Lombardi on U.S. hockey growth, team construction

If you recall an article from 11 months ago that appeared on this site, you may remember Dean Lombardi cautioning against using analytics as the be-all, end-all of player and team evaluation. “You’ll never convince me that emotion isn’t a huge part of this game, more than any other game,” he said at the time.

Similar sentiments arose today as Lombardi was introduced in Lake Placid, N.Y. on Thursday as the United States’ general manager for the 2016 World Cup of Hockey, which will take place next September-October in Toronto, Ont.

It began as a broad question. “What are your views of the state of the game today in the U.S., and how has it changed in your lifetime?

One would think such an open-ended question would allow Lombardi to devolve into a long, seven-minute response laced with references to historical figures. He did, after all, mention Cincinnatus in his opening remarks.

But Lombardi remained on point after Philadelphia Flyers President Paul Holmgren took the first stab at the query. And when he spoke, Lombardi share a pithy reflection of the emotional component inherent in the championship traits of accomplished teams, as well as the sport itself.

“As far as the game itself, obviously there’s been a lot of changes in the way the game is played, particularly the physical part of the game. Somebody from the Flyers organization would certainly understand what I’m talking about,” he said. “That physical dimension and the intimidation factor is certainly more limited, but what I think hasn’t been lost and has to be garnered in other ways is that hockey is still an incredibly emotional game. I’ve always said that of the four major sports, no sport can close the talent gap with emotion like hockey, and your 1980 team is the greatest example of that. And so I think the state of the game has changed in a way that we tap into that emotion, but make no mistake, it is still critical, and it’s a hallmark of this game. But I think it’s very different the way we have to make sure we tap into that pipeline – it’s very different from when Homer (Paul Holmgren) played, and some of the things they were able to do to bond and ignite that type of emotion.”

As for when Holmgren played, the biggest changes between then and now would be the size and depth of the United States’ talent pool.

“I’ll put it in a real simple perspective: I don’t think I’d make our Olympic teams in this era, when I came through. I humbly would say I would not make the teams now with the depth of talent that we have. It’s come that far to make these teams now is a big process and it’s a great accomplishment – it always has been – but it’s just even that much more of a challenge now with so many wonderful players being developed in a wide variety of settings, a wide variety of programs.”

Lombardi, who has been a part of the U.S. Men’s National Advisory Group since 2009 and helped construct the 2010 and 2014 United States Olympic teams, shared some insight into the way he plans on constructing his World Cup team, though such plans remain in their infancy 13 months away from the start of the tournament.

Dean Lombardi, on whether anything other than gold is a disappointment, and whether there’s anything “different” he would have to do to get the United States “over the hump”:
I think one of the things that I found really appealing from ’96, I think that team went into that tournament expecting to win, and that’s been to me, watching the growth with USA Hockey is one of the intangibles that has manifested itself right in front of me over the years, and it’s just amazing to watch. When I first started going to sports festivals and things, it was almost like, ‘OK, let’s just be respectable.’ And to watch the growth of this program, to where now they’re walking into the rinks and we expect to win is an entirely different mindset. It’s a totally different challenge. It’s very different once you’ve won a Stanley Cup where your mindset is at versus maybe years of not making the playoffs where it’s a totally different animal. Having seen that evolution here, it was almost like the breakthrough in ’96. It was just awesome. We don’t want to lose that. That’s where we are right now, and that’s what this country’s all about, quite frankly. I think that’s where our expectations have to be, and it’s going to be a process to get there. There’s a difference between being cocky and confident, and I think that’s a process that we’ve already started and laid some groundwork in the meetings a couple of weeks ago. I’m not saying anything in terms of that we lost it, but it’s up to us to keep it going, and that’s where we’re going to have to be.

Lombardi, on the tournament taking place at the end of the off-season, and whether that affects the personnel decision that weighs how a player is playing at the time versus his overall body of work (question followed a remark by Holmgren that the U-23 “Young Stars” World Cup team would fit very nicely under the salary cap):
I’m just recovering. Did you have to bring up cap and stuff? It’s been really nice just to come and deal with hockey and the players just playing for their country, and you had to bring up the cap. I think, and I’m not trying to avoid your question, but I’ve got to be honest with you. I’ve got a lot of work to do here. This is why JJ (Jim Johannson) to me is invaluable. We’ve spent times at the World Championship being in this international setting in a short tournament. Again, why Paul and Brian have extensive experience in this arena. I’ve already had extensive talk with Lou Lamoriello. So I don’t really want to avoid your question, but I’ve got to be honest with you – I don’t have a definitive answer right now, but it’s something we’re going to have to lay out there very shortly. I want this plan in place in terms of we’ve already started our templates, as I talked about, how we’re going to scout, divide it up by regions, how decisions are going to be made, and then the timing of those things as you’re asking. The only thing I can envision right now is I’m debating in my head, I think when you’re looking at this team, you get that feeling for definites, and then maybe there’s that middle group. The key, also, don’t forget, is fit, that it’s not only who the best player is, but how they’re going to fit with those players that we feel are core, so to speak. So to answer your question, I think we have to get to our core early, whether it’s five, seven or eight, and then start working from there on what fits within that core, and then maybe get down to the roles. So, again, I’m not avoiding your question. I think if you ask me this in probably another month and a half, I’ll have a more definitive answer. But I think that’s the way we’re trending on structure right now.