Leaderboard

In an effort to boost our editorial coverage outside the realm of division-specific ECL content, we've enlisted NHL.com/sv writer, and long-time ECL player, Hampus Duvefelt (l-Furyan-l) to provide a series of special columns for SportsGamer.GG throughout the NHL 26 cycle. This is the second edition. THE BUSINESS OF WINNING Winning has been on my mind lately. I don't say that to make it out like I am some kind of mentality monster; that my sole nourishment is winning and that I wake up every day ready to feast on the flesh of my enemies. Sure, I like winning. In fact, I love it. It's the reason I compete here at SportsGamer. But it is not the be-all and end-all of everything. At least not outside of this game that we all play and love (or hate?). Even so, winning has been on my mind. Or rather, the stories we tell ourselves (and others) about what constitutes a winner. The narratives we create. Being involved in hockey media – and consuming an unhealthy amount of it even when off the clock – I see it every day. "Oh, you just can't win with this guy" or "This guy is a born winner, this is the type of player you acquire if you want to go for it". It's everywhere. Everyone has their own narrative around a specific player, more often than not shaped by the opinion of others. It came into focus for me recently when watching the Olympics and following the aftermath of the final between USA and Canada. I saw Connor Hellebuyck, a player the majority of media and fans had decided couldn't get it done when it mattered, play out of his mind during the finals in one of the best goaltending performances I'd ever seen. I saw Auston Matthews, a player many had written off due to his failings in the playoffs in the NHL, captain a squad to a gold medal on the biggest stage in the world. And I saw Connor McDavid, possibly the greatest hockey player of all time when all is said and done, come up short. Again. The short reprieve McDavid received when he led Canada to the 4 Nations title last year was suddenly gone and again the narrative was "this guy can't get it done when it matters the most". Matthew Tkachuk is another interesting example. Titles just seem to follow him everywhere he goes, winning two Stanley Cups recently and now an Olympic gold medal. Yet it can be argued he, like Matthews, had less of an impact on his team in the tournament than McDavid did. Who is a winner and who is not? Well, before I derail my train of thought here and lose hold of your interest, dear reader, I'd like to posit my argument and my inspiration for writing all this. See, my take is that winners aren't born. They're made. They are made when (really) good players do everything they humanly can to put themselves in a position to succeed again and again, until they do. For some, that is right away. For others, it takes time. Hell, even Sidney Crosby lost a Stanley Cup final before he won it all. It won't happen for everyone. But I would argue that you can't know for sure who "has it" or who "will never have it" until everything is said and done. Case in point; Hellebuyck. His narrative blew up the moment he had a gold medal hung around his neck. Some might say this epiphany of mine is an obvious conclusion, but not everyone will agree. Some will look at a player like Tkachuk and say: "Ah, that guy is a born winner". Was he, though? Did he not first spend six years with the Calgary Flames, never making it past the 2nd round of the playoffs? Did he not lose in his first ever appearance in the Stanley Cup finals and in the 4 Nations finals (albeit injured in both)? If you ask me, Tkachuk wasn't born a winner. He has always appeared to have a winner's mentality, sure, but he had to both fight and stay patient to get across that finish line. Until he made himself a winner. You look at players like McDavid, like Nathan MacKinnon. The way they dedicate every fibre of their being to winning; the nutrition, the practice habits, the mentality. Their grim faces on the bench and in the media, even after winning games. If something doesn't get them closer to a title, they are not interested. And yet, MacKinnon – who famously said "I'm in my 10th year in the league and I haven't won shit" – has "just" the one Stanley Cup win. McDavid has none. They are the best players in the world right now and they eat, live and breathe winning, but they simply cannot do it alone. In hockey, no one can. The same goes for virtual hockey. Because even though we have just six active players for each game, not 20, and we play the full "60" minutes of a game instead of 20 – meaning each individual player is afforded the opportunity to have a bigger impact on the game than in actual hockey – we still cannot do it on our own. Circumstances matter. Teammates matter. Opponents matter. Timing matters. I look at players like Patzlaf and FlyerKungen, who just weeks ago won their first Elite titles since 2021. Or a player like Eki, who last year finished out his ECL career by winning his first Elite title in quite a few years. I've never looked at these players as anything but winners, even though they hadn't been on the winning side of a final for some time. Sure, it helped that they had gotten it done before so the pedigree was there, but to me they are prime examples of (really) good players who did everything they could to put themselves in positions to succeed, again and again. And under the right circumstances and with the right teammates, they finally did. Again. I look at a player like Antoniomannen, who has won everything there is to win on the Swedish side of things, but who – like most Swedish players on the scene – hadn't experienced that same success in the playoffs at the Elite level. But this past season, he and his team put themselves in a position to succeed and I have no doubt that if they continue to do so, they'll eventually be at the top of the mountain. I look at a player like Sokkelo, who just couldn't seem to get into the playoffs at the Elite level. Then, suddenly, he became a bonafide Finnish champion and nearly led his team to an Elite title (!) in his first ever playoff appearance there. In the span of just two playoff runs, he ended up making those who wrote him off early look quite foolish. I look at a player like KingOfApes_, who has won multiple ECL Elite titles in his career but hasn't been back in the thick of things for a while now. I have no doubt he can get back there again, under the right circumstances. At the same time, I understand the narratives aren't going away. People love telling each other stories. If you listen, I mean really listen, to any conversation between two people, it often has a tendency to evolve into each individual telling the other stories from their perspective. Most of the time, that's how we relate to each other as human beings. The story of McDavid "unable to come up big when it matters" will live on until the day he does. The story of Tkachuk being a "born winner" is strong enough to survive the Panthers missing the playoffs this year – and probably a few more years after that, should it happen. But stories and narratives are just that, stories and narratives. They can change. A playoff run, a series, a game, a single moment even, is sometimes enough to change it. Like Hellebuyck changed his. Like Sokkelo changed his. So, if you are a player who has found yourself involved in a story or narrative you didn't chose to be involved in, remember that it is never too late to change it. Because winners aren't born, they're made.