HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > International Tournaments
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
International Tournaments Discuss international tournaments such as the World Juniors, Olympic hockey, and Ice Hockey World Championships, as they take place; or discuss past tournaments.

Hockey Canada's fundamental philosphy (roster talk/omissions)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-19-2010, 10:55 AM
  #26
leo2892
Registered User
 
leo2892's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
At least when Sweden & Russia do it, they have already brought all their best guys (tho Russia maybe coulda used Kovalev's touch last night).
I stopped reading there. You just lost the argument to yourself. Do you think that for a team with Ovechkin, Malkin, Semin, Kovalchuk, etc., the problem was the lack of talent?

Your fundamental philosophy is FAIL. The Olympic games aren't about who has the most talent - it's about which team can gel and play as a team the best. Having two-way forwards that are strong along the boards and add grit is a part of that.

If you really think you know more about hockey than Hockey Canada, give your head a shake.


Last edited by leo2892: 02-19-2010 at 11:03 AM.
leo2892 is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 10:57 AM
  #27
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 28,052
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
Russia sure coulda used Kovalev, a great offensive touch who also knows Halak like a book.

USA will regret taking Drury & Callahan over the dynamic offensive threat of Gomez-Gionta when they come up short in scoring.
I didn't think i'd ever do this... but I will quote Jagr:

"It's not the best team that wins the Olympics, it's the most lucky."

LickTheEnvelope is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:22 AM
  #28
kanuck87
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,208
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
When you desperately need a goal against a hot goalie, you want every player out there being a gamebreaker who be your hero.
Or he could be the goat. Everyone is aware of the defensive deficiencies Mike Green has and that is why he did not make the team. You would be singing a different tune if Green had a defensive gaffe that led to the Swiss team scoring the winning goal in regulation.

Quote:
Again in these short tournaments, they aren't NHL playoff series. You LOSE these tournaments when you run into a hot goalie, how do you minimize the chance of that happening? You bring ALL your best scorers to overwhelm him. Canada didnt.
There is nothing you can do about running into a hot goalie. Even a scrub like Jason LaBarbera can pull out a game like that from out of nowhere.

Halak let in one goal to a Russian team featuring the likes of Ovechkin, Semin, Datsyuk, Kovalchuk, Malkin, Gonchar and Markov. These things happen and there is usually nothing you can do about it.

We ran into a hot goalie and still won the game. There isnt a better outcome than we could have asked for.

kanuck87 is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:26 AM
  #29
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Gentle Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 21,194
vCash: 413
What every fan from every country needs to realize is that the best team on paper doesn't win at the Olympics. The hottest team at the time wins or a hot goaltender can beat even the most stacked team.

Gentle Ben Kenobi is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:31 AM
  #30
NinthSpoke06
Registered User
 
NinthSpoke06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chestnut Hill
Country: United States
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
1. TurboFlex's spelling is FAIL.

2. Yes, its the 12th and 13th forwards and 7th defensemens fault Canada couldn't score. This thread is FAIL.

NinthSpoke06 is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:31 AM
  #31
Lebanezer
Registered User
 
Lebanezer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 2,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
Russia sure coulda used Kovalev, a great offensive touch who also knows Halak like a book.

USA will regret taking Drury & Callahan over the dynamic offensive threat of Gomez-Gionta when they come up short in scoring.


That line is priceless

Lebanezer is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:32 AM
  #32
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
This team is going to win Gold. I am not doubting that. Too many of you are jumping the gun here. Team Canada just played their SECOND game together. They just played a team that plays ALL year together and has had time to build that chemistry... chemistry is a huge advantage.

Canada had one fluke goal get scored against them, and they had one goal that was basically a perfect shot and no fault of brodeur's. Hillar basically stood on his head and the score could very easily have been 5 or 6-1. I am not worried. I think Babcocks plan to REST Brodeur in the first game was brilliant. Brodeur looked good last night and with 3 days until the USA game, he should be more than prepaired. Playing the first game and then waiting until sunday would have been TOO LONG... and a lot of people are not seeing that.

I expect that Canada will be in full stride by the end of game 3 and no more excuses by game 4.

Uhmkay is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:37 AM
  #33
Krut
Registered User
 
Krut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,930
vCash: 500
Could be the dumbest post I've ever seen. Every single player on team Canada (even Morrow and Bergeron) are excellent goal scorers. In fact, Morrow was one of the better, and more noticeable players when he stepped on the ice because he kept his game simple and effective.

The olympics are won on two variables:

1) Quick chemistry
2) Whoever buys into a system the fastest, and most effectively

Canada looked like they didn't follow either of those variables last night, and it resulted in a close game that souldn't have been. To think that having Green and Stamkos on this team would have made a difference last night is completely retarded. In fact, it may have actually hurt the team.

Krut is online now  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:37 AM
  #34
NinthSpoke06
Registered User
 
NinthSpoke06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chestnut Hill
Country: United States
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
Russia sure coulda used Kovalev, a great offensive touch who also knows Halak like a book.

USA will regret taking Drury & Callahan over the dynamic offensive threat of Gomez-Gionta when they come up short in scoring.
You are so wrong in every aspect of this thread.

Us Americans won't regret selecting Drury and Callahan if we can't score. They aren't here to score, there is more to a hockey game than scoring, they are here to do those things and IF they score even better. Drury and Callahan have been a few of the players who have been AWESOME for USA so far, so glad they were selected. Perfect role players. If we can't score that goes on the players who were actually selected to score....Kane, Parise, Kessel, Statsny, Pavelski, Kesler, Ryan, Brown, Langenbrunner and Malone.

Unlike you, we understand that this isn't an all-star game and the 4th line should have MORE scoring. Not at all.

Oh and could you leave your Montreal Canadiens bias out of this, Gomez and Gionta don't deserve a spot over anyone on this team.

NinthSpoke06 is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:39 AM
  #35
Human Thumb*
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 2,534
vCash: 500
Using "fail" as an adjective is uh... FAIL.

Human Thumb* is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:40 AM
  #36
Kekumba
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,695
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kekumba Send a message via MSN to Kekumba Send a message via Skype™ to Kekumba
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
Hockey Canada gets it wrong again. You'd think they'd learn, but nope, keep coming back with the same dumbass selection errors. I have been calling for months!!!
Cool, dude. I'll be back to bump these threads for you when Canada wins gold.

Kekumba is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:43 AM
  #37
El Diego
Registered User
 
El Diego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 486
vCash: 500
I think it's funny/ridiculous when people try and find some grand, systemic error when something doesn't go to plan when a lot of times it is just luck or a single variable you can't control (i.e. opposition goalie) that makes the difference.

El Diego is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:43 AM
  #38
bohlmeister
$$ For Sale $$
 
bohlmeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,505
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BCShark View Post
getz is fail


Nope. Thornton is fail.

bohlmeister is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:45 AM
  #39
SC2008
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JordanStaal#1Fan View Post
The Swiss played a GREAT game, some people seem to overlook that. They took away our time and space very effectively and when we got chances, Hiller was there. It didn't help that Brodeur gave up a softy either.

Give credit where credit's due.
Exactly. Being a shark and Team USA fan, finally people are realizing how good hiller is.

Also the era of Dream Teamers is gone. Talent in the hockey world is starting to level. The Swiss and Germans have improved tremendously. Same can be said with USA, Slovakia, etc...

SC2008 is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:46 AM
  #40
RainingRats
Registered User
 
RainingRats's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 10,214
vCash: 500
The last thing Canada needs is MORE skill. They're over passing as it is. They have more than enough to score plenty of goals.

RainingRats is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:46 AM
  #41
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
anyone else really sick of hearing the stupid term "fail" for everything?

its just not cool, people...really..

KreiMeARiver* is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:47 AM
  #42
SC2008
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,017
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
Hockey Canada gets it wrong again. You'd think they'd learn, but nope, keep coming back with the same dumbass selection errors. I have been calling for months!!!

Hcoeky Canada builds their team like it's for a NHL best of 7 series, and to "stop" big bad team Russia. So they put on all these "gritty" 2 way checkers over more talented players. OH LOOK WHAT A SURPISE, Canada can't buy goals when they run into a hot goalie. What a great idea to bring guys like Seabrook, Morrow & Bergeron over top 15 NHL forwards!! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrit didn't do much last night for them vs. Hiller, sure coulda used a nice unstoppable Stamkos or Green one timer from the face off circle tho!

Where have I seen this movie before? Oh right, all those other times that team Canada and other favourite teams lose when they run into hot goalies. At least when Sweden & Russia do it, they have already brought all their best guys (tho Russia maybe coulda used Kovalev's touch last night). Team Canada left 5 of the top 25 NHL forwards at home, including 3 in this year's top 10, and bring a bunch of guys way down the list instead because they are grrrrrrrrrity!! Forget that they are younger, have never won anything, and nowhere near as dominant as the guys staying at home.

Hockey Canada just doesn't get it, this isn't a best of 7 series, you come up short in scoring in ONE GAME and you're gone. Having a dominant stanely cup winning line Richards-Lecavalier-St Louis on your bench would sure be more likely to get something going than Morrow-Richards-Toews. Woulda been nice to have Stamkos' DEVESTATING one timer and Mike Green doing his thang when Canada was going like 1 for 8 on the PP too.

History repeating itself here, and the genius braintrust at hockey Canada is 100% to blame.
On the flip side Bergie, Seabrook, and Morrow helped keep it a 2-2 game. They did their job, playing solid D. Wasn't Bergie 4-4 on faceoffs in the defensive zone?

SC2008 is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:47 AM
  #43
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 32,181
vCash: 500
I stopped caring when you described something as "is fail".

kmad is online now  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:49 AM
  #44
Turboflex*
 
Turboflex*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krut View Post
Canada looked like they didn't follow either of those variables last night, and it resulted in a close game that souldn't have been. To think that having Green and Stamkos on this team would have made a difference last night is completely retarded. In fact, it may have actually hurt the team.
haha did you even read my post?

Canada went 1 for 7 on the PP last night! You are trying to claim that the 4 guys who are in the top 7 in NHL PP points that Canada left at home WOULDN'T have made a difference??? HELLO??

Turboflex* is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:49 AM
  #45
Enhanced
Registered User
 
Enhanced's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 325
vCash: 500
I find it hard to take the OP seriously when he says that Team Canada needs more offense. Yes, they did only score 2 goals yesterday but this team is absolutely loaded with it. Hockey Canada went the correct route this time by bringing role players instead of picking just the top point getters from the NHL. Plus, as much as you're saying Hockey Canada discredited some of the defensive abilities of the likes of B. Richards/Lecavalier/St. Louis, you are also discrediting the offensive abilities of M. Richards, Bergeron and Morrow. Chemistry is definitely the problem right now, not firepower.

Canada ran into a hot goalie but it doesn't justify sacrificing defensive hockey so they can make up for that. Penalty killing and checking is important as you will see when the tournament progresses.

Enhanced is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:53 AM
  #46
Bobby Blowhard
Registered User
 
Bobby Blowhard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
Hockey Canada gets it wrong again. You'd think they'd learn, but nope, keep coming back with the same dumbass selection errors. I have been calling for months!!!

Hcoeky Canada builds their team like it's for a NHL best of 7 series, and to "stop" big bad team Russia. So they put on all these "gritty" 2 way checkers over more talented players. OH LOOK WHAT A SURPISE, Canada can't buy goals when they run into a hot goalie. What a great idea to bring guys like Seabrook, Morrow & Bergeron over top 15 NHL forwards!! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrit didn't do much last night for them vs. Hiller, sure coulda used a nice unstoppable Stamkos or Green one timer from the face off circle tho!

Where have I seen this movie before? Oh right, all those other times that team Canada and other favourite teams lose when they run into hot goalies. At least when Sweden & Russia do it, they have already brought all their best guys (tho Russia maybe coulda used Kovalev's touch last night). Team Canada left 5 of the top 25 NHL forwards at home, including 3 in this year's top 10, and bring a bunch of guys way down the list instead because they are grrrrrrrrrity!! Forget that they are younger, have never won anything, and nowhere near as dominant as the guys staying at home.

Hockey Canada just doesn't get it, this isn't a best of 7 series, you come up short in scoring in ONE GAME and you're gone. Having a dominant stanely cup winning line Richards-Lecavalier-St Louis on your bench would sure be more likely to get something going than Morrow-Richards-Toews. Woulda been nice to have Stamkos' DEVESTATING one timer and Mike Green doing his thang when Canada was going like 1 for 8 on the PP too.

History repeating itself here, and the genius braintrust at hockey Canada is 100% to blame.
QUICK CALL ROBBIE SCHREMP!!!!!

seriously though, you didn't address 2002 so pretty much you are trying to stand on paper stilts.

And who were the no shows in 2006? Listening to your revisionism I would assume it must have only been the role players.

How come every other nation, with less overall talent than Canada no matter who we ice, has an advantage?

so we have 3 skilled lines, if they fail to beat Hiller (e.g) surely a fourth will put us over the top, right?

Bobby Blowhard is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:53 AM
  #47
NinthSpoke06
Registered User
 
NinthSpoke06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chestnut Hill
Country: United States
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SC2008 View Post
On the flip side Bergie, Seabrook, and Morrow helped keep it a 2-2 game. They did their job, playing solid D. Wasn't Bergie 4-4 on faceoffs in the defensive zone?
Who brings stats to a bash fest?

You haven't learned yet? Its Bergeron's fault for everything that goes wrong at these Olympics. God dammit Patrice, how could you allow a PP that your weren't even on to go 1 for 7. ONE FOR SEVEN BERGY! UNACCEPTABLE.


NinthSpoke06 is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:54 AM
  #48
Turboflex*
 
Turboflex*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanuck87 View Post
There is nothing you can do about running into a hot goalie. Even a scrub like Jason LaBarbera can pull out a game like that from out of nowhere.

Halak let in one goal to a Russian team featuring the likes of Ovechkin, Semin, Datsyuk, Kovalchuk, Malkin, Gonchar and Markov. These things happen and there is usually nothing you can do about it.

We ran into a hot goalie and still won the game. There isnt a better outcome than we could have asked for.
You can do something about a hot goalie...you can bring better goal scorers if you have them.

Turboflex* is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:55 AM
  #49
It Kills Me
Registered User
 
It Kills Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,792
vCash: 500
The mistake team Canada makes all the time is overrating chemistry.

It Kills Me is offline  
Old
02-19-2010, 11:58 AM
  #50
Turboflex*
 
Turboflex*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enhanced View Post
I find it hard to take the OP seriously when he says that Team Canada needs more offense. Yes, they did only score 2 goals yesterday but this team is absolutely loaded with it. Hockey Canada went the correct route this time by bringing role players instead of picking just the top point getters from the NHL. Plus, as much as you're saying Hockey Canada discredited some of the defensive abilities of the likes of B. Richards/Lecavalier/St. Louis, you are also discrediting the offensive abilities of M. Richards, Bergeron and Morrow. Chemistry is definitely the problem right now, not firepower.
Anyone know any all-star lines with proven chemistry that weren't invited to the team? Anyone? Like a line that played together for years and won a stanley cup? Top 25 forwards in NHL? League MVPs? Damn can't think of one, too bad, cuz the team sure could use that kind of chemistry.

Turboflex* is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:37 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.