IIHF World ChampionshipDiscuss International Tournaments like the WJC, Olympics, and World Cup, as they take place, or discuss past tournaments. performances.
Hockey Canada's fundamental philosphy (roster talk/omissions)
The mistake team Canada makes all the time is overrating chemistry.
to be fair, they went with proven pairs and lines this year. They understand chemistry is important. The problem is they are over passing. They'll be fine if they simplify their game.
I'm not calling you out but threads like this are inevitable when your team doesn't destroy the opponents. There is no way to know you're building a perfect team.
Not playing well as a team isn't much of an excuse though.
Team USA, Sweden, Czech Republic, Russia, Slovakia, Finland, etc, all are in the same situation. Most of them had little to no time to practice as a team. Canada or Canada fans shouldn't be using "It's the way we are playing" as an excuse because every major team has the same standards they have to persevere through.
Personally, I don't know if Canada or Russia will get a medal during the Olympics this year. The only team I have confidence in with getting a medal is Sweden. Would it surprise me to see Russia or Canada win a medal? Nope. It wouldn't surprise me to see them not win a medal either.
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??
Marleau - Thornton - Heatley
They make up a PP that is 3rd in the league
Pronger - Richards
Members of the 4th best unit in the league
Getzlaf - Perry
Niedermayer
Members of the 6th best PP in the league
This isn't even mentioning the PP prowess of guys like Nash, Toews, Doughty and Boyle.
Everyone I just listed is a member of a top 10 NHL unit, with the exception of Doughty, who is just outside with the kings at 11th.
Canada already has the PP weapons, Stamkos and Green wouldn't make a night and day difference. HELLO??
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.
Lol, too funny.
Sound the alarm, time to bring in Canada's B-Team.
It sure is a good thing that that Swedish and Russian squads crushed their last respective opponents with their superior goal scoring talent, yesiree. Sweden managed 2 goals against Germany and Russia managed 1 goal against the Slovaks.
You can do something about a hot goalie...you can bring better goal scorers if you have them.
Okay so you bring Steven Stamkos and his 73rd faceoff rating and rather than winning that imporant draw in the defensive zone he loses it and the Swiss get that third goal. Then what happens?
I have to say i agree with this. From the min the team was selected I could not believe the players on Tampa were left off to some of these "gritty" players. Even players like Heatley should be lower on the pick list. Great on regular games but has not once been clutch in a game that means anything.
Saying that I'm not throwing the towel in yet. Team still has a lot of skill and with the right chemistry can still take gold
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.
As much as I like those players individually (and I would have liked to have seen St. Louis make this team), I still don't think you bring that whole line to Vancouver. Richards isn't as effective a playmaker as either Crosby, Thornton, or Getzlaf, and wouldn't fit in well as a 4th line center (I'd rather have Toews and Richards). Lecavalier, while superbly talented, hasn't played with much passion in recent years. Maybe its a result of playing in TB, I don't know. Plus, their Stanley Cups and individual awards came in 2004 - 6 years ago. Since then, in 2006, they had the opportunity to take over Team Canada for this generation, and failed. So if anyone from the Lightning (I guess including Richards) deserved a shot, it would be MSL and Stamkos.
Okay so you bring Steven Stamkos and his 73rd faceoff rating and rather than winning that imporant draw in the defensive zone he loses it and the Swiss get that third goal. Then what happens?
You bring him for his ridiculous blocker side PP one timer (#1 in PP goals & pts). He is the 13th forward.
I have to say i agree with this. From the min the team was selected I could not believe the players on Tampa were left off to some of these "gritty" players. Even players like Heatley should be lower on the pick list. Great on regular games but has not once been clutch in a game that means anything.
Saying that I'm not throwing the towel in yet. Team still has a lot of skill and with the right chemistry can still take gold
wow, he has like 79 points and 79 games, while in 26 elimination games he has 26 pts in 26 games, seems pretty good to me.
Hockey Canada gets it wrong again. You'd think they'd learn, but nope, keep coming back with the same dumbass selection errors. I havebeencallingfor 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!
You are absolutely right!! Why the **** didn't they pick St. Louis to play defense instead of Seabrook!!!!
When you desperately need a goal against a hot goalie, you want every player out there being a gamebreaker who be your hero. You don't need plugs. You need to MAXIMIZE your chances by bringing ALL the most dangerous players your country has.
why would you bring a fourth? When you need a goal you can easily roll just those 3 lines. Everyone there can play 20 minutes a game. I'd rather only play 9 forwards the whole game than i would play 12 scoring forwards, that way you spread the ice time too thin.
You bring a strong defensive line (And none of Toews, Richards, Bergeron are slouches on offense) for when it can prove useful, because 12 pure scoring forwards is too many cooks.
Last edited by TrevorLinden16: 02-19-2010 at 12:26 PM.
You bring him for his ridiculous blocker side PP one timer (#1 in PP goals & pts). He is the 13th forward.
We all know that the 13th forward is the game breaker. Eyeing up the game from the stands, his hawklike gaze can make any goalie tremble if you pick the right guy.
Oh, and the US has a better PP% so far (I know, only 2 games) than Canada. Wanna explain how a team based almost entirely around said gritty, two way players you despise is doing better than a team with some pure scoring lines?
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.
This.
There's plenty enough skill on many of these teams to win any given game. Relative skill level matters a little, but not enough to guarantee anything in a single elimination format. Look at it this way...the relative talent levels between the best team in the NHL and the worst is obvious even to casual observers. Yet the best best team is only winning about 66% of their games and the worst team is winning almost 33%. If they played each other in a single game the top team would be favored, but it would hardly be a lock.
At this level of competition, there's a definite diminishing return on skill. Any given game factors like the ones below will have a larger impact in determining the outcome than the disparity in skill levels between the teams:
-Quality of execution within the team's various offensive and defensive schemes
-Intensity level and effort
-Luck
-Relative difference in the quality of play between the two goaltenders
Any number of teams in this tournament have goalies good enough to steal a single game. You sure can't depend on, or control, luck. What you do have some control over, however, is constructing a team around players who consistently have high intensity levels and who you think will be able to execute the best within the schemes you want to play. Those players aren't always the most skilled ones available.
wow, he has like 79 points and 79 games, while in 26 elimination games he has 26 pts in 26 games, seems pretty good to me.
Yeah I did expect this response and I don't completely disagree
What I don't like is his disappearance act in Stanley cup finals or World Championships last game last spring
I do think he's worthy of the team so I shouldn’t argue otherwise
while im not necessarily in 100% agreement with the extent to canada's "failure" to bring even more firepower... i will say this.
i think we could've used stamkos' right handed one timer. and for everyone claiming about green's deficiencies on defense.. theyre overblown imo and it's not like the other dmen we have our error free.. look at the many bad turnovers in the defensive end yesterday by niedermayer yesterday, and pronger's dumb penalties.
wouldve had green as the 7th dman, and stamkos as the 13th forward. that way we still keep the checking line which we do need of toews, bergeron, and richards.
but we're giving ourselves at least the top PP point men in the league on forward (stamkos) and defense (green).
but again, even with these additions fundamentally team canada still wouldve struggled last nite imo. 1 or 2 players wont make or break your team, but can definitely help for sure.
At this level of competition, there's a definite diminishing return on skill. Any given game factors like the ones below will have a larger impact in determining the outcome than the disparity in skill levels between the teams:
-Quality of execution within the team's various offensive and defensive schemes
-Intensity level and effort
-Luck
-Relative difference in the quality of play between the two goaltenders
Any number of teams in this tournament have goalies good enough to steal a single game. You sure can't depend on, or control, luck. What you do have some control over, however, is constructing a team around players who consistently have high intensity levels and who you think will be able to execute the best within the schemes you want to play. Those players aren't always the most skilled ones available.
It's not about teams, it's all about GOALIES. When a favoured team loses, it's almost always due to the opposition's goalie being on fire. You don't reduce your risk to that by playing with relative tactical strength ratios, your best chance at getting past the hot goalie is ABSOLUTE firepower. Canada left too much firepower and unqiue offensive threats at home, period, and have made themselves more vulnerable to the most common form of elimination, the HOT GOALIE.
The problem with the Swiss game wasn't a lack of high end skill. It was too much of it.
Hello, Canada was up 2-0 and gave up the lead!! What does this tell you; complacency, all star attitude, bad defence, lack of pushback.
Don't expect to score six goals against the Swiss. They area strong-willed, well coached, well coordinated defensive team. Canada had them at 2-0 and thought they could pass their way to a win. Silly.
