What does everybody think of the team? There were no huge surprises, but being we have so many great players there could have been a few different selections. It should be a great tournament.
This is going to hurt The D badly from a physical standpoint.
+Stamkos: I thought had an outside shot.
Kinda hoping they would go with the new guard for defenceman (ie. no Niedermeyer, Pronger). Like Doughy (or however the hell you spell it)....he's looked awesome when I saw him play.
Not sure how they can take Bergeron over Stamkos if you want a young player.
I think Bergeron would have been a lock all along if he had not been injured. I hate the Bruins (Go Habs Go) but he is an outstanding player at both ends of the rink.
I thought Green would make it to quarterback the power play but it looks like they went for all well rounder players. I think the D looks outstanding. I wish Phaneuf was playing, only because he is my favourite player to watch.
Very glad Richards made it, I loved watching him when he played junior in Kitchener.
In 2005, Bergeron was by far the best player on a great Canadian junior team. He is a great scorer, defensive player and face off man. When healthy, which he is now, he is one of the best players in the NHL.
In 2005, Bergeron was by far the best player on a great Canadian junior team. He is a great scorer, defensive player and face off man. When healthy, which he is now, he is one of the best players in the NHL.
Don't think that was the case, he did lead the team in scoring, and was probably the best player.
But, doing good in the Jr's does not equate greatness in the NHL.
Here's a few leading scorers the past few years for Team Canada:
But, doing good in the Jr's does not equate greatness in the NHL.
I would argue that they aren't choosing players for the NHL, they are choosing players to fill roles on an Olympic team. I guarantee that Yzerman and Babcock (et al) went through every possible role they need on this team and looked to fill those roles with a mix of players. Having all primadonna forwards that only fill the "score lots of goals" role will not cut it against solid international competition. You need to have two-way forwards, forwards who can play a checking role, forwards for the PP and for the PK, forwards who can win faceoffs (both left- and right-handed shots). According to the guys on TSN Bergeron is one of the top faceoff guys in the NHL.
I think Bergeron is a great pick for this team and I expect he will prove that in February.
I also like the youth slant on this team, I think the 2006 team proved that having too many older players just won't get the job done anymore. Also sets us up well for future Olympics, assuming a CBA arises that allows it to happen.
I would argue that they aren't choosing players for the NHL, they are choosing players to fill roles on an Olympic team. I guarantee that Yzerman and Babcock (et al) went through every possible role they need on this team and looked to fill those roles with a mix of players. Having all primadonna forwards that only fill the "score lots of goals" role will not cut it against solid international competition. You need to have two-way forwards, forwards who can play a checking role, forwards for the PP and for the PK, forwards who can win faceoffs (both left- and right-handed shots). According to the guys on TSN Bergeron is one of the top faceoff guys in the NHL.
I think Bergeron is a great pick for this team and I expect he will prove that in February.
I also like the youth slant on this team, I think the 2006 team proved that having too many older players just won't get the job done anymore. Also sets us up well for future Olympics, assuming a CBA arises that allows it to happen.
Definately like the youth movement, no issues with that. But having a guy on the team for his 'face-off skills' is a little farcical.
My thoughts are, most offensively talented players would be excellent defensive players if that's what there role was to be.
I've always been a 'may the best players play' attitude, and he just doesn't fall in that group (and I don't think anyone can argue the contrary).
Not sure how you can argue you'd rather have him on the team than:
Brad Richards
Martin St Louis
Vincent Lecavelier
Mike Cammaleri
Stamkos
And that's just to name a few. This experiment has been tried (Kris Draper).....worked 50%.
That being said, I'm sure it won't make a whole lot of difference, maybe Bergeron turns out to be alot better than I think he is........we'll see.
Not sure he'll even be on a defensive roll, as radio here mentioned he's slated to skate with Crosby and Nash on the top line?
Not sure how you can argue you'd rather have him on the team than:
Brad Richards Martin St Louis Vincent Lecavelier
Mike Cammaleri Stamkos
Umm, lemme guess, you're a Lightning fan?
Honestly, none of those guys should have made the team and they didn't, so yay Yzerman. Stamkos was playing great at the beginning of the year and tappered off the last month or so. He's not ready for the kind of pressure that playing for our Olympic team at home is going to bring. Have still yet to see the whole list, but I'm pretty willing to drink the kool-aid Yzerman is serving.
Good thing they kept the puck away from Luongo during the overtime. Would hate to have them lose because of another softy like the one by Slovakia from behind the goal line. At least he redeemed himself somewhat with the save on Demitra. Of course he lets in the tying goal against US with 20 some odd seconds to go. Just when I thought we'd get though a game without a "Luongoal."
You that hard on Brodeur in the first USA game, Steve? Luongo did fine.
The first USA goal was on a late deflection that barely made it through between his arm and body pads. Not much to say about that one, it happens. Moving on . . .
The second USA goal came off another deflection, this time off a forwrd's skate. Luongo is in the way of the deflection but unable to prevent the short rebound and Parise is in the right place to capitalize. Not sure how he could have smothered it in time, but whatever.
Overall, you have one goal that was pretty tough for any Golaie, and a second goal that was as much attributable to Team Canada's decision to try and protect their lead, rather than increase it. Even the commentators were discussing the momentum shift, as Canada began backing further and further towards their own end as the third period wnet on.
You that hard on Brodeur in the first USA game, Steve? Luongo did fine.
The first USA goal was on a late deflection that barely made it through between his arm and body pads. Not much to say about that one, it happens. Moving on . . .
The second USA goal came off another deflection, this time off a forwrd's skate. Luongo is in the way of the deflection but unable to prevent the short rebound and Parise is in the right place to capitalize. Not sure how he could have smothered it in time, but whatever.
Overall, you have one goal that was pretty tough for any Golaie, and a second goal that was as much attributable to Team Canada's decision to try and protect their lead, rather than increase it. Even the commentators were discussing the momentum shift, as Canada began backing further and further towards their own end as the third period wnet on.
Yeah, well, my opinion on Brodeur is he shouldn't have even been on the team. Just calling it like it was. Every shot on Luongo you had to hold your breath.
Luongo is good. You don't make it to the NHL without being good. But great goalies make that save with 20 seconds to go and the game on the line.
Fleury should have been in the net. I'm not even a fan of him or Pitts, he's just the best goalie Canada had there. But for some reason Red Wings coach Babcock decided to keep him on the bench and go with a grizzled veteran and then the overrated Luongo. Why? Could it have anything to do with the last Cup Final?
Thats like saying Miller blew it for the U.S. cause he let in an OT softie. Brodeur 100% deserved to be on the team as did Luongo, and Luongo did fine. He had no chance on the game tying goal. No way I would have Fleury play any of the games, the only time I would have dressed him would be as the backup in the Germany game in case it got to be a blowout after the 2nd.
Thats like saying Miller blew it for the U.S. cause he let in an OT softie. Brodeur 100% deserved to be on the team as did Luongo, and Luongo did fine. He had no chance on the game tying goal. No way I would have Fleury play any of the games, the only time I would have dressed him would be as the backup in the Germany game in case it got to be a blowout after the 2nd.
I agree 100% with this post. Judging by a lot of the posts about them, If a Canadian player makes any mistake at all he is shit.
This is not like the women's hockey, there are a whole bunch of tough teams now. It will never be a cakewalk for anyone to win ever again. That it why it is so great when we do pull it off.
I'm sure Miller would agree that he did blow it by letting in a relatively easy shot. He admitted he didn't think Crosby would shoot when he did and was caught off guard. Proof that it's not how hard you shoot, but timing and misdirection.
I agree 100% with this post. Judging by a lot of the posts about them, If a Canadian player makes any mistake at all he is shit.
This is not like the women's hockey, there are a whole bunch of tough teams now. It will never be a cakewalk for anyone to win ever again. That it why it is so great when we do pull it off.
Look at Crosby, he was criticized pretty much the whole olympics about how he was playing and yet he scores the final Gold medal goal and hes a hero. Just shows you how quickly people opinions can change lol
I doubt that we will ever go back to no NHL'ers in the winter games, as it has raised the play considerably. It was an awesome tournament, can't wait for the next time.
Comments
Only other surprise, no Flames D made the cut.......figured one of Boumeester, Phaneuf or Regehr would make it.
This is going to hurt The D badly from a physical standpoint.
+Stamkos: I thought had an outside shot.
Kinda hoping they would go with the new guard for defenceman (ie. no Niedermeyer, Pronger). Like Doughy (or however the hell you spell it)....he's looked awesome when I saw him play.
Not sure how they can take Bergeron over Stamkos if you want a young player.
I thought Green would make it to quarterback the power play but it looks like they went for all well rounder players. I think the D looks outstanding. I wish Phaneuf was playing, only because he is my favourite player to watch.
Very glad Richards made it, I loved watching him when he played junior in Kitchener.
They can't do much worse than in Italy, or at least, better not. That was just sad.
I must be missing something with him......don't know him at all, just looked at his stats, and they were very unimpressive (ie. Leaf-like)
He's obviously this years Kris Draper.
Don't think it'll matter much, but I always say bring the best players, he just doesn't look like one to me.
Yeah me too, no St. Louis either. Definitely wanted to see Bouwmeester in the lineup.
Don't think that was the case, he did lead the team in scoring, and was probably the best player.
But, doing good in the Jr's does not equate greatness in the NHL.
Here's a few leading scorers the past few years for Team Canada:
2006 - Blake Comeau
2004 - Nigel Dawes
2003 - Carlo Colavaciou
2001 - Jamie Lundmark
2000 - Brandon Reid
I would venture to say, he is now where near one of the best players in the NHL, and I think his stat's would back that up.
Maybe he's still destined for greatness, just saying he's a long way from being there ATM.
I would argue that they aren't choosing players for the NHL, they are choosing players to fill roles on an Olympic team. I guarantee that Yzerman and Babcock (et al) went through every possible role they need on this team and looked to fill those roles with a mix of players. Having all primadonna forwards that only fill the "score lots of goals" role will not cut it against solid international competition. You need to have two-way forwards, forwards who can play a checking role, forwards for the PP and for the PK, forwards who can win faceoffs (both left- and right-handed shots). According to the guys on TSN Bergeron is one of the top faceoff guys in the NHL.
I think Bergeron is a great pick for this team and I expect he will prove that in February.
I also like the youth slant on this team, I think the 2006 team proved that having too many older players just won't get the job done anymore. Also sets us up well for future Olympics, assuming a CBA arises that allows it to happen.
Definately like the youth movement, no issues with that. But having a guy on the team for his 'face-off skills' is a little farcical.
My thoughts are, most offensively talented players would be excellent defensive players if that's what there role was to be.
I've always been a 'may the best players play' attitude, and he just doesn't fall in that group (and I don't think anyone can argue the contrary).
Not sure how you can argue you'd rather have him on the team than:
Brad Richards
Martin St Louis
Vincent Lecavelier
Mike Cammaleri
Stamkos
And that's just to name a few. This experiment has been tried (Kris Draper).....worked 50%.
That being said, I'm sure it won't make a whole lot of difference, maybe Bergeron turns out to be alot better than I think he is........we'll see.
Not sure he'll even be on a defensive roll, as radio here mentioned he's slated to skate with Crosby and Nash on the top line?
Brad Richards
Martin St Louis
Vincent Lecavelier
Mike Cammaleri
Stamkos
Umm, lemme guess, you're a Lightning fan?
Honestly, none of those guys should have made the team and they didn't, so yay Yzerman. Stamkos was playing great at the beginning of the year and tappered off the last month or so. He's not ready for the kind of pressure that playing for our Olympic team at home is going to bring. Have still yet to see the whole list, but I'm pretty willing to drink the kool-aid Yzerman is serving.
Good thing they didn't, they were the two best defencemen out there today.
The first USA goal was on a late deflection that barely made it through between his arm and body pads. Not much to say about that one, it happens. Moving on . . .
The second USA goal came off another deflection, this time off a forwrd's skate. Luongo is in the way of the deflection but unable to prevent the short rebound and Parise is in the right place to capitalize. Not sure how he could have smothered it in time, but whatever.
Overall, you have one goal that was pretty tough for any Golaie, and a second goal that was as much attributable to Team Canada's decision to try and protect their lead, rather than increase it. Even the commentators were discussing the momentum shift, as Canada began backing further and further towards their own end as the third period wnet on.
Yeah, well, my opinion on Brodeur is he shouldn't have even been on the team. Just calling it like it was. Every shot on Luongo you had to hold your breath.
Luongo is good. You don't make it to the NHL without being good. But great goalies make that save with 20 seconds to go and the game on the line.
Fleury should have been in the net. I'm not even a fan of him or Pitts, he's just the best goalie Canada had there. But for some reason Red Wings coach Babcock decided to keep him on the bench and go with a grizzled veteran and then the overrated Luongo. Why? Could it have anything to do with the last Cup Final?
I agree 100% with this post. Judging by a lot of the posts about them, If a Canadian player makes any mistake at all he is shit.
This is not like the women's hockey, there are a whole bunch of tough teams now. It will never be a cakewalk for anyone to win ever again. That it why it is so great when we do pull it off.
Look at Crosby, he was criticized pretty much the whole olympics about how he was playing and yet he scores the final Gold medal goal and hes a hero. Just shows you how quickly people opinions can change lol
Any thoughts on no NHL'ers in 2014 (chance to take gold on Russian ice).