Toggle sidebar

GDT: Anaheim players at the World Cup

Status
Not open for further replies.
WhatTheDuck

WhatTheDuck

9 - 20 - 8
May 17, 2007
23,303
15,909
Worst Case, Ontario
Ducks DVM said:
I don't understand why the USA made a big show of saying they were going to beat Canada into submission, playing that way in the first exhibition game, then rolling over in this one. I wonder if the NHL and/or NHPLA told them to cool it so nobodies investment was ruined for the NHL season.
Click to expand...

USA hockey should give themselves more credit than that. The best team they can put together is more than good enough to beat any of these top teams, they shouldn't focus on building around beating Canada or anyone else in particular.
 

DucksAreCool

Registered User
Feb 24, 2015
1,147
1
Exit Dose said:
That's just a guess on your part. I'm sure they are starving for hockey, but that doesn't mean that the World Cup is going away. The NHL wants to replace the Olympics with a tournament that's better timed for them, midseason injuries are a bigger issue for teams looking to contend, and better suited to them financially. There is absolutely nothing right now that would indicate that they've given up on that. If the fans want an international tournament, then the NHL will want to be the ones providing it.

As for the bold, I don't follow.
Click to expand...
I think you may be right that the World Cup will stick around but I think the Olympics would turn into a U-23 tournament, not a semi-pro one. Kind of like a midpoint tournament between the World Juniors and the World Cup. The World Championships would continue to be mostly an afterthought.
 
Exit Dose

Exit Dose

Registered User
Jul 2, 2011
29,203
3,336
Georgia
DucksAreCool said:
I think you may be right that the World Cup will stick around but I think the Olympics would turn into a U-23 tournament, not a semi-pro one. Kind of like a midpoint tournament between the World Juniors and the World Cup. The World Championships would continue to be mostly an afterthought.
Click to expand...

It's hard to say. It depends on whether teams would release their AHL players for the tourney.
 
Sojourn

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
As exciting as the NA team is to watch, this is a good example of why it's all a bit of a joke. That team didn't hurt Canada much, or really at all. Who makes the Canadian team from NA? McDavid? Maybe, and possibly only as an extra forward. He's not really a clear choice over anyone, but I could see him playing.

Team USA though, got hit pretty hard. Not having access to Gaudreau, Larkin, Eichel, Matthews, and even Saad. These are the types of players the US could have used. Having access to them could also justify keeping someone like Jack Johnson off the roster, because the US team might emphasize the grit aspect a little less, and want a more skilled defenseman, which they definitely needed.
 
dracom

dracom

Registered User
Dec 22, 2015
13,291
9,055
Vancouver, WA
Sojourn said:
As exciting as the NA team is to watch, this is a good example of why it's all a bit of a joke. That team didn't hurt Canada much, or really at all. Who makes the Canadian team from NA? McDavid? Maybe, and possibly only as an extra forward. He's not really a clear choice over anyone, but I could see him playing.

Team USA though, got hit pretty hard. Not having access to Gaudreau, Larkin, Eichel, Matthews, and even Saad. These are the types of players the US could have used. Having access to them could also justify keeping someone like Jack Johnson off the roster, because the US team might emphasize the grit aspect a little less, and want a more skilled defenseman, which they definitely needed.
Click to expand...

Team USA wanted grit over skill. It's why they had Abdelkader in over Kessel or Tyler Johnson. Even if they had accessed to guys like Larkin, Eichel,Matthews I bet they wouldn't take them. Maybe now that they got embarrassed, those in charge will start taking the best players so they can actually compete.
 

DucksAreCool

Registered User
Feb 24, 2015
1,147
1
Sojourn said:
As exciting as the NA team is to watch, this is a good example of why it's all a bit of a joke. That team didn't hurt Canada much, or really at all. Who makes the Canadian team from NA? McDavid? Maybe, and possibly only as an extra forward. He's not really a clear choice over anyone, but I could see him playing.

Team USA though, got hit pretty hard. Not having access to Gaudreau, Larkin, Eichel, Matthews, and even Saad. These are the types of players the US could have used. Having access to them could also justify keeping someone like Jack Johnson off the roster, because the US team might emphasize the grit aspect a little less, and want a more skilled defenseman, which they definitely needed.
Click to expand...
I don't know, I think McDavid would definitely make the Canadian team and may have been a difference maker with all that talent around him. Canada can absorb that easily, though.

Maybe USA hockey would have picked Gaudreau and Saad but they had just as skilled goal scorers available to them that they chose not to pick. USA hurt itself with who they picked, I don't think North America being there can be blamed for that.

Basically, I think any player USA may have picked if North America didn't exist had another player they could have picked of equal value (in this short tournament setting) but chose not to.
 
Sojourn

Sojourn

Registered User
Nov 1, 2006
50,523
9,377
DucksAreCool said:
I don't know, I think McDavid would definitely make the Canadian team and may have been a difference maker with all that talent around him. Canada can absorb that easily, though.

Maybe USA hockey would have picked Gaudreau and Saad but they had just as skilled goal scorers available to them that they chose not to pick. USA hurt itself with who they picked, I don't think North America being there can be blamed for that.

Basically, I think any player USA may have picked if North America didn't exist had another player they could have picked of equal value (in this short tournament setting) but chose not to.
Click to expand...

The problem is that, I think, Team USA had to choose between emphasizing talent or grit. Adding 2 skill players(like Kessel or T. Johnson) is one thing. Being able to add 4 or 5 more skill players, well, that can completely change the make-up of the team. In essence, I think you could argue that Team USA felt they needed to emphasize grit, because they didn't have enough skill to match other teams in that department. It's a difference between adding some more skill, and being able to have that skill define your identity. I think they could have done the former. I don't think they could have done the latter. Not with some of their best pure talents forced to play for the NA team.

I can see McDavid making the team, but I can't see it being as a center. Who does he beat out? As a winger, his options are there, but sometimes there is chemistry and roles to consider. McDavid is as dynamic as they come offensively, but one of the things that makes Canada so good is they excel on both sides of the puck. McDavid adds to the former, but not the latter, and I don't think that McDavid's offensive play, at this stage, is so good that Babcock would favor him over more well-rounded players. Canada is a team that beats you offensively and defensively, and it's not like they lack offensive talent. I don't think McDavid is a lock when you consider the team they've built. I'm sure some people would disagree with me, but consider guys like Subban and Letang kept off the team. To me, that's McDavid. Dynamic, exciting, and with the puck he's lethal. But Canada is a team that wants their players to be just as good without the puck. That isn't McDavid yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom