Canada or the USA U18?

Status
Not open for further replies.

VOB

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,692
0
Michigan
Visit site
HabLover said:
Of course Monster Bertuzzi is right, but until someone lays it out for you, JJ to you is #2 in everyone's eyes, but I think this tourney proved otherwise. He may have been solid in some respects, but he clearly didn't dominate to the point he has been hyped by you and NMK, etc.

Just a quick question, how many times have you seen Johnson play?


Believe me in that he is the real deal and will be a solid NHL defensemen.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,014
11,020
Murica
VOB said:
Just a quick question, how many times have you seen Johnson play?


Believe me in that he is the real deal and will be a solid NHL defensemen.


HabLover doesn't believe in first hand viewings. It's all hearsay and innuendo with him.
 

monster_bertuzzi

registered user
May 26, 2003
32,733
3
Vancouver
Visit site
Rabid Ranger said:
What level of "domination" were you expecting? He was the best defenseman on the best team in the tournament. The fact remains that he is the top ranked defenseman by virtually every major scouting service, and nothing you say can prove otherwise. As for monster bertuzzi, he's the biggest Gilbert Brule fanboy on these boards, so I'm not surprised he'll come to the aid of his hero.

No aid to my hero here, I was just pointing out the rankings of all the magazines. But HELL YES, Johnson is easily the best defenceman for the draft. Easily.
 

LaLaLaprise

lalalaprise -twitter
Feb 28, 2002
8,716
1
Halifax, Nova Scotia
VOB said:
Nice way of putting it. I wonder if the game would have been different had Canada started Pelletier instead?

I still think we would have lost. Pelletier would have had to have gotten a shutout.

Price was shaky all tournment, yet Camp kept playing him.
 

HabLover

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
2,482
0
Sandspit
Visit site
La-La-Laprise said:
Price.... :help:

Goaltending was not the problem and Price was far from being the problem at this tourney. Remember Pelletier played against the Danes and the Germans, hardly world class competition. Price didn't stand on his head today, but you can hardly blame him on any of the goals. If Canada had of scored on chances per shots, compare with the USA, the game would have been a different outcome.
 

CH Wizard

Guest
HabLover said:
Price didn't stand on his head today, but you can hardly blame him on any of the goals.

He let Kessel do the first move and he payed the price.He was just not awake.He's low at making the first move, he should work on that because vs the Czechs on a breakaway he made the first move not on time and a canadian d putted the puck between the leg of his own goalie.Again, against the swedes, he allowed a soft goal, his team lost like that (he's too slow)I expected Price to do way better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

GoSSCHgo

Registered User
Apr 3, 2005
30
0
I'm amazed at all the *****ing. What we have here is essentially the same hockey system, spread out on both sides of the border. A lot of our guys are playing in their prep schools, the USHL and other leagues. A lot of their guys come up to play in our Major Junior and Tier II leagues.

Same holds true for women's ice hockey. Kessel is a heckuva player, whether or not Crosby and Brule were there. Johnston is a terrific D, and Luc Bourdon was a revelation at the tournament. The U.S. under-17s (1988) are coming along with some pretty good talent as well, and Canada has tons of wonderful players in the 1988s and 1989s, again on both sides of the border.

We'll win some, they'll win some, and in the meantime we'll all be entertained by talented players.

That works for me.
 

Genghis Keon

Registered User
Apr 1, 2002
918
115
Visit site
La-La-Laprise said:
Price.... :help:

Does he remind you a bit of goalies like Brian Finley, Mathieu Garon, and Dan Cloutier? To me, they're all goalies who have very impressive tools (good frames, reflexes, and raw lateral speed) and they're all basically unbeatable when they're on (though I've never seen Price on), but their styles are not "solid." Technically, they don't always stay square and they don't always close the holes very effectively: they all seem to spread out on a lot of bang-bang or in close shots, letting the puck have a chance of going through them, instead of squaring up and compacting, which makes the shooter have to pick a corner or shelf it to have a chance of scoring.
 

NWDood

Registered User
Apr 18, 2005
35
0
Vancouver
The Great One said:
He let Kessel do the first move and he payed the price.He was just not awake.He's low at making the first move, he should work on that because vs the Czechs on a breakaway he made the first move not on time and a canadian d putted the puck between the leg of his own goalie.Again, against the swedes, he allowed a soft goal, his team lost like that (he's too slow)I expected Price to do way better.

Mistakes like that are made by tired players. Price has probably played over 80 games this year. I would guess that's at least 30 more than any other tendy there. I've seen Price a lot the last couple of years and he's very good.
 

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
24,472
6,298
Colorado
Speed Demon said:
Only reason USA won is because Canada didn't have their best players. Sorry USA.

Ahh, damn. There goes the theory that Canada could ice three teams at every tournament and compete for all three medals.
 

HabLover

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
2,482
0
Sandspit
Visit site
Mobey said:
Ahh, damn. There goes the theory that Canada could ice three teams at every tournament and compete for all three medals.


Well, we did at the U17's last year as Mr. Kessel, Mueller, Johnson, Frazee and co. were shutout!! And Crosby didn't even play in that tourney either.
 

HabLover

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
2,482
0
Sandspit
Visit site
Mobey said:
So then why whine now?

I'm not.

Canada got beat today, big deal. It sucks to lose, but they gave all they had. I really would have been impressed if they had won the gold. They played well and fired alot of shots at Frazee, but were denied when they needed a goal or two. The USA was good and minus Kessel it might have been a different story. Canada won the summer tourney last year and the USA won this one for 87's. Pretty good for NA.
 

Seachd

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
24,937
8,946
Rabid Ranger said:
What level of "domination" were you expecting? He was the best defenseman on the best team in the tournament.

I only saw 2 of the Americans' games, and I thought Johnson would be a little better. He clearly has all the tools, but I just felt that he could have been better. Maybe he was a little overshadowed because he was on such a good team.

But I certainly can't argue with Bourdon being named the best d-man of the tournament.
 

Le Golie

...
Jul 4, 2002
8,541
464
Rabid Ranger said:
When Ondřej Pavelec is named top goaltender over Jeff Frazee, I take the tournament All-Star team with a grain of salt. Whatever makes you feel better though.

Pavelec was the top goaltender.

He was outstanding against the US in the round robin and gave his team a chance to win where they had no business running with the Americans. He was also the difference in the win against Russia, and against Canada again he kept the Czechs in the game and his play had them ahead of Canada in the third period.

Frazee was ok all tournament but he never had to be the difference until the final game. That was the only game he was forced to fend off a serious threat.

Everyone at the tournament was raving over Pavelec. He was very, very good.
 

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,014
11,020
Murica
Le Golie said:
Pavelec was the top goaltender.

He was outstanding against the US in the round robin and gave his team a chance to win where they had no business running with the Americans. He was also the difference in the win against Russia, and against Canada again he kept the Czechs in the game and his play had them ahead of Canada in the third period.

Frazee was ok all tournament but he never had to be the difference until the final game. That was the only game he was forced to fend off a serious threat.

Everyone at the tournament was raving over Pavelec. He was very, very good.


You're evaluation of Frazee's overall play and contributions to the team couldn't be more wrong.
 

Le Golie

...
Jul 4, 2002
8,541
464
Rabid Ranger said:
You're evaluation of Frazee's overall play and contributions to the team couldn't be more wrong.

Yes it could be. I could have said he played bad and had nothing to do with his teams success. I didn't say that at all.

Frazee was good when he had to be but the American team wasn't ever seriously threatened until the final. They won with their offense. Sure the game against the Czechs was close, but it was only close because of Pavelec.

Pavelec was good when he had to be, and he had to be good a lot more than Frazee. He was a clear game breaker in the win over Russia and he almost pulled off two huge wins that a goalie shouldn't have been able to do alone.

Not taking anything away from Frazee but he was never a real difference maker until the final game. Even in that game the Americans were the better team.
 

espo*

Guest
Le Golie said:
Pavelec was the top goaltender.

He was outstanding against the US in the round robin and gave his team a chance to win where they had no business running with the Americans. He was also the difference in the win against Russia, and against Canada again he kept the Czechs in the game and his play had them ahead of Canada in the third period.

Frazee was ok all tournament but he never had to be the difference until the final game. That was the only game he was forced to fend off a serious threat.

Everyone at the tournament was raving over Pavelec. He was very, very good.
Yeah, i thought that Czech goaltender was real good from what i saw.Holds the fort well.
 

LaLaLaprise

lalalaprise -twitter
Feb 28, 2002
8,716
1
Halifax, Nova Scotia
HabLover said:
Goaltending was not the problem and Price was far from being the problem at this tourney. Remember Pelletier played against the Danes and the Germans, hardly world class competition. Price didn't stand on his head today, but you can hardly blame him on any of the goals. If Canada had of scored on chances per shots, compare with the USA, the game would have been a different outcome.

It WAS a problem. Shots were 27-11 Canada and we were down 3-1. When your goalie isnt coming up with the big stops it is hard to concentrate on puting the puck in the net.
 

HabLover

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
2,482
0
Sandspit
Visit site
Rabid Ranger said:
I'm not sure how you can say that when the U.S. has received contributions offensively from a variety of players. As for Canada getting 45 shots on goal, I don't think so. There would have to be a monumental collapse on the part of the U.S. defense for that to happen.

Didn't Canada have 49 shots on net? I guess JJ wasn't part of that monumental collapse cuz he is in a totally different stratosphere than anyone else! :biglaugh:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->