Klaus Zaugg says N.A. hockey in crisis

[VanIslander]

Some european german guy bashing north americans and praising europeans

read the subtext

it's pure Don Cherry in reverse

 

[LoudmouthHemskyfan#1]

Interesting how you kept the older Oiler (Pronger - 35 years old in 2010) rather than the older Duck (Niedermayer - 36 years old in 2010).

Niedermayer will likely deteriorate more than Pronger I'm guessing. But that's just a guess. Both could be there for all I know, but it seems as though Niedermayer's already nearly broken physically.

 

[Force]

Some european german guy bashing north americans and praising europeans

read the subtext

it's pure Don Cherry in reverse

Swiss guy.

 

[BigE]

K. Zaugg has been an embodyment of amaturism for several years. Ignore the idiot!!

I was going to say. Thank-you.

 

[zarathustra1900]

Thanks for taking time.

Nothing new really, that is, it is not exactly news.

I think the ultimate *change* that could or would be interesting to take place in NHL hockey is to enlarge the rinks to European/Olympic size...

That would truly be the final straw to force teams/players to play old school/traditional Oilers of the 80's and Candiens of the 60-70's hockey...


...whaic was apparently their intentions with all of these rule changes beginning this season.

Being a Devils fan, well, we are adapting, but that I think would be too big a leap for the NHL...baby steps.


Not that it would ever happen anytime soon regardless.


Thanks for posting... Interesting nonetheless.

ciao

 

[SammyTheBull]

Maybe if Jacques Lemaire was the team Canada head coach...

 

[twelve]

Swiss guy.

But I'm not taking responsibility for anything he says.

The only thing that is sure is that KZ likes to provoke.

 

[Backin72]

haha who is this Klaus Zaugg clown?

Crisis?

 

[Bank Shot]

Haha. Someone tell this clown that speed and skilled players aren't the way to go. Russia lost and they are the fastest and skilled of them all. We'd better all change our game to the trap, using gritty two-way forwards! Huzzah!

 

[Mike8]

Interesting commentary and observations from sometimes controversial IIHF hockey expert writer Klaus Zaugg. Mr. Zaugg's latest writing states that "Jurassic Park" hockey is dead.

He says February 22 might have marked the end of the dinosaurs in international hockey by claiming "Jurassic Park is closed". Mr. Zaugg contends that large slow-footed defensemen like Derian Hatcher and Chris Pronger do not rule the world any longer. He says they just can't keep up with speedy young forwards like Russia's Alexander Ovechkin and Evgeni Malkin or even veterans like Finland's Olli Jokinen and Saku Koivu.

Exaggeration. Derian Hatcher has never 'ruled the world'. He has always had serious flaws in his game that have been exploited by smaller, shifty forwards--especially on the international stage.

Pronger was injured and this slowed him down.

Zaugg's misrepresenting these two defensemen to prove his (incorrect) argument.

He goes on to write that the obstruction crackdown that has banned holding, hooking and interference from NHL and international rinks has given teams like Finland and Russia space to fly in Turin,

Finland used obstruction and trapping methods more than any team in this tournament.

I think the obstruction crackdown led to other teams, like Canada, seeking a more free-flowing system and assuming the obstruction crackdown would in fact be in place.

resulting in the "USA and Canada leaving the Olympics on the same day as Switzerland. Canada is even ranked behind Switzerland in this tournament." Mr. Zaugg proclaims: "This is truly a landmark in the history of international hockey."

Canada's finished far down in the standings in international hockey tournaments many times before. This is no landmark.

He also says that the Canadian losses to Switzerland, Finland and Russia were not because the referees made bad calls or that Team Canada just had some bad luck.
Mr. Zaugg says it was "because they picked the stars of yesterday's hockey to play today's game--a game that has changed fundamentally since last fall. It's a game that has to be played fast and not 'worked slow.' Russia's explosive speed rendered useless the experience, scoring touch, and physical power of the Canadians."

I'd say Russia had the physical power and scoring touch on paper (and in the game) over Canada.

Simply put: Russia's filled with explosive, dynamic players. Canada has very good to great offensive players, but few explosive players. Heatley is actually the only player on Team Canada that I would say can be as explosive as the Russian stars. Lecavalier too, but I'm more wary of depending on him.

Canada did not lose because Canada produces slow hockey players, or because Canada produces unskilled grinders. Canada lost because it never found an identity; its players never found an identity, and the team never played with any cohesion.

Sure, I think in retrospect a lot of mistakes were made in the roster selection. I believe Team Canada had good north-south speed but poor skaters. Meaning: the team has players who can skate up and down the ice, but they have trouble cutting into the middle. Russia controlled the center of the ice all game long. They forced Canada to the outside. Canada, with its strong forwards, should have been cutting into the middle. They didn't and lost.

Players like Bergeron, Crosby, Kariya excel when it comes to zig-zagging and cutting into the middle to generate chances, which'll generate second and third chances.

The only players on this Team Canada who were effective at cutting into the middle to create chances: Sakic and Heatley. And Heatley was playing with Draper, for God knows what reason.

Mr. Zaugg concludes by asking these questions:
"Will February 22 prove to be just a joke of the hockey gods? Will the dinosaurs return to rule again? I don't think so. Hockey has never been so fast or exciting as it's here in Turin. It's at a whole new level. What we saw during the Preliminary Round has continued in the life-or-death playoff games."

Russia-Canada was exciting. Games with Finland involved have been less exciting.

And finally, Mr. Zaugg asks:
"And here is a question a European hockey writer can ask, while a Canadian can only do so with great difficulty: is Wayne Gretzky able to adapt? His golden touch as the mastermind behind Team Canada failed on February 22. What a sad day for Canadian hockey."

Sensational alarmist journalism at its best (or worst?). A very generic piece that is unfortunately common-place whenever Canada has moderate struggles.

Bottom-line:

- Canada produces tremendously skilled talent & great skaters

- Canada had a bad tournament. It happens.

- Losing and being disappointed will only serve to humble Canada, which is a necessity once in awhile, along with hopefully provide some hunger. Also: it should give way to a younger generation (Crosby, Bergeron, et al.) who are better suited for the wider ice surface

- Canada is not the dominant hockey nation, so expecting Canada to win gold each and every Olympics/World Cup is setting the team up for failure. Having the wealth of talent spread around among nations is better and more enjoyable for hockey anyhow.


In other words: I don't see what's so interesting about this article. It seems generic to me, and all the examples used to bolster the argument that Canada's a 'dinosaur' hockey nation are very flawed.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Jesus Christ!! This guy expresses my exact sentiments. I couldn't agree more (not being sarcastic, i'm serious).

What you are applauding are the rantings of a guy who's embellishing facts to make a splash.

Does everyone forget 2002?
How about the World Cup?
How about recent world championships?

Even then, I can't understand why everyone seems to think a two week hockey tournament (with teams that rarely play together) is going to shatter the way we view the hockey world.

Anyone who counted out Euro teams because of 2002 was a numbskull.
Anyone who dismisses Canada and the US because of 2006 is equally silly.

 

[Vic Rattlehead*]

Jeez, we lose one tournament and it's the end of the world.

 

[Greyhounds]

Pulp for the masses.

First of all, hockey talent goes in cycles. We aren't so naive to think that only Canada can put together a talented hockey club at the national level. The other countries also have substantial talent. Canada won't be there to grab a medal every year.

Second, the year off in the NHL make it a little tricky to decide what sort of team should be iced for Canada. The decision, obviously, was to take the conservative route and select essentially the previous Canada team. Didn't work out.

Third, those of you who caught today's game with Finland, on USA network, would have heard that Finland has been making an effort to produce more gritty players. In fact, their rinks are not international size; they are 91-93 feet wide as opposed to 100. This encourages more skill along the boards. Why? They recognize that grit is useful, even on the speediest teams.

Canada is no stranger to speed. Our hockey consists of both grit and speed. This year's team had some flaws. Don't expect those flaws to be there in 4 years.