U20 Team USA: six players added

[speeds]

Is Jessiman injured or something, just playing bad? Is US hockey just not a fan of him?

Seems kind of strange he wouldn't be selected, or is he too old?

 

[FiveforFighting]

Something that has to be realized is that the US wasn't looking for who was better, they wanted kids who play well together, have played together, and can play certain roles. The majority of their picks played together at the WJC last year or were part of the USNTDP.

I say good for them...what is the use of having a "National Team Development Program" if you don't use it to produce your national team? It honors a designation that no doubt these kids wanted when they signed up for the USNTDP. USA is trying to build team chemistry instead of just putting an All-Star team out there and letting them try to fill the nets. Which I also might add is a similar strategy they used in the 1980 Olympics, but that is another whole situation , it won't be a miracle if the US wins, but I would definitely point to the strategic roster planning as the key, by the same token if they lose, alot of people will be wondering why the above mentioned players that are more talented were left off of the roster, so it is important that they perform well.

I understand what your saying but the puck does have to go in the net.
Also this is a tournament for the best players. everyone wants to see the best players perform and I'm sure that would be the case for you.
To pick role players in a tournament of this magnitude is a shame. Do you think Fans want to see a team playing the neutral zone trap at the junior level. What do you think this great tournament will turn into if it is won by a team that wins by using a trapping defense. Creative hockey is the best game going: win, lose, or draw it is what the fans want to see and pay to see. They do not want to see role players at an international junior allstar tournament.

 

[FiveforFighting]

Is Jessiman injured or something, just playing bad? Is US hockey just not a fan of him?

Seems kind of strange he wouldn't be selected, or is he too old?

He's not to old. Draw your own conclusions about the rest.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

He's not to old. Draw your own conclusions about the rest.

What, that he's a "project"? I don't think anyone doubts that. He's just not at the right stage of development this year to make the U.S. squad, and I think that speaks more about the current depth of U.S. hockey than it does about Jessiman's ability or rate of progress.

 

[TMHUNH]

I understand what your saying but the puck does have to go in the net.
Also this is a tournament for the best players. everyone wants to see the best players perform and I'm sure that would be the case for you.
To pick role players in a tournament of this magnitude is a shame. Do you think Fans want to see a team playing the neutral zone trap at the junior level. What do you think this great tournament will turn into if it is won by a team that wins by using a trapping defense. Creative hockey is the best game going: win, lose, or draw it is what the fans want to see and pay to see. They do not want to see role players at an international junior allstar tournament.

No one said they were role players. Plenty of the players on the roster can score, the catch was most of them had to come from the U-18 team or last years WJC. So instead of taking "better" scorers like Schremp, Jessiman etc.. they took guys like Werner instead, but he is a scorer in his own right. The original argument was for Hennessy and he would be a role player anyway, so your point is pretty far fetched. The bottom line is... the USA likes to feed their roster from their "development team" instead of reaching for CHL guys like Schremp and Hennessy. For whatever reason.

 

[FiveforFighting]

No one said they were role players. Plenty of the players on the roster can score, the catch was most of them had to come from the U-18 team or last years WJC. So instead of taking "better" scorers like Schremp, Jessiman etc.. they took guys like Werner instead, but he is a scorer in his own right. The original argument was for Hennessy and he would be a role player anyway, so your point is pretty far fetched. The bottom line is... the USA likes to feed their roster from their "development team" instead of reaching for CHL guys like Schremp and Hennessy. For whatever reason.

My point is fairly simple. Take the best players no matter what league or team they play for. Take the best players that deserve to go! The Fans deserve to see creative hockey. Keep politics out of the process. Simple!

 

[Rabid Ranger]

No one said they were role players. Plenty of the players on the roster can score, the catch was most of them had to come from the U-18 team or last years WJC. So instead of taking "better" scorers like Schremp, Jessiman etc.. they took guys like Werner instead, but he is a scorer in his own right. The original argument was for Hennessy and he would be a role player anyway, so your point is pretty far fetched. The bottom line is... the USA likes to feed their roster from their "development team" instead of reaching for CHL guys like Schremp and Hennessy. For whatever reason.

You already mentioned the reason. USA Hockey wants to carry over the success it's had with it's under 17/18 squads to the under 20 WJC's. Naturally, that's going to mean keeping many of the same players, even if a couple standouts (as individuals) aren't there.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

My point is fairly simple. Take the best players no matter what league or team they play for. Take the best players that deserve to go! The Fans deserve to see creative hockey. Keep politics out of the process. Simple!

Do you have any clue about the calibre of offensive talent on the U.S. roster? It's outstanding. There will be plenty of "creative" hockey from the defense and the forwards.

 

[Marshall]

My point is fairly simple. Take the best players no matter what league or team they play for. Take the best players that deserve to go! The Fans deserve to see creative hockey. Keep politics out of the process. Simple!

So take a team that may have more skill, but less chemistry and teamwork so that the team can lose in a creative and appealing manner?

Take the best team. The best team is the team that has the best chance to win. I'd rather see a 'boring' 2 - 1 victory for the team I was rooting for (in this case, the US), than a 'creative' 5 - 4 loss.

Schremp got himself into this mess. I'd like to see what he could do, but understand and agree with the reasons why he was left off.

 

[FiveforFighting]

Something that has to be realized is that the US wasn't looking for who was better, they wanted kids who play well together, have played together, and can play certain roles. The majority of their picks played together at the WJC last year or were part of the USNTDP.

 

[cagney]

Word out of Grand Forks, ND is that Drew Stafford, a forward with the University of North Dakota, will be making the trip with the US team. Whether that means a player on the US team is injured, or a player is perhaps not going to be released by his NHL team, I don't know. I guess we will know soon enough.

It looks like Stafford will replace Dustin Brown who is still having problems with an injury...

USA Hockey

Personally, I would have taken Stafford over David Booth in the first place. Now with Brown being out, I think they need someone who can replace his offense. I doubt Stafford or Booth will be able to do that. Hopefully they don't end up having problems scoring because of these decisions.

This also makes me wonder a bit about the lines now. I figured they would have Brown with Zach Parise and Brady Murray. Now who plays with them? You could put Pat Eaves there but I'd rather keep him with O'Sullivan at this point as they've been dynamite together. Could Fritsche or Kesler end up in that RW spot? Or will they try to get Stafford on that line somehow (from what I understand, both Murray and Stafford are LW's)? Either way, they have to find someone who can really finish to play with Parise IMO.

I really don't have as much faith in the guys at USA Hockey as I'd like to have unfortunately. I'm beginning to worry that they might screw up one of the USA's best ever chances to win this thing.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

It looks like Stafford will replace Dustin Brown who is still having problems with an injury...

USA Hockey

Personally, I would have taken Stafford over David Booth in the first place. Now with Brown being out, I think they need someone who can replace his offense. I doubt Stafford or Booth will be able to do that. Hopefully they don't end up having problems scoring because of these decisions.

This also makes me wonder a bit about the lines now. I figured they would have Brown with Zach Parise and Brady Murray. Now who plays with them? You could put Pat Eaves there but I'd rather keep him with O'Sullivan at this point as they've been dynamite together. Could Fritsche or Kesler end up in that RW spot? Or will they try to get Stafford on that line somehow (from what I understand, both Murray and Stafford are LW's)? Either way, they have to find someone who can really finish to play with Parise IMO.

I really don't have as much faith in the guys at USA Hockey as I'd like to have unfortunately. I'm beginning to worry that they might screw up one of the USA's best ever chances to win this thing.

May I ask what your main concern is? Is it lack of scoring? I'm not sure who could have been added (with the exception of Schremp) that could really be considered a "differance maker" on the U.S. team. I think alot of these guys (like Werner for instance) are underrated as offensive talents, and will be fine. Another aspect to remember is team chemistry, and the U.S. should have one of the most cohesive units in the tourney.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Kesler is a go:

http://www.canoe.ca/Slam031213/ahl_win3-sun.html

 

[MentalPowerHouse]

Alot of people are calling them the favourties but I am not quite sure. They have some forwards that can score, but they are rather weak for the most part other than that. They are somewhat small, goaltending is a question, and their defensemen are not all that impressive. I am not saying they will suck, and I do think they can compete with the top teams, but they are somewhat overrated in my opinion. This may be the best USA team in a while, but thats not saying all that much. In comparison to the other teams, they have strong and weak points, and are no better.

This should be a interesting tournament with Canada and Russia being strong as always, with USA putting forth a strong team. I think the Czech team is a little forgotten and underrated. Finland may play a very had tournament and be a tough team to beat as well.

 

[FiveforFighting]

So take a team that may have more skill, but less chemistry and teamwork so that the team can lose in a creative and appealing manner?

Take the best team. The best team is the team that has the best chance to win. I'd rather see a 'boring' 2 - 1 victory for the team I was rooting for (in this case, the US), than a 'creative' 5 - 4 loss.

Schremp got himself into this mess. I'd like to see what he could do, but understand and agree with the reasons why he was left off.

I wonder how many hockey fans would agrea with this statement!

I wonder how the last olympic games would have turned out if Wayne and co. didn't pick all the best most highly skilled hockey players.