Olympics: US Takes only 9 of Top 20 Scorers

[AmericanDream]

I didn't realise just how much scoring the US was not taking until I looked today at our top 20 scorers and how many will be going to Vancouver.

I am also well aware of what kind of team we are building, and that we aren't just putting out the best scoring players, but can anyone remember a time when the US left off this many top 20 scorers for any competition?

I took a glance at Canada, and as deep as they are, I think they are missing less from their top 20, then we are. Now thats nothing to really compare as they are soooo deep, but the US is going to need all the scoring we can get.


The top 20 US players that are going to Vancouver:

Kane- 56 points
Parise- 47 points
Kesler- 42 points
Stastny- 44 points
Langenbrunner- 41 points
Ryan- 38 points
Malone- 38 points
Brown- 32 points
Kessel- 27 points

The top 20 US players that aren't going to Vancouver:

Tim Connolly- 39 points
Bill Guerin- 33 points
RJ Umberger- 32 points
Kyle Okposo- 32 points
Scott Gomez- 32 points
Blake Wheeler- 28 points
Jason Pominville- 29 points
David Legwand- 28 points
Matt Cullen- 28 points
James vanRiemsdyk- 28 points
Lee Stempniak 27 points

All that I am saying is that I cannot recall the US leaving this many top 20 scorers behind, with that said, I certainly wouldn't want a couple of these guys on the team anyway, but you have to hope that Burke and co. have put enough fuel in the tank.

I still feel this team will win a medal, and much of that has to do with Miller and our big mobile defense (especially if either Gleason or Whitney gets added), but a few of these guys would have looked pretty nice on the team instead of a couple of guys we did pick imo.

Click to read more...

 

[knifer]

Its pretty simple, Burke builds his teams with a distinct top 6 and bottom 6.

 

[Matata]

During the recent world juniors, the announcer had commented that the US had success because they went with the best team guys and left the 'fancy Dans' at home.

Teams Canada and Sweden are also employing this tactic because they have deep enough talent pools to leave out the non-elite scorers.

 

[JMFJ 3]

The US has plenty of weapons to find the back of the net, it's really a nice balance of finesse and grit.

 

[BLONG7]

Its pretty simple, Burke builds his teams with a distinct top 6 and bottom 6.

just look at the Leafs...Burkie knows what he is doing...

 

[Big Phil]

It is a weird US team they built this year. Leaving Gomez, Pominville and Connolly off the team was a little shocking for me in the first place but I think on paper at least this is the worst US team they have named in a while. There was a time say 1996, 1998, 2002 etc. when you looked at the roster to the US team and saw the names of: Roenick, Hull, Modano, Weight, Lafontaine, Amonte, Tkachuk, Leclair and Guerin and you realized that there were three high scoring lines they could throw at you. This US team doesn't scare anybody. I know they are in transition and don't have the players to compete with their peak (1996 World Cup) but I remember having those teams strike a little fear into me and to be honest Burke probably could have picked a team that had a little more firepower.

 

[Tyler Myers]

this may not be the best possible team but this is the core they have going forward. giving them experience will only benefit them in the long run.

 

[Big Phil]

this may not be the best possible team but this is the core they have going forward. giving them experience will only benefit them in the long run.

perhaps, but you need to win now! I don't think there was a single player on Canada that was wasted on being "groomed" for future Olympics. Even Drew Doughty was young but I think earned his stripes to get selected. I would rather pick a team with the best players NOW than the ones that will be more ready in 2014

 

[BillyShoe1721]

perhaps, but you need to win now! I don't think there was a single player on Canada that was wasted on being "groomed" for future Olympics. Even Drew Doughty was young but I think earned his stripes to get selected. I would rather pick a team with the best players NOW than the ones that will be more ready in 2014

There's a big, big difference between the US and Canada in terms of international play.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

It is a weird US team they built this year. Leaving Gomez, Pominville and Connolly off the team was a little shocking for me in the first place but I think on paper at least this is the worst US team they have named in a while. There was a time say 1996, 1998, 2002 etc. when you looked at the roster to the US team and saw the names of: Roenick, Hull, Modano, Weight, Lafontaine, Amonte, Tkachuk, Leclair and Guerin and you realized that there were three high scoring lines they could throw at you. This US team doesn't scare anybody. I know they are in transition and don't have the players to compete with their peak (1996 World Cup) but I remember having those teams strike a little fear into me and to be honest Burke probably could have picked a team that had a little more firepower.

I really hope the rest of field feels the same way you do. As a matter of fact, Burke and co are banking on such arrogance.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

perhaps, but you need to win now! I don't think there was a single player on Canada that was wasted on being "groomed" for future Olympics. Even Drew Doughty was young but I think earned his stripes to get selected. I would rather pick a team with the best players NOW than the ones that will be more ready in 2014

You wade repeatedly into these threads with the same level of ignorance. Burke could have taken the top 12 or 13 American scorers, but he rightly surmised that wasn't going to result in the right type of team that would be capable of medaling. Instead, he chose to build a more traditional team. To say that just because this team is young means that to win now is not the objective completely misses the point. Burke and co went with the team they felt like would give the U.S. the best opportunity to not only win a medal, but win gold. Whether that will happen or not is unknown, but it is the objective.

 

[TheBradyBunch]

You wade repeatedly into these threads with the same level of ignorance. Burke could have taken the top 12 or 13 American scorers, but he rightly surmised that wasn't going to result in the right type of team that would be capable of mealing. Instead, he chose to build a more traditional team. To say that just because this team is young means that to win now is not the objective completely misses the point. Burke and co went with the team they felt like would give the U.S. the best opportunity to not only win a medal, but win gold. Whether that will happen or not is unknown, but it is the objective.

Remember when Gretzky employed the same tactic for Canada as Burke is for the U.S?
Draper was great!

What if one of your scoring lines doesn't produce? Players slump. Do you really want all offensive responsibilities to fall on the shoulders of 3 guys?

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Remember when Gretzky employed the same tactic for Canada as Burke is for the U.S?
Draper was great!

What if one of your scoring lines doesn't produce? Players slump. Do you really want all offensive responsibilities to fall on the shoulders of 3 guys?

Kris Draper or Rob Zamuner didn't cost Canada a medal. IMO, the U.S. has enough offensive depth to get the job done. If not, one or two guys wouldn't make ANY differance.

 

[Matata]

During the recent world juniors, the announcer had commented that the US had success in juniors because they went with the best team guys and left the 'fancy Dans' at home.

Teams Canada and Sweden are also employing this tactic because they have deep enough talent pools to leave out the non-elite scorers.

 

[SabresSharks]

Why is it so difficult for some to understand that selecting a team with the best chance of winning is not the same as selecting an all-star team?

 

[knifer]

During the recent world juniors, the announcer had commented that the US had success in juniors because they went with the best team guys and left the 'fancy Dans' at home.

Teams Canada and Sweden are also employing this tactic because they have deep enough talent pools to leave out the non-elite scorers.

Theres one way to get your post count up, anyways I think if they US went with a third scoring line it would have been a huge mistake.

This team was never one that was going to beat teams with their scoring prowess and Burke knew this. For this team to win gold they will have to become a team and win all the little battles and have outstanding goaltending.

I think if things come together for this squad watch out, seems like they are severely underrated.

 

[CapsWolverinesUSA]

The "9 of the top 20" stat is a little misleading since they're taking 7 of the top 8. Connolly (6th) is the only guy who is really an outlier here, and his omission is simply a product of the fact that he is not the kind of center Burke is looking for as a 3rd/4th liner, and Kessler and Statsny (the top 2 centers) are ranked higher on the list than Connolly is.

 

[Bob Probert Owns You]

I wish Connolly would have made the team over Drury..... and I think Okposo or Oshie should have been added, too.

 

[BIG BLUE]

it's pretty apparent that the USA GMs who made up this team aren't fond of Tim Connoly...I think he's got a poor rep in terms of attitude etc...he wasn't even invited to the summer camp..

 

[R S]

Yep, it's a Brian Burke team...no real surprise.

They could've brought a lot more talent, and I think they will regret it. Burke new his top end talent can't compete with the likes of Canada/Russia/Sweden, so he had to build a complete team. Overall in the general sense it's a good idea, but there were still a number of omissions in my mind, atleast up front.

 

[Mr Brownstone]

I didn't realize that scoring was the only thing needed when building a team. Thanks for the enlightenment. I guess defensive responsibility and grit don't mean a thing.

If this tournament were held overseas on the bigger surface, you'd have a lot more of an argument and there would have been different players selected. But, on the North American rink, with more of an ability to play a physical game and take a shutdown line with you, the construction of this team makes perfect sense.

 

[BIG BLUE]

3 top lines...a 4th line and an extra forward...here they are...plenty of offense...

the top group are the top 3 lines the bottom are the 4th line and the extra guy...

it's either the same as below...or Malone or Langenbrunner drops to the 4th line and Brown moves up

Patrick Kane
Ryan Kesler
Phil Kessel
Jamie Langenbrunner
Ryan Malone
Zach Parise
Joe Pavelski
Bobby Ryan
Paul Stastny

Dustin Brown
David Backes
Ryan Callahan
Chris Drury

What if one of your scoring lines doesn't produce? Players slump. Do you really want all offensive responsibilities to fall on the shoulders of 3 guys?

all 3 of those lines above are talented offensively...even the 4th can score

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Is the U.S. top six as talented as Canada's or Russia's? No, but they are talented. This underrating of American talent is amusing to say the least. Yeah, there's no way Pat Kane, Zach Parise, Paul Stastny, and co are going to be able to do squat.....

 

[dubey]

just look at the Leafs...Burkie knows what he is doing...

To be fair, our team is almost all bottom 6

Canada did kind of the same thing but as a whole we have a lot more talent to choose from. Selecting a team isn't about taking all of the top scorers. Everyone has a role and I guess what Burke and co. were trying to do is get players that were already comfortable in those roles rather than selecting scorers and forcing them to adapt to a style they weren't comfortable playing.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

It is a weird US team they built this year. Leaving Gomez, Pominville and Connolly off the team was a little shocking for me in the first place but I think on paper at least this is the worst US team they have named in a while. There was a time say 1996, 1998, 2002 etc. when you looked at the roster to the US team and saw the names of: Roenick, Hull, Modano, Weight, Lafontaine, Amonte, Tkachuk, Leclair and Guerin and you realized that there were three high scoring lines they could throw at you. This US team doesn't scare anybody. I know they are in transition and don't have the players to compete with their peak (1996 World Cup) but I remember having those teams strike a little fear into me and to be honest Burke probably could have picked a team that had a little more firepower.

First - I think it should be pretty obvious from looking at the "top 20 scoring list" that unless a team is going to take 20 forwards, most teams aren't going to have most of top 20 lists. And looking at total points is misleading when some of the guys selected have missed games (Kessel).

I'd bet that guys like Kane, Parise and Ryan have better careers than most of the guys you mentioned. Of course they haven't proven as much, because they're all 22-23 YO. The US team is definetely in transition - but I'd MUCH rather have the young guys than trot out the Guerin's & Modano's for one more kick at the can.

From a team perspective - how does Tim Connelly or Scott Gomez fit into the 4th line center role? I think that Burke was smart to take the best player for the role he needed, rather than take the highest skilled player available.

Yzerman did the same thing with Team Canada. It's obvious that Team Canada is the deepest team in the Olympics, and they have the luxury of taking the guys like Richards, Bergeron or Toews to play the 4th line role. Savard has more offensive skill than a guy like Richards or Bergeron, and St. Louis more than Morrow, but SY was smart enough to realize that you need energy guys, & PK'ers as well.

If Team USA is to have a chance - they're going to have to play a really disciplined, smart, physical game, rely on Miller in net, and hope for a 2-1 score against Canada or Russia. No team they could ice would have a chance straight-up skill wise against the elite teams in a run and gun game.