Toggle sidebar

Olympics: 2014 — U.S. Roster Discussion (Part VIII)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Novacain

Registered User
Feb 24, 2012
4,362
4,875
Sojourn said:
I didnt say they dont look strong up front, I said as strong. As in, they don't look as strong as favorite Canada.
Click to expand...

Nobody ever looks as strong as Canada. Depth wise though, I'd say there forwards are the second best in the tournament: How many players on the 3rd line for Sweden or Russia would have made Team USA?
 
Bure

Bure

Registered User
Jan 3, 2011
3,719
2
Ottawa, Ontario
Novacain said:
Nobody ever looks as strong as Canada. Depth wise though, I'd say there forwards are the second best in the tournament: How many players on the 3rd line for Sweden or Russia would have made Team USA?
Click to expand...

How many of your top six would make Russia or Swedens top 6.
 
William H Bonney

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,084
7,143
Colorado
All things considered I don't think they could have started the tournament any better than that. Slovakia is a dangerous team that is better accustomed to the international ice but Team USA completely neutralized them outside of Tatar. Of the "contenders", I think USAH had the toughest opponent to start and I think they looked the best of the contenders in their opening game. That means nothing at this point but it was a nice start that hopefully will make this thread bearable for a change.

Lots of positives to take from this game:

  • Most of our "elite" players (yes, we do have elite players) showed up. Kessel, Kane, McDonagh, and Kesler in particular were standouts.
  • Quick was solid. It didn't seem like he faced as many shots as the box score indicates but he made some quality saves which is tough to do through long stretches of inactivity. He's the utmost competitor so I'm sure he would say he should have had the Tatar goal but that was a perfect shot and the right way for the opposition to attach Quick - lateral speed to try and get a super aggressive goalie off his angle.
  • The defense, on a whole, was very good and I think it bodes well for the team especially because Suter, their best d-man and a top 3 d-man in the world, struggled today but he will be better than that going forward. The McDonagh - Shattenkirk and Fowler - Carlson pairings were fantastic.
  • I thought the Parise line was the only line that looked "off" but it's not like they were bad. I'd prefer to see Callahan in the 13th forward role or at least rotate Wheeler in more often on that line to see what happens. Hard to make any other changes at this point because the other lines all looked so good you don't want to mess with them -- yet.
  • I'm a huge Pavelski fan but I hate him on the PP point here (even though he's great at it in the NHL) because as others have pointed out it's a lot tougher for him here because he's not the best skater and the big ice makes him more vulnerable. Plus, with the d-men we have, we don't need to use a forward on the point. It's not a huge concern if he stays there but I just hope they're not married to the idea.

Lots to be happy about so far but they need to be even better against Russia. A little odd to me that Bylsma is mum on the goalie decision for the Russia game because I would think he already knew whether he was running with Quick or planning to give both Quick and Miller a game to start. If it was the former there was nothing in today's game that should make Bylsma already want to switch it up. I have full confidence in both goalies though so it's a win-win decision at this point to me. I think he's likely just looking for a small edge by not tipping his hand to Russia early on about his choice.
 

Novacain

Registered User
Feb 24, 2012
4,362
4,875
Bure said:
How many of your top six would make Russia or Swedens top 6.
Click to expand...

Kane and Kessel, no question are in either teams top 6. Russia's RW's are Semin and Radulov, and neither is as talented imo. Sweden has Eriksson and Steen, which the same can be said. Also, if Zetterberg is out for the rest of the tournament, Patrick Berglund becomes Swedens No.2 Center. Any and all US Centermen would be an upgrade on Patrick.

Also, he bigger thing is: The gap between the US's 1st and 2nd line (whichever you wanna argue that is since I think any could make a claim) to Sweden or Russia, is a heck of a lot smaller then the gap between the US's 3rd and 4th line to Sweden or Russia.
 
SirClintonPortis

SirClintonPortis

ProudCapitalsTraitor
Mar 9, 2011
18,558
4,422
Maryland native
Bure said:
How many of your top six would make Russia or Swedens top 6.
Click to expand...
His point is that we have a more complete team since even our fourth line of Pacioretty-Statsny-Oshie is a danger to score; teams with poor D pairs should cringe. And even with deadweight Callahan on one line and the worrisome Dustin Brown on the other, we still have a duo creating offense on their respective lines. In addition, many of our players do play a two-way game, and they are well-spread out so that every single line has at least one play with a reputation for quality two-way play. Russia certainly has more dealy scorers in their top 6, with Ovechkin, Malkin, Datsyuk, Kovalchuk, etc but not their entire 12.
 
Soups On

Soups On

Registered User
Apr 27, 2012
3,791
1,987
As a Canadian, I know I shouldn't root for the U.S but I really love that roster.
That Kesler and Kane combo is filthy and the JVR - Pavelski - Kessel line is a recipe for success.

I imagine a Parise - Kesler - Kane line would be devastating.

Damn you Americans. Damn you for having my favourites :cry:
 
FloridaCap

FloridaCap

Beaglechuk Mania
Jun 30, 2012
2,651
0
7thOverdrive said:
As a Canadian, I know I shouldn't root for the U.S but I really love that roster.
That Kesler and Kane combo is filthy and the JVR - Pavelski - Kessel line is a recipe for success.

I imagine a Parise - Kesler - Kane line would be devastating.

Damn you Americans. Damn you for having my favourites :cry:
Click to expand...

Come on over. We won't tell anyone. :naughty:
 
Last edited:
cheesedanish87

cheesedanish87

Registered User
Jun 27, 2012
10,797
2,157
Pittsburgh
https://twitter.com/SWhyno/status/434304811757232128

U.S. lines: Parise-Kesler-Kane, JvR-Pavelski-Kessel, Brown-Backes-Callahan, Pacioretty-Stastny-Oshie.


https://twitter.com/SWhyno/status/434305343834054656

U.S. D-pairs: Suter-McDonagh, Orpik-Martin, Shattenkirk-Carlson, Fowler-Faulk


https://twitter.com/SWhyno/status/434306087169564672

Correction to U.S. D-pairs: Faulk with Carlson and Fowler with Shattenkirk. Still Suter with McDonagh and Orpik with Martin.


I like loading up the d pairs by putting Suter/Mcd together against Russia, they will be on the ice all night against Malkin/OV
 
TwiztedHeat

TwiztedHeat

Registered User
Feb 6, 2010
4,786
324
Parise-Kesler-Kane is going to be stupid good against that Russian defense. Also agree on the goalie choice, play Quick against Russia and let Miller play against Slovenia.
 
Rabid Ranger

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,141
11,172
Murica
Frederick Stanley said:
I'm not sure Brooks Orpik is the right guy for a shutdown pair.
Click to expand...

His presence on this team is for that exact purpose. He's going to be asked to help with the heavy lifting against the Russian (and Canadian if it gets to that point) top six. I think with the forward support he'll be fine.
 

Levitate

Registered User
Jul 29, 2004
31,055
7,842
Teemu Salami said:
@drosennhl 4m
Looks like U.S. going with 2 shutdown pairs vs Russia, Suter-McDonagh, Orpik-Martin. Other pairs were Shattenkirk-Carlson, Fowler-Faulk.

Meh.
Click to expand...

Don't Suter and McDonagh play the same side normally? That seems really dumb...don't force players to play their off side when you've got pairs that looked good and comfortable together previously
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom