The result of the 2010 WJC proved one thing: that the 2010 US WJC team was one goal better than the 2010 Canadian WJC team. The problem arises when ignorant hockey fans and journalists try to attach more meaning to the result than what is really there. These are the people who have concluded that the Canadian development system isn't working and the US system is a better system because of an overtime win.
The US played a great tournament and were full value for their win. That being said, it was a one goal game and Canada could have easily won the game. That's hockey. The point Cherry makes regarding the talent Canada was missing is certainly a valid one. By my count, Canada played without 8 players who would have been locks to play for Canada (Stamkos, Tavares, Duchene, Kane, Hodgson, O'Reilly, Myers and Del Zotto) and one (James Wright) who would have been a strong contender. Anyone who argues that these players wouldn't have had an enormous impact on Canada's performance isn't being honest.
If the Detroit Red Wings miss the NHL playoffs this season you can bet many hockey people will point to the fact that they've been without many of their top players for long stretches of the season as a key contributor. They can replace those players with call ups from the AHL but they certainly will not get the same performance from them.
If the NHL had been in the midst of a lockout like it was in 2005 I suspect we would be debating whether the 2010 version of Team Canada was better than the 2005 version of Team Canada. The fact is, Canada is developing more elite young players than any other country in the world. Unfortunately, with the state of the NHL many of these players will be unavailable to play for Canada in this tournament. While the relative strength of Canada's wjc teams may be diminished as a result, it certainly doesn't mean we aren't doing a good job of developing players.
There is nothing wrong with giving the US the credit it deserves for winning the WJC, and to Canada for putting up a good fight, but trying to make conclusions beyond the outcome of one game is preposterous when all of the facts are taken into account.