WJC: Horrible team selection (Canada)

[PensFan101]

Well, Hishon was one of my pre-selection camp favourites, but I guess if you look at it like they took Schwartz as a potential game-breaking offense-generating forward instead, it's just bad luck that Schwartz got hurt. And while I wanted Murphy there... I really have no complaints about Tyson Barrie, he played great and I don't think Murphy was going to do better. Ellis already gets the prime-time offensive responsbility, and Murphy wasn't going to give us a better 2-way game than what Barrie gave us.

I will fall back on my complaint that Stajcer is my OHL goalie of choice and nobody will agree with me that he should have been there.

I don't see any value in hindsighting the selections. You go through the process, and Canada is meticulous in their process, and the team that comes out of it may or may not vindicate all the selections, but I don't think you could do the process much differently. It's not just Team USA that plays big or hard, the Russians, Swedes, Finns are all playing tough hockey too, and I don't buy that Team Canada was selected just to pit against Team USA. The same values that favoured a blend of size and grit with skill over pure skill would have emerged when trying to construct an opponent for any of those teams IMHO.

Hockey Canada hates Stajcer, it was pretty clear when they took O'Hagan and Zador (lol) over him at the U18's way back when. He got hurt and struggled hard when Missy came to Owen Sound so I knew he was cooked.

Also (and not directed to Blind Gardien), to those who say it's funny how haters come out after the tourney is over... What about those who were skeptical from the start? I was certainly one. The team selection was flawed from the beginning.

My view of the team pretty much from the start was this was going to be a square peg going into a round hole... When making a team at the national level, countries should always take the best players available... Most countries lack the talent pool of Canada at the men's level so they have to take their best anyhow... And let the players fill the roles on the team, and fit the team with the system.

I don't think it was a good fit. And they spurned some fantastic offensive players with as much speed, skill, and grit as some of the other picks on the team... Too hard to say if it would make a difference, but I feel like the team was doomed from the start.

 

[Pick Six]

Of course, Canada only lost due to the team selection. Another country couldn't possibly be better...

QFT.

I've never understood why people act like in a winner take all final against a worthy opponent it should be considered a completely failure to lose.

Solid posts.

This thread is truly embarrassing. The Russians played better and deserved the win (I was at the game last night). This was the best possible team selected and you don't have to look farther than Bob McKenzie's comments.

But it's HFBoards, so the *****ing and moaning shouldn't surprise.

 

[hammerwielder]

I found myself cheering for the Russians as the game went on due to their evident surplus of "skilled" players compared to Canada's.

Surely there was no need for that. Who were you cheering for when Canada smoked them 6-3 on Boxing Day? Or during the first period of last night's game? Or against the Americans?

I'm all for bringing only the most skilled players onto our national teams, and leaving the low and slow guys off, and don't buy into this banging and crashing mode either, but I think we have to acknowledge that the Russian top five played a lot better than Canada's top five in this game, and were helped by better goaltending, and that is what wins hockey games. I am not sure that any other combination of players for Canada would have changed the result, as there is no way any of Schenn, Johansen, Couterier, Ellis or Gudbranson would have been left off the team. Canada had a letdown after their kill of the remaining penalty time early in the third, and panicked and lost their composure after the two quick goals. No Canadian team had done that in any of the 23 previous periods against this team, including in the Super Series, and this one picked a terrible time to do that.

 

[BRUINS since 1995]

I was disgusted when this team was announced due to its lack of skill. I am disgusted just as much today.

Big, Strong, and lack of high end skill is what this team was built on. Im sorry but I like the "little guys" with skill, not the big brutes who just crash and bang.

The team needed a better mixture of the "skill guys" with the big guys.
Hopefully Canada has learned that "big and strong" doesn't mean best.

I found myself cheering for the Russians as the game went on due to their evident surplus of "skilled" players compared to Canada's.

--
Hope you are not a canadian fan!

 

[JSilvius*]

The team selection has always been terrible. Why would you ever leave Duchene or Seguin off the team? Who cares if they're younger, they're clearly better than 18/19 year olds that you're picking.

EDIT: Talking about Duchene and Seguin in regards to past years, not this year.

 

[17Kurri]

Dead on. In fact thats exactly what Schenn said in his interview. Really shameful and thats what makes this loss harder to take then last years..if they played their hearts out and lost its still easy to be proud..but that was shameful..that being said...just another thing to keep in mind and a lesson to learn that future canadian teams will have...At the end of the day..this loss sucked..but 10 straight visits to the gold medal game is still extremely impressive..

I don't know if I'd point to lack of heart as a reason for the loss because I don't think that they deliberately mailed it in. They should have stayed the course and kept trying to add to the lead, but they obviously thought that protecting the lead was a better idea, so that when the Russians tied it up, they couldn't get back to what had given them such a comfortable lead in the first place.

Truth is, there are many valid factors that contributed to "the collapse", including the Russians not throwing in the towel at any point, but I think the most likely to have contributed was the absence of Schwartz and Gormley.

Ellis did a commendable job of leading from the back end, but we didn't have anybody as well rounded as Gormely is in our D corps. Schwartz proved to be irreplaceable, given that he was relied on so heavily in their overall game plan from the beginning of the tournament. Most importantly, though, was missing their composure. This team became incredibly unglued when facing adversity at various times during the tourney, but were able to somehow weather the storm each time before the Russia game.

All this said, this team was good enough to win the tourney as is, so the only thing that holds true when all is said and done is that the Russians were the better team at the end of this game. Good for them for sticking with it at the most opportune time.

 

[leafsfuture]

I don't know if I'd point to lack of heart as a reason for the loss because I don't think that they deliberately mailed it in. They should have stayed the course and kept trying to add to the lead, but they obviously thought that protecting the lead was a better idea, so that when the Russians tied it up, they couldn't get back to what had given them such a comfortable lead in the first place.

Truth is, there are many valid factors that contributed to "the collapse", including the Russians not throwing in the towel at any point, but I think the most likely to have contributed was the absence of Schwartz and Gormley.

Ellis did a commendable job of leading from the back end, but we didn't have anybody as well rounded as Gormely is in our D corps. Schwartz proved to be irreplaceable, given that he was relied on so heavily in their overall game plan from the beginning of the tournament. Most importantly, though, was missing their composure. This team became incredibly unglued when facing adversity at various times during the tourney, but were able to somehow weather the storm each time before the Russia game.

All this said, this team was good enough to win the tourney as is, so the only thing that holds true when all is said and done is that the Russians were the better team at the end of this game. Good for them for sticking with it at the most opportune time.

This is a great post.

And I agree that the void left by Gormely was huge. Our D was composed of 2 things: PMD's and big shutdown D. Our best two way defenceman were Barrie and Gudbranson, and we missed Gormely big time. Hes going to likely anchor the defence next year, and we are going to need him to be as good as he was prior to his injury.

The big problem with the team was that Olsen and Despres were not as good as they can / expected to be. Fact is that guys like Ellis and DeHaan should not be relied on to protect leads late in big games. Because the two I mentioned struggled, Ellis was playing a little more time than he should have when it was between 3-1 and 3-3.

The other player who wasnt good in the final was Louis Leblanc. He was our 2nd best forward in the round robin, but dissapeared in the final. When its 3-3 and when we were down 4-3, he is a guy that has to bring his speed and get a forcheck going. He was big against the Swedes, and Czechs but didnt play his best game yesterday. We can also say that Eakin was incredibly unlucky not to get a point. He was buzzing everywhere

 

[Blind Gardien]

Both Murphy and Murray who are very mobile and rush the puck offensively, far out played all of Gudbranson, Barrie and Despres even DEFENSIVELY at the selection camp...but both were cut.

I don't think the Selection Camp is what really matters, though. It's like an opportunity for a bit of tweaking or for somebody to really try to change their minds, but I bet the framework of the team is mostly-set in their minds before the camp. The camp is still necessary however, just to give that final chance, and to evaluate combinations, build camaraderie, start evaluations for future years, etc.

Anyway, my point is that no matter how well they all played in camp, I see Barrie as being the guy at the bottom of the list on D, and if Murphy had displaced him (as I was hoping/promoting), well, I just don't think it would have made a difference, in light of how well Barrie played.

It's just not based only on camp, that's all. Nor IMHO should it be.

I'd have had Murphy, Hishon, Stajcer, maybe RNH on my team. Let's say instead of Barrie, Foligno, Roy, and Ashton, say. Just offhand. I don't honestly think it would have made a difference. Maybe it would have made things worse, I don't know. I honestly can't fault the Canadian Selection process. They really put a lot of time and resources into it. Granted, Canada has more difficult decisions to make than some other countries which might not have as many options to choose from. But still, I think the guys in charge there have earned our trust. 10 gold medal games in 10 years, especially with the single-game elimination rounds now, that's pretty much a complete vote of confidence.

Funny, it turned out that Olsen, Connolly, dunno who else were the ones that it would have been nice to replace, but they weren't guys I was originally thinking were the ones to leave off my team. So who knows really. If Murphy was in, no guarantees he wouldn't have been the one who in hindsight we wished wasn't on the team.

All in all, I trust the selection process and the people in charge, I really do. None of us is as knowledgeable as those guys, and none of us has the observational data they have on the specific players either. So it's really kind of presumptuous to go too far with our preferences. For sure as fans we are entitled to have our preferences, don't get me wrong, and to talk about them. But we just ought to stay aware of the limitations of them, that's all. Even if we don't voice that awareness in every post, say.

 

[PaulieVegas]

As well, unfortunately for Canada, the fast and skilled players that could have played are all playing in the NHL.

Ah yes, the old Canadian "we didn't have our best players excuse."

An open letter to Canada: either (1) stop bragging about your unprecedented and unequaled depth, and how your "B" team is so good it could compete with anyone else's "A" team; or (2) stop whining about not having your best players when you lose. If you're that damn deep, it shouldn't matter if you're missing a couple of your best.

 

[Alberta tough]

Ah yes, the old Canadian "we didn't have our best players excuse."

An open letter to Canada: either (1) stop bragging about your unprecedented and unequaled depth, and how your "B" team is so good it could compete with anyone else's "A" team; or (2) stop whining about not having your best players when you lose. If you're that damn deep, it shouldn't matter if you're missing a couple of your best.

I see where you are coming from, but it was not just "a couple of your best". Regardless of how deep your talent pool is those missing guys are hard to replace.

 

[PaulieVegas]

I see where you are coming from, but it was not just "a couple of your best". Regardless of how deep your talent pool is those missing guys are hard to replace.

If the USA lost a baseball game to Canada with Tim Linsecum on the mound instead of Roy Halladay, Prince Fielder at 1B instead of Ryan Howard, and Carl Crawford in LF instead of Ryan Braun, and we said afterwards, "Well we didn't have our best players," we'd get flamed, just as Canada should.

If you have the most talented team in the tournament, you should win. It doesn't matter if your team is the most talented team that you CAN produce, if it's more talented than the other teams, you should not complain about not having your best players.

I personally don't think Canada had the most talented team in the tournament, but a lot of Canadians did, and those same Canadians are whining that they didn't have their best players. They can talk to the hand, cause this face ain't listening.

 

[wjhl2009fan]

Cowen was not one of Canada's top 3 players. He **** the bed tonight big time. Congratulations Ottawa you used a first round pick to draft Cory Cross.

A great or good player at this level does not equal a good or great nhl player.On the flip side a player who has a bad world juniors does not mean there will be a bad nhl player some have had great world juniors go on to the nhl and turn out to be not so good while some may not be great world junior go on and have a real good nhl players.So no because cowen did not have a good tournemant that does not mean he will not be a good nhl player.

 

[Street Hawk]

Versatility

The team selection has always been terrible. Why would you ever leave Duchene or Seguin off the team? Who cares if they're younger, they're clearly better than 18/19 year olds that you're picking.

EDIT: Talking about Duchene and Seguin in regards to past years, not this year.

Don't forget how Canada builds their roster.

1st line - Scoring line
2nd line - Scoring line
3rd line - 2 way line
4th line - Energy line
13th forward - Versatile - needs to play Center and wing

We saw in this year's tournament, Schwartz go down in game 2, Kassian suspended in game 2 for 2 games, Eakin with a busted hand, missed game 3, Schenn with a bum shoulder in the Medal games. So, as much as it would be nice to have an offensively gifted RNH as the spare forward, the coaching staff does prefer someone older who can plug a hole when necessary.

No one was arguing about selections after the 2nd period were they? No need for this. After the 3-1 goal, it was a bunch of mental/defensive breakdowns.

Couple of the blueliners, Olsen and Depres struggled. Sucks that Gromley was hurt, but hey, that happens. Landeskog (spelling) never played for Sweden either, so it does happen.

Be proud of the fact the program has given itself a chance to win gold for the past decade. Canada is not in the 1998-2004 slump (7 years) in between the 2 runs of Five Straight, where they had a 7th place finish a couple of bronze medals, and 4 silvers. And most countries would not call those 7 years a slump.

As a Canadian, it stings to lose like that.

For Hockey in general, it's good to see other nations develop strong teams and players. Makes the game better overall.

 

[David]

I'd have had Murphy, Hishon, Stajcer, maybe RNH on my team. Let's say instead of Barrie, Foligno, Roy, and Ashton, say. Just offhand. I don't honestly think it would have made a difference.

I think my previous post and others on here explained EXACTLY how it would have made a difference with Murphy and/or Murray.

Perhaps you should go back to matching Jose Theodore Propecia lyrics to classic Queen songs (which still makes me chuckle) instead of trying to defend the undefendable.

 

[Pick Six]

Kassian is a plug. He lacks skill and speed. Remember when Canada wasn't winning gold? We lacked skill and speed. Canadians need to be more focused on developing skills and using them in the game, rather than developing morons that try to hit everything that moves which takes themselves out of position.The Russians and Swedes took advantage of this. They are faster and more skilled.

Yes, Kassian with his 50 points in 27 games (2nd best PPG in the OHL) lacks skill.

Great call.

 

[Blind Gardien]

I think my previous post and others on here explained EXACTLY how it would have made a difference with Murphy and/or Murray.

Yeah, but you were wrong. Or at least, it is impossible enough to project that your hypothesis would have played out as to make it as meaningless as any of the other hindsighting attempts in this thread. De Haan and Barrie are mobile guys who can move the puck and maybe could have taken the pressure off Ellis. But the staff never used them much that way, and still leaned entirely on Ellis. I think it's a stretch to think they'd have used the 17-year olds any more/differently. I mean, that's basically reflected in the selections of De Haan/Barrie (older/stronger) to begin with. Hey, I think Murphy is a better player than they do, and I would have picked him too. But after watching the games, I don't think they would have used him, and I'm not confident he could have outplayed Barrie in the kind of reduced role they clearly envisioned for their non-Ellis d-men.

Anyway, they'll be on next year's team, I can't wait.

Perhaps you should go back to matching Jose Theodore Propecia lyrics to classic Queen songs (which still makes me chuckle) instead of trying to defend the undefendable.

Well did you catch the "My Chipchura" / The Knack classic adaptation? Not as much material to work with, but it was catchy. "Ooh my little gritty one?"

 

[leafsfuture]

If the USA lost a baseball game to Canada with Tim Linsecum on the mound instead of Roy Halladay, Prince Fielder at 1B instead of Ryan Howard, and Carl Crawford in LF instead of Ryan Braun, and we said afterwards, "Well we didn't have our best players," we'd get flamed, just as Canada should.

If you have the most talented team in the tournament, you should win. It doesn't matter if your team is the most talented team that you CAN produce, if it's more talented than the other teams, you should not complain about not having your best players.

I personally don't think Canada had the most talented team in the tournament, but a lot of Canadians did, and those same Canadians are whining that they didn't have their best players. They can talk to the hand, cause this face ain't listening.

Fail.

Lincecum was back to back Cy Young winner before Halladay replaced him and is much younger. Matt Duchene is one of the top 30 players in the NHL. Taylor Hall, Evander Kane and Jeff Skinner, are quality NHL top 6 forwards. They are way, way superior to guys like Johansen, Leblanc and Hamilton. Also, in baseball, 9 good guys can win you game. In hockey and the WJC you need 22

 

[David]

Yeah, but you were wrong. Or at least, it is impossible enough to project that your hypothesis would have played out as to make it as meaningless as any of the other hindsighting attempts in this thread.

De Haan and Barrie are mobile guys who can move the puck and maybe could have taken the pressure off Ellis. But the staff never used them much that way, and still leaned entirely on Ellis.

Well did you catch the "My Chipchura" / The Knack classic adaptation? Not as much material to work with, but it was catchy. "Ooh my little gritty one?"

Hog wash! Simply put, being short-sighted, Cameron took a team that could not play catch up hockey...

then made numerous questionable decisions which contributed largely to the collapse.

Nah, I think you're a one-hit wonder.

 

[Canuck21t]

Of course, Canada only lost due to the team selection. Another country couldn't possibly be better...

After every tournament, I see people of all nations question the selection. Why would Canadians be different? We're not saying that another selection would guarantee us the Gold but in retrospect, maybe we should have selected differently. Don't you ever do that? No? Right, Swedes are perfect.