WJC Gold Medal Game: Game Day Thread - Canada vs. USA (3-4)

[Lou is God]

To be honest, I just really wasn't that impressed with Zach Parise in either the Finland or Canada games. And IMO I'm not sure what to think towards that because that because Canada and Finland were the two most physical teams in the tourney besides the US of course. Not sure whether you want to put anything into that at all.

I didn't get to see the Finland game but the Canadian one I did and the one thing I noticed was that they payed special attention on Parise all game long, everytime he had the puck it seemed Dion Phaneuf and two forwards seem to converge on him, it was as if the Canadian coach was willing to get beat by anybody than Parise, and depite that I thought he played a good game, granted it wasn't up to the standards of the earlier games. He should have got an assist on the tying goal and he made a good defensive play on Carter near the end to deny him a good oppurtunity. Anyways it was a good game by both sides and one I was happy to be able to catch it.

 

[Baron Von Shark]

Fleury made a horrible play by trying to play the puck up the middle. What he should have done is play the puck to the side. I mean, does he think he's got the puck handling skills of Brodeur? Luck? Yeah, we got a good bounce. But at the same time, it was a horrible decision by the goalie.

 

[Brock]

As for Sid Crosby, I think that he will be a tremendous talent in the NHL but he's physically gonna have to get bigger and stronger before he's gonna dominate there. He's no Wayne Gretzky, but he certainly reminds me a lot of Pat Lafontaine/Pavel Bure combo. Best of luck to you young man!
.

The one thing that I've noticed contrary to what you said there, is that despite being such a young fellow, Sidney Crosby is exceptionaly strong on the puck. Even today against the rough Americans, he showed moments where his puck control, especially behind the net was outstanding. At other times, yes he did seem to be outmuscled, but that was the first time this happened in the WJC's. And in the Q so far this year, his strength has been a positive in a league where he's among the youngest. Can you imagine when he manages to put on some more muscle and maybe grow another inch or so. His puckhandling will only improve.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

The one thing that I've noticed contrary to what you said there, is that despite being such a young fellow, Sidney Crosby is exceptionaly strong on the puck. Even today against the rough Americans, he showed moments where his puck control, especially behind the net was outstanding. At other times, yes he did seem to be outmuscled, but that was the first time this happened in the WJC's. And in the Q so far this year, his strength has been a positive in a league where he's among the youngest. Can you imagine when he manages to put on some more muscle and maybe grow another inch or so. His puckhandling will only improve.

Crosby's strength on the puck was one of things I was most impressed by when I saw him play. He's not big by any stretch, but protects the puck extremely well. I think that was the hallmark of the U.S. team to a certain degree, and enabled them to deal a bit with Canada's physicality.

 

[NJD Jester]

Almost every Canadian in this thread has handled themselves with class and that should be applauded.

It's called being humbled.

Two things I wanted to see:

1. Another shot of that watering hole they kept showing during the first two periods, only this time after Fleury's blunder.

2. McGuire explain what exactly he meant when he said the Americans were "playing very Canadian" in the third period. What kind of twisted compliment is that?

 

[CharlieGirl]

It's called being humbled.

2. McGuire explain what exactly he meant when he said the Americans were "playing very Canadian" in the third period. What kind of twisted compliment is that?

A slight correction -- It's called being humble. Most Canadians are.

I couldn't agree more with the McGuire comment - my eyes almost popped out of my head when I heard that - what an ass!

 

[chicpea*]

It's called being humbled.

Two things I wanted to see:

1. Another shot of that watering hole they kept showing during the first two periods, only this time after Fleury's blunder.

2. McGuire explain what exactly he meant when he said the Americans were "playing very Canadian" in the third period. What kind of twisted compliment is that?

Classy, Jester, real Classy. And don't bother with McGuire.

 

[flybynite77]

I have a question about hockey taught in Canada to youngsters today.
Do they teach them to only play 2 periods? That could explain today.

I don't know if anyone else saw this but during the 2nd and 3rd period intermission I heard interviews with the Canadian players and they were joking, carrying on, Brent Burns acted like a media person and was asking Talbot questions.

Now I only listened to the game so I have no idea if it was taped before the game (I sure as hell hope it was) If it wasn't then it seemed to me like they thought the game was over already.

 

[littleD]

Congrats to the US.

Personally, I couldn't watch the last part of the 3rd period. As soon as Kesler scored, I turned off the TV. Didn't want to see that outcome again. I still haven't seen the winning goal, probably a good thing.

You could tell Fleury was shaky for most of the tournament, but to blame him solely for the loss is fairly ridiculous.

Roll on 2005 WJC.

 

[littleD]

I have a question about hockey taught in Canada to youngsters today.
Do they teach them to only play 2 periods? That could explain today.

I don't know if anyone else saw this but during the 2nd and 3rd period intermission I heard interviews with the Canadian players and they were joking, carrying on, Brent Burns acted like a media person and was asking Talbot questions.

Now I only listened to the game so I have no idea if it was taped before the game (I sure as hell hope it was) If it wasn't then it seemed to me like they thought the game was over already.

I didn't see the intermission, but I think they've been showing little "vignettes" like that during the tournament. I don't think they interviewed any players during any games all tournament long.

 

[nordique]

I have a question about hockey taught in Canada to youngsters today.
Do they teach them to only play 2 periods? That could explain today.

I don't know if anyone else saw this but during the 2nd and 3rd period intermission I heard interviews with the Canadian players and they were joking, carrying on, Brent Burns acted like a media person and was asking Talbot questions.

Now I only listened to the game so I have no idea if it was taped before the game (I sure as hell hope it was) If it wasn't then it seemed to me like they thought the game was over already.

#1 - Unnecessary potshot. Don't do it again.

#2 - Yeah, those were live shots...

OBVIOUSLY those were from before the tournament and from the round robin. You think Durocher was gonna say "let's keep our focus and win gold...except for you, Burnsie, you go goof off with Talbot."

Common sense, please.

 

[flybynite77]

#1 - Unnecessary potshot. Don't do it again.

#2 - Yeah, those were live shots...

OBVIOUSLY those were from before the tournament and from the round robin. You think Durocher was gonna say "let's keep our focus and win gold...except for you, Burnsie, you go goof off with Talbot."

Common sense, please.

Sorry about the shot. Man those were live? I thought they were, but just hearing them for the first time I wasn't sure.

Also. Second Question. Ironically the 2nd question asked to Talbot by the reporter was "So how has Sydney been handling all the pressure?" or something like that.

So has the whole tournament been "Sydney this and how's Sydney doing here, etc... on the Canadian broadcasts?"

 

[punchy1]

Where is the pot shot? I read the post and don't see it. Maybe I simply don't understand the language but it just looks like a valid question and a valid point about what he saw. I wonder if you could point out the pot shot for me so I don't make the same mistake. If it is the bit where he asked if Canada were only teaching the kids to play two periods then I think I get what you meant but to me, it seemed more like him just venting a little frustration so if that is it then forget what I wrote. If that is what you meant though, you should riffle through the rest of the threads and send the same message quickly because his is the least offencive of an entire slew of angry posts that I read. Thanks for the time,

Cheers.

 

[Jacob]

It's been a couple of years that I've been saying that anyone who was stupid enough to pass on Fleury or Zach Parise will have them come back to haunt them over and over again. I still believe this to be true. However, what a set back for that young man Fleury!

I think that Marc Andre Fleury is clearly not the goalie that he was when he played in the WJC last year. The thing that I noticed first last year was how advanced his postioning was at his tender age of 18. I thought that there was nobody in even the NHL that had positioning like him except for St. Patrick. However, by the first game of this year's WJC, it was pretty plain, that he had lost his postioning...and this became so very, very painfully obvious by the time that Canada played the Czechs the first time. His technical game has suffered too since last year...that second goal where that shot sort of chipped over him showed pretty clearly that he wasn't square to the puck but that he was crouching way too low...with the paddle down.

These kind of technical flaws were not evident before he was thrown to the wolves on the worst team in the NHL with the worst defense in the league. I think that this kid had/perhaps still has the potential to become the greatest goal tender of all time... rivaling the likes of Pat Roy but I put the blame for this potential demise squarely on the shoulders of Mario Lepieux, Eddie Olcyck and the Pittsburg management. Shame on you!!! For a quick buck, you've done your darnest to ruin such a talent!

The thing is, you can still do the right thing and send him back to the Screaming Eagles. Let the boy find his game and win a championship and learn to perfect his game and become a champion. You have a tremendously talented player here. Don't ruin him PLEASE!!!!


As for Zach Parise, I think that his haunting has just started. Watch out all you scouts and GM's that passed on him. You measured his height and said that he was too small. YOu measured his weight and said that he was too light. What you forgot to do was to measure his heart! Boy, this guy is a dandy! Yes, he may not be as effective in physical games...YET!...but he's a winner through and through! I warned you not to bet against this young man and I bet that he's just started to prove me right!


As much as it pains me to watch Canada lose...and in this way, I'm kind of glad that they did because I could just see every other country and NHL teams going the way of the giant goliaths and completely ignoring the smaller, speedier players with big hearts if team Canada did win the gold. My opinion is that there is a place for big men in our game but there is perhaps a bigger role for smaller men!


As for Sid Crosby, I think that he will be a tremendous talent in the NHL but he's physically gonna have to get bigger and stronger before he's gonna dominate there. He's no Wayne Gretzky, but he certainly reminds me a lot of Pat Lafontaine/Pavel Bure combo. Best of luck to you young man!

Congratulations to US. As for Canada, I think that the goalie, the team and the coaching staff need to take the responsibility for their failure to win the gold. What I don't understand is why the coaching staff started playing Crosby and Tambellini's line so much later in the game when it mattered when it was the first two lines that got them the 3-1 lead? I think that the coaching staff made some strange/questionable decisions leading up to this game and in this game.

The blame should not fall on Fleury alone.

Just my 2 cents.

Cutting a guy that clearly earned at least a brief look at the NHL level may have been more damaging than putting him in the NHL at such a young age.

Fluery. I feel bad for this kid. I blame his getting shelled in Pitts for destroying his game and confidence and why had an average at best tourney. It looked to me that he is a kid who were rushed into the NHL and since he weren't ready developed some bloody awful habbits while there in order to try and survive and is going to need at least a couple of years in the minors to regain his game. Sad as I feel that if he weren't rushed into NHL service that he just might have been the best ever. Now, who knows.

See, statements like these are absolutely ridiculous. One bad game and he's a flop? You people are unbelievable. He wasn't rushed to the NHL, he earned it. He dominated preseason, training camp and October. Now, he may have come back down to earth.

Almost every single player that is released from the NHL struggles in the WJCs, why is Fleury all of a sudden "damaged goods"?

 

[nordique]

Where is the pot shot? I read the post and don't see it. Maybe I simply don't understand the language but it just looks like a valid question and a valid point about what he saw. I wonder if you could point out the pot shot for me so I don't make the same mistake. If it is the bit where he asked if Canada were only teaching the kids to play two periods then I think I get what you meant but to me, it seemed more like him just venting a little frustration so if that is it then forget what I wrote. If that is what you meant though, you should riffle through the rest of the threads and send the same message quickly because his is the least offencive of an entire slew of angry posts that I read. Thanks for the time,

Cheers.

Yes, the shot was the "don't they teach Canadians the game is three periods" thing. Enough.

flybynite - sarcasm. NO, THOSE WERE NOT LIVE SHOTS. I figured that was obvious by the rest of what I wrote.

 

[ZadorovNJD*]

Why didn't Parise get an assist on Kesler's goal? That would have given him 12 points and made him the sole point leader...

 

[punchy1]

Cheers mate. I weren't sure.

I too must be daft on this one as well as I actually thought those bits of the players interviewing each other and that rot that were happening during the intermissions were live and not filmed prior to the game.

No sarcasm intended either. I thought "wow, that is odd for them to be doing that, talk about tempting fates". So there you go. I guess it shows how some of us actually pay close attention and some are too busy having a laugh to know what is going on in between periods.

Cheers.

 

[SwisshockeyAcademy]

After nearly 400 posts i am doubting i will reinvent the wheel with a comment on the game other than- i am very disappointed the TEAM lost. I will be at the World Cup in the fall and looking for redemption.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

After nearly 400 posts i am doubting i will reinvent the wheel with a comment on the game other than- i am very disappointed the TEAM lost. I will be at the World Cup in the fall and looking for redemption.

With the way U.S. goaltending is shaping up this year, you might see Montoya between the pipes for the American team there as well........... :p

 

[chicpea*]

With the way U.S. goaltending is shaping up this year, you might see Montoya between the pipes for the American team there as well........... :p

That's not as crazy as some people may think - especially with the new rule of having under 22yr olds (?) on each team. US has few young stars at the NHL level right now and Montoya could be among the most ready. Of course, the world cup is a long way off and he would be up against some more experienced fwds.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

My thoughts on the game. I taped it while at work and made sure I didn't know the outcome and then wtached it last night.

Americans -

I thought Kessler was their best forward by quite a bit.
Parise was a non-factor.
Tremendous shot by O'Sullivan on the 2nd goal, that changed the momentum.
Montoya looked very very good, clearly outplayed Fleury.
American defenseman seemed to have trouble with the Canadians beating them wide with speed.


Canadians -
The Richards line was the best on the ice again.
Fleury was not good. First goal was weak, the 3rd goal was stoppable, and nothing more to be said about the game winner.

Canada had their chances to put the game away.

Leading 3-1, Tambellini & Paille each had patial breakaways and missed the net. Getzlaf had 2 great chances to make it 4-1.

At 4-1 the game is over, instead O'Sullivan snaps a perfect shot and all of a sudden it's a one goal game.

Curious coaching moves:

At 3-3 the Americans had the Canadians on their heels, i though a time-out would have helped the Canadians to re-group.

Canada down a goal with a face-off in the offensive zone, 1:18 to go goalie pulled.

IMO and my Dad's as well (watching the game together) Canada should have gone with the Richards line + Carter. Instead they went with the Carter line + Richards. The Richards line was clearly better than the Carter line throughout the game and score all 3 goals. Dawes HAS to be on the ice there.

 

[Habnot]

Somewhat disappointed by the loss but not unexpected. When you view the tournament as a whole, you realize that Canada was lacking skill and finesse that ultimately did them in. The game was lost in the second and early third period when our "skilled players" (Getzlaf, Carter, and even Crosby to name a few) had an opportunity to put the game away and couldn't. Skill baby - Skill. To put this loss on MA's head is putting our collective heads in the sand.

In a year that the opposition was relatively weak, Canada chose a young, physically imposing team and steamrolled over weaker teams. I do question Mackasey's vision in going with size and skating as the major selection factor. Sure, when you intimidate the opposition - you win and they did against inferior teams. But once a team is not afraid of you - such as the Americans this year or the Russians last year, skill becomes the deciding factor. O'Sullivan's first and second goal was pure skill. The first goal was just an incredible shot and his ability to pivot, receive a long pass, maintain his speed and create an opportunity cause MA to misplay the puck.

Same can be said for Durocher, who stuck to his guns once the score was tied. I would of liked to see more of Crosby, Tambellini, Dawes instead of Burns, Getzlaf, Carter. Once the score was tied 3-3 in the third, physical size and intimidation did not matter anymore and the more skilled team had the advantage - USA. Durocher could of countered with his more skilled players, that being said with my 20-20 hindsight vision.

Finally, the fact that 12 players are illegible to return next year does not guarantee success. Canada did prove that you can possible win the tournament with 18 year olds. It also proved that you cannot guarantee performance from an individual. Last year MA was the MVP of the tournament, this year the goat.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

That's not as crazy as some people may think - especially with the new rule of having under 22yr olds (?) on each team. US has few young stars at the NHL level right now and Montoya could be among the most ready. Of course, the world cup is a long way off and he would be up against some more experienced fwds.

The World Cup is this summer. I was joking about Montoya. There are several young(er) goalies that would be chosen ahead of him. Dipietro and Miller are two that come to mind. My point was the U.S. doesn't have an "elite" goaltender at this point. Once Mike Richter retired, the task is going to fall to guys like Dunham, Boucher, Esche, Grahame, Johnson, and Snow. It's tough to tell if they can do the job. I wouldn't be surprised if Chris Osgood, a dual citizen gets asked by Larry Pleau to be between the pipes.

 

[chicpea*]

THe World Cup is this summer. I was joking about Montoya. There are several young(er) goalies that would be chosen ahead of him. Dipietro and Miller are two that come to mind. My point was the U.S. doesn't have an "elite" goaltender at this point. Once Mike Richter retired, the task is going to fall to guys like Dunham, Boucher, Esche, Grahame, Johnson, and Snow. It's tough to tell of they can do the job. I wouldn't be surprised if Chris Osgood, a dual citizen gets asked by Larry Pleau to be between the pipes.

Yes, RR, I realise that you were joking. I'm just saying it's not that implausible a scenario if there are untimely injuries, cool streaks etc. I wouldn't expect him to actually play and they do need to have young players on the team. That said, you're right that Dipietro would go before Montoya. As to Chris Osgood being the #1, I hope for your sake that isn't the case.

 

[Dr_Chimera*]

Yes, RR, I realise that you were joking. I'm just saying it's not that implausible a scenario if there are untimely injuries, cool streaks etc. I wouldn't expect him to actually play and they do need to have young players on the team. That said, you're right that Dipietro would go before Montoya. As to Chris Osgood being the #1, I hope for your sake that isn't the case.

I just realized that probably only Canada and Russia will have solid goaltending at the World Cup.

Sweden has the shaky Salo. Czechs will probably have Hasek, but I'm not sure how good he is anymore. Finns might surprise with Kipprussoff, but I don't know how that'll go. Slovakia has no one and the US, as people say, don't have a real #1.

Canada is stacked on goalies, while Russia should have both Khabby and Nabby in nets. Here's to hoping for an old-fashioned Canada-Russia final!