Quote:
Originally Posted by Claeren
What a hilarious analysis.
Basically if he had scored 10g but played horrible in other areas of his game you would think he had played better than if he played a great and mature 2-way game and only scored 1g?
Canada's problem in this tournament was not scoring goals. It was playing two way hockey against the few opponents that could push back. And from what I saw Nemisz was one of the few forwards as commited (or more so) behind his own blueline as he was across the opponents blueline.
Did you ever stop to wonder why he was on the top line in the first place? Basically it was his job to cover for Kadri and Hall when they overcommited or made a boneheaded pass -- of which there were many. He did a pretty good job IMO.
Plus big guys always take a few more years to develop (before their size/strength/durability can impose on the small guys agility/speed/coordination). A good portion of these little tiny speedy forwards at the world juniors will never make much of an impact at the NHL level, especially from this group. Where Nemisz still has 2-5 years to grow into his body. There is no way he ends up worse than a Moss and has plenty of upside above that I think.
Claeren.
|
Your post would have been a perfect post it you didn't insult the previous person's analysis. Why did you feel you had to insult his analysis? Does it make you feel better?
Yes, I feel better for asking you that question. This site would be alot better if people would stick to their thoughts and stop the insults.
Thanks for the analysis. It is well thought out.