Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainYooh
...Stronger teams simply murder the weaker teams on the court. This is not what we're seeing in today's international hockey. If obviously weak teams can win, this means our coaches are not doing a good job.
|
Except Latvia DIDN'T win, and never looked like a threat to win at any point past scoring their single goal on a single mistake in the game. I might take you seriously if you could point to some specific problems in today's game that the coaches could have anticipated and corrected. In actual fact, it is very, VERY difficult to structure and execute penetration against a team that collapses like Latvia did around their own goal. What more should Canada have done? What more could they have done?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainYooh
NHL players and coaches always like to say "we just want/need to play our game". Babcock said this same phrase a day or two ago. I have a fundamental disagreement with this statement. In order to win, the team must play the most effective game against the other team. And if "your game" is not it, then you better adjust the game plan and tailor it specifically against the opponent's style of play. Which is exactly what Ted Nolan did and Babcock did not.
|
Babcock did not?! His team outshot their opponent by a 4 : 1 margin! This was not a coaching breakdown. Nolan had his team playing the ONLY game they could to win, and they kept the score close. Babcock's response is precisely what it should have been: to maintain possession and zone pressure, and to basically wear out the other team, who was practically playing like their lives depended on it.
I would be interested to hear what you expect the Canadian coaches should have done differently, and how it would have helped. For my part, I think Team Canada played very well, despite the score.