Quote:
Originally Posted by transplant99
Who else were they supposed to play?
I don't know what their game will translate too against the US or Sweden but right now, this team was clearly built as a 200' grind em down group and it has worked....that much is pretty hard to dispute when your starting G hasn't given up a goal in 2 games.
I would think that "fans" would want to see that continue because in order to win...it has to.
It reminds me a bit of the Olympic club that went to Sochi. Only scored 14 goals in 5 games (6 in one against Austria) barely beat Latvia, barely beat Norway and then won the semi 1-0 against the US.
Yet, that was one of the most stifling/dominantly defensive clubs ever assembled anywhere....never felt like they were in trouble because they only surrendered 3 goals against in those 5 games.
There are different ways to win. One just isn't as sexy as the others.
|
That's what it reminds me of too.
That team left guys like Giroux, Eric Staal, Hall, and Seguin at home, scratched Subban most games, but were dominant defensively and won the tournament.
But I'm still not sure taking guys like Kunitz or Marleau over Giroux or Staal was the right decision even though they won. In the end that team probably ended up relying on Price more than it needed to and was a bit lucky that they won 1-0 against USA with Price getting a 31 save shutout.
And personally I look back at the 2002 and 2010 teams a lot more favourably than I do the 2014 team because as a fan seeing the best players playing together and against each other is what makes these tournaments fun.
And for every 2014 team that wins that way, you have a 2006 team that loses in embarrassing fashion because you took Ryan Smith, Shane Doan and Kris Draper over Sydney Crosby, Eric Staal, and Jason Spezza.
As you said though there are different ways to win, and in the end if you win it doesn't matter and luck plays a big factor in it all in the end too, but I'd rather take the best players and end up winning or losing than take a team trying to win a certain way and end up winning or losing.
Historically for hockey Canada they've won and lost both ways but I'd argue there are a lot more question marks if you lose with the team that left some of their best players at home, and generally those teams are led by coaches that think they know better than others.