Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperMatt18
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.
|
Yeah i dont disagree with any of this other than the bolded....because thats what worked for them to win the Gold. I refuse to criticize success personally.
I think the opposite comparison was the 87 Canada Cup roster.
I would argue that was the most purely offensively talented group this country has ever assembled.
They won of course but it was nail biting crazy 6-5 games in the best of 3 final with 2 going to OT.
Point being though, that was really how the game was at that time. Wide open offensive push, defense be damned hockey. We were really good at it too. Also maybe the single most entertaining tournament I ever witnessed in any sport to this day.
But thats not the game anymore. Even in the playoffs now, if you cant grind it out, up and down the ice, you aren't gonna win. That's how coaches operate now and this iteration of TC is an example. Whether it works or not remains to be seen but its pretty easy to see what/why Cameron has done what he has even if i disagree with him on some of the choices.