Where credit is due: Babcock coached a great game.

[Keselke]

Well basically to counter, the "Babcock is the worst international coach of all time" thread(s)

I felt Babcock did a tremendous job of coaching tonight, defined what matchups could be successful and handidly outcoached bykov. Toews, Nash and Richards basically shut down Ovechkin for the entire game aswell as the rest of that line. how many times this year have you seen ovechkin this big of a non factor?

All the line juggling and different players given different minutes and situations was a leadup to this game to see what roles they could be counted on to play when the time called for it

I think for a coach its a huge process to go from game 1 to gold and really Babcock is a brilliant coaching mind...he knew what he was doing all along.

Discuss!

[BACKCHECK!!!]

I think Corey Perry has really just been working up to this game. I mean, people have been saying that he looks like trash, that he's crapped the bed constantly this entire tournament to date, but I think he was really just expandng his comfort zone with his linemates.

In summary, Corey Perry hasn't sucked hard all tournament, only to finally get his act together just in time to avoid his untimely death after a Canadian elimination. He's acually been awesome all along, and we just couldn't see it.

[Cowperson]

If he wins, he's a great coach. If he loses, he was outcoached.

This is why the shelf life of an average NHL coach is two years or less.

We are very shallow people.

Funny to hear Pierre McGuire last night say the system beating the crap out of Russia was first developed by Brent Sutter and has been emulated by every Canadian coach since, including Babcock.

Cowperson

[mykalberta]

Credit is due to Canadian players playing like Canadian players.

In alot of ways this is no different from the US game except the US fought back after Miller stood on his head. The only goal I fault Nabakov on is the last one before he got pulled.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

If he wins, he's a great coach. If he loses, he was outcoached.

It's less that he won or lost, but that he seems to have learned that changing the lines every effing shift was dooming this team. When he left the team alone, for the most part, they have dominated. When he starts micromanaging, they struggle.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It's less that he won or lost, but that he seems to have learned that changing the lines every effing shift was dooming this team. When he left the team alone, for the most part, they have dominated. When he starts micromanaging, they struggle.

Pretty much my views. He was doing way to much line juggling and not allow players to get chemistry going.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

It's less that he won or lost, but that he seems to have learned that changing the lines every effing shift was dooming this team. When he left the team alone, for the most part, they have dominated. When he starts micromanaging, they struggle.

Or he brilliantly micromanaged early on to find the combinations that would eventually work in destroying the Russians and anyone else making the mistake of crossing his path . . . . .

If he wins, he's a genius. If he loses, he's an idiot.

We remain a very shallow people.

Cowperson

[Hammertime]

I like that he started to go 12 fwds and 6 ds for most of the game.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

If Nabakov sucks, he's a genius. If we lose, he's an idiot.

Fixed.

But yeah, we are probably shallow people.

[GirlySports]

Just looking at it neutrally. The Russians abandoned their plan to beat Canada from 2006. They came in thinking their top 6 could blow the Canadians out of the water.

Play run and gun against Canada and die. US and Suisse proved that you have to grind Canada down, limit odd man rushes and control the neutral zone. Russia didn't follow this blueprint and they have guys like Grebeskov on defense.

[SOMBRI2]

It's not like the NHL you go on a 3-game winless streak and you don't hit the panic button at all. In short tournament like this, coach's reaction time is tight. they can't sleep on it when things go wrong. but from what i saw last night, team canada was ready to play, they looked composed making creative plays, determined. due credits to babcock, who once i called him idiot. he should have done some good things there.

[MelBridgeman]

Nothing against Babcock, I think most of is decisions have been thought out...but i give credit to the Russians for just standing around being terrible and to San Jose's second biggest problem in the post season - Nabokov

[ricardodw]

Yep ... he has 2 of best defensive coaching minds on his staff. He must have sent Hitchcock and Lemaire out of the room when he figured out how to stop Ovechkin.

I prefer to think that somehow Iginla, Morrow and Niedermayer got through the kids that they had better be ready die on their shields as nothing they would do would repair the stench that would be attached to their careers if they went down weakly to the Russians.

[sa226]

Given the original plan to have Iggy play the "4th" line and the fact that against the Better teams you need a shutdown group, I wonder if the original plan was to have Iginla play the role that Nash played last night, essentially go up against the top wingers in the tourney.....if true that very interesting.

Or it could just be a case of mid tourney, on the fly adjustments.

[burning_acid1]

I think he has figured out the lineups and hopefully he doesn't change them anymore.

[Smell My Finger]

Common hockey sense had to eventually come to the forefront with Babcocks constant line snafu.

[MelBridgeman]

Putting Iginla on the 4th line could of also been away to motivate his ass...If it was it was brillant

[Azure]

I wonder what he will do about Thornton.

[3thirty]

Originally Posted by Azure

I wonder what he will do about Thornton.

who cares when 95% of the team is playing well right now...