Kessel comments on Team USA being eliminated

[saillias]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Maybe. I know it's tantalizing to see this and wonder about the whole "surround your talent with beef" philosophy that the Flames evidently employ.

But the issue with USA is, and arguably with the Flames is, you only have so much elite talent. Do you take more "skilled" players who are less skilled than Canada's 3rd and 4th lines, or do you try to take some sandpaper guys?

Guys that Canada is sticking on their 3rd and 4th lines are as skilled as anybody the USA has save maybe Kane. So you can't out-skill Canada. Furthermore, most guys on Canada are also pretty big and are, if not gritty, at least hard to push off the puck. So you can't really outhit or outmuscle them either.

So do you take skilled 25-25-50 guys, or do you take grittier 15-20-30 guys like Abdelkader? The problem is you're pretty much damned if you do, damned if you don't. Canada is just waaay too deep.

I think too much is being made over this strategy. You might as well try something.

(None of this excuses not having Kessel on your team. That was sheer stupidity.)

You're not damned if you do by taking your best players. It's not like the US was horribly embarrassed in 2010 or 2002 or the 94 World Cup. When they bring their best players they can compete with Canada. The problem is they simply didn't and didn't give themselves the best chance to win.

Canada was/is not perfect, plenty of questionable decisions on their part too. Carey Price is rusty and JBo is playing a regular shift.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by doctajones428

Why not one of the following was on team USA is beyond me:

Kessel
Okposo
Kreider
Stastny
Ryan
Tyler Johnson
Fowler
Yandle
Goligoski
Faulk

Eric Johnson, Abdelkader, Dubinsky and to a lesser extent, Backes, had no business being on that team

Plus these guys that are on team NA. Not that the idiots in charge would have brought any of them save maybe Johnny.

Auston Matthews, Jack Eichel, Johnny Gaudreau, Brandon Saad, Dylan Larkin, Vincent Trocheck, Shayne Gostisbehere, Seth Jones and Jacob Trouba.

[pseudoreality]

Originally Posted by MattyC

In a short tournament, it can matter. Kessel is one of the best scorers in the game from the blueline in. He's done it against every defenseman on team Canada in the NHL. Is it harder when you see them every damn shift? Absolutely. But do you really think playing against Abdelkader or Palmieri is wearing any of Canada's defense down? Defense gets worn down by being forced to defend. And yes, coaching can matter from the point of the need to bring everyone together to work to win. That's why Babcock is great. These guys know how to play hockey, he doesn't need to tell them. But he does need to tell him what roles they're doing and how they should do it in the team system, and they have to listen. No one is listening to Torts anymore. The entire NHL tuned out his kind of coach years ago.

And again, they shouldn't be building with Canada in mind, they should be building the best possible hockey team USA can make. And then game planning with Canada in mind, when they play Canada.

Best scorer from the blue line in? That's an odd way of putting it. How many goals are scored from outside the blue line? Not many and its typically pretty embarrassing.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Actual team USA, selected properly:

Pacioretti Pavelski Kane
Gaudreau Johnson Kessel
Parise Kesler Wheeler
JVR Stepan Okposo
Saad (You could make an argument for Palmieri, maybe Eichel as 13th forward but probably not yet.)

Byfuglien Suter
McDonaghn Shattenkirk
Faulk Carlson
Gostisbehere

Schneider
Bishop
Quick

EDIT: Almost forgot Shattenkirk.

That's actually a pretty good team. They have center depth, and that's without David Backes. All four lines can score and there's some grit in the bottom 6. The second line is as skilled and fast as almost any in the tourney.

So really, while people want to say that the Team North America concept kinda screwed team USA over, it didn't really. There are only a couple of guys they lose because of that. Most it was their own fault.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

NSFW!

Actual team USA, selected properly:

Pacioretti Pavelski Kane
Gaudreau Johnson Kessel
Parise Kesler Wheeler
JVR Stepan Okposo
Saad (You could make an argument for Palmieri, maybe Eichel as 13th forward but probably not yet.)

Byfuglien Suter
McDonaghn Shattenkirk
Faulk Carlson
Gostisbehere

Schneider
Bishop
Quick

That's actually a pretty good team. They have center depth, and that's without David Backes. All four lines can score and there's some grit in the bottom 6. The second line is as skilled and fast as almost any in the tourney.

So really, while people want to say that the Team North America concept kinda screwed team USA over, it didn't really. There are only a couple of guys they lose because of that. Most it was their own fault.

n/m - didn't read correctly

[SportsJunky]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Actual team USA, selected properly:

Pacioretti Pavelski Kane
Gaudreau Johnson Kessel
Parise Kesler Wheeler
JVR Stepan Okposo
Saad (You could make an argument for Palmieri, maybe Eichel as 13th forward but probably not yet.)

Byfuglien Suter
McDonaghn Shattenkirk
Faulk Carlson
Gostisbehere

Schneider
Bishop
Quick

I'd find a way to get Yandle in there on D but otherwise it looks good.

[GioforPM]

It's a better team but I think it still falls to Canada by the same sort of scores.

[Enoch Root]

Sure, there are 3 or 4 guys you could maybe swap out, but I doubt it makes much difference.

It's a short tournament and they didn't play very well - including their best players - and when that happens, you aren't going to win.

What did Kane do? Where was Parise? I can't remember hearing Wheeler's name. I thought Quick was pretty lousy, which is probably the biggest factor.

If they re-run the tournament next week, the results might be different. Over-analyzing 2 games is ridiculous.

Think of Johnny's rookie season - he gets cut if they make definitive decisions after the first 5 games.

[Roof-Daddy]

IMO USA hockey needs to have Matthews and Eichel be the real deal to have any hope of taking Canada out in best on best tourneys, and even then it won't be easy. Their center depth pales in comparison to Canada's who's entire forward group is almost made up entirely of big, fast, smart two way centers.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by MRCboicgy

Essentially Canada in Torino 06.

And we all remember how well that went.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Locke

And we all remember how well that went.

Beautifully, we got Iginla and Bertuzzi out of it.

The Americans have the ace in the hole against Canada and that's goaltending. In a best on Best tournament any team with goaltending can win any game.

Their team needed a little less Lyle Odellein and Adam Graves and a little more scoring punch.

[thefoss1957]

I usually don't pay much attention to the NHL exhibition season, too many marginal NHLers on PTO contracts to really get a "feel" on the actual quality of the teams...I also have little interest in the exhibition that is the All-Star game, even in the newer formats...I have always HATED most sports at the Olympics as an exhibition, except as the venue for the most meaningful track and field meet, which don't really have another significant showcase.

Similarly, and I believe, typically, with most Americans, this "World Cup" tournament really didn't fire my passion for hockey. For me, it combined the worst of all worlds, a contrived assemblage of "All-star" players in an Exhibition tournament, with national or continental groupings.

That said, I DID watch yesterday's US/Canada game, with the same expectation of fascination as for watching a train wreck...and a train wreck is what was witnessed.

I have little respect for Tortorella as a coach, especially, his fascination for pre-lockout "grit" and "sandpaper" hockey. And for those that want to say that Torts had little to do with the roster composition, I point to the inclusion of Dubinsky and J. Johnson to this roster as evidence that he DID have significant input. The laughably weak efforts of the "offensive" defensemen, to play DEFENSE, pointed out the deficiencies in team building with this squad...I was amused to see Housley behind the US bench, he didn't play that much defense either, in his stint, on the ice, with my Blackhawks. Kane overtried the dangle stuff, but, really, never clicked with anyone else on the ice, and the ESPN announcers tried to put too much blame on him, personally.

It was silly to think that a team built this way, (I mean, they actually trotted out Abdelkader!), and playing with a grinding mentality coach, would meet with any success.

Where the Burkes and Lombardis and Tortorellas TRULY failed, however, was in the false focus of using a 1996 model to beat ONE TEAM...Canada...and the indictment of their incompetence was proven, in the total failure at accomplishing even that.

Although, I admit, that I watched NO OTHER game in this tournament, I must comment that the pre-tourney jokes among media, dealt with the hodge-podge nature of Team Europe...perhaps the flexibility of play that came with just throwing the most talented roster out there, without overthinking, or focus on ONE opponent, is a lesson to be learned by the idiots that run USA Hockey.

Of course, when it comes to non-direct NHL season/playoffs, I can't even guarantee that THIS fan's interest would be piqued enough to invest much in following...

My main hope going INTO and wrapping up this WC Exhibition, is that the Blackhawk participants escape, injury free, to prepare for the stuff that REALLY COUNTS, the NHL run to the Stanley Cup.

[CaptainCrunch]

Building a team to specifically beat another team is just bad strategy.

How many times did we see teams that were built to beat the Oilers in the 80's fail to even get to that matchup because they didn't match up very well with other teams.

Or they get that match up and find out that their design is flawed.

You basically build the best team you can, slot the players into their best suited roles and then throw the dice.

[Stud_McCool]

Jack Johnson? Dubinsky? Abdelkader? Enough said.
I like Burke, but everyone knew that was a bad lineup when the roster was named.

[stang]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

long.

Don't Judge the tourney off that one game, they other games have been pretty damn good.

NAT is just fun to watch too!

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by stang

Don't Judge the tourney off that one game, they other games have been pretty damn good.

NAT is just fun to watch too!

Yeah, I really don't understand why people are so upset about getting to watch elite level hockey in September.

[thefoss1957]

Stang...the other games may be pretty good, but, I'd rather watch carefully built NHL rosters, playing for Lord Stanley's Cup, than Bettman's contrived pseudo-Olympic competition.

If I wasn't stuck at work, I probably wouldn't have streamed/watched even this game...I admit an aversion to exhibitions.

And Text, while the TALENT may be elite, neither the team's chemistry or the play can be elite in a short preparation all-star format.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

Stang...the other games may be pretty good, but, I'd rather watch carefully built NHL rosters, playing for Lord Stanley's Cup, than Bettman's contrived pseudo-Olympic competition.

If I wasn't stuck at work, I probably wouldn't have streamed/watched even this game...I admit an aversion to exhibitions.

And Text, while the TALENT may be elite, neither the team's chemistry or the play can be elite in a short preparation all-star format.

To each his own, I guess.

I have personally found the quality of hockey in nearly all of the games to be fantastic. The NA sized ice helps that a lot, but I think after four or five of these tournaments occurring consistently on a regular schedule we will all start to wonder how we ever did without it.

[TheoFleury]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Yeah, I really don't understand why people are so upset about getting to watch elite level hockey in September.

I feel like the anti-WC side has made their reasons pretty clear, so I suspect you are asking a question you already know the answer to.

One of the things I was worried about was injuries and, lo and behold, our 2nd line center is injured before the first pre-season game! All for a meaningless exhibition tournament.

Maybe Johnny can get injured next so we can really handicap the team's already 50/50 chances at a playoff spot...

[stang]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

Stang...the other games may be pretty good, but, I'd rather watch carefully built NHL rosters, playing for Lord Stanley's Cup, than Bettman's contrived pseudo-Olympic competition.

If I wasn't stuck at work, I probably wouldn't have streamed/watched even this game...I admit an aversion to exhibitions.

And Text, while the TALENT may be elite, neither the team's chemistry or the play can be elite in a short preparation all-star format.

You're wrong. Team North America is just crazy fun to watch, they have been gelling great. Europe is another team that's been working together amazing. Canada's team has been amazing like always. Better hockey then Columvus vs minny that's for sure.

Maybe it's just me though. I love hockey. Doesn't matter if it's my nephews Tier 1 atom team, or my season tickets for the local AJHL team, I like watching them all. I see how you like to call everything non nhl an exhibition game... But I like watching exhibition games too.