Apparently Iginla sucks......

[BourqueBourqueBourque]

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/...5419179&ref=ts

[flip]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I don't think this is the whole story, though. Most people are outraged that the team's leading goal scorer, the top-scoring Canadian in Olympic tournament play, and the team's ONLY Olympic gold-medal winning forward has been placed on the fourth line prematurely. People are upset because Iginla seems to have been singled out for a problem that is not his alone.

I think that might be fair. I just think that a reasonable response is necessary from us fans. Gathering up our pitchforks and torches isn't the way to analyze this issue, nor is declaring Iginla a martyr.

Even being outraged at Iggy's placement on the 4th line is a bit much. Concerned, maybe. Even upset. Outraged? Give me a break.

Plus, who is "blaming" Iggy? We already know that the media sucks. So does that mean we are assuming Babcock is blaming Iggy by moving him to the 4th line? Maybe Babs just thinks Iggy will have more success there.

Don't forget Jarome only had NINE minutes of ice time in his hat trick game against Norway. 9!!! That is like half of what he gets on a regular night.

Why weren't people up in arms over that? Oh right, because he was successful with the ice he was given.

[minnow]

Um, people were upset with his low ice time. And amazed at what he did with it. Everyone except coach, apparently.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by flip

Good for you. If you don't agree with me then feel free to not read it.

Feel free to do the same.

Am I annoying because I actually think Babcock is a decent coach? Or is it because despite my love for Iggy, I don't think he's the greatest player in the history of hockey? Or maybe it is because I recognize that there are other players on this team that have incredible skill? Or maybe it is because I realize that Iggy can just as easily be back on the 1st line? Or maybe it is because I didn't just complain about team Canada for a whole page and tried to use some logic and reason as to why Iggy isn't on the 1st line?

You're annoying because you basically ignore the brunt of the posts in this thread and claim that you are the one using logic. There have been many posters that are logically making arguments that Babcock has coached this team poorly thus far. Yet, apparently, we are all Iginla homers that are blind to your "logic"

If defending the coaching staff and not just making Iggy out to be a martyr is annoying then I guess I'm annoying.

It's not just about Iginla though, and this has been stated many, many times. Why is the coaching staff not rolling 4 lines? Canada's depth is it's greatest strength, but if you are just going to shorten your bench and ride 6-7 guys then Canada's offense is matched pretty easily by a handful of other teams. Why is the coaching staff breaking up the Seabrook-Keith pairng when it has been made apparent that the only reason Seabrook made the team was because of his chemistry with Keith. Why are they benching certain players like Doughty, Morrow, Richards, Iginla, and Seabrook for alleged poor play while leaning on players like Pronger and Niedermayer who are playing even worse? Why does Bergeron keep getting placed on the first line when he has done nothing and it looks fairly obvious that he does not belong there? But I guess all these questions can just be brushed aside because I'm an Iginla fan boy.

Some posters have made some very valid points about the setup of this team (Vlad had a nice breakdown in one of these threads). Agree or disagree it is better than just saying Babcock pissed away gold and that you won't be cheering for Canada anymore because Iggy isn't the centerpiece of this team.

I don't recall anyone saying that we have lost the gold, but I do see many concerned posters that have stated that if things do not improve, Canada will come up short again, and that's a fair comment. There are other people saying that they won't be cheering for Canada, but please don't be equally childish and imply that they are somehow unpatriotic because of a hockey game.

I like Iginla as much as the next guy and I think Babcock has some kinks to work out with his line up but I'm not such a kool aid drinking, blinders on fan that I just blindly proclaim the team a failure because Iggy isn't on the 1st line. It just sounds like sour grapes. "well OUR guy isn't the #1 RW so I guess the coach is an idiot and has it out for him". Riiiiiiiiiight.

As I said, the issues are far deeper than that as there appear to be multiple mistakes being made. I get that you are on the Babcock fan-wagon and are willing to believe whatever $hit he shovels because of his NHL record, just don't be upset when everyone else is not on the same page.

[MissTeeks]

Gee, what a shock that people would be upset that their favorite player from their favorite team is getting put on the fourth line at the Olympics. All it does is give something else for the Iginla haters on this board to use to say I told you so, he is washed up.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by flip

...So does that mean we are assuming Babcock is blaming Iggy by moving him to the 4th line? Maybe Babs just thinks Iggy will have more success there.

That might be a fair argument if Babcock had actually played with more than 2 1/2 lines for the second and third periods of the Swiss game. Iginla can only succeed if he gets the chance to play, and when he was stapled to the bench while the coaches continued to roll with the SJ trio, the Getzlaf line and an ineffective grouping of Crosby, Nash and any player not named Iginla, it was fairly evident that Babcock does not believe Iginla can contribute much. As I mentioned before, this decision strikes many as premature.

Originally Posted by flip

Don't forget Jarome only had NINE minutes of ice time in his hat trick game against Norway. 9!!! That is like half of what he gets on a regular night.

Why weren't people up in arms over that? Oh right, because he was successful with the ice he was given.

I'm not sure what your point is here; that Iginla was great with a low amount of icetime, and then was never given the opportunity to develop on that success in game 2?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Smell My Finger

The thing is they didn't. Nash Crosby Iginla were the #1 line the entire time at Team Canada Orientation. I would not be suprised if Babcock pulled this crap on Iginla before the first game.
Isn't Detriot and the Flames in a battle to get into that last playoff spot. Isn't common knowledge around the NHL that a confident Iginla is hard to stop? But Iggy lacking confidence is a shaky competitor.
Iginla Being bumped from the top line to the 4th for no reason would be a mindfrack to Iginla. All the while Canada has enough depth to overcome that ridiculous Babcock decision. I just think Babcock, Yzerman, Holland have other possibly other motives. Food for thought anyways.

Iginla was a 4th liner from the get go. Even before Christmas. Again, watch the hockey powers show. You'll see the selection process of Bergeron being on Crosby's right wing cause they were good together in some irrelevant kid's tournament 5 years ago.

[Keselke]

Originally Posted by Chump

Rick Nash 28 29 57 -8

Jarome Iginla 27 30 57 +4

The guys have nearly identical stats this year and Iginla has proven much more over his career yet Nash is an elite player and a lock for the top line while Iginila is a non-elite and borderline team Cananda player.

I just don't see it and that is not mentioning their play in the tournament to date and Ignila's past olympic performances.

You cant tell how good a player is by pulling their stats up on nhl.com Stats only tell a portion of the story, Nash is a far more dynamic player than Iginla currently is. Iginla in 2002 or 2006 has nothing to do with 2010, why even bring that up, that was 8 years ago.

When players hit their 30's the dropoff is usually quick and steep, Iginla has lost a step this year and that is the reason he has less of a role on this team. He put up three goals against Norway. It was Norway, I think down the stretch you will see basically 3 lines being rolled and 4 D getting the bulk of the ice time, and good or bad Iginla is likely odd man out

[HPLovecraft]

Originally Posted by Keselke

You cant tell how good a player is by pulling their stats up on nhl.com Stats only tell a portion of the story, Nash is a far more dynamic player than Iginla currently is. Iginla in 2002 has nothing to do with 2010, why even bring that up, that was 8 years ago, when players hit their 30's the dropoff is usually quick and steep, Iginla has lost a step this year and that is the reason he is a non factor on the national team

The drop-off of a player when they hit 30 isn't usually quick and steep. 30 is not a magic number, and a player's prime generally spans a hand full of years past 30.

[Keselke]

[quote=HPLovecraft;2349772]The drop-off of a player when they hit 30 isn't usually quick and steep. 30 is not a magic number, and a player's prime generally spans a hand full of years past 30.[/quot

Not really. a player typically will have his general career numbers , and then suddenly one season will have a QUICK and STEEP dropoff in production, I could cite several examples, I didnt say 30 I said in your 30s, considering that is after your physical peak its to be expected. as for your prime being in your 30s among scoring forwards, specifically powerforwards as Iginla, that couldnt be farther from the truth, the truth is a player like Iginla who played that hard style for 10 years, his body starts to breakdown.

A powerforward whos production goes UP in his thirties........thats rare to non existant

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by flip

Nash isn't really competing with a spot with Iggy. He is playing LW and Iggy doesn't. It is more like Richards and Toews are competing for spots with Iggy on the 1st line.

Except that he is when he got moved to RW so that Toews could play LW. If you don't know what you are talking about, then just move on.

By good hands I mean that Nash is more than just a shooter like Iggy. I don't think Iggy brings a whole lot to the table in comparison with these other guys when it comes to on ice skill.

Nash is the better dangler, Iginla is the better shooter. Iginla is also the better passer and there is no way that you can say Nash is better in his own zone than Iginla since he is pretty much the biggest floater on this team. Outside of dangles and camping out on the blueline, what does Nash offer?

Nash/Toews/Richards all have a wider range of offensive (and for Toews and Richards better defensive) weapons.

This is what I don't understand. You say that you are using logic, and then you make a statment that defies all logical analysis. Between these 3 players, you have 1 season above 80 points and yet, somehow, they all have a "wider range of offensive weapons"?

Iggy can shoot. That is about all. He's an ok set up guy as we learned last year with Cammy but I think Toews, Richards and Nash all have a wider range of weapons, even if they maybe aren't as good at pure goal scoring. All of them can gain the zone, make beautiful moves, score 1 on 1 (something Iggy is REALLY lacking), and make wonderful passes.

Yupp, 2 Rocket Richard trophies, 1 Art Ross trophy, 1 Lester B. Pearson trophy, and 3 Hart trophy nominations and all the guy can do is shoot. The fact that you seem to be giving more credence to a couple of highlight reel goals than actual results is laughable. I think you would fit right in on the Oilers scouting staff.

That isn't to say Iggy can't play 1st line RW, he just isn't the only one who can and maybe isn't even the best choice.

So far he has been. Generally when you score 3 goals on a line, that doesn't scream "find someone else". And before you say, "it was against Norway" explain then why no other Canadian Olympian has done it in the last 22 years. Canada has played against some pretty weak opponents since then and no one else has scored 3 goals in a game, much less doing so playing under 10 minutes.

I will add that you made another post that was laughable, alluding to the fact that Canada did so poorly because they had guys like Matlby and Draper on the team. Anyone can tell you that they did poorly because they couldn't score, and the reason that they couldn't score was because they were more interested in dangling and looking for the perfect play than they were in just putting the puck in the net. So, if Yzerman and co. have learned their lesson, please explain to me why they have put so much stock in a couple of floating danglers (ie. Getzlaf and Nash).

[Diet Water]

Originally Posted by Keselke

Not really. a player typically will have his general career numbers , and then suddenly one season will have a QUICK and STEEP dropoff in production, I could cite several examples, I didnt say 30 I said in your 30s, considering that is after your physical peak its to be expected. as for your prime being in your 30s among scoring forwards, specifically powerforwards as Iginla, that couldnt be farther from the truth, the truth is a player like Iginla who played that hard style for 10 years, his body starts to breakdown.

A powerforward whos production goes UP in his thirties........thats rare to non existant

I'm not exactly sure what your point is, do you think the Olympics last 2 years or something?

This is a 2 week tournament and Iginla has been the best winger on the first line so far, but because he is older I guess he should just go to the 4th line. Makes a ton of sense.

[BourqueBourqueBourque]

Keselke is a Canucks troll..
Probably one of the guys who thinks Burrows deserves a spot over Iginla.

[Rubicant]

If the coaching staff feels that Iginla is better suited playing with Toews and Morrow - fine, I wouldn't be second guessing them.

Call it the 4th line if you want - also fine, there are a lot of good players on the team.

What I do have a problem with, is the coaching staff basically marginalizing Iginla as the 13th forward on this team.

I have been as critical as anyone about Iginla's play this season but through 2 games, I actually feel Iginla has been one of Canada's better players. Even if he hasn't been the best, he definetely hasn't been the worst.



More than anything though, I don't agree with a multitude of other decisions made by Babcock and the braintrust of this incarnation of team Canada.

The whole point of bringing a team like we have is to have more depth than any other country - which we do at this tournament. Why are we not rolling 4 lines (maybe not perfectly equally but close) with this makeup of team? Why are we basically playing 2.5 lines against freaking Switzerland - especially when those lines aren't generating much?

If you want a real 'checking' line then we have plenty of Canadian players that could do that job better than Morrow, Toews and Iginla. They can also have their butts stapled to the bench for 2 periods just as easily.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Keselke

You cant tell how good a player is by pulling their stats up on nhl.com Stats only tell a portion of the story, Nash is a far more dynamic player than Iginla currently is. Iginla in 2002 or 2006 has nothing to do with 2010, why even bring that up, that was 8 years ago.

Because it wasn't just eight years ago, the performances in these Olympics is basically demonstrating the same: Between Iginla, Nash, Richards and Bergeron four goals have been scored; three of them belong to Iginla and 0 to Nash.

Originally Posted by Keselke

When players hit their 30's the dropoff is usually quick and steep, Iginla has lost a step this year and that is the reason he has less of a role on this team. He put up three goals against Norway. It was Norway...

So, do those goals not count because "It was Norway"? If Iginla is such an average player for Team Canada, then why is it their much better players like Nash, Getzlaf, Perry, etc. manage to score so many more against Norway?

Originally Posted by Keselke

I think down the stretch you will see basically 3 lines being rolled and 4 D getting the bulk of the ice time, and good or bad Iginla is likely odd man out

Regardless of whether Iginla is the odd man out, I think—along with many other posters here—that to ride two or three lines with the sort of talent that Canadian coaches have at their disposal is a huge mistake. The reason Canada won in 2002 was because of their remarkable balance and their ability to roll four lines. There is the potential for that in this tournament, but as long as the SJ line continues to be double-shifted, Canada's greatest advantage in their depth will not at all be a factor in this tournament.

[flip]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I'm not sure what your point is here; that Iginla was great with a low amount of icetime, and then was never given the opportunity to develop on that success in game 2?

My point is why weren't people bitching and whining about his ice time in game 1. If he had 18 minutes like normal he could have had 6 goals!!!

Another poster has already confirmed that 9 minutes in game 1 was unacceptable...

The fact that some posters are crying foul and declaring all those who aren't part of the kill Babcock mob is pretty funny but also quite sad. Attacking other posters because they don't agree with a bunch of ridiculous shiznat like "If we don't get Olympic Gold, it is Babcocks fault for not playing Iggy more" is really sad/funny.

I don't even necessarily agree that Iggy should be on the 4th line, I'm just not prepared to declare all people who even suggest that someone else get top line time is a traitor and an idiot. Frankly I think it is embarrassing that posters might read CP and think all Flames fans are that fickle.

I'm sure we'll all be attacking Canucks fans who cry foul and burn their passport if Lou doesn't get the start tonight. Yet, when it is Iggy, and it is based on less than ONE game (so far) people are ready to declare Babcock a loser and the Olympics a failure? Give me a break.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by flip

My point is why weren't people bitching and whining about his ice time in game 1. If he had 18 minutes like normal he could have had 6 goals!!!

Another poster has already confirmed that 9 minutes in game 1 was unacceptable...

People were complaining. Not sure what your point is at all. But hey, you just continue to wave your hand and tell everyone that you're the one being logical

[flip]

Originally Posted by Ark2

People were complaining. Not sure what your point is at all. But hey, you just continue to wave your hand and tell everyone that you're the one being logical

Dude you can put little rolly eyes in every post but it doesn't make your posts good.

Insinuating I'm not a Flames fan and that I'm an idiot just because I think it is premature to say Iggy has been disrespected, Babcock is a moron and the tournament is a failure is hilarious.

At least try and have some class like some of the other respondents. You can get your point across without declaring all those against you morons. I have certainly made a point to only point and laugh at a very select group of posters.

If you'd like to purposely take me out of context so that you can make yourself feel better about being a "superior" Flames/Iggy fan go right ahead.

I'm trying to encourage SOME people to settle down and stop being chicken littles. I think debate about the merits of Iggy and his potential line mates is great. I even think he should be playing with Crosby and Nash. I just don't see how Iggy on the 4th line somehow equals lets all chase Babcock out of town and declare all other Canadian players as losers.

That doesn't mean I'm going to call everyone who disagrees a moron. I'll reserve those judgments for people who say they don't even care any more or that they refuse to watch Iggy be disrespected etc etc.

I think it is totally fair to question everything. That is what CP is for. QUestion the team, the choices, the lines, the ice time, the strategy, the goal tending. Go ahead, it is what makes CP fun.

What I like to laugh at though, is people posting stuff like "I don't even care about the Olympics anymore because Babcock is a moron for not giving Iggy more ice time. Iggy has been disgraced and disrespected by the coaching staff". Like I said before: Riiiiiiigggghhhhtttt. There is no logic or reason in that.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by flip

Dude you can put little rolly eyes in every post but it doesn't make your posts good.

I like to do it every other post.

Insinuating I'm not a Flames fan and that I'm an idiot just because I think it is premature to say Iggy has been disrespected, Babcock is a moron and the tournament is a failure is hilarious.

I have not insinuated either things. What I am getting at though is that you don't seem to know what you are talking about.

At least try and have some class like some of the other respondents. You can get your point across without declaring all those against you morons. I have certainly made a point to only point and laugh at a very select group of posters.

I haven't called you a moron, that is your word not mine. Please try not to be so dramatic.

If you'd like to purposely take me out of context so that you can make yourself feel better about being a "superior" Flames/Iggy fan go right ahead.

Where have I taken you out of context?

I'm trying to encourage SOME people to settle down and stop being chicken littles. I think debate about the merits of Iggy and his potential line mates is great. I even think he should be playing with Crosby and Nash. I just don't see how Iggy on the 4th line somehow equals lets all chase Babcock out of town and declare all other Canadian players as losers.

That's the problem I, along with others have repeatedly said that the issue with Babcock is not just about his handling of Iginla. Yet, you continuously ignore this fact and act like we are all flipping out simply because our favourite player isn't getting 20 minutes a game.

That doesn't mean I'm going to call everyone who disagrees a moron. I'll reserve those judgments for people who say they don't even care any more or that they refuse to watch Iggy be disrespected etc etc.

Sigh, once again, I have not called anyone a moron. Please stop being such a drama queen.

[flip]

Originally Posted by Ark2

I like to do it every other post.



I have not insinuated either things. What I am getting at though that you don't seem to know what you are talking about.



I haven't called you a moron, that is your word not mine. Please try not to be so dramatic.



Where have I taken you out of context?



That's the problem I, along with others have repeatedly said that the issue with Babcock is not just about his handling of Iginla. Yet, you continuously ignore this fact and act like we are all flipping out simply because our favourite player isn't getting 20 minutes a game.



Sigh, once again, I have not called anyone a moron. Please stop being such a drama queen.

Go back and read your responses to me. It has all been condescending and full of snide backhanded comments. Even this post if full of insults.

Try and just contribute without having to tell the other posters they don't know anything.

My first post took a shot at the chicken little types and I've maintained that throughout my posts. I've done so because I want to be clear that there are 2 issues. First, Iggy has not been disgraced, the games are not lost, Babcock is not a loser. Second, there are valid issues to discuss and debate but they should be done in the context of Team Canada and logic. You seem to be confusing these two debates. I have been bashing the first debate (the one that is all whining), while encouraging the second debate (actual discussion about who fits where and why). Just posting stuff like "Iggy has SO many awards. That means he MUST be a 1st line guy!!!" is not an argument at all. I think I know enough about the styles of each players game to at least have a guess on where and who they should play with. If you have an idea, feel free to post it. Just try to do so without taking pot shots at me because unless you've declared the games a failure or Iggy a martyr or Babcock a loser I haven't posted a single thing that would get you so riled up.

If you have a great post about how Iggy is a better player I would love to see it. In fact, I'm not sure why you are responding to me at all. Much of your first response just repeated things I said, but you tried to use it to make me wrong.

See, what I'm trying to do is encourage real discussion, not just people whining and being overly dramatic. How about instead of just focusing on defending a select group of posters who are acting like chicken littles, you actually say something of worth.

I've provided a fair amount of commentary on why I think Iggy is on the 4th line and why we shouldn't worry. So far you've....said I don't know anything (several times), insinuated I should work for the Oilers (another backhanded insult), called me a drama queen.

The only contributions I've seen from you is that you repeated what I said, but turned the context around. I said Iggy is mainly a shooter, you said that too. I said Iggy is better on defence than Nash, you repeated that too. I said Iggy was a pretty good set up man, you repeated that too.

I said some guys have a wider range of offensive weapons. You said I don't know anything. I didn't say they were BETTER, I said wider range. Iggy needs a set up man, is ok at D and isn't really a dominant puck handler.

Nash is definitely a dominant puck handler. Richards and Toews probably are better defensively than Iggy and both of them are C, not wingers, so they can take face offs too. I also think they are equal or better passers/set up men than Iginla.

Since I know you'll want to twist my words and start posting Pts and awards I'll repeat myself. Some guys on Team Canada who are competing with Iggy for that 1st line spot have a WIDER range of talents. Not better. WIDER RANGE. That means they may not be pure shooters like Iggy but they are proficient at a RANGE of different offensive talents. Babcock may like that.

Also, let's not forget that this is BY FAR the deepest team in the tourney. With the exception of Crosby being on the 1st line and the SJ line staying together, pretty much EVERYONE else on the team (cept maybe Morrow, he's a gritty/checking kind of guy) could be switched around with good reason.

I'm sure Staal fans in Caronlina (if there are any hockey fans in Carolina) could be whining and complaining that he's been embarrassed and disrespected by Babcock and needs more ice time. I'm sure Toews fans could say the same thing. Or Bergeron fans, or Morrow fans.

No one is disagreeing that Iggy is good (hence you taking me out of context). No one is disagreeing that Iggy can play on the top line. No one is saying that Iggy definitely is the 13th forward and doesn't deserve to get ice time.

In fact, no one said that other players are better than Iggy. Just that they have different talents than Iggy.

Every single player on this team would be a top line player on EVERY team in the league. We are lucky that we even have a player that made Team Canada. We are lucky that Iggy, among all that talent, is being given a chance to shine. Maybe not as much of a chance as some of us want but he'll get his ice time.