2014 Olympics Thread (2/12-2/23)

[IHeartZherdev*]

Orpik is also a no class thug who lacks character. Jack is a model citizen on and off the ice.

 

[CBJfan4evr]

Who is paying for insurance and salaries for players injured now? I know that was a negotiated point for this Olympics because the owners didn't want to pay for it themselves. Do the players like it enought to potentially give up large sums of money in order to do it?

NBC just likes money. It only makes sense to introduce the World Cup of Hockey back in. You can hold it in the summer so it doesn't conflict with the seasons. The NHL can partner with other leagues around the world to make it a money maker for them and not the IOC. NBC can get the USA TV rights. It can work but you need the European leagues to buy in the be a part of it. If the KHL buys in, the others will follow.

Insurance to pick up the salaries of the players is one thing; but who is going to pay off the fans and Blue Jackets owners if they miss the playoffs now that Tyutin is out 2-3 weeks with a high ankle sprain. I hate the Olympics just want the Jackets to win !

 

[Samkow]

No one can say for sure, but his skating and outlet passing would've been a real asset, if you ask me. The American defensemen often looked like they were skating in mud, and time after time failed to get the puck to the forwards resulting in long stretches of being hemmed in their own end. I also think his passion might've injected some energy into their lifeless, uninspired play. Most of the team looked like it was going through the motions.

It comes down to risk. The Americans were scared: their selections were risk-averse, their system was passive and reeked of fear of making a mistake, and their play was a reflection of all these things. Frankly, David Poile probably dreamed of "keeping it close and stealing it late." One could argue that some teams need to do that against Canada (read: Finland), I just don't buy that the US is one of them. They're not as talented or deep as Canada, but they're not so far apart that they need to play hockey like a game of chess.

At the very least, he can't possibly have been worse than Orpik.

 

[FANonymous]

I can't wait for the Jackets to get back on the ice. This break for the Olympics has felt far longer than 2 weeks and there's still 4 more days until our next game.

 

[stevo61]

Well I can't wait for tomorrow morning, then I'll start thinking about the Jackets

 

[cbjfaninmo]

Congrats to Canada. Gold. Can't wait for NHL hockey to get cranked up. Go Jackets!!

 

[cbjfan]

Other than the Russia - USA game, this was a pretty boring tournament. Nowhere near the intensity of the Stanley Cup playoffs.

 

[major major]

Other than the Russia - USA game, this was a pretty boring tournament. Nowhere near the intensity of the Stanley Cup playoffs.

Let me guess, not a Canada fan? I personally enjoyed watching Canada dominate everyone, great forechecking and backchecking especially, though that's probably the exact thing that made it hard to watch for fans of other clubs. Intensity wasn't in short supply, players really want to win for their country, you just look lazy when you play against better defensive teams. The level of play was much better than the Stanley Cup, more skilled players playing with fewer broken ribs and punctured lungs. Lots of 5-player passing plays that you hardly ever see in the NHL because you hardly ever have enough skill out there.

 

[Crede777]

Other than the Russia - USA game, this was a pretty boring tournament. Nowhere near the intensity of the Stanley Cup playoffs.

Agreed. Way too many shutouts and slow defensive play this time around. I'd take the Stanley Cup 10/10 times over this.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Although I didn't watch the game, looking at the score Im assuming Canada played the trap again?

 

[Sore Loser]

Never understood the fascination with hating the trap ... while it doesn't make for exciting hockey, it's entirely effective and I'm surprised more coaches don't use it. For a whole generation of hockey, it's been the go-to gameplan for some of the most successful teams.

In this tournament, some of the top players in the world bought into it and played for the name on the front of their sweater, instead of for themselves. Like it or not, Canada was simply the best team, as far as playing as a team and working together ... that's why they won.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

Never understood the fascination with hating the trap ... while it doesn't make for exciting hockey, it's entirely effective and I'm surprised more coaches don't use it. For a whole generation of hockey, it's been the go-to gameplan for some of the most successful teams.

In this tournament, some of the top players in the world bought into it and played for the name on the front of their sweater, instead of for themselves. Like it or not, Canada was simply the best team, as far as playing as a team and working together ... that's why they won.

You just answered your question.

 

[Crede777]

Never understood the fascination with hating the trap ... while it doesn't make for exciting hockey, it's entirely effective and I'm surprised more coaches don't use it. For a whole generation of hockey, it's been the go-to gameplan for some of the most successful teams.

In this tournament, some of the top players in the world bought into it and played for the name on the front of their sweater, instead of for themselves. Like it or not, Canada was simply the best team, as far as playing as a team and working together ... that's why they won.

It depends on what you want to see out of the Olympics.

Yes, the teams and coaches want to WIN and will do whatever it takes to do so. Me, on the other hand, I want it to be exciting and to convert more American fans. So playing a boring style is counteractive to that and, to me, disappointing.

 

[Wendy Clear]

Other than the Russia - USA game, this was a pretty boring tournament. Nowhere near the intensity of the Stanley Cup playoffs.

Agreed. I was really hyped up for it, and thought the NHL had been pretty slow this year -- maybe players saving themselves for the 'Pics -- but it didn't work out that way. Sure, some teams played their hearts out in certain games, but overall it was a wash of lethargy, boring systems and passive play. I've never been a big ice "hater," but there's no doubt the games are slowwww.

Bring on the Devils!

 

[Nanabijou]

Although I didn't watch the game, looking at the score Im assuming Canada played the trap again?

Semantics, but I don't think the style Canada played during the elimination games is a pure 'trap' system. Yes, they kept things to the outside in the defensive and neutral zones, but part of the reason they were so effective defensively was the fact that they had an incredible amount of puck possession time in the neutral and offensive zones.

When I think of a pure trap, I don't think of puck possession. It's more of a passive 'we'll let the other team have the puck as long as they want as long as they stay to the perimeter' type of style in which you just wait it out until a mistake is made.

Perhaps not the most exciting games for everyone, but I was fascinated to just see the precision with which Babcock and the coaching staff was able to get all these millionaires on the same page and doing their jobs.

 

[Sore Loser]

You just answered your question.

The fans who hate the trap are typically the ones cheering for the losing team. Outside of that reason, it's a legit strategy that gets results.

It would be like hating the Seattle Seahawks for having a dominant defense ... the only people who complained about that are the Bronco fans.

 

[Sore Loser]

It depends on what you want to see out of the Olympics.

Yes, the teams and coaches want to WIN and will do whatever it takes to do so. Me, on the other hand, I want it to be exciting and to convert more American fans. So playing a boring style is counteractive to that and, to me, disappointing.

If the US played the trap and won, would that not attract more American fans?

 

[major major]

Semantics, but I don't think the style Canada played during the elimination games is a pure 'trap' system. Yes, they kept things to the outside in the defensive and neutral zones, but part of the reason they were so effective defensively was the fact that they had an incredible amount of puck possession time in the neutral and offensive zones.

When I think of a pure trap, I don't think of puck possession. It's more of a passive 'we'll let the other team have the puck as long as they want as long as they stay to the perimeter' type of style in which you just wait it out until a mistake is made.

Perhaps not the most exciting games for everyone, but I was fascinated to just see the precision with which Babcock and the coaching staff was able to get all these millionaires on the same page and doing their jobs.

Exactly, Canada didn't play a sit back and trap game. It's ridiculous people who didn't closely watch are criticizing them for shutting out teams. What Canada did do, if you actually watch, is furiously forecheck and backcheck. They had guys deep who outskated the other team to get back and break up the rush, not sitting in the neutral zone and waiting.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

The fans who hate the trap are typically the ones cheering for the losing team. Outside of that reason, it's a legit strategy that gets results.

It would be like hating the Seattle Seahawks for having a dominant defense ... the only people who complained about that are the Bronco fans.

It is a legit tactic, but if both teams are playing the trap and it's 0-0 going into the 3rd with like 15-13 shots between the two teams, im pretty sure both teams wouldn't think very highly of the trap. I'm not a fan of it, but it works.

 

[stevo61]

It is a legit tactic, but if both teams are playing the trap and it's 0-0 going into the 3rd with like 15-13 shots between the two teams, im pretty sure both teams wouldn't think very highly of the trap. I'm not a fan of it, but it works.

So you say Canada plays a trap and technically they and Sweden should have had 13-15 shots? they were 22-20 headed to the 3rd in that game with Canada ending up well above 30. Big ice sucks but losing doesn't mean the winning team is playing a trap or winning because of it

 

[CBJWerenski8]

So you say Canada plays a trap and technically they and Sweden should have had 13-15 shots? they were 22-20 headed to the 3rd in that game with Canada ending up well above 30. Big ice sucks but losing doesn't mean the winning team is playing a trap or winning because of it

I didn't see the Gold game, I don't know if they did or if they didn't vs Sweden.

However, they did vs the US. Which is fine, they won, not sure why the trap is considered an insult on these boards (not here, HF in general).

 

[stevo61]

I didn't see the Gold game, I don't know if they did or if they didn't vs Sweden.

However, they did vs the US. Which is fine, they won, not sure why the trap is considered an insult on these boards (not here, HF in general).

It's not an insult, you're just wrong

 

[major major]

I didn't see the Gold game, I don't know if they did or if they didn't vs Sweden.

However, they did vs the US. Which is fine, they won, not sure why the trap is considered an insult on these boards (not here, HF in general).

They in no sense played the "classical trap" against the U.S., and they didn't sat back and wait either (which is another thing people often refer to as a trap). The one photo suggesting otherwise is actually of a line change.

 

[CBJWerenski8]

It's not an insult, you're just wrong

They in no sense played the "classical trap" against the U.S., and they didn't sat back and wait either (which is another thing people often refer to as a trap). The one photo suggesting otherwise is actually of a line change.

You're entitled to your opinions.

 

[Wendy Clear]

Any of the boring hockey I watched wasn't Canada's fault. The US-Canada game wasn't that interesting because the US simply wasn't on the same level as Canada. Ditto Canada-Sweden. Any game involving Finland was slow, but that was understandable given their level of injuries.