Toggle sidebar

WJC: 2016 — Finland Roster Talk

  • We're expecting server maintenance on March 3rd starting at midnight, there may be downtime during the work.
  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
FiLe said:
Think again. If/When Sweden beats Denmark tomorrow, they lock the win of Group A. So we'd have to finish 4th to face them - in other words, lose not only to the Czechs, but Slovakia as well.

So if we do beat Slovakia as everyone expects, and we win the Czechs, we face Canada. If we lose, we face USA.
Click to expand...
Yeah I knew that and still said it. But yeah I think they will beat at least Slovakia. About the Czechs, I am not too sure. USA scares me a lot..
 
▲ ▲▲▲▲ Mr. FiLE, let me respond while sitting in a train heading to Lapland. You must take the best out of it when on the spot.

Okay. Admittedly I drink wine and beer atm in this pektobah cart standing at the station of Tammerfors. But that doesn't cloud my analysis
of the state of the affairs.

First of all. The game is the game of trade offs. It's the game of alternate costs. The game of dilemmas. Like this thing. I choose to hit Lapland amidst of the WJC in Helsinki. Well, I had to choose. You can't get everything in this life
But get the best out of it.

That is, you have to choose. And you have to be
acutely AWARE of the fact of choosing. That is, you have to be so very aware of the inevitability and imperative of choosing you feel it and live it even then when choosing you are not. THAT is the game of
Life and the game of inches and seconds.

Well, it's only hockey, you say now. Indeed, only
hockey it is. But big time hockey for these kids. They can freeze, slide, fall, collapse in that intense
once in a lifetime moment. It's only natural. But the coach, like Jalonen. He should know better: it's only hockey. - In fact, he should be on the ball all the time and not get carried away by the moment. Since moments are short, fickle and illusory. The game is moments after moments unfolding until resolution takes place. And you just have to get the grip of the dynamics of that slide show, of the game by BEING AWARE; by REACTING and by CHOOSING.

As I have watched the long via dolorosa of Finnish hockey in retrospect: All those collapses like that INCREDIBLE 5-1 --> 5-6 loss to Sweden - Foppa in the office and Sundin selling the goods - well, it ain't over even yet. It is only a symptom of the game getting the best of Team Finland due to immature lacking awareness and thus inappropriate lacking reaction and response.

It is a coaching problem, not the problem of the players. Even more so when dealing with unexperienced teens.

You say Jalonen reacted. I say he did not. It was just a cosmetic gesture and even that happened too late. The guy was not aware. He was in denial. He couldn't do the drastic changes the situation asked. The game got the best of him. It beat the guy. And he should have known better given his experience and CV. Been better prepared. Ready to react immediately. Do what he had to do. He should have been on the pulse of the game and his team and change the course of the ship before it was only too --:LATE: too LITTLE and too LATE.

The guy couldn't do it. He lost. And failed.
 
Loffer said:
text
Click to expand...

One who was definitely aware was Karri Kivi, somehow that guy suited best possible way for this job. We don't absolutely know yet how is the case with Jukka Jalonen. You said he didn't react enough, it's hard to say with these kids which one is right way to act, let things evolve slowly or try things rapidly. It's awe thing too, whatever keeps confident building works best.
 
Jalonen does deserve the most criticism when all things are considered imo. Didn't make the right choices vs Russia. Arguably badly timed time out, refuses to change goalie even after "leaking" five goals, playing players in unnatural positions, and generally unable to fix the lines that lack chemistry (again not reacting quickly enough) during and off the game. The team was just unable to generate enough offence and control the flow of the game in the 3rd period when it mattered the most, which is often a hindsight regarding the coaches' ability to calm and handle the troops. This type of ability is extremely valuable, even mandatory when we are talking about a group of youngsters. Should Finland end up out off the medal games he would get most of the heat and it would be warranted. Then again, I'm still having trouble seeing this. No matter the flaws, Finland has enough quality to beat the best of them. Just cannot afford the same errors to repeat themselves. I'm already missing Kivi, while willing to give Jalonen the benefit of the doubt.
 
behemolari said:
One who was definitely aware was Karri Kivi, somehow that guy suited best possible way for this job. We don't absolutely know yet how is the case with Jukka Jalonen. You said he didn't react enough, it's hard to say with these kids which one is right way to act, let things evolve slowly or try things rapidly. It's awe thing too, whatever keeps confident building works best.
Click to expand...
This. Sometimes you just have to let things cook slowly, and you have a team that's more prepared to win that way. This was true for Kivi's team too. That group went through its growing pains, and was undeniably stronger because of it. Jalonen may have thought the same way - not acting beyond a gentle guiding hand may cost us the game now, but help us win the day later on.

Besides, one essential ability of a good coach is not to think of things that are beyond his control. Jalonen's main concern should be how his team plays, not thinking about the other group and potential game five matchups. In fact, it's not a great vote of confidence in your team's abilities if you want to see this game won at all costs, because it means you don't give them good odds to advance unless they're facing the other group's scrubs. For us viewers, that's less nerve-wracking, of course. And since you know your goalie can play better than that, you don't want to make him excessively moody either, in case you end up in a position where you have to rely on him again.

One of the difficult things as a viewer is to keep in mind that things may look plenty different from behind the bench than they do from the stands. This does not mean the coach is always right and the viewers are always wrong, but I still wince whenever I see somebody behaving as if he or she has all the solutions - even more so, if they come with a hefty dose of hindsight and essentially pit a personal best-case fantasy scenario against what has just occurred.

Whenever I see a coach do something controversial, stuff that could be debated either way, instead of considering them outright mistakes, I consider them gambles. If they pay off, it's the stuff that gives you a better team going forward. If they don't, well... there are going to be five million people telling you where you went wrong. But if you're not willing to accept that, you never should have taken the job in the first place. After all, attaining a 100% triumph rate is a sheer impossibility.

And for better measure, let me tell you that a 0% triumph rate - never having won anything significant - is not something you should just excuse away. But luckily, we don't have to go there with J.Jalonen.
 
To be brutally honest, I don't really think that it's so absolutely necessary that team does well here - some years we might have a competitive team, some years not. Some years we overachieve (though much less regularly than in the men's tournaments) and some years we underachieve (totally possible that this is one of those years).

But what is really important for Finnish hockey is that do we produce at least 2-3 top talents (that is, top talent in the Finnish context, top-6 and top-4 calibre NHL players) each year or do we not (as the case was all too often some years ago). Now we have clearly more than that minimum - the drought is finally over. For Canada it's obviously different and they have their silly overhype of this tournament anyway - but for us it's not like that.
 
Jalonen should try to put Hintz to the wing. It's not like we don't have enough centers that Hintz is forced to play C. I don't think changing Kapanen to Kalapudas will help to find that first line which carries Finland to the championships. I would have tried Saarela as first line center.
 
JJTT said:
New forward lines

Click to expand...


What on earth is that 2nd line? Why is Hintz not playing LW and how come Saarela hasn't been placed at center? Why was Repo scratched over Kalapudas? I really don't understand JJ's master plan here... :help:

Laine - Aho - Puljujärvi
Hintz - Saarela - Rantanen
Repo - Nättinen - Kapanen
Björkqvist - Siikonen - Lammikko

IMO that's the way the lines should be, assuming that the kid line stays that way. IF we wanted to "spread the wealth" a bit, you could also swap Saarela and Aho in that lineup, making the 2nd line a bit more difficult to play against.
 
Opak said:
What on earth is that 2nd line? Why is Hintz not playing LW and how come Saarela hasn't been placed at center? Why was Repo scratched over Kalapudas? I really don't understand JJ's master plan here... :help:

Laine - Aho - Puljujärvi
Hintz - Saarela - Rantanen
Repo - Nättinen - Kapanen
Björkqvist - Siikonen - Lammikko
Click to expand...
+1

I'm kind of okay with seeing what Kalapudas has to offer, but Repo's play had been at least decent, so I don't understand the need for THAT chance. I want this to be some sort of genius masterplan and not just unawareness on Jalonen's part :( To the naked eye, there clearly would be better options, like the lineup you posted. That 2nd line, if correct, is an unnecessary cluster****. You have a natural centre, another centreman who has played LW, a RW that has played centre, and you place them all on positions that they've never played in???

Hintz-Kalapudas-Rantanen would make so much more sense. Not as much as Hintz-Saarela-Rantanen and Repo-Nättinen-Kapanen, but we'll see what Kalapudas has to offer. He might be slow-looking but sees the ice well.
 
Last edited:
Im curious to know how al the "dont put Laine and Puljujärvi on the same line" folks thinks right now :sarcasm::laugh:
 
fr9dd9 said:
Im curious to know how al the "dont put Laine and Puljujärvi on the same line" folks thinks right now :sarcasm::laugh:
Click to expand...
As one of them, I'm happily surprised about the amount of production. No way of knowing if they would produce even more on separate lines, but that is not a thing I want happening right now. Happy to be somewhat wrong :handclap:
 
Even if there were still some issues with production (apart from the kiddie line, I mean), looks like Jalonen knew what he was doing when he put those units together. Rantanen and Kapanen both played their best game, and Kalapudas didn't look out of place at all. Of course, the opposition was not of the same caliber as two days ago, but still. Let's hope Kappy and Rants are now on what's come to known as the "Ristolainen curve".

Perhaps it was simply because Slovakia was generally worse at it than Russia, but our faceoffs improved as well, especially so with Nättinen. Did he lose a single one? Siikonen picked it up too. Hintz, however, was still pretty bad with his draws. Maybe they should try Kalapudas on the spot.

I give Kähkönen two stars out of three for that game. It wasn't exactly a lights-out performance (not that opposition required one in the first place), but he sure looked somewhat more steady and calmer than Vehviläinen. Can't blame him for the first two goals either. He lost the puck in the first and was screened in the second. He was in a good position to catch the third, though. Bottom line, it may be a bit early to call him the rock we'd all love to see, but he sure earnt the next start as well.

Jalonen still needs to pull an all-nighter to fix our PK though.
 
Last edited:
fr9dd9 said:
Im curious to know how al the "dont put Laine and Puljujärvi on the same line" folks thinks right now :sarcasm::laugh:
Click to expand...

Same people are bashing everybody else on this team plus Jalonen. I don't even find it funny really.
 
So, basically Finland's best player this year (Pulju) is actually a SWEDE. That's irony at it's best.
 
FiLe said:
I give Kähkönen two stars out of three for that game. It wasn't exactly a lights-out performance (not that opposition required one in the first place), but he sure looked somewhat more steady and calmer than Vehviläinen. Can't blame him for the first two goals either. He lost the puck in the first and was screened in the second. He was in a good position to catch the third, though. Bottom line, it may be a bit early to call him the rock we'd all love to see, but he sure earnt the next start as well.
.
Click to expand...

Agree. I was going to say Kähkönen had a rough start as the team did, warmed up and showed ability to be a game winner. Tuulola's pass to the Slovak guy is a perfect example.
Vehviläinen is flashier as he has an element of instinct saves, so he ends up out of position. Kähkönen was perfectly positioned and what we get is a weak shot on goal from an otherwise dream scoring chance. Vehviläinen would either have been out of position or made a dream save.
Kähkönen is my vote going forwards.
 
Slapper said:
By that logic Nylanders are actually Canadians.
Click to expand...

Well since you somehow mysteriously missed the whole point, I'm just going to lay it out for you.

Finland.
Sweden.
Neighbours.
Hockey.
History.

And the list goes on.

Does that cover it for you?
 
Alright, so we've now established that they can score. Lots. This is good. Defend, however, they cannot. Whenever the opposition gets set up in the zone, they can be pretty certain that a quality scoring chance will soon follow, doubly so on power-play. The goaltenders have been unable to bail the team out in these situations too, though Kähkönen did improve as the game went on. In short, control the puck or lose is the name of the game until they get their act together on defense.
 
Without taking anything away from Puljujärvi's points, it sure as hell feels like he only needs to touch the puck and soon the puck is in the net.
 
Im the Vatman said:
Without taking anything away from Puljujärvi's points, it sure as hell feels like he only needs to touch the puck and soon the puck is in the net.
Click to expand...

They seem to spend every shift in the offensive zone and have the puck a lot, not the worst recipe for goal scoring.

McDavid had 11 points in 7 games, C'moon Pulju& Laine, get more.
 
Nikkola is having really tough tournament. His decisionmaking is really horrible even when he has alot of time and space he seems to turn the puck over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom