Toggle sidebar

World Cup: Canada 4 Nations Tournament 2025 Roster Talk

Offence is incredible, defence is great, goaltending is a major concern though.

Binnington was having serious trouble with the simplest of shots looking like a fish out of water at times.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ORRFForever
Avsfan1921 said:
Don’t let a one game sample size fool you. He likes to carry the puck, and he’s damn good at it, but way too much is being made of this. For example, necas has absolutely thrived playing with MacKinnon and has had the puck on his stick an awful lot since joining.

This was simply a case of a guy that’s amped up and in the moment. Don’t let jaded Edmonton and Tampa fans pull you into the echo chamber.

I’m sure he’ll do more solo runs, as will Mcdavid, they are built on speed and power. But that is part of their game.
Click to expand...

Yeah, as a Jets fan I see him play often and his OT play isn't characteristic of him. He generally uses his linemates extremely well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigDaddyLurch and Avsfan1921
Not bad, we won. I don't like the lead being squandered in the 3rd period. With that lineup if you are up 3-1 in the 3rd period you need to finish that. Add onto it. So a nail biter that didn't need to be one but no question there is chemistry on those lines. Crosby is.........Crosby. What else can you say? I thought Binnington was shaky though. He made a huge game saver about a minute before the Marner OT goal but I am not sure what to do with the net after this. Is it Hill's or Binnington's? I don't know.
 
cneely said:
Are they? First off, that's not true at all.
Click to expand...
What's not true? There is not a top player in the game that plays a worse all around game than Bedard.

When he was asked to play a more responsible game at the WC, he failed and was demoted from 1st line C to 13th forward.
cneely said:
Secondly, how many are 18?
Click to expand...
You're making my point, Bedard is nowhere near developed enough to make a team like this. Him being a teenager certainly means he has more room for growth than others, but he's just not there. He's just too soft on the puck, and his decision making is really reckless at times - lots of high risk low reward plays. Not to mention his poor defensive zone coverage.

When he's motivated, he's a pretty effective back checker, but everywhere else he's like in the bottom 1% of the league.
 
WhiskeyYerTheDevils said:
All of the top players in the game are also tasked with scoring. Yet they are all much better defensively than Bedard.

There's a reason he was demoted to 13th forward at the WCs.
Click to expand...

What makes him objectively bad at defence?

His 260th in high danger shot attempts against per 60 mins? 3.53. Auston Matthews is 4.9. Jarvis, 4.17
82nd in on ice expected goals against per 60. 3.48. Matthews, 3.76. Jarvis, 3.17.

NHL Player Statistics -Advanced Stats 2024-2025

Scoring Leaders, Expected Goals, Player Stats
moneypuck.com moneypuck.com
 
  • Haha
Reactions: WhiskeyYerTheDevils
cneely said:
What makes him objectively bad at defence?

His 260th in high danger shot attempts against per 60 mins? 3.53. Auston Matthews is 4.9. Jarvis, 4.17
82nd in on ice expected goals against per 60. 3.48. Matthews, 3.76. Jarvis, 3.17.

NHL Player Statistics -Advanced Stats 2024-2025

Scoring Leaders, Expected Goals, Player Stats
moneypuck.com moneypuck.com
Click to expand...
Did you just use all situations numbers to justify Bedard's defensive ability? Lol.
 
cneely said:
You're right.

Let's do 5 on 5. High danger shot attempts against per 60. Bedard, 2.19. Matthews, 3.09. Jarvis 2.41
Click to expand...
Those numbers aren't even remotely correct


HDCA/60
Bedard 12.94
Jarvis 11.41
Matthews 9.64

rel HDCA/60
Bedard +1.19
Jarvis +0.23
Matthews -0.74

xGA/60
Bedard 2.97
Jarvis 2.31
Matthews 2.64

rel xGA/60
Bedard +0.34
Jarvis -.07
Matthews +.07
 
cneely said:
I mean, I provided the link. You can look them up yourself.
Click to expand...
Yeah, those numbers don't make any sense. Money puck must be using a different definition for high danger shot attempts.

Regardless, Bedard's expected goal numbers are brutal, and by eye test its very clear how poor he is defensively. Dude has a negative rel xG% playing on one of the worst teams in the league.
 
cneely said:
I'm perfectly okay with leaving him behind. Someone specified trying to turn over to the youth movement as a reason for taking Jarvis. That's rubbish.
Click to expand...
I thought that, too. Jarvis is young and a terrific 200 foot player. Add the fact that he is young and a member / leader of the next generation is a bonus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigDaddyLurch
ORRFForever said:
I thought that, too. Jarvis is young and a terrific 200 foot player. Add the fact that he is young and a member / leader of the next generation is a bonus.
Click to expand...

We're going in circles and will have to agree to disagree. He's a fine young player. He's not a top 13 Canadian forward in my opinion.
 
WhiskeyYerTheDevils said:
Yeah, those numbers don't make any sense. Money puck must be using a different definition for high danger shot attempts.

Regardless, Bedard's expected goal numbers are brutal, and by eye test its very clear how poor he is defensively. Dude has a negative rel xG% playing on one of the worst teams in the league.
Click to expand...

He's trying to carry the team on his back.
 
Community said:
The original poster stated they didn't want Marner on the team.

Real arguments can be made for adding Scheifele, Hyman, Suzuki, and even Bedard, but added players would be replacing Marchand, Hagel, Jarvis, Cirelli, and/or Konecny. Not Marner given his top end offensive talent and good defensive/PK ability.

I do feel like Team Canada took a few too many forwards they viewed as role playing guys considering we already have top PK guys and great defensive players playing in the top 6 already. It might not make a difference considering their Bottom 6 are still very talented, but you never know.

Hell, why do you really need the bottom 6 to all be two-way guys when you have 4(?) of your top 6 forwards that have one or more top 5 finishes in Selke voting in their careers. I'd rather have a few more of our top offensive talents being available in case we're chasing a game since your top 6 can still be trusted when ahead. It's not like our top line is P. Kane - Kuznetsov - Ovechkin or something.
Click to expand...
Not having Marner would have been a mistake.
Not having Hyman and Scheifele was a mistake; even if they win the tourny;
They basically have 2 checking lines. This may work in their favour against the US team, which is a heavy team but the skilled Swedes took control in p's 2 and 3.
 
cneely said:
We're going in circles and will have to agree to disagree. He's a fine young player. He's not a top 13 Canadian forward in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I didn't say he was. But, given how little you lose between Jarvis and Canada's 13th best forward, it was worth bringing him for the experience and to make him a future leader.

I know we are all caught up in this silly tournament but, my guess, Hockey Canada is far more concerned with doing well at the Olympics in 12 months.
 
I know Canadas goaltending is considered weak, but Canada should be considered the favorite in any international tournament.
 
On The Prowl said:
I know Canadas goaltending is considered weak, but Canada should be considered the favorite in any international tournament.
Click to expand...

It didn't have to be weak, it was done purposely.
 
Bertuzzzi44 said:
Offence is incredible, defence is great, goaltending is a major concern though.

Binnington was having serious trouble with the simplest of shots looking like a fish out of water at times.
Click to expand...
The first goal no one stops.
The second was WEAK.
The third was as much the D's fault as Binnington's.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom