Latendresse benched again

[Ice]

And btw, a guy like Latendresse did stand out. Thats why he's sitting.

I'm sure Sutter wouldn't mind his playing a but but he's sitting only because its his personality that stands out.

 

[SwisshockeyAcademy]

At this point Latte does not deserve to start over anyone 5 on 5. Look at Walt Kyle with Bobby Ryan. early on he was not happy with Ryan but did give him some pp time , especially when the top unit faltered against Finland. Ryan gained his confidence on the PP and has carried it over to a regular shift. Canada's PP needs a spark and maybe Latte can provide it- maybe not. I can say for certain Latte will probably see no 5 on 5 time right now without an injury or five. If anyone here thinks we are walking down electric avenue and winning this without the PP going they are kidding themselves. If Bourque does not trip over the linesman you may have a different result and the soul searching would be on then. Whether latte gets PP time or not they better get better on the PP no matter who is on it. Sutter has done a fine job in most aspects but this is far from over.

 

[Transported Upstater]

still doesnt matter even though it is a good point, the WJC is a very special thing, he sometimes writes on RDS.ca and he said before the team was announced that he was very confident he would be part of the team. Here is another post he made on december 27th.

http://www.rds.ca/lhjmq/chroniques/194669.html

it basicly says for those who cant read french that Brent Sutter talked to him after the 5-1 win over finland and wanted him to improve on the little things. He also said that he listens to Sutters advice and thinks hes a very good coach.

Thanks for the translation, it was gibberish to me before

I agree with you though, what I said in my post doesn't give Guillame an excuse to not give 110% every time he plays.

 

[ZombieMatt]

You just keep parroting the same irrelevant accomplishments that any mediocre coach could have accomplished.

One who is not an overbearing idiot. One who doesn't treat his team like they were a bunch of robots. One who has semblance of imagination and can like the full range of playing styles instead of being obsessed with grit and grit only. One who doesn't mind of a player or a line can standout above the rest. One doesn't mess with a player's future for no other reason than disliking him.

Okay, let me break this down for you even more simply than already has, because you seem to have a significant problem with comprehension.

What is the job of a coach?

I'll answer it for you, because frankly I'm a little concerned that you're going to answer something as ridiculous and completely unsubstantiated as the rest of your contribution to this thread.

The job is a coach is to win games. He does this through getting the most out of the line-up he is given.

For Team Canada, WJC edition, Coach Sutter has done NOTHING but get wins. Nothing. Literally nothing but win games. If I recall correct, he's up to ten wins in a row (once again, in case you missed it, this is a Team Canada record). This fact is not something you can just try to ignore because it isn't condusive to your misconception. It is fact. Coach Sutter has done things that no other Canadian WJC coach has EVER done. Through years and years of dominant, strong, solid and weak rosters, no coach has ever won this many games in a row. This accomplishment is far from irrelevant. It is the epitome of relevant, because as the end of the day, there is one thing that measures a coaches success and ability.

And that is win-loss record.

You call a flawless record AND a gold medal "irrelevant."

So what exactly would you call relevant? Perhaps you may consider multiple appearances in the Memorial Cup, and a Memorial Cup Championship, relevant.

All you continue to do is ignore reality. Well, that as well as making things up, such as this gem:

"One doesn't mess with a player's future for no other reason than disliking him."

For example?

Proof?

Any form of substantiated evidence?

What about some of your other beauties.

One who is not an overbearing idiot.

How exactly is he an idiot? He certainly has had a tremendously successful coaching career.

One who doesn't treat his team like they were a bunch of robots.

Like what? I think you have some major problems with the whole hair cut thing. It's not as if they were forced to shave it all off and look the same. And I don't really understand how this makes him treat his team like robots.

Proof?

One who has semblance of imagination and can like the full range of playing styles instead of being obsessed with grit and grit only.

Huh? Are you trying to insinuate that Coach Sutter doesn't play skilled players? Guys like Sidney Crosby, Patrice Bergeron, Jeff Carter, Andrew Cogliano, Kris Letang, etc, etc, etc?

Proof?

One who doesn't mind of a player or a line can standout above the rest.

So now he's all about equality? You're accusing Sutter of being a communist? How has he held anybody or any line from excelling? Are you saying Sutter benches players that are performing well?

Proof?

 

[Sammy*]

Okay, let me break this down for you even more simply than already has, because you seem to have a significant problem with comprehension.

What is the job of a coach?

I'll answer it for you, because frankly I'm a little concerned that you're going to answer something as ridiculous and completely unsubstantiated as the rest of your contribution to this thread.

The job is a coach is to win games. He does this through getting the most out of the line-up he is given.

For Team Canada, WJC edition, Coach Sutter has done NOTHING but get wins. Nothing. Literally nothing but win games. If I recall correct, he's up to ten wins in a row (once again, in case you missed it, this is a Team Canada record). This fact is not something you can just try to ignore because it isn't condusive to your misconception. It is fact. Coach Sutter has done things that no other Canadian WJC coach has EVER done. Through years and years of dominant, strong, solid and weak rosters, no coach has ever won this many games in a row. This accomplishment is far from irrelevant. It is the epitome of relevant, because as the end of the day, there is one thing that measures a coaches success and ability.

And that is win-loss record.

You call a flawless record AND a gold medal "irrelevant."

So what exactly would you call relevant? Perhaps you may consider multiple appearances in the Memorial Cup, and a Memorial Cup Championship, relevant.

All you continue to do is ignore reality. Well, that as well as making things up, such as this gem:



For example?

Proof?

Any form of substantiated evidence?

What about some of your other beauties.



How exactly is he an idiot? He certainly has had a tremendously successful coaching career.



Like what? I think you have some major problems with the whole hair cut thing. It's not as if they were forced to shave it all off and look the same. And I don't really understand how this makes him treat his team like robots.

Proof?



Huh? Are you trying to insinuate that Coach Sutter doesn't play skilled players? Guys like Sidney Crosby, Patrice Bergeron, Jeff Carter, Andrew Cogliano, Kris Letang, etc, etc, etc?

Proof?



So now he's all about equality? You're accusing Sutter of being a communist? How has he held anybody or any line from excelling? Are you saying Sutter benches players that are performing well?

Proof?

\
Dont even bother.
He has no idea.

 

[Roughneck]

\
Dont even bother.
He has no idea.

I have a suspision that he, or one of his direct family members was cut by a Sutter at some point in their life.

 

[baston]

Thanks for the translation, it was gibberish to me before

...

Yes, Latendresse obviously has his mind in Montreal, and he looks pretty bored in the Q if you ask me. Everybody in Quebec said Latendresse was a lock for the team in October, and the kid probably ended thinking that he would never have to go back to juinor hockey and the 12 hours bus rides.

Anyways, I decided to translate that article Latendresse wrote the 27th right after the game vs Finland for RDS. Here it is :

We had a good tournament start beating Finland 5 to 1.

Our game plan was to impose our rhythm as soon as the game started and to force the Finns into playing our way.

Michael Blunden started the game with a big hit. This is part of our team's identity and we have to impose ourselves physically throughout the tournament.

On the personnal side, things have been a little more difficult. In the third period, I had only two shifts.

Today (tuesday), I had the chance to speak with Brent Sutter and he asked me to improve some little aspects of my game. However, I won't get into details here. Our team is made of 23 good players et we need to deserve our ice time. To do so, we need to offer better performances and, yesterday, I must admit that I didn't had my best game.

Today at practice, I was playing on a line with Blake Comeau and Dustin Boyd.

Switzerland and Norway

We will play our next two games wednesday and thursday against Switzerland and Norway. Obviously, these teams are not known to be as good as Finland or the United States.

However, we can't take any team easily and we need to focus for these games as if we were playing the United States. he entire team is conscient of the importance of every game.

A friendly coach

Many people are asking how Brent Sutter is with his players. I can tell you that he is a friendly coach. He knows his hockey and when he gives you an advice, you have to listen to him.

I took his recommandations seriously. I'll try to use the advice he gave me in the next games and try to bring them with me in Drummondville for the rest of the season.

A first Christmas away from home

It is the first time I am spending Christmas outside Québec. Usually, when I played in tournaments during the Holidays, we always left the 26th.

I thought it would be harder than it actually is. I must admit that we don't really have the time to be bored around here. We have a lot of fun.

The 24th, the team had organized a "gift trade" between the players. It was pleasant.

 

[Rise from the Ashes]

hes a good kid, as you can see his mind is on Montreal i mean he writes for RDS, the Habs channel lol. Still if he is trying to take his advice, why isnt it working???????????

 

[baston]

Latendresse gave an interview to RDS tonight ... he seemed pissed hehe.

Now, I didn't write what he said right away, so don't blame me if it isn't exactly what he said. I'll try to do my best

"I didn't really have a chance, and, yesterday, I had no chance at all * laugh *. One thing is sure, if I ever play again, I know what I have to do, I'll go crazy and hit every single thing that moves on the ice."

"Yeah, it sure is boring, but I won't cry. Staying here and whine would be useless"

"Yeah, I am still hosted and fed so it's ok *laugh*"

 

[Canadian_Brewtality]

Just cause I feel like it...

The whole Lats thing is very ridiculous.

First off, Sutter, in my opinion is a decent coach. Yes he has crudentials and all that, but lets face it, he hardly had to coach that team last year, they were just too good. This year the team hasnt performed all that well, except vs USA and they were by no means dominant. Canada has always been the leading hockey nation, so you can be hard pressed to find a coach who would be really horrible with a U20 Canada team.

I like the intensity and pride he brings to the team, but as a coach strategy wise, I dont know much about him. The players are so talented, that I find it hard to distinguish good coaching from superior talent.

Im a Habs fan, and just like anyone else, I would like to see Lats play. I think before the tourny started he was looked upon as one of the offensive leaders of the team. It just seems to me that Sutter, just in general does not like him. I have watched all the games, and he hasnt played enough to make a real jugdment on his play. Many players made mistakes, too penalties, and he benched a few, but at most for a period, not an entire game. I dont know how Guillaume is in practice, but Im sure he tries hard, because once you make Team Canada, you want to prove yourself and not ride the bench.

Guy definately can bring an offensive spark to a team that lacks finishing. Play him a regular shift, and see how he plays. If he reallly doesent show up, then dont make him play. But everyone deserves a shot to prove themselves. Everyone has games/shifts. I think its a misjudgment by Sutter's part.

 

[Rise from the Ashes]

Latendresse gave an interview to RDS tonight ... he seemed pissed hehe.

Now, I didn't write what he said right away, so don't blame me if it isn't exactly what he said. I'll try to do my best

"I didn't really have a chance, and, yesterday, I had no chance at all * laugh *. One thing is sure, if I ever play again, I know what I have to do, I'll go crazy and hit every single thing that moves on the ice."

"Yeah, it sure is boring, but I won't cry. Staying here and whine would be useless"

"Yeah, I am still hosted and fed so it's ok *laugh*"

poor guy

 

[God Bless Canada]

Just to clarify a few things, that may or may not have been stated already:

*Since Sutter took over the Red Deer Rebels, they have been viewed as the model organization in the CHL by those in the know. Ahead of teams like Kelowna and London who have enjoyed perennial success as well. (Red Deer has been a little down this year, but every junior hockey franchise has their down time, as anyone who knows junior hockey would tell you).
*Red Deer has won a Memorial Cup under Sutter. Anyone who wants to question Sutter's coaching abilities can please mail me their Memorial Cup ring as proof that you are in a position to do so.
*Sutter is such a good coach that Hockey Canada begged him to take the job. They even let him run camps his way.
*His work in the 2005 WJC was brilliant. Yes, he had the best collection of Canadian talent in a decade to work with, but he got everyone to buy into his strategy. Guys like Perry who are used to starring roles made the team as support players and thrived. It's as good of a job as you'll see coaching a dream team.
*He is considered by many to be the best coach outside of the NHL today. He has had many NHL offers, but is fully committed to his job in Red Deer.
*If Latendresse was playing to his potential, he'd be playing for Canada right now. The Latendresse that we saw dominate the 2004 Junior World Cup is not the Latendresse we've seen at this tournament. He has been a disappointment. (Along with several other 18-year-olds on this team). I don't know if I should be surprise, given a) his heart seems to be in Montreal and b) consistency has been an issue at times in the past. Could he at least contribute on the PP, with his size and hands in front of the net. Probably, but Sutter seems to have a strategy of using 12 forwards and 6 defencemen. (I also think Pokuluk would do well clearing the front of the net on the PK, but in the end, who are we to complain when talking about one of the most successful coaches in Canada).

 

[MentalPowerHouse]

Latendresse gave an interview to RDS tonight ... he seemed pissed hehe.

Now, I didn't write what he said right away, so don't blame me if it isn't exactly what he said. I'll try to do my best

"I didn't really have a chance, and, yesterday, I had no chance at all * laugh *. One thing is sure, if I ever play again, I know what I have to do, I'll go crazy and hit every single thing that moves on the ice."

"Yeah, it sure is boring, but I won't cry. Staying here and whine would be useless"

"Yeah, I am still hosted and fed so it's ok *laugh*"

If he truely said these things maybe we now know why he is being benched, not playing well + poor attitude = little ice time from Sutter.

 

[Anksun]

I dont understand how you could actually agree with both of those points.

1. It's been said around there in this very thread, big guys have a tendancy to be inconsistent. The player could be playing with passion for a game and disapear for the next one.

2. Latendresse was given 0 shift last game, because he was "bad" (oh well...) a week ago.
_________

Seems to me the logical choice would be to give him at least a chance. Let's say 1 pp opportunity and see if it might be one of those games... no??? I actually not like this way of thinking but it seems like it should be the way to go if you think Suter is not playing him because of his bad play.
_________

Point is, last game. Latendresse was benched to help the coach make an example.
Last game against Usa, this team was playing to protect a tie. That's simply not the way you should play a short tournament. It did turns out well but that's not the way i'd want my team to react if the same situation prevail with a 1 goal lead in a few days. I want my team to keep control of the puck, stay in the game and play a strong 2-ways game, not that defensive at 100% game.

You got a player that is over 230 pounds with good hands on the bench for the entire game. You got a PP that is NOT looking sharp, not only they arent scoring, but it's not even looking good. You are in a tournament of the best youngs -20 players, which mean you have strong young goalies at an age where rebound-control is usually still a work in progress. Seems like you might AT LEAST try to see what he can do in front of the net, especially when you got arguably the best defense of the tournament. Use the defense, put the puck on the net and the rebounds will comes.

 

[Phanuthier*]

First off, Sutter, in my opinion is a decent coach. Yes he has crudentials and all that, but lets face it, he hardly had to coach that team last year, they were just too good.

Tell that to the coaches from 1997 to 2004, where none of them could win a gold medel on a "just too good" team.

This year the team hasnt performed all that well, except vs USA and they were by no means dominant.

Why? The 5-1 win over Finland? The 4-0 win over Norway? The 4-3 win over the Swiss, who tied the supposed favourites USA? Beating (or tie, however you want to call it) Team USA, the favourite of the tournament?

Canada has always been the leading hockey nation, so you can be hard pressed to find a coach who would be really horrible with a U20 Canada team.

How about the Team Canada that finished 7th place? Ask Dany Heatly if he wished he had a WJC gold. Or Mike Camarelli, Brad Boyes, Jay Bouwmeester, Jason Spezza, Raffi Torres, Bryan Allen, Robyn Regehr, Roberto Luongo, MA Fleury, Brandan Morrow, Brad Stuart, Joffrey Lupul, Scotty Upshall or PM Bouchard if they could have walked their way to a gold medel.

Or ask Dion Phaneuf, Braydon Coburn, Jeff Carter, Anthony Stewart, Ryan Getzlaf, Mike Richards and Sidney Crosby why their supposed stacked roster couldn't get it done in 2004 (with MA Fleury, btw) but could get it done in 2005 (with Jeff Glass).

Brent Sutter did what no other Team Canada coach could do for 7 years, and that was lead a favourite Team Canada to gold. All those good players through the system, even the team the past year, could not get through to gold. Yet Brent Sutter managed to.

Fluke, right? As fluky as his perfect 10-0 record?

Brent Sutter ain't no idiot. Idiot's don't accomplish what Brent Sutter has accomplished.

A team of ego's is arguably harder to win with then a team of underdogs. When you are coaching a good team like Team Canada, it is always a challenge to manage the ego's in the dressing room, so its important to preach accountability and your actions. The fact is that Brent Sutter knows what it takes to win, and he needs all his guys pulling their weight if Canada has a chance at gold - Latendresse is not playing well, and thus he is accountable for his play. Thus, Latendresse isn't playing.

Its funny, last year, Brent Sutter was an idiot for leaving Alex Picard or MA Bernier or Eric Fehr. People said Team Canada lost the gold the day they picked a dumb farmer like Brent Sutter. And what was even funnier was none of these idiots came back when Team Canada won gold.

I have a feeling those people that call Brent Sutter an idiot now will be AWOL if Team Canada leads an underdog Team Canada to gold this year.

 

[Ice]

Okay, let me break this down for you even more simply than already has, because you seem to have a significant problem with comprehension.

What is the job of a coach?

I'll answer it for you, because frankly I'm a little concerned that you're going to answer something as ridiculous and completely unsubstantiated as the rest of your contribution to this thread.

The job is a coach is to win games. He does this through getting the most out of the line-up he is given.

I was one of the few who saw Sutter for what he was last year and now this year there is a definite rise in number of those questioning his tactics. Who knows maybe in a few years you too will see the light. Sutter is one-dimensional, hardline, unfair and bad for Canadian hockey. It would be a disaster if he did win gold this year because then it could cause his one-dimensional style to be applied too broadly much like how the Swedes made a big mistake by way over-emphasizing systems.

For Team Canada, WJC edition, Coach Sutter has done NOTHING but get wins. Nothing. Literally nothing but win games. If I recall correct, he's up to ten wins in a row (once again, in case you missed it, this is a Team Canada record).

Please somebody give this guy a cracker. The accomplishment is obviously not irrelevant to the boys but the credit is theirs not Sutters.

So what exactly would you call relevant? Perhaps you may consider multiple appearances in the Memorial Cup, and a Memorial Cup Championship, relevant.

As I said, that is a totally different situation where he can mold the team to his liking and get rid of any player who stands out unless they tacitly agree to reel themselves in enough not to standout.

Like what? I think you have some major problems with the whole hair cut thing. It's not as if they were forced to shave it all off and look the same. And I don't really understand how this makes him treat his team like robots.

Yes I didn't like him last year but this was a topper. What an embarrassment to Canada; we are supposed to be part of the free world.

Huh? Are you trying to insinuate that Coach Sutter doesn't play skilled players? Guys like Sidney Crosby, Patrice Bergeron, Jeff Carter, Andrew Cogliano, Kris Letang, etc, etc, etc?

No I'm trying to insinuate that, I said standout not skilled. You're stone cold blind if you do not see Sutter's anti-bias against the Q. Sutter did not like Bergeron and he hated Crosby and he looked for ways to quiet their line down last year after they started running away with the tournament.

 

[Blackshad]

If he truely said these things maybe we now know why he is being benched, not playing well + poor attitude = little ice time from Sutter.

Latendresse is far from having a bad attitude.
With his skill if i was benched like that i would go back to Dummundville.
There's an article in "Le droit" - a french newspaper this morning.
Here's 2 of his quotes translated. (I did my best, that might not sound exactly the same in english)

"It's sad to say but there's nothing i can do or say to the coach. I must think for the team before me. If we win the gold medal, i will be happy."

"When you have the chance to play, you need to take advantage of it. What's boring (Plate ... i cant translate that word cause i cant find a proper word for it), it's that i didnt had alot of chance to show what i can do. Now, i must prepare myself for the next game like if i will play and if the coach give me a shift i will hit everything that move and give everything i got."

 

[Sammy*]

No I'm trying to insinuate that, I said standout not skilled. You're stone cold blind if you do not see Sutter's anti-bias against the Q. Sutter did not like Bergeron and he hated Crosby and he looked for ways to quiet their line down last year after they started running away with the tournament.

Quit it. You are really embarassing yourself.

 

[Rise from the Ashes]

her barely played crosby and didnt let him play on PP sometimes but Bergeron was out there a lot, he simply likes 19 year olds.

 

[Misos Milakos*]

So why is it that he decided to get fat anyways?

 

[Roughneck]

I was one of the few who saw Sutter for what he was last year and now this year there is a definite rise in number of those questioning his tactics. Who knows maybe in a few years you too will see the light. Sutter is one-dimensional, hardline, unfair and bad for Canadian hockey. It would be a disaster if he did win gold this year because then it could cause his one-dimensional style to be applied too broadly much like how the Swedes made a big mistake by way over-emphasizing systems.

The only difference is that instead of underachieving and not producing hockey players, Brent Sutter is 11-0 and has had an impressive group of players make their way through the Red Deer system (Boyd Gordon, Cam Ward, Dion Phaneuf, Justin Mapletoft, Jeff Woywitka and Doug Lynch just to name a few).

The World Juniors isn't a tournament meant for develloping players, its to have your country's best compete against the rest of the world's best in a 7 game tournament

Please somebody give this guy a cracker. The accomplishment is obviously not irrelevant to the boys but the credit is theirs not Sutters.

Yet when the team loses, you will be the first to blame Sutter (hell, you're already blaming him for not winning as convincingly as he should), yet its only the players that should get credit for a win?

Wow.

As I said, that is a totally different situation where he can mold the team to his liking and get rid of any player who stands out unless they tacitly agree to reel themselves in enough not to standout.

And as several people have said, and what you have obviously chosen to ignore, is that Sutter has built this World Junior teams of players he likes and players that can play the roles that he needs, which is why a guy like Tom Pyatt is on the team, and Wojtek Wolski is not.

Yes I didn't like him last year but this was a topper. What an embarrassment to Canada; we are supposed to be part of the free world.

We aren't forcing the players to play for Team Canada, but you raise an interesting point. perhaps Hockey Canada should put team member's families in gulags until they win gold, now THAT would be a motivational tool.

Or perhaps we should have a draw that includes all the U-20 people in Canada to choose the team, now THAT would be he way a true free world country would deal with this.

Seriously, what did Sutter do to you?

No I'm trying to insinuate that, I said standout not skilled. You're stone cold blind if you do not see Sutter's anti-bias against the Q. Sutter did not like Bergeron and he hated Crosby and he looked for ways to quiet their line down last year after they started running away with the tournament.

Like giving them first line powerplay time? And if he hates standout players, please try to tell us why Phaneuf and Weber still saw all the time Sutter could give them last year? Or why he chose Stephen Dixon (a Q player) over Boyd and Bolland (the non-Q guys). Its not like he needed the extra experience to win, afterall, "my grandmother could have coached that team to gold". And this year, Luc Bourdon and Kristopher Letang, dear god, not only did he pick Q players, he picked Q DEFENSEMEN!

Maybe you should stick to watching pickup pond hockey if you don't like the way teams are picked. I'd love to hear your critiques at the omissions the Americans have had in the past, or even the free-flying Russians (who you should hate even more than Canada, their coaches are much meaner than Sutter is, and much less democratic.

 

[Sammy*]

her barely played crosby and didnt let him play on PP sometimes but Bergeron was out there a lot, he simply likes 19 year olds.

Crosby played alot.

 

[Roughneck]

Crosby played alot.

But I heard that Sutter put Benadryl in his water bottle to tire him out. And kept ordering pizzas to Bergeron's room at 3 in the morning before they played Russia in the final.

 

[LaLaLaprise]

If he truely said these things maybe we now know why he is being benched, not playing well + poor attitude = little ice time from Sutter.

How does that show poor attitude? Is he sooking? He basically said it sucks but that he is still part of the team and he will do anything he can to win.

What would have been better for him to say? Plus you gotta take into account he was speaking english. Sometimes words dont always come out the way you want them if youre speaking a 2nd language.

If anything that interview proves that the kid has charachter and he is swallowing his pride. Something a lot of players wouldnt do.

 

[baston]

I'll correct Guillaume's quotes after hearing them again on RDS :

"I didn't really have a chance, and, yesterday, I had no chance at all * laugh *. One thing is sure, if I ever play again, I know what I have to do, I'll hit every single thing that moves on the ice."

"Yeah, it sure is boring, but I won't cry. Staying here and whine would be useless. The best I can do to help my teamates is laugh and come to practice everyday with a smile"

"Yeah, I am still hosted and fed so it's ok *laugh*"


.............................................................................................


That guy has an awesome attitude. He has shown in the past that he can be better than any forwards in that team. Yes, he sucked previously, and yes, Sutter benched him and it was ok to do it in a way.

But no shifts in the most important game of the tournament is very hard for an 18 years old kid. I know I wouldn't be able to laugh about it. Anybody saying that Guillaume doesn't have a great attitude has some serious bias towards Sutter.

Eh, I don't even know the kid and I was mad to see that he is staying on the bench. To be able to keep your calm and laugh about it at 18 shows some serious signs of maturity.