Team Canada Predictions

[espo*]

Nash and Kovalchuk aren't in the same league. They shouldn't even be compared at this point.

Yes, Nash tied Kovalchuk in goals, but Kovalchuk beat him by 30 points and has also been a huge scoring threat for more than one year.

Not in the same league as far as producing points yes,i agree.But they are in the same league as far as producing goals and you have to score goals to WIN GAMES,why some people do not understand the importance of this to Team Canada or any other team is starting to baffle me.They definately can be compared together in this regard,without question.Last year they tied for the league lead in goals...........................we can talk about them together,trust me.

 

[therealdeal]

Well, Nash will no longer be on the team, as he will be out 4-6 weeks. Unless he comes back in those two weeks and just ****ing dominates.

 

[espo*]

Well, Nash will no longer be on the team, as he will be out 4-6 weeks. Unless he comes back in those two weeks and just ****ing dominates.

it's looking that way right now yes.However,we can certainly talk about those two guys in the same sentence,that's for sure.

Too bad about Nash,he was going to be a big part of that team.Six other teams must be breathing a sigh of relief now.Thankfully we have the depth to compensate(though not replace) a guy of his talent.

 

[joe_shannon_1983*]

Not in the same league as far as producing points yes,i agree.But they are in the same league as far as producing goals and you have to score goals to WIN GAMES,why some people do not understand the importance of this to Team Canada or any other team is starting to baffle me.They definately can be compared together in this regard,without question.Last year they tied for the league lead in goals...........................we can talk about them together,trust me.

You are baffled why some people don't understand the importance of scoring goals?

I am baffled that you don't seem to understand the importance of guys who can actually pass the puck.

Look, I know goal scoring is important. But so is being able to pass the puck. Most goals involve a playmaker. Most goals involve more than simply an individual effort. Thus a playmaker is usually partially responsible for the goal.

Why not take someone who is almost as good as Nash as a goal scorer, but can also help other players score by being a great passer? This way, you don't lose that much in the goal-scoring department, and also gain a lot when it comes to helping the rest of your team score.

Earlier, you spoke of a situation where Canada wins 5-3, with Nash getting 2 goals. What about a situation where a guy like Spezza, Kariya, or Staal gets 3 points?

Getting 1 goal and 2 assists, or 0 goals and 3 assists, is helping a team more than getting 2 goals and 0 assists.

Even 1 goal and 1 assist, or 0 goals and 2 assists, is helping a team just as much as 2 goals and 0 assists.

Just ask Gretzky. He has said numerous times in his career and his life that an assist is just as important as a goal.

Saying all of this, with Nash's one-dimensional offense, as a whole he is not as likely to help a team offensively nearly as much as Spezza, Kariya, or Staal would.

Heck, I would take Ryan Smyth and/or Shane Doan before I would ever take Rick Nash.

Both of those guy's best seasons are equally productive as Nash's points-wise. Combine this with the fact that they help you out much more than Nash in the defensive end, along the boards, and in the leadership department, and this justifies why I think they should make the team before Nash should.

 

[arrbez]

Just ask Gretzky. He has said numerous times in his career and his life that an assist is just as important as a goal.

This is only true in the sense of one player "assisting" another's goal. The second-assist needs to be eliminated before I would ever consider an assist to be as valuable as a goal in terms of statistics.

What Gretzky means is that creating the play is just as important as finishing it. However, not all assists are results of the player "making the play", so to speak.

 

[arrbez]

Heck, I would take Ryan Smyth and/or Shane Doan before I would ever take Rick Nash.

Both of those guy's best seasons are equally productive as Nash's points-wise. Combine this with the fact that they help you out much more than Nash in the defensive end, along the boards, and in the leadership department, and this justifies why I think they should make the team before Nash should.

Well...Rick Nash was 19 years old the last time there was a season. I think it's reasonable to expect that his stats will increase, as well as his all-around play. I don't think it's even in question as to who will go down as the best offensive player of the 3, when all is said and done.

Sadly, Nash is now hurt again, so I doubt he'll be on the team. However, he would easily make this team by virtue of his offensive skills alone, IMO. He was dynamite with Thornton and Gagne at the WC's, and lead that tournament with 9 goals, while the 2nd place player had 6.

To win in a tournament like this, you need game-breaking talent to go along with the grinders (a lesson we learned the hard way in the 1990's). Nash is arguably the most dynamic offensive weapon Canada has, and there's ALWAYS a place for offense.

 

[espo*]

This is only true in the sense of one player "assisting" another's goal. The second-assist needs to be eliminated before I would ever consider an assist to be as valuable as a goal in terms of statistics.

What Gretzky means is that creating the play is just as important as finishing it. However, not all assists are results of the player "making the play", so to speak.

Not always,sometimes the best play(the play that really made the goal possible) is the second assist.Discretion should be used in awarding second assists,that's all.

 

[espo*]

You are baffled why some people don't understand the importance of scoring goals?

I am baffled that you don't seem to understand the importance of guys who can actually pass the puck.

Look, I know goal scoring is important. But so is being able to pass the puck. Most goals involve a playmaker. Most goals involve more than simply an individual effort. Thus a playmaker is usually partially responsible for the goal.

Why not take someone who is almost as good as Nash as a goal scorer, but can also help other players score by being a great passer? This way, you don't lose that much in the goal-scoring department, and also gain a lot when it comes to helping the rest of your team score.

Earlier, you spoke of a situation where Canada wins 5-3, with Nash getting 2 goals. What about a situation where a guy like Spezza, Kariya, or Staal gets 3 points?

Getting 1 goal and 2 assists, or 0 goals and 3 assists, is helping a team more than getting 2 goals and 0 assists.

Even 1 goal and 1 assist, or 0 goals and 2 assists, is helping a team just as much as 2 goals and 0 assists.

Just ask Gretzky. He has said numerous times in his career and his life that an assist is just as important as a goal.

Saying all of this, with Nash's one-dimensional offense, as a whole he is not as likely to help a team offensively nearly as much as Spezza, Kariya, or Staal would.

Heck, I would take Ryan Smyth and/or Shane Doan before I would ever take Rick Nash.

Both of those guy's best seasons are equally productive as Nash's points-wise. Combine this with the fact that they help you out much more than Nash in the defensive end, along the boards, and in the leadership department, and this justifies why I think they should make the team before Nash should.

You've gotta be joking here.It is all relevant depending on HOW the goals came about.Sometimes the goal scorer has nothing to do but tap the puck in the net and sometimes the playmaking could have been done by my little cousin because it is the GOALSCORER who has done all the real stuff that got your team on the board.Big deal if i make a simple pass in the zone 2 feet away from Pavel Bure and then he motors and dipsy doodles around three guys and shelves it top corner,what the hell did the passer do that was so great? Hell,you could put me on the ice and i could have pulled that off.

Goal scorers Score GOALS,period....................they make goals happen sometimes purely by their ability to score goals,that's why a guy like Phil Esposito was on Team Canada,not because he could pass like wayne Grezky but because the guy just had an ability to put the puck behind the opposition goalie,simple as that.

It's all relative who is more important on each play,the passer or the goalscorer.Bottom line.....................you don't leave off your best goalscorers,period.Hey,Canada is not so deep that we can just disregard pure goalscorers,no-one is.like i said,we have lot's of playmakers on the team.It would be nice if we had 13 guys who like you said are as good or almost as good a goal scorer as Nash and can still thread the puck through a needle on the pass but we don't!! We have plenty of passers to have a playmaker on each line to make up a team but we also need pure snipers,we simply don't have the luxury to ice a team of 13 mario Lemieux's at age 25 type forwards,i wish we did but it's a pipe dream. it's a pipe dream for everyone else too.

Your argument IMO is based on realties that don't exist.And it's also based on a weighting of playmaker versus goalscorer that isn't accurate depending from play to play during the course of a game.

At least that's the way i see it.

 

[arrbez]

Not always,sometimes the best play(the play that really made the goal possible) is the second assist.Discretion should be used in awarding second assists,that's all.

Exactly, but it's not. and the vast majority of "unearned assists" come off the second assist. Hell, sometimes a guy can set up a goal without touching the puck at all, whether it's from forechecking, decoy, etc.

I was just pointing out to the original poster that every assist on the stat sheet can't be taken automatically as the set-up for a goal

 

[espo*]

Exactly, but it's not. and the vast majority of "unearned assists" come off the second assist. Hell, sometimes a guy can set up a goal without touching the puck at all, whether it's from forechecking, decoy, etc.

I was just pointing out to the original poster that every assist on the stat sheet can't be taken automatically as the set-up for a goal

You're right,it's not.I can't argue that.

 

[Mike Bossy*]

LW Eric Staal
LW Simon Gagne
LW Brendan Shanahan
LW Paul Kariya
C Joe Thornton
C Jason Spezza
C Vincent Lecavalier
C Sidney Crosby
C Patrick Marleau
C Joe Sakic
RW Danny Heatley
RW Jarome Iginla
RW Glen Murray

D Scott Niedermayer
D Chris Pronger
D Rob Blake
D Wade Redden
D Bryan McCabe
D Dion Phaneuf

G Roberto Luongo
G Curtis Joseph
G Manny Legace

 

[12# Peter Bondra]

Off that CAN list Id certainlt scratch Phaneuf, Legace, Marleau and Murray along with Shanahan.

All others are locks or borderliners.

 

[espo*]

Off that CAN list Id certainlt scratch Phaneuf, Legace, Marleau and Murray along with Shanahan.

All others are locks or borderliners.

Pretty much agree,except i'd be comfortable taking Phaneuf.If i was picking i probably would'nt take him over other guys but if he did get named i would'nt be worried about him,i don't doubt he could go a decent job there.To me,Murray isn't a good enough skater and just brings mostly a super shot.As much as i love Shanahan i think his time for this gig has passed on the big ice.Marleau i've always been so-so on but he does have the skills to be effective at this type of a game but i would'nt gamble on him.

 

[Slitty]

Sure, gently proding the puck to Pavel Bure in your own zone, who then blows by the entire opposing team and pulls off a stellar breakaway move of his foot or something is not something thats hard.

But having the puck bounce off you and into the net when someone takes a McInns type shot from the point isnt all that hard either. For all we know, the guy from passed to McInnis so he could blast it did all the hard work getting the puck into the zone and setting everything up.