-
Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Westlander
the olden time
Mountain Dude said:
Nah. This team is younger, faster, and much more creative offensively. The only thing better about the Nagano team was that they weren't missing so many top defencemen like we are in this tournament. But I still like this team way more.
bennysflyers16
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2004
- 87,010
- 65,484
Nope, and I doubt Quinn would choose Foote to take a penalty shot over Mario even if they existed anyway.
Not at all, and it's purely mathematical.
Zamuner = Maltby
Zamuner on the ice = no gold medal
no Maltby on the ice = better players get to play
better players = better team
better team = World Cup!
Zamuner = Maltby
Zamuner on the ice = no gold medal
no Maltby on the ice = better players get to play
better players = better team
better team = World Cup!
I must say, if we do manage to get by the Slovaks tonight, the Czechs scare the crap out of me. But, to win a tourney, you have to beat the best eventually.
not reallyMountain Dude said:
does that mean a win over Slovakia is a sure thing? of course not...but I'm not about to worry that every time Team Canada looks good in a prelim round that they are then going to implode (or run into an allworld Hasek)
smells like chicken.
tastes like chicken.
but this ain't nagano.
every tournament is different, as each has a different meaning to players from different countries. i would expect most european players would dream of olympic gold, whereas n.a. players dream of Lord Stanley's Cup. either way, no 2 tournaments are alike and thats what makes international play so good.
tastes like chicken.
but this ain't nagano.
every tournament is different, as each has a different meaning to players from different countries. i would expect most european players would dream of olympic gold, whereas n.a. players dream of Lord Stanley's Cup. either way, no 2 tournaments are alike and thats what makes international play so good.
AGraveOne
Registered User
nope - Vokoun <<< Hasek
Could Canada lose...sure - no heart no win for the most part...but that is the only way this team will lose it.
Could Canada lose...sure - no heart no win for the most part...but that is the only way this team will lose it.
The Albino said:
So it is possible to beat yourselves....wait, that's not the good kind of beating yourself, is it?
On the plus side, unlike Nagano, the game will be played in the eastern time zone. The eastern time zone is the best time zone in the world.
It does not have to be Hasek. Ari Sulander stopped Canada in Nagano also. There is always a chance...tonight for the Slovaks and for Czech, USA and Finland also. Canada has 3 more games to win and each of these opponents might just get a Hasek performance. Or a Sulander performance. Few lucky bounces, flawless goaltending...
I'm expecting Canada to win this tournament but there are no sure things in life...and especially in this tournament. Sweden anyone?
I'm expecting Canada to win this tournament but there are no sure things in life...and especially in this tournament. Sweden anyone?
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,168
In Nagano if you remember we beat the USA 4-1 in the preliminary round, but were outplayed by the faster younger Americans, and were saved by Roy in net. We beat Kazakstan only 4-1 and were at 2-1 very late in the second. And besides we only got 22 shots on net against the Czechs in regulation. Not enough to beat Hasek.
And that team had Zamuner, Corson, Linden, Desjardins. No Mario, no Sakic in the Czech game. Jagr was the undisputed best in the world, if not then Hasek was. This team is a little different. Its the fastest team in the tournament, the youngest team, has the best goalie by far, and has the Norris, Selke, Conn Smythe, Hart, Art Ross, Vezina, Pearson trophy winners. To me this tournament reminds me of 1991. Canada never lost in that tournament and then beat the USA. Its looking a lot like that now.
Also in 1998 it was a weird team. Bourque, Stevens, MacInnis were good but all old and slow. Gretzky was good, but a year away from retirement. Heatley, Lecavalier, Richards, Bouwmeester, Regehr, Gagne werent even drafted. And guys like Thornton and Luongo and Marleau were just barely drafted. We'll be fine, dont worry!
And that team had Zamuner, Corson, Linden, Desjardins. No Mario, no Sakic in the Czech game. Jagr was the undisputed best in the world, if not then Hasek was. This team is a little different. Its the fastest team in the tournament, the youngest team, has the best goalie by far, and has the Norris, Selke, Conn Smythe, Hart, Art Ross, Vezina, Pearson trophy winners. To me this tournament reminds me of 1991. Canada never lost in that tournament and then beat the USA. Its looking a lot like that now.
Also in 1998 it was a weird team. Bourque, Stevens, MacInnis were good but all old and slow. Gretzky was good, but a year away from retirement. Heatley, Lecavalier, Richards, Bouwmeester, Regehr, Gagne werent even drafted. And guys like Thornton and Luongo and Marleau were just barely drafted. We'll be fine, dont worry!
Good points boys, I was just looking for some more opinions.
I just reminded me with the record that we have, and the fact that we're playing so well, not that we shouldn't, but you know. I'm just paranoid though.
I just reminded me with the record that we have, and the fact that we're playing so well, not that we shouldn't, but you know. I'm just paranoid though.
- Status
