Our D was flat out horrible, again. When Leppänen tried to do something on the ice I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. 
WJC SF: Jan 3 GDT - Canada vs. Finland
- Thread starter Predatore
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Daily Special
Registered User
Leafer4Life said:Goin' For Gold
Don't get too big for your britches there Jr.
That's Finland you just knocked off, not Russia.
Calm down.
A good win, to be sure, but the first five wins don't mean that much if we don't win Thursday. Thus far, Canada has played the ultimate team game. They have been virtually air-tight at five-on-five in the first five games. When the coverage has broken down, either at five-on-five or the PP, Pogge has been there to bail them out. If Canada continues to play like this, they will win, because they play so well as a team.
Am I concerned about the result if Canada gets into a high-scoring game? Yes. Unlike the last two years, it is not likely going to win 6-5 or 7-6. But if Canada plays their game, and doesn't panic if things go awry, they should be able to win.
Am I concerned about the result if Canada gets into a high-scoring game? Yes. Unlike the last two years, it is not likely going to win 6-5 or 7-6. But if Canada plays their game, and doesn't panic if things go awry, they should be able to win.
FLYLine27*
BUCH
Steveorama
Registered User
I'll remember to quote this after your bronze medal game versus the Finns.Rush5Collapse5 said:
Rush5Collapse5 said:
So Team Canada is not "goin' for gold"?
I think we're allowed to say our team is going for it since they are in fact playing in the gold medal game.
thomasincanada said:
Exactly. Christ, the poster just said exactly what Canada was doing. Going for Gold. Clear as day. They're not in the Gold medal game to go for Silver.
Some people are so friggin' sensitive this tournament. I feel the organizers should hand out earplugs for Team USA their next game. Wouldn't want to offend anybody.
Steveorama
Registered User
I'm curious why Sutter plays Barker on the first PP unit and Bourdon/Letang on the second.TheDynasty said:
Barker has been fantastic defensively in this tourney, but Bourdon and Letang are firing the puck well right now and moving the puck smartly.
The only time the PP looked good tonight was when Bourdon and Letang were holding the line. Tough to criticize a coach who has us in the final, but I think our PP would be more effective with the "Q" combo on the points.
Steveorama said:
I'm also wondering why Sutter had Downie out on every PP. There are more capable offensive guys that should be getting those minutes. By having Downie out there and the Canadians playing so undisciplined, he's gassed for crucial PKs. He and Blake Comeau have been unreal as the #1 PK pairing, but Downie should not be wasted on the PP when Cogliano and others are sitting.
Le Tricolore
Boo! BOOOO!
How did Latendresse play? I know he at least got some ice time, I was at the Canadiens game, so I couldn't watch this.
Steveorama said:
Bourdon/Letang are the only d-men who get a good amount of both PP and PK time (Letang because he is Bourdon's partner, though he was our best d-man tonight). You rarely ever see Barker/Russel killing a penalty if either of the other two pairings are available, and you almost never see Staal/Parent on the PP either (maybe once or twice in the last 10 seconds).
Sutter is, in my opinion, using the Bourdon/Letang pairing as a true two-way defensive unit. Bourdon probably could have more PP time, but then Sutter wouldn't have him available for the last half of a penalty that Staal/Parent had killed for a minute.
Obviously, he's getting enough PP time as he's leading the Canadian TEAM in points. He's also got a reasonable +/-, at +4 and is by far Canada's most physical d-man.
I think Sutter is using all our defensemen just right. Don't get me started on Latendresse.
Team_Spirit
95% Elliotte
- Jul 3, 2002
- 40,942
- 24,607
FLYLine27*
BUCH
Jozeph_Balej said:
For being POG? I thought last year it was a watch or something...not sure...could be some sort of trophy
Vikke
ViktorAllvin twitter
Debrincat93
Registered User
So it's the Russians. Before this game, I'd have said a match-up with the Russians favours us. Not now. This is a dynamic Russian team. Malkin is having the best tournament by a forward at the WJC since Iginla in 1996. They have a lot of highly-skilled 19-year-olds. The goalie showed he knows how to get the job done. The defence is highly skilled, but I think it can be had. It's just a matter of whether Canada has enough offence up front to capitalize on Russia's potential deficiencies.
To win this game, we're going to have to play better than we did against the U.S. We owned that game at 5-on-5, thanks to our physical play. Most of the Americans chances came on the power play. Hit them hard, hit them often, and hit them clean.
Make no mistake, the 8-1 win in the pre-season is irrelevant. The Russians didn't have Malkin, and it appears they were playing possum. Canada will have to not only play their best game of the tournament, all 18 players will have to play their best game of the tournament.
This game is not mission impossible. If Canada continues to do what they've done all tournament, with stiffling defence 5-on-5, effective play on the PK, strong goaltending and an uncompromising commitment to team play, they can win this tournament. They also have to feed off the home ice advantage.
To win this game, we're going to have to play better than we did against the U.S. We owned that game at 5-on-5, thanks to our physical play. Most of the Americans chances came on the power play. Hit them hard, hit them often, and hit them clean.
Make no mistake, the 8-1 win in the pre-season is irrelevant. The Russians didn't have Malkin, and it appears they were playing possum. Canada will have to not only play their best game of the tournament, all 18 players will have to play their best game of the tournament.
This game is not mission impossible. If Canada continues to do what they've done all tournament, with stiffling defence 5-on-5, effective play on the PK, strong goaltending and an uncompromising commitment to team play, they can win this tournament. They also have to feed off the home ice advantage.
The Viking Fury
Registered User
- Nov 28, 2005
- 12,650
- 0
Was at the game tonight. You can really see who stands out for the Canadians on defence. Russel and Letang - though they both scored, are clearly the 5th and 6th best defenceman on the squad. Bourdon, Barker, Parent, and Staal are all studs.
Notes of my own collected over the tourney so far:
Kris Letang - Clearly the 6th defenceman on the team. Although he has provived some steady play, I've seen him mishandle the puck three or four times a game leading to a turn-over or a blown chance for the Canucks. I was honestly expecting much more from him. It's a good thing he's going back to the Q to play with Bour. . . no, not anymore.
Steve Downie - Love the energy he has brought to this team. He's fought hard for everything and won most of the battle's for the puck. Incredible pressure on the PK and throws timely hits. But why, in the name of all that is Holy, is he getting a regular shift on the PP? Downie has about as much offensive creativity as Wade Belak with a broken stick. Sure he'd fight for the puck, but then he wouldn't know what to do with it. He'd look around without moving, then make a half-assed drive to the net a flub a shot. The points he's gotten have been from a lot of hard work and a little bit of luck. Just imagine what would have happened if Latendresse had the heart of this kid.
Ryan Parent - Grew on me as the tourney went on and impressed me with some very no-nonsense defensive play at all times. If Canada ever needed an answer to Aaron Miller, I'd nominate Parent as an early candidate.
Lack of offensive production from the offensive players - McGuire can go on all he wants about how Pouliot or Toews have been given a bunch of chances to produce and have not capitalised on them, but I think that a lack of regular ice time is whats really hurting them; I'd be surprised if Pouliot, Cogliano, or Toews got more than 13:00 of ice time in the past three games (IIHF isn't tracking TOI). With spotty shifts, it's pretty hard to develop any kind of offensive rythm, especially with the amount of time the PKers have been on the ice.
Just observations . . .
Kris Letang - Clearly the 6th defenceman on the team. Although he has provived some steady play, I've seen him mishandle the puck three or four times a game leading to a turn-over or a blown chance for the Canucks. I was honestly expecting much more from him. It's a good thing he's going back to the Q to play with Bour. . . no, not anymore.
Steve Downie - Love the energy he has brought to this team. He's fought hard for everything and won most of the battle's for the puck. Incredible pressure on the PK and throws timely hits. But why, in the name of all that is Holy, is he getting a regular shift on the PP? Downie has about as much offensive creativity as Wade Belak with a broken stick. Sure he'd fight for the puck, but then he wouldn't know what to do with it. He'd look around without moving, then make a half-assed drive to the net a flub a shot. The points he's gotten have been from a lot of hard work and a little bit of luck. Just imagine what would have happened if Latendresse had the heart of this kid.
Ryan Parent - Grew on me as the tourney went on and impressed me with some very no-nonsense defensive play at all times. If Canada ever needed an answer to Aaron Miller, I'd nominate Parent as an early candidate.
Lack of offensive production from the offensive players - McGuire can go on all he wants about how Pouliot or Toews have been given a bunch of chances to produce and have not capitalised on them, but I think that a lack of regular ice time is whats really hurting them; I'd be surprised if Pouliot, Cogliano, or Toews got more than 13:00 of ice time in the past three games (IIHF isn't tracking TOI). With spotty shifts, it's pretty hard to develop any kind of offensive rythm, especially with the amount of time the PKers have been on the ice.
Just observations . . .
God Bless Canada said:
Yup... this has a very famaliar feel... reminds me of the year we lost with Luongo standing on his head, whatever year that was.
I think that the reason why Downie is getting lots of PP time, is that he's been excellent defensively. Sutter is rewarding him for his good efforts. Against Finland, he didn't look so out of place as Pete Rock claimed. Many times he fooled Finnish defensemen with dekes, and then dished the puck towards an open man on the far side.
Canada palyed extremely solid team game and Finnish offense was just non-existent. The line of Tukonen, Lindgren and Seitsonen was the only one that managed to get as far Canadian blue line. As the game progressed, our PP became worse and worse. Passing the puck to a guarded man and so on. It didn't help that coach Aravirta stubbornly played Jesse Joensuu in the first PP unit. It was evident he was fatigued by the harsh competition. A guy like Seitsonen would have had much more to put to the table.
Speaking of Joensuu, in my mind he hasn't shown any kinds of abilities he has in Finland. By judging his performance in this tournament only, it wouldn't warrant a top-15 selection.
Canada palyed extremely solid team game and Finnish offense was just non-existent. The line of Tukonen, Lindgren and Seitsonen was the only one that managed to get as far Canadian blue line. As the game progressed, our PP became worse and worse. Passing the puck to a guarded man and so on. It didn't help that coach Aravirta stubbornly played Jesse Joensuu in the first PP unit. It was evident he was fatigued by the harsh competition. A guy like Seitsonen would have had much more to put to the table.
Speaking of Joensuu, in my mind he hasn't shown any kinds of abilities he has in Finland. By judging his performance in this tournament only, it wouldn't warrant a top-15 selection.
Mestarin malja said:
No, but if the ref allows them to hit with elbows and jump before contact, they will do it. Only the result matters, and of course it is more effective to hit like that if it is allowed.
What puzzled me though is that penalty to Rask. I'd like to ask the ref, what rule in the IIHF rulebook he based his decision on. I can't think of any.
The IIHF rulebook has an objective rule about hits to the head (no contact allowed with any body part), but the North American ref chose not to enforce it at all in that game. Can't really complain, though, since the most exciting recent WJC game was when both Finland and Canada went overboard in the hitfest of '03.
Unless the rule is adopted in North America or there's a huge crackdown in international games, Canadians will keep on delivering the blows with that technique 'til the end of days. Gotta like it how they smell the opportunities, though.
Unless the rule is adopted in North America or there's a huge crackdown in international games, Canadians will keep on delivering the blows with that technique 'til the end of days. Gotta like it how they smell the opportunities, though.
psycho_dad said:
The Finnish coach, Aravirta, was quite upset about the way the Canadians were allowed to hit in the game with both feet leaving the ice and so forth. He thinks there should have been penalties whistled on many occasions. In another article he makes it clear that the better team won, so he's not trying to pin the defeat on the refs.
http://www.yle.fi/urheilu/jaakiekko/id26624.html
(in Finnish unfortunately)
- Status
