brobin Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 So, I am watching PK coming back and bailing out his partner several times now. But those pinching D have the coaches trust and P.k doesn't, according to the pundits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 14, 2014 Author Share Posted February 14, 2014 So, I am watching PK coming back and bailing out his partner several times now. But those pinching D have the coaches trust and P.k doesn't, according to the pundits. Subban caused a couple of those himself to be fair. If the decision for Saturday's game is based on which 7th D played better in their game, it'll be Hamhuis getting the nod (which doesn't bother me as I want Subban to get some rest while he's out there anyways). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 So, no real hard chances against Luongo, not a single deflected shot that I noticed. how do they pick a goalie with those two games. Until we play a decent team we can't really say who is really going. Frankly, with an easy shutout, I suspect Luongo gets the net. Babcock is extremely conservative and will go with the guy he knows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revvvrob Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 I still think Price starts the next game. Price earned that last game regardless of Luongo's performance. All Luongo did was ensure Smith remained #3 and let Babcock know that at the slightest hint of Price faltering, he is ready to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 I'll be shocked if it's not Luongo. Price did make that one gaffe handling the puck in Game One - that plus a shutout for Bobby Lou = deferring to the defending gold medal-winning goalie. Price will, I expect, be the latest victim of the principle that the guy who starts a tournament for Canada ends up paying the price for the team's early hiccups. That doesn't bother me all that much. I think Luongo is a strong choice in nets. I'm much more bothered by Canada looking a gift horse in the mouth by treating the mighty Subban as a scrub. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 I agree with your take on it, Cukes. Hopefully Price can take some positives from the experience even if he's watching from the bench (and maybe we could expect less of a post-tournament letdown in that case). A problem for Subban is that Team Canada is fine without him. Sure, they'd be better if they used him more, but they don't really need to. Any other country would build their defense around him - look at how central Karlsson is for the Swedes. It's easier to have that sort of puck-dominant sparkplug on your top pairing than your bottom pairing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 PK as the seventh D is way better then Hamuis, IMO. As for PK causing any issues, he was the last man back and Doughty pinched and got caught. I didn't see any defensive issues from PK. Doesn't matter, I figured Price and PK were long shots to play much with Babcock. Unless Luongo blows it Price might not get another game. PK might see a couple more games as the seventh D with limited minutes, unless there is a injury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 The Karlsson comparison is interesting - and revealing. Is he SO much more incredibly reliable in his own zone than PK? Is he more of a complete player? Why is it that HE is universally acclaimed as a phenomenally gifted offensive defenceman, and allowed to be just that by his own teams and coaches? Why isn't he continually being treated like a problem, like something that coaches and management have to "fix?" Neech, I love your comment that Canada would "be better if they used PK more," but that they don't have to use him because of the glut of awesome defenceman. That says it all right there, I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 The Karlsson comparison is interesting - and revealing. Is he SO much more incredibly reliable in his own zone than PK? Is he more of a complete player? Why is it that HE is universally acclaimed as a phenomenally gifted offensive defenceman, and allowed to be just that by his own teams and coaches? Why isn't he continually being treated like a problem, like something that coaches and management have to "fix?" Neech, I love your comment that Canada would "be better if they used PK more," but that they don't have to use him because of the glut of awesome defenceman. That says it all right there, I think. One thing is that Ottawa has much better coaching than Montreal. Karlsson is among the league leaders in icetime - their coaches recognize that he's among the very best players in the game, and that that obviously should translate to more icetime. Therrien is still up and down on Subban (maybe a long term contract could help change this). I think if Karlsson was Canadian, Yzerman and co. would have chosen between him and Subban and left the other at home, and he'd still be facing similar doubts. It could just be the conservatism of the coaching staff with such an abundance of talent on defense. In a short tournament with not much time for implementing a system, it's easier to just stick with the reliable guys who will play in an easy-to-predict way. With Sweden or any other team, Karlsson or Subban would clearly be the player they'd build their team and system around. And they could be better off for it; if we have so many good players that we're disregarding some of our best, it could be a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovett's Magnatones Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 I couldn't watch the game, did Subban do anything of merit? Judging from the tweets I saw at work, he didn't really factor in much. But then again, what the heck does Dan Hamhuis bring to the table? On a team as deep as Team Canada, number two defense men should be out of the equation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chicoutimi Cucumber Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Well, it's worth asking whether Subban will really be able to excel in this environment anyway - after all, he has been told non-stop by these and other coaches that his absolutely dominant game is profoundly defective and that he has to change it. Pretty hard to perform when your coaches don't believe in you and you are constantly being told NOT to do any of the things that make you a superstar in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 I couldn't watch the game, did Subban do anything of merit? Judging from the tweets I saw at work, he didn't really factor in much. But then again, what the heck does Dan Hamhuis bring to the table? On a team as deep as Team Canada, number two defense men should be out of the equation. I thought PK was decent, maybe a little nervous at first. He took a hard fall into the boards defending a breakaway after a turnover by Carter I believe, but he came back afterwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brobin Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Karlsson is minus 15 and his team is struggling.... But they have great coaching? Sure, they allow him to rack up points, but it isn't making him a solid D or helping his team much. Karlsson would have trouble making team canada. They are trying to make PK into another Keith, not a defensive liability like Karlsson, or Kaberle was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovett's Magnatones Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Karlsson is minus 15 and his team is struggling.... But they have great coaching? Sure, they allow him to rack up points, but it isn't making him a solid D or helping his team much. Karlsson would have trouble making team canada. They are trying to make PK into another Keith, not a defensive liability like Karlsson, or Kaberle was. With the pop gun offense this team has had for twenty years, Therrien might as well yell "sic em" when he goes over the boards.It's nothing to get too discouraged over, PK is still young, and to be fair, Doughty and Keith already have an Olympics under their belts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
illWill Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 The Karlsson comparison is interesting - and revealing. Is he SO much more incredibly reliable in his own zone than PK? Is he more of a complete player? Why is it that HE is universally acclaimed as a phenomenally gifted offensive defenceman, and allowed to be just that by his own teams and coaches? Why isn't he continually being treated like a problem, like something that coaches and management have to "fix?" I think alot of it has to do with the fact that because PK is an amazing, flashy talent, AND also has a big personality, they want to conform him into the team concept more so it doesn't become the "PK show". It is very rare that a player combines all the attributes that he does and has the ability to entertain the average fan who might not normally care. I think he'd be an excellent marketing tool for the NHL in the States if only he weren't a Hab. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sakiqc Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 First time I see Subban snubbed on the PP by his teammates. We always see him carry the puck to the offensive zone. Today the other D always went for rapid stretch passes out of the zone instead of letting a waiting PK go with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 If I were the Slovakia coach, I'd start Budaj next game. Halak has not looked good in both losses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Super game by Markov vs americans Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Great game between Russia and the USA, I have to say the Americans were a little lucky to get to OT with that disallowed goal after Quick knocked his net off. Powerplays were huge throughout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neech Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Oshie is a hell of a weapon in the shootout. Same for Kovalchuk and Datsyuk. I wouldn't like Canada's chances in a shootout against either of these teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 The Oshie vs Kovalchuk shootoff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovett's Magnatones Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 That game really took off after some slow play imo. Great game. Can't wait to see Pleki in a couple of hours! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlbalr Posted February 15, 2014 Author Share Posted February 15, 2014 If I were the Slovakia coach, I'd start Budaj next game. Halak has not looked good in both losses. Losing to Slovenia, there's the first real upset of the tournament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Link67 Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Oshie is a hell of a weapon in the shootout. Same for Kovalchuk and Datsyuk. I wouldn't like Canada's chances in a shootout against either of these teams. Really? you don't think with Price in net and Crosby, Toews, Getzlaf as our first 3 shooters we wouldn't be ok? Come on now, there is no team scarier in every facet of the game at this tournament than Canada, none, it is once again our tournament to trip over our own feet at, or we win it. As far as the goalies go, I say Price should go in, because frankly everyone was sold that he was our starter, and it was his job to lose. I don't see how anyone loses a starter job at any level of hockey with a .950 sv%. Both of them were solid, Luongo was slightly more solid, but as long as your designated starter for the tournament doesn't play poorly, there is no reason to change anything. Last time around, Brodeur played poorly against the US, Luongo got in and stole it, this time Price lets in one goal, looked very solid except for one 4 second window, hardly the same scenario. As far as PK goes, he is the 7th d-man in my books, you let him play the PP, you give him 10 min or so of 5 on 5, and if the team needs a goal and there is a PP chance, i'm much happier knowing we have PK in the mix over Hamuis. PK can't really do any damage in 10 min of 5 on 5, but he can be the difference between a goal or none on the PP at any given time. Outside of the Habs at olympics, anyone else disturbed by Kunitz still being in the lineup after 2 games? i'm also wondering why none of the brass has used a past connection of when Bergeron and Crosby tore up the WJC together on the same line to put them together again. Kunitz was a nice try but obviously he doesn't belong on the big ice, being counted on at the olympics to be a performing winger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DON Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Really? you don't think with Price in net and Crosby, Toews, Getzlaf as our first 3 shooters we wouldn't be ok? Come on now, there is no team scarier in every facet of the game at this tournament than Canada, none, it is once again our tournament to trip over our own feet at, or we win it. As far as the goalies go, I say Price should go in, because frankly everyone was sold that he was our starter, and it was his job to lose. I don't see how anyone loses a starter job at any level of hockey with a .950 sv%. Both of them were solid, Luongo was slightly more solid, but as long as your designated starter for the tournament doesn't play poorly, there is no reason to change anything. Last time around, Brodeur played poorly against the US, Luongo got in and stole it, this time Price lets in one goal, looked very solid except for one 4 second window, hardly the same scenario. As far as PK goes, he is the 7th d-man in my books, you let him play the PP, you give him 10 min or so of 5 on 5, and if the team needs a goal and there is a PP chance, i'm much happier knowing we have PK in the mix over Hamuis. PK can't really do any damage in 10 min of 5 on 5, but he can be the difference between a goal or none on the PP at any given time. Outside of the Habs at olympics, anyone else disturbed by Kunitz still being in the lineup after 2 games? i'm also wondering why none of the brass has used a past connection of when Bergeron and Crosby tore up the WJC together on the same line to put them together again. Kunitz was a nice try but obviously he doesn't belong on the big ice, being counted on at the olympics to be a performing winger. No, not disturbed by Kunitzs' play. 2 games pretty small sample and were only playing maybe a poor AHL calibre teams. Simply haven't noticed him make bad plays, but really haven't noticed him standout at all, good nor bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.