Team USA-Torey Krug

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucdufour. Show lucdufour's posts

    Team USA-Torey Krug

    Easy to play Monday Morning QB but looking back at the construction of this team---what was most missing was a legit quick offensive defenseman that could join the rush a la Doughty and Karlsson.  Torey Krug would have been an excellent fit on the big ice given his mobility, ability to join the rush, and shot.  The argument was probably that he did not have the size and they were perhaps redundant in that area with Suter, Carlson, and Shattenkirk already OR they were concerned with his defense (although I would argue that Carlson is not a stalwart).  However, Suter had to spend his time in a shutdown role, and I think Krug would have been better at joining the play (more of a difference maker) than Shattenkirk/Carlson.  Obviously, they got no offense (at all from anyone) in the last two games and perhaps could have used a bigger threat from the back end to get things going.    Canada has had Doughty/Weber carry them offensively through much of the Tournament and it seemed to be a big void for the US. 

     

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Team USA-Torey Krug

    In response to lucdufour's comment:

     Torey Krug would have been an excellent fit on the big ice given his mobility, ability to join the rush, and shot.   

     



    Add in the fact there was barely any hitting and i think Tory would have done really well.Not saying Tory can't take a hit,just the fact it would have been easier to retrieve the puck and skate out with it.Good point on Tory.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Team USA-Torey Krug

    I like Krug, heck he might be there in 2018 if the NHL sends it's players, but no way I take Krug over Yandle.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Team USA-Torey Krug

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

    I like Krug, heck he might be there in 2018 if the NHL sends it's players, but no way I take Krug over Yandle.



    Maybe Krug & Yandle over Orprick & Martin.all second guessing at this point,i'll leave that to Brian Burke.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucdufour. Show lucdufour's posts

    Re: Team USA-Torey Krug

    Yep, I like Yandle too...  especially over Orpik.    Perhaps it was in the mindset of the Team USA braintrust that they...

    a)  had enough offense with their forwards already and wanted more defensive types

    b) were worried about Canada's bigger forwards and needed bigger sized D-men to combat that.

    What was noticable against Canada was how they couldn't get the puck out of their own end.  I think it was more to do with skill/quickness and less to do with size.   Unless your Chara sized, I don't think it matters if you are 6'4", 6'2" or even 5'11, you are not going to take the puck from Getzlaf, Perry, Benn, etc...along the wall, so you might as well have some speed, quickness, agile types to get loose pucks, be mobile, get it out, join the rush, etc...  They simply got beat to loose pucks and looked sluggish.  The only thing they did well was block shots which is all you can do when running around in your own zone.

     

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from marco0863. Show marco0863's posts

    Re: Team USA-Torey Krug

    Krug could have been added for sure would he have made a significant difference - no

    I expect canada to win gold no matter who usa sent.  

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from lucdufour. Show lucdufour's posts

    Re: Team USA-Torey Krug

    marco0863,

    You don't need a significant difference in a 1-goal game..just need a slight difference and a hot goalie.  They had the latter.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: Team USA-Torey Krug

    In response to lucdufour's comment:

    marco0863,

    You don't need a significant difference in a 1-goal game..just need a slight difference and a hot goalie.  They had the latter.




    Totally agree. We had a lousy PP when we had those opportunities. Canada certainly outplayed us, especially after they got the lead in the 2nd period. Maybe if we had gotten an early PP goal with Krug in there things might have different. That is not to diminish the fact that on that particular day Canada played a much better game.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share