U.S.A out everything Canada

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

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    Fletch and Kel,  I also thought the way Seguin was tearing up the OHL should have been on that team but that's because of his point production . At one pint he wa leading Hall and wondered why he was chosen and not Tyler , then I saw both play and it was clear without a reasonable doubt that Hall was more advanced and/or ready for the NHL thus the WJC.

    Success in the Junior doesn't equate to the WJC. 

    Good point on Seth Griffith, he was in the top 3 in scoring so when I watched him for the first time early in the OHL season , I was very disappointed (the same as Domi if you recall Chowdah) and then realized mny expectations were way too high just by reading stats and what was said at times on the hockey forums.

    BTW anyone seen pauly ? according to him (maybe even the Canadian team) after beating the Russians , the team to beat  (and beaten) ,  Canada had already won the Gold.

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

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    on another note all this debating is great !  Glad to be discussing hockey play related stories.

     p.s. and Mr Shot can suck an egg

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

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to BsLegion's comment:

    Fletch and Kel,  I also thought the way Seguin was tearing up the OHL should have been on that team but that's because of his point production . At one pint he wa leading Hall and wondered why he was chosen and not Tyler , then I saw both play and it was clear without a reasonable doubt that Hall was more advanced and/or ready for the NHL thus the WJC.

    Success in the Junior doesn't equate to the WJC. 

    Good point on Seth Griffith, he was in the top 3 in scoring so when I watched him for the first time early in the OHL season , I was very disappointed (the same as Domi if you recall Chowdah) and then realized mny expectations were way too high just by reading stats and what was said at times on the hockey forums.

    BTW anyone seen pauly ? according to him (maybe even the Canadian team) after beating the Russians , the team to beat  (and beaten) ,  Canada had already won the Gold.




    Chowda made some good points as to why he didnt make it, he also would have been the youngest on the team..What I find interesting is that he was one of the first four cuts..I don't know about that one..

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

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    One of the toughest transitions from amateur to pro sport is finding consistency to ones game, and summoning the stones to bring it night after night.  Most of these guys are still growing physically, still learning the game, and most are a long way from where they're "projected" to be in a few years.   

    This isn't a pro tournament, and if it was, you'd see plenty of upsets in a one game, winner take all format.  Look at most 7 game Cup playoff series, and you'll see both teams usually dominate one of those games.

    Everyone whose criticised Hamiltons play, has admitted, their attitude has been affected by hype.  No ones said he sucks, or he'll never be any good, they're just saying the obvious.  This  guy, whose projected to go straight from Junior to the big time, who happens to play defense(the toughest transition to the NHL) seemed fairly "normal" throughout the tournament, and since the competition there...is less than the NHL,.......

    We're surprised.  If Hamilton fails to crack the B's lineup when the time comes, most will be surprised then too.  Not fair probably, but he has some pretty big expectations. 

    What's so blasphemus about that? 

    High pick teenagers are usually more advanced in their offensive abilities anyway.  The pro game is where they learn to play the other end.  Cripes, Seguin didn't even make the team in his time, so even if Hamilton played poorly...it means little moving forward.  

     

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to BsLegion's comment:

    Fletch and Kel,  I also thought the way Seguin was tearing up the OHL should have been on that team but that's because of his point production . At one pint he wa leading Hall and wondered why he was chosen and not Tyler , then I saw both play and it was clear without a reasonable doubt that Hall was more advanced and/or ready for the NHL thus the WJC.

    Success in the Junior doesn't equate to the WJC. 

    Good point on Seth Griffith, he was in the top 3 in scoring so when I watched him for the first time early in the OHL season , I was very disappointed (the same as Domi if you recall Chowdah) and then realized mny expectations were way too high just by reading stats and what was said at times on the hockey forums.

    BTW anyone seen pauly ? according to him (maybe even the Canadian team) after beating the Russians , the team to beat  (and beaten) ,  Canada had already won the Gold.



    I will gladly admit on both Seguin and Griffith that my comments would be based zero first-hand experience.  I never saw Seguin play a single junior game (outside of highlights).  But as a fan of Team USA, I remember being happy that he was cut from the Canadian roster based on what I had heard.  But, like I said, great players will always be cut from the Canadian roster because there is always so much talent and a limited spots for high scoring types who don't backcheck that well.

    Last I heard, pauly was reading the definition of "one horse race" over and over on wikipedia.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    One of the toughest transitions from amateur to pro sport is finding consistency to ones game, and summoning the stones to bring it night after night.  Most of these guys are still growing physically, still learning the game, and most are a long way from where they're "projected" to be in a few years.   

    This isn't a pro tournament, and if it was, you'd see plenty of upsets in a one game, winner take all format.  Look at most 7 game Cup playoff series, and you'll see both teams usually dominate one of those games.

    Everyone whose criticised Hamiltons play, has admitted, their attitude has been affected by hype.  No ones said he sucks, or he'll never be any good, they're just saying the obvious.  This  guy, whose projected to go straight from Junior to the big time, who happens to play defense(the toughest transition to the NHL) seemed fairly "normal" throughout the tournament, and since the competition there...is less than the NHL,.......

    We're surprised.  If Hamilton fails to crack the B's lineup when the time comes, most will be surprised then too.  Not fair probably, but he has some pretty big expectations. 

    What's so blasphemus about that? 

    High pick teenagers are usually more advanced in their offensive abilities anyway.  The pro game is where they learn to play the other end.  Cripes, Seguin didn't even make the team in his time, so even if Hamilton played poorly...it means little moving forward.  

      



    Very well said.  And in the end, I am heartened that Chowdah, Book, Legion, Sandog and others who know more about Hamilton than me think he will succeed in the NHL.  I will defer to them on the big picture for Hamilton, regardless of my WJC impressions.

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

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    One of the toughest transitions from amateur to pro sport is finding consistency to ones game, and summoning the stones to bring it night after night.  Most of these guys are still growing physically, still learning the game, and most are a long way from where they're "projected" to be in a few years.   

    This isn't a pro tournament, and if it was, you'd see plenty of upsets in a one game, winner take all format.  Look at most 7 game Cup playoff series, and you'll see both teams usually dominate one of those games.

    Everyone whose criticised Hamiltons play, has admitted, their attitude has been affected by hype.  No ones said he sucks, or he'll never be any good, they're just saying the obvious.  This  guy, whose projected to go straight from Junior to the big time, who happens to play defense(the toughest transition to the NHL) seemed fairly "normal" throughout the tournament, and since the competition there...is less than the NHL,.......

    We're surprised.  If Hamilton fails to crack the B's lineup when the time comes, most will be surprised then too.  Not fair probably, but he has some pretty big expectations. 

    What's so blasphemus about that? 

    High pick teenagers are usually more advanced in their offensive abilities anyway.  The pro game is where they learn to play the other end.  Cripes, Seguin didn't even make the team in his time, so even if Hamilton played poorly...it means little moving forward.  

     

     



    Exactly. Debating how Dougie played in this tourney and what we think he'll do in the NHL is all good hockey talk. Its not a personal attack on Hamilton, just observations . I'm sure the heck not a pro scout and maybe the way Dougie played was exactly the way his coaches wanted him to, i'll never know. I've watched a lot of hockey over the years though and if thats the way the coaches wanted him to play, with all the pre tournament reputation surrounding Hamilton, he was not using his whole tool kit it seems to me.

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

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    I didn't watch the game, but WELL DONE USA! It burns to say it, but we got it handed to us. Obviously if it was a best of 3 or a 2 game total, then things would be different, but it's not. 

     

    Outside of Carey Price, I can't think of a 'recent' #1 Canadian goalie that has done well at the WJC, and went on to a decent career. Maybe this will bode well for the Bruins. Anyone? 

     

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     

     



     Hamilton's offensive game is way ahead of his defensive game at this point. I have posted multiple times. I also posted his game was not of a physical brand of hockey.

    Sorry you missed all of that but your's and others expectations of his defensive game sure as heck didn't come from anything I ever posted. It was in your heads. I have pointed out numerous times that he has to get better with this part of the game.

    Compared to where he once was with his defence in the past I was encouraged by the way  he played the shutdown role in this tourney.

    I don't think your blind to the nuances of the game, I just think your expectations were ridiculously high. Apparently, you and others didn't know anything about this part of his game and thought he should put on his Superman cape on the back end.

    And considering you've watched hockey long enough I'm surprised that you don't know that the success of a PP comes from working as a unit. Saying Hamilton didn't do anything means individuality was expected. The whole PP unit was not at their best making nobody look good.

    And the goals in the 5-1 loss were a result of the shutdown roled defenceman not shutting down anything ? A bit of finger pointing there don't you think considering they were not all the result of any 2 specific shutdown roled players ( Harrington and Hamilton ).

    TLDR

    Well, it is hard to argue about Hamilton with guys like Chowdah and Legion because they are so much more knowledgeable about his development and his play in the OHL.  That said,  I still haven't seen anything to convince me that I shouldn't be disappointed with his WJC performance, on some level.

    I think Book may have brought us to a new and more valid excuse -- blame the coaching.  Chowdah is arguing that defensive play is not Hamilton's strength and everyone knows he may be the best offensive d-man in the OHL.  But then, the excuse for Hamilton here is that he was put in a purely defensive "shutdown" role in the WJC.  How can that be?

    It seems like a dubious decision to take the best two-way defensmen in the OHL and tell him to play a one-way game, but maybe that's what happened.  With Hamilton's vast offensive skills, you have to think he was at least encouraged to play a two-way game.  No? If not, then the coahing staff apparently asked him to avoid his best skill set, which is hard for me to believe.

    As for Hamilton's performance as a shutdown defensemen, that's a mixed bag as well.  I typically think of shutdown d-men being physical and we've heard a lot about Hamilton's size and strength.  What's more, the opponents were small.  We can all complain about the penalties and/or suspensions for hitting in the tournament, but you still would want Hamilton to hit and be physical with the 5'8 160 lb. US forwards.  He wasn't.  Maybe that just isn't his game, which again brings us back the possibility that he shouldn't be (or wasn't) playing a shutdown role.  The comparison with Trouba was a good one.  I expected them to be neck and neck.  They weren't, not this past week anyhow.

    Same disclaimer as the other naysayers -- I still like him, great prospect, he played well at times, lots of tools, etc.

    As for the nonsense about a Superman cape and people not understanding how a powerplay works -  I think- sorry, but that's where you're slipping into just being defensive and deflecting. if you read what me, shupe, Crowls, and others are saying, you might realize that you're not responding to what is being said.  I think it is okay to expect Hamilton to be the one that might lead the powerplay, or lead the physical play against vastly smaller opponents, or maybe play "all-tournament team" caiber hockey.  It isn't really that threatening of a commentary.



Actually I was on the offense. Nothing defensive about this at all.

From where his defensive standards are at in the current moment. To where the high expectations in your posts set the bar at for this tourney I believe the Superman cape comment was appropriate. Just responding to the unattainable thoughts of those who are trying to make a point based on .......... what they think rather then what is the real. 

And if understanding how a PP works should be knowing that puck movement is a big part of success then why say "Hamilton did nothing". Success on the PP comes from working together as a unit.  Criticism towards Dougie seems a tad silly if one knows this.

Threatening commentary for me ? No. I'd call it misinformed on how Hamilton plays . 



 

 

 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Klaas. Show Klaas's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    ..

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

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to Klaas' comment:

    ..



    I agree.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Klaas. Show Klaas's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:

    In response to Klaas' comment:

    ..



    I agree.


    I posted a post that should have been on another post. I thought I was there but was here.

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

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to Klaas' comment:

    In response to 50belowzero's comment:

    In response to Klaas' comment:

    ..



    I agree.


    I posted a post that should have been on another post. I thought I was there but was here.



    No prob, i still agree.;p

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually I was on the offense. Nothing defensive about this at all.

    From where his defensive standards are at in the current moment. To where the high expectations in your posts set the bar at for this tourney I believe the Superman cape comment was appropriate. Just responding to the unattainable thoughts of those who are trying to make a point based on .......... what they think rather then what is the real. 

    And if understanding how a PP works should be knowing that puck movement is a big part of success then why say "Hamilton did nothing". Success on the PP comes from working together as a unit.  Criticism towards Dougie seems a tad silly if one knows this.

    Threatening commentary for me ? No. I'd call it misinformed on how Hamilton plays . 

    [/QUOTE]

    Oh boy...so pissy about this -- it almost hits the definition of 'defensive' to a T.  You came to Hamilton's 'defense' after seeing criticism of him -- that seems...defensive.  Whatever, who cares.  Again, I don't think you're really reading my posts or trying to understand what I, and several others here, are saying.  And really, sometimes people can watch the same tournament and come away with different reactions.  Don't let that upset you.  You say average was good enough for Hamilton, I was hoping for more.

    Hoping for Hamilton to have a good tournament and be a team leader for Canada certainly isn't an "unattainable" standard.  If it is, then the reports on this guy's skill over the years have been utterly worthless.  Why are we afraid to ask Hamilton to be a leader in a tournament of teenagers?  Aren't there a handful of Canadian players who could be asked to stand out and lead that team?  Isn't Hamilton among that handful?

    Sometimes when the powerplay isn't working well, you can look to individual players, instead of throwing up your hands in dispair because there are too many guys involved to break it down.  You know this.  One guy who has the pedigree to make a powerplay better was Hamilton and we all know that he can quarterback a powerplay.  He wasn't awful, but he wasn't all that effective.  Do you really think that any criticism of Hamilton stems from people not understanding the PP as well as you do.  I'll look past how arrogance of that, but it isn't even backed with logic.  A PP works as a unit, sure.  Puck movement is important, sure.  That doesn't even begin to rebuke the rather mild criticism of Hamilton on the PP.  Again, I don't think you're reading or considering people's posts very carefully.  You're responding to something different than what people are saying.

    Anyhow, this subject seems to be a little raw.  Let's take a deep breath, I really don't mean to antagonize and I enjoy all of the background on Hamilton from posters as knowledgeable as yourself.  I just think you should consider the validity of some pretty well thought out posts here instead of assuming that others don't undertsand the fundamentals of hockey.  Smart posters on both sides here, IMO.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    And the goals in the 5-1 loss were a result of the shutdown roled defenceman not shutting down anything ? A bit of finger pointing there don't you think considering they were not all the result of any 2 specific shutdown roled players ( Harrington and Hamilton ).




    Ahem...

    From McKenzie's review of the USA-Canada game:

    Then there was the number one defence pair - Scott Harrington and Dougie Hamilton - on the ice for that first American goal. It looked like a fire drill. The defence was breaking down all over the place. 

    Good to know I'm not alone.

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     



    Actually I was on the offense. Nothing defensive about this at all.

    From where his defensive standards are at in the current moment. To where the high expectations in your posts set the bar at for this tourney I believe the Superman cape comment was appropriate. Just responding to the unattainable thoughts of those who are trying to make a point based on .......... what they think rather then what is the real. 

    And if understanding how a PP works should be knowing that puck movement is a big part of success then why say "Hamilton did nothing". Success on the PP comes from working together as a unit.  Criticism towards Dougie seems a tad silly if one knows this.

    Threatening commentary for me ? No. I'd call it misinformed on how Hamilton plays . 



    Oh boy...so pissy about this -- it almost hits the definition of 'defensive' to a T.  You came to Hamilton's 'defense' after seeing criticism of him -- that seems...defensive.  Whatever, who cares.  Again, I don't think you're really reading my posts or trying to understand what I, and several others here, are saying.  And really, sometimes people can watch the same tournament and come away with different reactions.  Don't let that upset you.  You say average was good enough for Hamilton, I was hoping for more.

    Hoping for Hamilton to have a good tournament and be a team leader for Canada certainly isn't an "unattainable" standard.  If it is, then the reports on this guy's skill over the years have been utterly worthless.  Why are we afraid to ask Hamilton to be a leader in a tournament of teenagers?  Aren't there a handful of Canadian players who could be asked to stand out and lead that team?  Isn't Hamilton among that handful?

    Sometimes when the powerplay isn't working well, you can look to individual players, instead of throwing up your hands in dispair because there are too many guys involved to break it down.  You know this.  One guy who has the pedigree to make a powerplay better was Hamilton and we all know that he can quarterback a powerplay.  He wasn't awful, but he wasn't all that effective.  Do you really think that any criticism of Hamilton stems from people not understanding the PP as well as you do.  I'll look past how arrogance of that, but it isn't even backed with logic.  A PP works as a unit, sure.  Puck movement is important, sure.  That doesn't even begin to rebuke the rather mild criticism of Hamilton on the PP.  Again, I don't think you're reading or considering people's posts very carefully.  You're responding to something different than what people are saying.

    Anyhow, this subject seems to be a little raw.  Let's take a deep breath, I really don't mean to antagonize and I enjoy all of the background on Hamilton from posters as knowledgeable as yourself.  I just think you should consider the validity of some pretty well thought out posts here instead of assuming that others don't undertsand the fundamentals of hockey.  Smart posters on both sides here, IMO.



  • Man are you wrong on this one ? Defensive with Hamilton because you criticized him ? I have been openly critical of his defensive play on many posts. 

    I have basically replied to you to say your expectations have no merit considering his past erratic defensive play.  

    Pissiness was also detected through these eyes too. Using the phrases average is good enough and happy with mediocrity. Pissy shots intended to make like I am satisfied with his defensive game. Good for you for thinking that way about me. Just added that one to the ever growing pile of ..... about me to go along with the rest.

    I'm not satisfied . But I  have seen growth in this area of his game which brings my own appreciation to how he played in this tourney. If you had seen his defensive game before this year you would have to. 







     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    And the goals in the 5-1 loss were a result of the shutdown roled defenceman not shutting down anything ? A bit of finger pointing there don't you think considering they were not all the result of any 2 specific shutdown roled players ( Harrington and Hamilton ).




    Ahem...

    From McKenzie's review of the USA-Canada game:

    Then there was the number one defence pair - Scott Harrington and Dougie Hamilton - on the ice for that first American goal. It looked like a fire drill. The defence was breaking down all over the place. 

    Good to know I'm not alone.

     



    Just a thought .

    Do you think it might be possible MacKenzie could have been referring to team defence ( as in all 5 players ) which also included Harrington and Hamilton on the ice ? They both had their men tied up in front of the net with the shot coming from a wide open point. What else could they have done ?

    See for yourself. Ahem....right back at you ! 

    http://www.hockeycanada.ca/

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

     

     

    Ahem...

    From McKenzie's review of the USA-Canada game:

    Then there was the number one defence pair - Scott Harrington and Dougie Hamilton - on the ice for that first American goal. It looked like a fire drill. The defence was breaking down all over the place. 

    Good to know I'm not alone.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Just a thought .

    Do you think it might be possible MacKenzie could have been referring to team defence ( as in all 5 players ) which also included Harrington and Hamilton on the ice ? They both had their men tied up in front of the net with the shot coming from a wide open point. What else could they have done ?

    See for yourself. Ahem....right back at you ! 

    http://www.hockeycanada.ca/

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, of course it was a team breakdown on that one.  I am not blaming Hamilton for anything really, just pointing out that he didn't stand out as a top end player among his peers at the WJC.  McKenzie did mention Hamilton specifically though, by name, so speculating that he really meant something else is a tough sell for me.

    You've said that my opinion is the result of not understanding the team game, so I'm simply demonstrating someone who is respected in all hockey circles is offering the same criticism.  You can disagree, of course, but you might consider the notion that other interpretations of what happened aren't uninformed or 'silly'. 

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Pissiness was also detected through these eyes too. Using the phrases average is good enough and happy with mediocrity. Pissy shots intended to make like I am satisfied with his defensive game. Good for you for thinking that way about me. Just added that one to the ever growing pile of ..... about me to go along with the rest.



    Truthfully, I have not meant to take any shots at you and my apologies if it seems that way.  I think I have gone out of my way to compliment your knowledge in just about every post I've written.  Unlike you, I have said from the beginning that you have a perfectly valid perspective here, but I think you slip away from that in your defense of all questioning of Hamilton's WJC performance (and the not-subtle implication that only uninformed people would think differently than you).  I hoped for more from Hamilton, and I don't think I'm alone.  I have tried to describe that in every way possible.

    I think the leaders of this team were Huberdeau, Scheifele, RNH, and Hamilton.  A couple of those guys did not seem to deliver their best game when it mattered.  That's all.




     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

     




    Pissiness was also detected through these eyes too. Using the phrases average is good enough and happy with mediocrity. Pissy shots intended to make like I am satisfied with his defensive game. Good for you for thinking that way about me. Just added that one to the ever growing pile of ..... about me to go along with the rest.



    Truthfully, I have not meant to take any shots at you and my apologies if it seems that way.  I think I have gone out of my way to compliment your knowledge in just about every post I've written.  Unlike you, I have said from the beginning that you have a perfectly valid perspective here, but I think you slip away from that in your defense of all questioning of Hamilton's WJC performance (and the not-subtle implication that only uninformed people would think differently than you).  I hoped for more from Hamilton, and I don't think I'm alone.  I have tried to describe that in every way possible.

    I think the leaders of this team were Huberdeau, Scheifele, RNH, and Hamilton.  A couple of those guys did not seem to deliver their best game when it mattered.  That's all.






    I have said this on many occasions about you. My opinion has not changed. Nor will it ever. No need for me to stray from the conversation to butter you up. 

    P.S.   xoxoxoxoxoxox

    I'm done. I have a long weekend ahead of me. Have a good one !

  •  
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    Can we be clear that there's a difference between reasons and excuses?  Saying that I don't think Spott did a very good job of getting the most out of a very impressive group of players doesn't excuse the players laying an egg.  Saying that Hamilton looked like he was being the good soldier and trying to do what the coaches asked of him first and foremost doesn't mean I'm content with what he showed in the tournament.

    I think one of the reasons Hamilton didn't show his offensive skills is that Canada didn't play a game that gave him the right structure in which to work.  When you look at the US team (and their coach), they looked at the talents of the players on their D and they let the horses run.  Top 3 D scorers in the tournament are Americans, 4 in the top 13, 5 in the top 21.  That's not just guys playing well; it happens when the team looks for O from the D.  Finland, same thing (though, what happend to Finland here?): 3 top ten D scorers, five guys with at least 2 points.  That's where the comparison, unflattering as it is, to Trouba breaks down.  If Hamilton was playing in the US system, I think you'd be salivating.

    One other thing: how often have we seen Chara have match-up problems against smurfs?  Expecting Hamilton to throw his weight around on speedy little mites like Gaudreau?  Based on what?  It ain't WWF out there.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

     


    P.S.   xoxoxoxoxoxox

    I'm done. I have a long weekend ahead of me. Have a good one !

    [/QUOTE]

    Hmmm...on second thought, I'll settle for the put downs...

    Cheers, enjoy the weekend.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    I hoped for more from Hamilton, and I don't think I'm alone.  I have tried to describe that in every way possible.

    I think the leaders of this team were Huberdeau, Scheifele, RNH, and Hamilton.  A couple of those guys did not seem to deliver their best game when it mattered.  That's all.





    I think everybody hoped for more from him, Camara, Subban and Khokhlachev.  Not to split hairs again, but the word being used re: Hamilton is "expected".  You hope when you know it's possible but not a certainty.  You expect when a result is reasonable or likely.  I didn't think it was likely that Hamilton was going to rip it up the way team Canada played the game.  He certainly wasn't a leader on the PP or in the offense - RNH ran the PP more than Hamilton ever did and he wasn't a first or second option a lot of the time.

    I'd go one step farther, Fletch, and say that none of those guys led when it mattered.  Not the way Bergeron, Perry, Carter or Richards did when they were the leaders.  I'm most surprised they didn't get more out of Huberdeau.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    In response to Fletcher1's comment:

    I hoped for more from Hamilton, and I don't think I'm alone.  I have tried to describe that in every way possible.

    I think the leaders of this team were Huberdeau, Scheifele, RNH, and Hamilton.  A couple of those guys did not seem to deliver their best game when it mattered.  That's all.


    I think everybody hoped for more from him, Camara, Subban and Khokhlachev.  Not to split hairs again, but the word being used re: Hamilton is "expected".  You hope when you know it's possible but not a certainty.  You expect when a result is reasonable or likely.  I didn't think it was likely that Hamilton was going to rip it up the way team Canada played the game.  He certainly wasn't a leader on the PP or in the offense - RNH ran the PP more than Hamilton ever did and he wasn't a first or second option a lot of the time.

    I'd go one step farther, Fletch, and say that none of those guys led when it mattered.  Not the way Bergeron, Perry, Carter or Richards did when they were the leaders.  I'm most surprised they didn't get more out of Huberdeau.



    And Huberdeau must have missed JC Lipon's "we don't flop" memo.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: U.S.A out everything Canada

    "When you look at the US team (and their coach), they looked at the talents of the players on their D and they let the horses run.  Top 3 D scorers in the tournament are Americans, 4 in the top 13, 5 in the top 21.  That's not just guys playing well; it happens when the team looks for O from the D."

    Did Housley ever let his Dmen run with it! Gotta love those PMDs that can play some D.

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share