Re: U.S.A out everything Canada
posted at 1/4/2013 3:18 PM EST
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 ).
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 .