Fair points, but I consider Taylor Hall's plus minus about as relevant as his astrological sign.
- James_Tanner

He also loves moonlit walks on the beach.

something to remember is that Team Canada selections will always be scrutinized until the final result and then it will be deemed smart or stupid.
In 2010, Yzerman left Stamkos off of the roster. He scored 51 goals in the 09-10 season and at the beginning of the tournament, all the reporters would talk about was the omission of Stamkos. It became a REALLY big deal when we lost a game to the US in the round robin. Canada won gold and everyone has forgotten about it since.
- ILoveLamp

Thats a good point. Like I said, the roster alone doesn't bother me. It's that there are four separate areas (Price, Subban, the roster, the forward lines) that start to create a pattern of questionable decisions.

"Sometimes I think - even on the highest levels - that people get caught up in narratives that done mean as much as they think. Whether its shots on goal, +/-, leadership, the coach, or chemistry, I hear people - like professional people and people who have played the game - make bigger deals about these things than in reality I think they deserve"

wanted to really drive this home. well said james.

these fallacies and myths that somehow become fact still mystify me. the people who are willing to think outside the box or really investigate things are so few and far between

said offensive dman must be horrible defensively.
said team is losing so I suppose that means that something is really wrong with 20 year old kid.
if we get that thug that plays 4 mins a night, no one will dare hit our superstar.

I could go on and on and on and on

Second guessing aplenty Tanner, but you are seriously underrating what Kunitz brings. Its not about picking all the best players, its about assembling the best team. And yes, chemistry is important, especially in a short tourney.

If I knew, I wouldn't have asked. If he plays both, one would think that perhaps they would have moved him to LW, seeing as Iginla plays the right side.
- hscesq

Neal started out as a left wing, but was switched to right and then started filling the net like crazy a couple years ago. He's clearly better and more comfortable on the right size. He switched to left last year after they got Iginla and never got in a groove the whole playoffs.

"Sometimes I think - even on the highest levels - that people get caught up in narratives that done mean as much as they think. Whether its shots on goal, +/-, leadership, the coach, or chemistry, I hear people - like professional people and people who have played the game - make bigger deals about these things than in reality I think they deserve"

wanted to really drive this home. well said james.

these fallacies and myths that somehow become fact still mystify me. the people who are willing to think outside the box or really investigate things are so few and far between

said offensive dman must be horrible defensively.
said team is losing so I suppose that means that something is really wrong with 20 year old kid.
if we get that thug that plays 4 mins a night, no one will dare hit our superstar.

I could go on and on and on and on
- hugefemale dog77

Yeah I couldn't agree more. Sometimes I think its just the nature of say Sportsnet or whoever giving too much time to fill.

For instance, Doug Mclean has forgotten more about hockey than I will ever know, but give him a full two hours to kill and he gets ridiculous.

Before the Leafs went on their crazy win streak, remember they lost like 4 or 5 in a row or something?

Well Maclean and Kypreos went on and on for like five minutes debating on if Dion Phaneuf was doing a good enough job as the leader. Now that they have won 8 out of 10, or whatever, where is the corresponding argument that he picked up his leadership abilities and lead the hell out of the team?

There isn't one, of course, because that would be ridiculous. Since his leadership played no more of a part in the losing steak as it did in the winning streak. The fact is, it was a good topic to talk about when they were losing because its the kind of thing people will respond to. It doesn't make it real.

Now, me personally, I have never met Phanuef nor hung out in the Leafs dressing room. I think unless you have, judging his leadership is like pointless and nothing but meaningless speculation.

I also suspect that if you look deeper into many of the narratives discussed around the league or sports in general, on a daily basis, you would come to the same conclusion: they aren't much more than talking points to distract us that sports comes down to two things: who assembles the most talent, and who gets the luckiest.

"Sometimes I think - even on the highest levels - that people get caught up in narratives that done mean as much as they think. Whether its shots on goal, +/-, leadership, the coach, or chemistry, I hear people - like professional people and people who have played the game - make bigger deals about these things than in reality I think they deserve"

wanted to really drive this home. well said james.

these fallacies and myths that somehow become fact still mystify me. the people who are willing to think outside the box or really investigate things are so few and far between

said offensive dman must be horrible defensively.
said team is losing so I suppose that means that something is really wrong with 20 year old kid.
if we get that thug that plays 4 mins a night, no one will dare hit our superstar.

I could go on and on and on and on
- hugefemale dog77

Thank goodness you haven't yet.

Second guessing aplenty Tanner, but you are seriously underrating what Kunitz brings. Its not about picking all the best players, its about assembling the best team. And yes, chemistry is important, especially in a short tourney.
- Emperor Filonius

Please see my previous arguments dismissing these ideas. Although I do think Kunitz is a good player.

I love how all the Steve Yzerman sycophants on this hockey discussion site think that Team Canada's team management decisions are infallible, sacred, and beyond critique.
- 1979AD

Yes you clearly know more than they do about hockey

Second guessing aplenty Tanner, but you are seriously underrating what Kunitz brings. Its not about picking all the best players, its about assembling the best team. And yes, chemistry is important, especially in a short tourney.
- Emperor Filonius

chemistry is abit overrated imo

keith and seabrook broken up in 2010. marleau taken off the "sharks" line in 2010.
the lightning players separated in 2006.
macinnis and pronger separated in 02.
etc etc\
but yet, it's still this 'chemistry" thing we have to have.

these are the best players in the world. to suggest they wont play as well with another superstar is abit silly.

in all examples, said players found a better niche playing alongside someone they were much less familiar with.
but the one that really correlates imo is the seabrook/kunitz comparison.
neither player would've been picked if the weren't linemates/paired with an absolute lock superstar.
in the first instance, it really didn't work out at all, and seabrook was in over his head. keith was much more effective playing with someone closer to his caliber.

Thank goodness you haven't yet.
- hscesq

being succinct is not a strong suit of mine

being succinct is not a strong suit of mine
- hugefemale dog77

That's ok. You get your points across.

Ugh.

These guys arent infallible. We should just keep our heads down and praise everything they do cause they happen to work in the sport?

So what happened in 06?

And wouldnt every team have hockey knowledge at their disposal?
11 national teams will have ended up picking wrong.

Do i even need to get into the staggering numbers of moronic gm's or hockey minds over the past 20 years?
Again; not infallible cause u happen to work in the game
- hugefemale dog77

Some of them have built themselves contenders in the league today and recent cup champions. I'd take what Chiarrelli, Holland, and Yzerman have to say as pretty close to infallible.

Yeah I couldn't agree more. Sometimes I think its just the nature of say Sportsnet or whoever giving too much time to fill.

For instance, Doug Mclean has forgotten more about hockey than I will ever know, but give him a full two hours to kill and he gets ridiculous.

Before the Leafs went on their crazy win streak, remember they lost like 4 or 5 in a row or something?

Well Maclean and Kypreos went on and on for like five minutes debating on if Dion Phaneuf was doing a good enough job as the leader. Now that they have won 8 out of 10, or whatever, where is the corresponding argument that he picked up his leadership abilities and lead the hell out of the team?

There isn't one, of course, because that would be ridiculous. Since his leadership played no more of a part in the losing steak as it did in the winning streak. The fact is, it was a good topic to talk about when they were losing because its the kind of thing people will respond to. It doesn't make it real.

Now, me personally, I have never met Phanuef nor hung out in the Leafs dressing room. I think unless you have, judging his leadership is like pointless and nothing but meaningless speculation.

I also suspect that if you look deeper into many of the narratives discussed around the league or sports in general, on a daily basis, you would come to the same conclusion: they aren't much more than talking points to distract us that sports comes down to two things: who assembles the most talent, and who gets the luckiest.
- James_Tanner

effin eh brah.

good post

Second guessing aplenty Tanner, but you are seriously underrating what Kunitz brings. Its not about picking all the best players, its about assembling the best team. And yes, chemistry is important, especially in a short tourney.
- Emperor Filonius

It always seems to be Pens fans supporting the Kunitz selection. I'm not sure yet if it's because you watch him play more than the rest of us, or if it's home town bias.

Some of them have built themselves contenders in the league today and recent cup champions. I'd take what Chiarrelli, Holland, and Yzerman have to say as pretty close to infallible.
- Ihatebrianburke

I prefer to question the decisions of the guys in charge as no one is infallible.

all of these guys have made multiple bad hockey decisions throughout their careers.
if you can point to championships as a reason theyre always right, do I then get to point out the far higher amounts of years they HAVENT won as failures?
isn't kevin lowe part of team management? would you consider him above questions on his decision making??


end of the day, I suppose it's just a fundamental difference of opinion

Yes you clearly know more than they do about hockey
- Ihatebrianburke

I never claimed to. I still dissect, discuss, and critique their choices. Should I stop because they're professionals and I'm not?

being succinct is not a strong suit of mine
- hugefemale dog77

Careful. There's been a couple Hawks fan around who find words beyond the grade 7 reading level extremely offensive.

Careful. There's been a couple Hawks fan around who find words beyond the grade 7 reading level extremely offensive.
- 1979AD

apparently using the word 'infallible' makes you arrogant.

I prefer to question the decisions of the guys in charge as no one is infallible.

all of these guys have made multiple bad hockey decisions throughout their careers.
if you can point to championships as a reason theyre always right, do I then get to point out the far higher amounts of years they HAVENT won as failures?
isn't kevin lowe part of team management? would you consider him above questions on his decision making??


end of the day, I suppose it's just a fundamental difference of opinion
- hugefemale dog77

I am.

Careful. There's been a couple Hawks fan around who find words beyond the grade 7 reading level extremely offensive.
- 1979AD

I prefer to question the decisions of the guys in charge as no one is infallible.

all of these guys have made multiple bad hockey decisions throughout their careers.
if you can point to championships as a reason theyre always right, do I then get to point out the far higher amounts of years they HAVENT won as failures?
isn't kevin lowe part of team management? would you consider him above questions on his decision making??


end of the day, I suppose it's just a fundamental difference of opinion
- hugefemale dog77

If you read what I wrote properly I said I trust everyone but Kevin Lowe in the team Canada management team. (frank) Lowe!

Pretty good article. I really couldn't agree more about Hall, who might be the most dynamic skater in the league. I would have bring Giroux over Kunitz, considering how complete of a player Giroux is. Also, i'm not so sure about your overconfidence in Nash. He isn't known to compete night in, night out and while he has a great skills set, he seems like he isn't the "wow" player he used to be in Columbus. And even if he is old and much slower, Jagr might be the toughest player to knock off the puck in the league. He just protects the puck like no one else while Nash is more efficient when he uses his speed and dangles.
- Habsody

Kunitz is there because of Crosby and for what he did while Sidney was hurt, deserves to be there.
I like Hall but his time will come its just not this year, better players who have done this before. Gotta remember most if not all the guys selected have played on the large ice for Canada while in jr, or worlds like the spangler cup.
Giroux while a great player didn't show for selection camp and ever think maybe he is a problem type with management or other players on the team. take that for the sake of being good or take a player that's the same but has a great history with others that have been choosen.
one of the only issues I have is that if they do not dress PK, he has been better than any of the other defence on the world stage and large sheet of ice.

The only thing that will keep this team from gold is it self

Someone wrote that Patrick Sharp was on the 2010 Olympic team but he was not. Yhe 13 forwards were Crosby, Iginla, E. Staal, Getzlaf, Perry, Morrow, Toews, M. Richards, Nash, Thornton, Marleau, Heatley, Bergeron.
That being said I do think Sharp deserves to be on the team, I'm just clarifying the facts. But I do agree with the article that Giroux should definitely be on the team! I would take Carter off.

Number one thing wrong this article is your saying chemistry has nothing to do with this tournament and that all world class players can play together. COMPLETELY FALSE! This is not an all star game this is a 7 game tournament with no time for getting aquainted with your linemates. Chris Kunitz is needed for this team because he will get in on the forecheck and backcheck his tail off every chance he gets. For you to even suggest Taylor Hall should be on this team is an absolute joke the guy has no experience what so ever and has done nothing but score a good amount of points this year to warrant a spot on the team. Finally last olympics Crosby struggled and Kunitz is there to make sure Crosby clicks right off the bat because end of the day if Crosby is playing well the gold medal will be Canadas end of story!