All in all though, I'm not sure what your larger point is?

The team that you thought would be the favourite won't medal and every team that plays on small ice beat every team that plays on big ice in head to head matchups.

To me, it's apparent that the bottom line is talent, effort, luck. And we both agree that the 3 most talented rosters are in the semis, with what I called the 5th most talented winning an upset over Russia today.

So if the International sized ice was NOT a minus for Canada, which I agree to a certain point, then it MUST have been an advantage for Latvia.


Case in point. As mentioned on today's telecast, all but one of the players for Latvia all play in Europe on International sized ice, and nine for the same team in the KHL, which shutdown two week prior to the Olympics.

They're way more accustomed to playing the tactical style of game the International sized ice demands, in this type of tournament.



Imagine if the team Canada roster had two weeks off prior to the Olympic tournament, in order to prepare for this tournament, and become more comfortable with the style of play required on International sized ice...................I think today's game would have been a complete blowout.




All that being said, Canada has not fared well against what most people would agree, are not teams they should have had no problem with.

A 3 - 1 win over Norway, a 6 - 0 win vs Austria (not bad) a 2 -1 overtime vs the Finns and today they escaped with a 2 - 1 win vs Latvia.

When they meet the USA they better have another gear.





BTW John Tavares done for the tournament, the NHL's third leading scoring leader.
- Doppleganger

Yawner and stretcher for Canada against Norway. A 6-0 win is not bad lol. Finland just took out Russia. They dominated Latvia the entire game long and ran into an unconscious goalie and some fortuitous iron.

I honestly dont see what youre talking about. The ice hasn't really had an impact at all.

Well Canada squeaked out a 2 - 1 win vs Latvia today.

Why was the game so close?

Canada has a NHL super star line up, and Latvia has one NHLer and rest are mostly all KHLers.

There must be some reasons that this game was NOT a blow out, as most people thought it would be.



Advantages the Latvian team had (That Canada did not)

ALL players grew up playing on International sized ice, and learning the style of play required to play on it

ALL players (but one) are playing in leagues in Europe (eg. KHL) on International sized ice, playing the the style of play required to play on it and being extremely comfortable on it (as much as NHLers are on NHL ice)

All the players, playing in the KHL, had two weeks off prior to the tournament to prepare for the tournament.


Disadvantages Canada had

None of the advantages the Latvians had (above)

Played a compressed schedule up to the point of having to fly between 9 and 12 time zones ( three flights) from North America before arriving in Sochi............and then having to adjust to the time zone change and jet lag.

Only a couple of practises before tournament started, and not nailing down line combinations even in today's game.
- Doppleganger

the shots were 57-14.
the chances were a landslide for Canada
most of the game was spent in the Latvia end.

Canada was by far the better team. A goal was not counted when the latvia player stopped it in the crease, or at the very least a penalty shot should have been given

your analysis is really nonsense. A goalie kept them in it..nothing more. the size of the ice had nothing to do with a 2-1 Canada win

Well Canada squeaked out a 2 - 1 win vs Latvia today.

Why was the game so close?

- Doppleganger

A young goalie stood on his head. End of story. Did you not watch the game?

A young goalie stood on his head. End of story. Did you not watch the game?
- prock

watching the game or not hes just gonna argue for arguments sake, stop giving him what he wants and arguing

3 of the 4 teams left are almost exclusively nhl'ers

watching the game or not hes just gonna argue for arguments sake, stop giving him what he wants and arguing
- nightmare3020

This

We won 15 pages ago[/img]

watching the game or not hes just gonna argue for arguments sake, stop giving him what he wants and arguing
- nightmare3020

This

We won 15 pages ago[

If he wants to argue, let's at least make it ridiculous:

Yawner and stretcher for Canada against Norway. A 6-0 win is not bad lol. Finland just took out Russia. They dominated Latvia the entire game long and ran into an unconscious goalie and some fortuitous iron.

I honestly dont see what youre talking about. The ice hasn't really had an impact at all.
- sanfordnson

So please explain to us, why a team full of KHLers, playing their back up goal tender, almost took Canada, with a roster of NHL super stars, to overtime?


Is Latvia that good, or Canada not much better than them?

There has to be reasons that game was so close.


So why was it only a one goal game?

All in all though, I'm not sure what your larger point is?

The team that you thought would be the favourite won't medal and every team that plays on small ice beat every team that plays on big ice in head to head matchups.

To me, it's apparent that the bottom line is talent, effort, luck. And we both agree that the 3 most talented rosters are in the semis, with what I called the 5th most talented winning an upset over Russia today.
- Morris

The team that the odds makers thought was the favourite a year ago, and the closer the games became, were co-favourite with Canada, lost out for a number of reasons, in my opinion.

The Russian coaching staff rolled four lines, made to line up changes to adjust to game being played and never shortened his bench at anytime during the tournament.

They faced the Finns, who had a couple of days off, when they had played 4 games in five nights. The Finns played as a "team" while the Russians did not (Coaching).

The team that the odds makers thought was the favourite a year ago, and the closer the games became, were co-favourite with Canada, lost out for a number of reasons, in my opinion.

The Russian coaching staff rolled four lines, made to line up changes to adjust to game being played and never shortened his bench at anytime during the tournament.

They faced the Finns, who had a couple of days off, when they had played 4 games in five nights. The Finns played as a "team" while the Russians did not (Coaching).
- Doppleganger

Yeah I ought to have mentioned coaching as a big factor as well.

I've never contended that big ice wasn't a factor. I've always contended it wasn't anywhere near the biggest factor.

the shots were 57-14.
the chances were a landslide for Canada
most of the game was spent in the Latvia end.

Canada was by far the better team. A goal was not counted when the latvia player stopped it in the crease, or at the very least a penalty shot should have been given

your analysis is really nonsense. A goalie kept them in it..nothing more. the size of the ice had nothing to do with a 2-1 Canada win
- senstroll

So Canada is only one goal better that Latvia?

How could a team of KHLers keep that game so close for so long against a team of NHL superstars??

Could it have been their familiarity with defensive style of play required to keep games close, on International sized ice, when playing against a vastly superior team?

Please don't say it was only a back up goaltender that currently plays for the Florida Everblades of the ECHL, because if it was, Tampa would have called him up long ago.

Yeah I ought to have mentioned coaching as a big factor as well.

I've never contended that big ice wasn't a factor. I've always contended it wasn't anywhere near the biggest factor.
- Morris

And neither have I!!!

But some people still seem to think I had.

I've sited many reasons why Teams like the Finns and other European teams would have a few advantages over the North American teams.

Less travel for some of their players, time zone adjustment, jet lag.



The Finns and Latvians benefited from the KHL shutting down two week prior to the tournament. That allowed coaching staffs to run way more practises with more players than both North American teams.

Bad news, American and Canadian fans. Unlike the Vancouver Games, this Olympic hockey tournament will be played on a larger European-style rink that will be less familiar to players with mainly North American experience. The rink this year will be 200 feet long by 100 feet wide, a full 15 feet wider than an NHL rink. That's 3,000 extra square feet of ice to cover. The Canadian and U.S. teams will have gotten some ice time together on an Olympic-sized rink, but the size change does give the 10 European teams a slight advantage. "It's no secret that European players prefer international hockey's bigger ice size that allows more skating to utilize their skills that are somewhat limited in the smaller NHL rinks," writes Josh Marks at Yahoo Sports

http://www.theatlantic.co...n-sochi-the-rinks/283592/

Chris Stevenson ,QMI Agency


When it comes to handicapping the Olympic men’s hockey tournament — which, for our purposes, comes down to evaluating Canada’s chances at defending the gold it won four years ago in Vancouver — the characteristics of the venue are pretty much summed up this way: The field is leveled by widening it.

It is one of the interesting realities of the Olympic tournament that Canada — and the U.S., for that matter — have struggled mightily on the large international ice surface, losing their games, their hopes, their scoring touch and, ultimately, any chance at a medal somewhere in the extra 3,000 square feet of the bigger rink.

The New Jersey Devils’ veteran forward Jaromir Jagr grew up on the big ice in what was then Czechoslovakia and, just recently, spent the 2008-11 seasons in the Kontinental Hockey League.

“It’s totally different hockey,” said the 41-year-old, who will be playing in his fifth Olympic Games. “It wouldn’t be any problem if you probably had a month to prepare for it. But you’ve got one practice. You’re playing for three months one kind of style where you’ve got to stand on the boards, then you’ve got to skate all the time.

“Some guys in Europe you don’t know about might be a big factor in that tournament. I think the European size is going to surprise a lot of people.”

And yet it's guaranteed that a North American team will be playing for gold while another will be playing for bronze.

So Canada is only one goal better that Latvia?

How could a team of KHLers keep that game so close for so long against a team of NHL superstars??

Could it have been their familiarity with defensive style of play required to keep games close, on International sized ice, when playing against a vastly superior team?

Please don't say it was only a back up goaltender that currently plays for the Florida Everblades of the ECHL, because if it was, Tampa would have called him up long ago.
- Doppleganger

He was called up and might be playing if Ottawa didnt hand TB an MVP/Vezina goalie

It was the international Ice and KHL experience that limited the Canadian team to only 60 shots.

Canada has a very low sh %
Canada's shooting percentage for the entire tournament: 7.7%. Latvia's: 7.8%.

I was reading that Canada has an average sh% of 13.5 in the past 20 international games or so. (before sochi)

So I would say thats a good reason why..they are not getting the shots through and that should change. If they managed to shoot the average thats 7 goals on 57 shots roughly.

Latvia is right on track with 1 goal on 14 shots (7.14%) which lines up with there average.

Ice size means nothing in this game

Ice size means nothing in this game
- senstroll

As long as you pick guys who have the skillset required for the ice size you are 100% correct.

There's a reason why Lucic, Thornton, Seabrook, etc aren't on the Canadian roster.

As long as you pick guys who have the skillset required for the ice size you are 100% correct.

There's a reason why Lucic, Thornton, Seabrook, etc aren't on the Canadian roster.
- daeth

I meant specifically the Latvia game.

Ice size means nothing in this game
- senstroll

These people tend to disagree with you...........I'll go with them, and not you.
Okay?





Dave Lozo , NHL National Lead Writer
Feb 10, 2014



Henrik Lundqvist, Goaltender, New York Rangers, Team Sweden

"The first couple practices, you try to get used to it. It’s like every summer, you skate back home and get used to the big ice, then you come back here, the first couple practices it feels very tight and narrow. But a couple days in, you don’t think about it.

You have to expect players to have more time. Here, if a guy gets a pass in the slot, usually there’s a guy there right away. The big ice, you have a little more room and a little more time. I think that’s the biggest difference."


Mats Zuccarello, Left Wing, New York Rangers, Team Norway

" It’s a little bit different, but not that much. You take the U.S. and Canada, and it’s going to take them a couple games to really get into the structure. But I’m sure it’s not going to be a problem. Even Sweden and Russia, everyone plays over here so it’s not going to benefit anyone…except Norway. Everyone plays on the big ice except me.

I like the small ice. On the big ice, you can just defend. Here, you can shoot from anywhere and it’s a scoring chance. There, you can put five guys in there and nothing really happens."

Nicklas Backstrom, Center, Washington Capitals, Team Sweden

"It’s going to be a different game than what we’re used to here. Hopefully we can use it to our advantage. I think you have to skate more, but you have more time to make plays too. We all grew up playing the bigger ice, so hopefully we still know how to play."


Jay Bouwmeester, Defenseman, St. Louis Blues, Team Canada

" There’s a little bit of an adjustment. The thing you have to remember is all the extra space is on the outside. All the dots and everything else is the same dimensions so as a defenseman, you don’t want to get running around caught on the outside. There’s times when guys go to those quiet areas and you have to let them go. You can’t chase them. That’s when you get caught running out of position. Maybe you have to play a bit more of a patient game defensively.

All the extra space is in the corners, behind the net, on the outside of the rink. You still can’t stand in the middle of the ice. Nothing changes. When you’re playing, you have to remind yourself the boards are further from the net. You have to have more awareness, because you can get yourself drawn out to guys. They’ll try to bait you out there and that opens up the space in the middle.

It’s almost like killing penalties. There’s times to go and pressure and there’s times where you have to be patient and realize that the real dangerous areas are still the same. In front of the net, dots to the net, that sort of thing. But there’s good players who are going to use that to try to spread you out, get you running around and find that open space."

Ken Hitchcock, Head Coach, St. Louis Blues, Team Canada Associate Coach

" It’s more comfortable for the Euros because they grew up on it. They understand how to play that game. But I coached in it in ’06 and the game’s changed. Some of the countries play like we do now. I think some of the countries that maybe have limited NHL players play the old way, which is basically five back. But I think a lot of the countries like Finland, the Slovaks, the Russians, they come at you. So I think it’s not going to be a game like we saw in ’06 where there was basically no forechecking throughout the tournament. I think you’re still going to see a lot of forechecking.

I know one thing—when you play on that big ice surface, your sense of timing of when to forecheck and when to pull back gets automatic quite a bit. And that’s probably the adjustment we have to make, knowing when to go and when to pull up. They’ve taken advantage of us being overly aggressive. Our natural instincts are to play on our toes and they have a balance in their game. I think that’s the balance that we have to learn quickly.

The difference between the big-ice game and the small-ice game is the small-ice game is played north and south and the big-ice game is played east and west. It’s always finding the weak side of the ice, the big-ice game. You’ve got to feel really comfortable finding the weak side of the ice. That’s where all the plays get made.

If you try to play north on the big ice, you’re going to run right into numbers all the time. You have to be really comfortable going east-west before you go north. That’s how they play. They play east-west to go north, whereas we play north to go north. So that’s the biggest adjustment. Chipping it on the boards and chasing it down doesn’t’ work in Europe. It doesn’t work on big ice. So we’ll have to make those adjustments right away in practice."

I meant specifically the Latvia game.
- senstroll

So you're saying Canada is only one goal better than Latvia.

I disagree.

As long as you pick guys who have the skillset required for the ice size you are 100% correct.

There's a reason why Lucic, Thornton, Seabrook, etc aren't on the Canadian roster.
- daeth

I agree with you.

The reason, is that game is played differently on the different ice sizes.




1998 (Nagano, Japan): Czech Republic, Russia, Finland (International sized ice)
2002 (Salt Lake City, Utah): Canada, United States, Russia (hybrid ice size)
2006 (Turin, Italy): Sweden, Finland, Czech Republic (International sized ice)
2010 (Vancouver, BC): Canada, United States, Finland (NHL sized ice)

I agree with you.

The reason, is that game is played differently on the different ice sizes.




1998 (Nagano, Japan): Czech Republic, Russia, Finland (International sized ice)
2002 (Salt Lake City, Utah): Canada, United States, Russia (hybrid ice size)
2006 (Turin, Italy): Sweden, Finland, Czech Republic (International sized ice)
2010 (Vancouver, BC): Canada, United States, Finland (NHL sized ice)
- Doppleganger

You called Russia the favourite NOT Canada. You said smart money was on Russia, and NOT the two North American teams because of the ice. We all told you the Canadian team was better, making them the favourite.

Who's the favourite now? Tell us, is it still Russia? Hmmm. Is it Finland or Sweden now? Tell us. Give us some more stupid comments.

So you're saying Canada is only one goal better than Latvia.

I disagree.
- Doppleganger

In that game they were. the score indicated that.

But I agree against a seasoned/superior Large Ice team like you have said..Canada is better