2016 World Cup of Hockey thread

[kliq 3,763]

f*** that. Canada vs Everybody. Don't care who plays on the national team.

I cant have national pride for a team that "A" has players I cant stand, and "B" could theoretically be knocked out of the tournament by fellow Canadians with the existence of Team North America. Once Team NA and Team Europe came into play, it just became teams to me and the national pride went out the window.

I have never cared less for an international hockey tournament in my entire life. I didn't watch a single game because I truly didn't care.

[kipwinger 8,755]

I cant have national pride for a team that "A" has players I cant stand, and "B" could theoretically be knocked out of the tournament by fellow Canadians with the existence of Team North America. Once Team NA and Team Europe came into play, it just became teams to me and the national pride went out the window.

I have never cared less for an international hockey tournament in my entire life. I didn't watch a single game because I truly didn't care.

Well, I'm certainly not going to try to talk you into liking something you don't. But it's too bad that you didn't see any games. There were some really good ones played. I really liked watching the NA team play.

[Buppy 1,720]

But if you look at Tatar, his even strength scoring rate last season was 1.69 pts/60. The year before it was 1.7 pts/60. However his powerplay production dropped from 5.43 to 3.9 pts/60, which likely had to do with our powerplay going from among the best in the league to one of the worst. Hardly an indictment of Tatar.

Nyquist's even strength points/60 actually increased from two years ago to last year. 1.44 to 1.69. But again, his powerplay production plummeted from 5.73 to 3.08 pts/60. Again, likely because our powerplay went from good to awful.

Their rates of production, at least at even strength, weren't worse. Their rates on the pp were much worse, but how much of that had to do with them vs. Ferschweiler's pp being ineffective?

Sure, even-strength points were similar (or better), but goal rates and overall scoring were down. Of course there are more factors to that than just individual play, but that doesn't mean it's wrong to point out that they had a "down" year (at least relative to the prior year).

[kipwinger 8,755]

Sure, even-strength points were similar (or better), but goal rates and overall scoring were down. Of course there are more factors to that than just individual play, but that doesn't mean it's wrong to point out that they had a "down" year (at least relative to the prior year).

I don't think it's "wrong". I just think it's a bit misleading, because saying a young player had a down year (meaning they scored less, which is demonstrable) is often misconstrued as they regressed or stalled in their development (which both Nyquist and Tatar have been accused of). I agree that they scored less overall. I guess my point is that their regression in production had very little to do with the quality of their individual play. I was responding to someone who called Tatar a "new man", and I think that's not really accurate. He's always been this good. He just looked worse last year because our powerplay was garbage and he played nearly 2;00 minutes less per game.

[Euro_Twins 4,485]

Just take comfort in knowing this is all Canada has going for it.

You're a dick. At least we aren't voting trump or Hillary into office.

[Buppy 1,720]

I don't think it's "wrong". I just think it's a bit misleading, because saying a young player had a down year (meaning they scored less, which is demonstrable) is often misconstrued as they regressed or stalled in their development (which both Nyquist and Tatar have been accused of). I agree that they scored less overall. I guess my point is that their regression in production had very little to do with the quality of their individual play. I was responding to someone who called Tatar a "new man", and I think that's not really accurate. He's always been this good. He just looked worse last year because our powerplay was garbage and he played nearly 2;00 minutes less per game.

Yeah, no one should be drawing conclusions based on a few games, even if they had been actual crap last year. But I don't think we can take their individual play completely out of it either.

At least we aren't voting trump or Hillary into office.

No one's voting for anyone this election. Only voting against the other guy.

[kickazz 5,459]

You're a dick. At least we aren't voting trump or Hillary into office.

Pow! Right in the kisser..

Still better than having that psycho/cheater in Russia.

Edited October 1, 2016 by kickazz

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

Pow! Right in the kisser..

Still better than having that psycho/cheater in Russia.

Putin? I wish we had him instead of Fredo Corleone. And I'm not voting for anyone in this election. It's a joke.

[kickazz 5,459]

Im voting for Henrik Zetterberg as a write-in candidate.

Would rather have the Swedish Mafia runing our Gov.

Then we would for sure win the Stanley Cup? Yea?

Edited October 1, 2016 by kickazz

[brett 1,029]

by any chance did tatar play with neilson?

[krsmith17 7,191]

No, none of our three European players played together in the tournament other than a scattered shift and a bit on the power-play. Tatar played on the top line with Kopitar and Hossa. Nielsen centered the second line with Zuccarello and either Gaborik or Boedker, and Vanek was on the third line with Bellemare and Hansen.

[kipwinger 8,755]

No, none of our three European players played together in the tournament other than a scattered shift and a bit on the power-play. Tatar played on the top line with Kopitar and Hossa. Nielsen centered the second line with Zuccarello and either Gaborik or Boedker, and Vanek was on the third line with Bellemare and Hansen.

This isn't quite true, but close. During the exhibitions games at the beginning of the tourney, when Team Europe was still trying to figure out their best line combos, Tatar-Neilsen-Vanek was a line (for about a period) against Team NA. Afterward, Tatar and Vanek played briefly together with Draisaitl (sp?) before Gaborik was eventually hurt and Tatar went up.

But you're right in the sense that they did not play together for prolonged periods of time. 100% accurate.

[krsmith17 7,191]

I missed most of exhibition. I was referring to the past 3-4 games in which they were on three separate lines. I do remember hearing before the tourney started though that they were supposed to form one line. Like I said, I didn't watch those games, but I would assume they didn't gel well together?

[55fan 5,133]

It was more that the team didn't gel during the exhibition games. Then it was that Tatar gelled well with Kopitar and Hossa.

[kipwinger 8,755]

It was more that the team didn't gel during the exhibition games. Then it was that Tatar gelled well with Kopitar and Hossa.

Exactly. I don't think it was that the Neilsen-Tatar-Vanek line didn't work, so much as they wanted different things out of their lines. My impression initially was that they wanted Neilsen, Zuccarello, and whichever other winger to act as a sort of shutdown line to play against other top lines, freeing up the first and third lines to provide the offense. Neilsen was their best defensive forward. So in that sense, putting him with Tatar and Vanek wouldn't work. Subsequently Gaborik got hurt and Tatar played extremely well on the top scoring line so there was no reason to change the philosophy. They just moved Tatar up to the first (from the third) and drew Boedker into the lineup.