Ice Hockey World Cup

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai


I was giving credit where credit is due (something Asher can't do): to Nash for outstanding work that proves he's not a one-way player like some idiots like to claim.

Ask Ken Hitchcock what he thinks of Nash -- and I think he's got a bit better idea than you do, particularly because we know you don't watch western conference hockey much, let alone Columbus.

Still, you seem to have problems understanding my simple point: Doan was a surprising choice for captain given that he doesn't have as good a record as other players and given the fact that he led his Pheonix to bottom of the NHL.

Did I ever say that he would destroy Team Canada's chances of winning? No.

Did I say anything that wasn't true. No.

Give me a break...

I stand by my statement that Doan was a surprising choice.

Surprising? You flat-out repeatedly said he wasn't the best choice and named a bunch of really young, inexperienced players as possible captains instead. You can't give credit where credit is due -- you were flat-out wrong.

Now Asher wants everyone to believe that Doan "got it done" as if Doan did it by himself. Ridiculous.

You're amazing!

You blame Doan for -- and I quote -- "leading Phoenix to the bottom of the NHL". All by himself, apparently!

Now that Doan was captain of an undefeated, gold-medal winning team you refuse to give him credit for his leadership -- especially under fire from stupid left-wing whining politicians.

Asher continues to trash talk Nash. Again, ridiculous.

Trash talk?

Nash has played well. His problem -- like Lombardi -- lies in inexperience and inconsistency. They are both no captaincy material, though they both can be amazing players when they choose to play.

You were wrong, wrong, wrong. Doan was an excellent choice in captain -- and he proved it. You don't watch enough NHL hockey to know a damn thing you're talking about here, and it shows all the time.

Oh, I agree, Yzerman did a great job putting together the team.

No maple leafs.

NO MCCABE! !

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Come on Asher, be a man and admit that you are wrong.

Why don't admit that Nash proved his outstanding abilities in the tourny.

I've never said he lacked outstanding abilities! I said he lacked leadership abilities, which is absolutely true. Hell, he was a healthy scratch this year for Columbus. Much of the time in the NHL he's simply invisible. He's a terrific player, but he's inconsistent with tremendous defensive liabilities.

You are the one that was wrong here. You criticized Doan as captain and as a player (in terms of point production). You were wrong on both counts, period.

I merely said Nash would not make a good captain right now -- which is certainly not something you've proven wrong...

Why not admit that his +/- there is proof that he is not a one-way player.

I'll admit he had a good tourney. But a good 9 games against Belarus, Switzerland, Nigeria, and China doesn't make up for the fact that he's an impressive -65 career in the NHL -- in only 283 games. That's not a strong two-way player.

He's such a good two-way player that he's behind Klesla, Foote, Hainsey, Malhotra, Modin, Vyborny, Eriksson, Chimera, Federov, and Tollefsson on his power-house team's PK time.

[Pekka]

You know why we're going to lose the next finals as well, no matter who comes up?

It's not that our material is too weak in general, it's that we are embedded with loser attitude. Like the whole time before the finals, all the TVs would play is all the tight but lost finals. You know, what's the point? Why do you want to show that over and over again?

"Let's remember what happened in 2001". Why? To learn from it or to just.. kind of let's see how bad that sucked. You know, there's a difference between not wanting to lose and really wanting to win. This is what you see with the better players in our team as well. They weren't crying *****es, they said they're ashamed for the team not playing as hard as they could from the beginning. Even the captain said, well, if you don't have the balls to play from the start, this is what happens. No balls no calls.

Only the younger players were with the right attitude. They were like let's have some fun out there and play as hard as we can. Everyone did their best to ask "what about previous losses". **** that. That's not the class of 83. THat's the class of 75. They're the ones dwelling on it and afraid they might lose again in the finals. We're here to play the game, win or lose.

So there's no culture of winning. People rather are scared of losing. Why? I don't get it. That's just a sure way to lose. If you want to win, then how about concentrate doing that. No one ever wins by not wanting to lose.

So when others are there, excited to play the finals, maybe win the gold, our players are there afraid they might lose again.

Thanks Jebus we have a new patch of players who are definitely like that, players like Tuomo Ruutu, Mikko Koivu etc. Not some whining losers. They didn't even want the silver, after they got their medals, they said like this don't mean ****. You come here to play for the victory, not getting there is just nothing then. You might as well throw the medal in the garbage because it doesn't matter. In fact, medals in hockey games should be obsolete. There's no second places in hockey. There can be only one

So, we are still far behind mentally.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
He's such a good two-way player that he's behind Klesla, Foote, Hainsey, Malhotra, Modin, Vyborny, Eriksson, Chimera, Federov, and Tollefsson on his power-house team's PK time.

The fact that you wrote this shows you don't understand basic concepts of the game like what "one-way player" and "two-way player" mean.

Try getting this book, maybe it will help you:

http://www.amazon.com/Hockey-Dummies-John-Davidson/dp/

Even without this book, you should be able to figure out why snipers are not used as penalty killers.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Even without this book, you should be able to figure out why snipers are not used as penalty killers.

Good defensive players are used on the PK.

Rick Nash is not a very good defensive player in the NHL.

How exactly do you define two-way player if it ignores defensive abilities because a player is a "sniper"?

Two-way players are good at both ends of the ice...not just in the offensive zone, like Nash.

Brind'Amour is a great example of a two-way player.

[Tingkai]

Asher think about it: Why is it a bad idea to have a team's best goal-scorers killing penalties?

[Asher]

Because it can be tiring for people not in the best of physical shape (eg, Nash ).

Other teams don't mind. Iginla is a fantastic penalty killer, for instance.

You're also avoiding the issue. You maintain that Nash is a good two-way player. His godawful career NHL +/- disagrees. As does his widely respected coach, Ken Hitchcock, who spent most of this year trying to MAKE him into a "responsible two-way player". because he certainly is not. As do most people who actually watch the guy play regularly.

[Tingkai]

The irony is that in trying to trash Nash's ability right after he played an incredible tournament, you have simply exposed your own limited knowledge about hockey.

There's a reason why Nash, a sniper, is typically not used to kill penalties, and it is because he is a sniper, nothing to do with one-way vs two-way players.

If you're going to trash Nash, then you need to understand why snipers are typically not used to kill penalties.

Here's a clue: forwards typically play not more than 25 minutes a game.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Tingkai
The irony is that in trying to trash Nash's ability right after he played an incredible tournament, you have simply exposed your own limited knowledge about hockey.

leadership is my criticism of Nash. I've clarified this repeatedly and you continue to ignore that with your retarded responses.

There's a reason why Nash, a sniper, is typically not used to kill penalties, and it is because he is a sniper, nothing to do with one-way vs two-way players.

If you're going to trash Nash, then you need to understand why snipers are typically not used to kill penalties.

The reason he's not on the PK isn't because he's a sniper. Well, it sort of is. Nash is not known as a strong defensive player. He is not known as a two-way player. You put players like Nash out when you want to score goals, not when you want to defend a lead or need to kill a penalty.

It is your assertion that he is a strong two-way player. Your basis for this is a weird tournament where Canada spends most of its time playing meaningless games against woefully inferior teams. You ignore his nearly 300 games of experience in the NHL where he's demonstrably not a strong two-way player. You ignore the opinion of his coach in which he says he wants to improve Nash's two-way play as it was lacking.


Here's a clue: forwards typically play not more than 25 minutes a game. [/QUOTE]
I've already said this -- players not in peak physical shape especially can't do it well. You're completely ignorant about Nash if you think the only reason he's not common on the PK is because he's a "sniper". The fact is, he IS known as a "sniper", and NOT as a two-way forward. His defensive play is lacking.

Your constant squirming is nauseating.

You were flat-out wrong about Doan being a "surprising" pick for captain.
You were flat-out stupid when you mentioned Staal and Nash as potential captains instead, then rationalized this by praising their sniping abilities.
You were flat-out blatant when you kept squirming the arguments away from where you were getting your ass handed to you.

You are wrong categorically in this thread, Tingkai. You do not watch enough hockey to know anything about Nash and how he plays.

[Flubber]

Tingkai

Please stop. While I don't agree on everything Asher is saying, you are rapidly making me fill up my "Asher Agreement" quota. If this thread continues in this vein, I'll find myself agreeing with him again and again until my head explodes

Quick Asher-- tell me Lombardi was excellent in every game all year or talk about the attractiveness of boys over girls or something... perhaps talk about the Wii a little

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Tingkai


There's a reason why Nash, a sniper, is typically not used to kill penalties, and it is because he is a sniper, nothing to do with one-way vs two-way players.

HUH?? THat hurts my head. A "sniper" is a gifted player in "one way"-- ie offensively


Now I can see a good two-way player NOT being the pre-eminent penalty killer on a team-- Usually that role goes to your best defensive players.

Nash is offensively gifted but I don't think anyone would see him as a tough two way player at this stage. Danny Cleary of Detroit though has earned that type of title this year

Oh and Asher-- you are right that Iggy killed penalties for a while but they stopped doing as much. They wanted most of his efforts to be expended on the PP and even strength. So I can see where a very good "two-way" player would not kill many penalties if you have some good defensive type players

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Asher
The reason he's not on the PK isn't because he's a sniper. Well, it sort of is. Nash is not known as a strong defensive player. He is not known as a two-way player. You put players like Nash out when you want to score goals, not when you want to defend a lead or need to kill a penalty.

Close, but no cigar.

Snipers are typically not used to kill penalties because it would be a waste of their offensive talent. Their ice-time is best utilized during even-handed and PP sitaution when they have a better chance to score. And every minute spent killing a penalty is one less minute that could be spend scoring goals in EH or PP so using them as penalty killers is a double whammy.

Now do you see why you are completely wrong?

Nash's lack of time killing penalties is not a reflection of his defensive abilities, it's because he is a top goal-scorer.

The vast majority of top goal scorers around the league are not used as primary penalty killers (top four). Coaches that use their snipers as top penalty killers are wasting their resources.

Is Iginla used as a primary penalty killer? Of course not, Does that mean he is a one-way player, of course not.

Oh, and Iginla spends less time killing penalties than Nash (neither are primary penalty killers). What's that say about your crazy theory.

You also fail to understand the obvious, that penalty killers are defensive specialists, they are not picked because they are two-way players, they are picked for their defensive skills.

Your whole theory is completely wrong.

And if you think that goalscorers are benched "to protect a lead" then you really don't understand the game.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Flubber
HUH?? THat hurts my head. A "sniper" is a gifted player in "one way"-- ie offensively

That's your definition of a "one-way" player?

To me a one-way player are those guys who can score goals, but won't help on the defence, the guys who float around when the puck is in their end.

Nash finished with the World Cup with the best +/- on the team. He was out there forechecking and battling in his end. He is obviously not a one-way player.

Two-way players are guys who can contribute at both ends.

Let's face it, the term is rather vague and meaningless. Yelle is not a two-way player, but that doesn't mean he is deficient. His job is defensive, not offensive.

[Asher]

Oh, and Iginla spends less time killing penalties than Nash (neither are primary penalty killers). What's that say about your crazy theory.

It says that Playfair is a moron, is what it says.

Check out Iginla's PK time under Sutter.

You're wrong across the board still, my friend.

[Tingkai]

By using Iginla to kill penalties, Sutter was depriving Iginla of the opportunity to score. When Iginla was taken off the PK main unit, his points when way up. Look back at when he tied the league for scoring. He wasn't killing penalties them. Same thing this year, less time killing penalties, more time scoring.

Meanwhile, Yelle takes over the main PK duties so the Flames get the best of both worlds.

Now according to your theory, the one that for some strange reason Flubber believes, Joe Thornton isn't used to kill penalties because he's can't play defensively. And Crosby doesn't kill penalties so he's another one-way player. Yeah, right.