AHL- Apolyton Hockey League III-- Olympic edition

[Flubber]

overall Ben it seems you just would pick the team according to points and plus minus-- You don't seem to think about defensive or other skills and you seem to give no credence to leadership or experience.

Iginla had averaged more than 90 points a season over the last 3 years and despite a team-wide scoring slump is still on pace for 75points this year and is currently 13th in the league in goals (6th among Canadians) --he brings grit and leadership, Olympic experience and a great attitude. Those are the reasons why every actual hockey person has Iggy on their team Canada and its why he is on the actual team Canada. He was clearly a correct selection.

Oh and curious but why does Rick Nash not get slammed by you Ben. In fact he was on your team!! He has the same number of points as Iggy and is Twelve worse in plus minus!! maybe its because he plays for low scoring Columbus and you know his point toatals are gained with not a lot of help from highly skilled offensive guys. maybe you acknowledge that the Jackets goalkeepers have been sieve-like such that everyon'e plus minus sufferered?

Just admit it -- you hate on Iggy just because you know it will get a reaction. But I would defend Nash just as much --The reasoning would be difefrent but I see him as a solid Olympian too

[Asher]

Then you admit that the last game was a meaningless warmup?

It was not meaningless. All of the games have meaning (look at Canada vs Switzerland last time).

For what it's worth, here's another example of how useless Iginla is to the team. They're rotating one of the 2 "A"s...but not Iginla's. Last game it was Pronger and Iginla, this game it's Crosby and Iginla.

Burrows should've been ****ing captain of Team Canada, right Ben?

It's called paraphrasing. Look it up sometime.

It's NOT paraphrasing. It's called a strawman.

Look that up sometime, ****er.

[Asher]

The Swiss are playing a great game.

[Flubber]

The Swiss are playing a great game.

Swiss played really good. They were generally outplayed but they played tight d and let Hiller be the difference. Heck he had 18 saves in the 3rd period alone. Canada wasn't sharp or urgent enough.

Bottom line is that the most likely seed for canada now is

3 if they beat the US
6 if they lose to the US

The only way they can improve on that is if there are extra time in some other pools or some upsets.(ie Sweden and Finland tying in regulation or a czech-Russia extra time game

So its likely Canada's road got a little tougher but we won't know until we see where the other results end up

I'm actually a little pleased by what happened in a weird way. Canada dropped its opener to Sweden before going gold ion Salt Lake City and a little spank in the ass should have them good and motivated. Its a good example of what can happen if you don't stay focused at all times.

I'd much rather they learn this lesson now than in the quarters

[Asher]

Babcock confirms that Brodeur is the starter vs the USA. He's the starter, as I predicted. You were wrong again, Ben.

That said, whether he stays the starter is anyone's guess. Luongo may get some starts as well, but still...Brodeur is the starter and its his job to lose.

[Ben Kenobi]

THis is a very different discussion which would have nothing to do with Burrows. IT actually has two parts--1. Who else do you think SHOULD be on team Canada and then 2. who would you drop for them?

I already said earlier.

I'd leave off Richards, Morrow, Bergeron and Iginla.

I'd Add, Carter, Sharp, Burrows, St. Louis

Carter, fits the winger position. Burrows fits the winger position. Sharpe with Toews as the 'Kid line', and St. Louis, just because he's that good.

All I know for certain was they did NOT want the top 13 offensive forwards to be the team -- for the simple reason that once you have your top 6 or 8, you HAVE the guys that you will be playing when you need a goal.

Iggy doesn't bring anything to the table in terms of intangibles. Burrows does. He's the best PKer if he were selected for team canada.

Its nonsense to just have mor and more scorers. The remainder of the team is trying to find guys that can fill very specific roles. The reality is that with 3 minutes to go and your team down a goal, the 7th and 8th best scorers (from the coach's perspective) are not getting on the ice.

And this is where the choice of Iginla hurts, and all those centremen.

But I would defend Nash just as much --The reasoning would be difefrent but I see him as a solid Olympian too

Nash is younger then Iggy. Fresh legs and all. Between Nash and Iggy, I don't think it's a choice. You go with Nash. Between Iggy and St. Louis, you go with St. Louis.

The only decision IMHO, is between Patrick Sharp and Iggy for the last slot. I'd like to see what Sharp and Toews could do as the kid line.

[Ben Kenobi]

Bottom line is that the most likely seed for canada now is

3 if they beat the US
6 if they lose to the US

The only way they can improve on that is if there are extra time in some other pools or some upsets.(ie Sweden and Finland tying in regulation or a czech-Russia extra time game

So its likely Canada's road got a little tougher but we won't know until we see where the other results end up

I don't think this team has it. I'm going with 6th.

Who came through in the crunch, when they needed scoring? Heatley and Marleau. Where was Iggy?

[Asher]

Carter, fits the winger position. Burrows fits the winger position. Sharpe with Toews as the 'Kid line', and St. Louis, just because he's that good.

Carter is a natural centre. Do you even watch hockey?

Iggy doesn't bring anything to the table in terms of intangibles. Burrows does.

Christ. Nevermind my above question, you have made that clear.

And this is where the choice of Iginla hurts, and all those centremen.

You're such an immensely ignorant douche about the sport of hockey that it is genuinely painful. You think Iginla is just a scorer??

Nash is younger then Iggy. Fresh legs and all. Between Nash and Iggy, I don't think it's a choice. You go with Nash. Between Iggy and St. Louis, you go with St. Louis.

St Louis is older than Iginla by a couple years.

The only decision IMHO, is between Patrick Sharp and Iggy for the last slot. I'd like to see what Sharp and Toews could do as the kid line.

Patrick Sharp is 28, you ********. How is that a kid line?

Holy **** your stupidity infuriates me.

[Sparrowhawk]

I think the debate among those respected hockey minds (including some of the most respected in the game) on who to pick for team Canada was on which agitator to take: Sean Avery or Alex Burrows

However they realized that taking either of the two most annoying players in the league would result in mutiny of the players they wanted, and a similar mutiny of many of the fans in Canada, myself included.

[action=Sparrowhawk][/action]

Disclaimer: I realize that Sean Avery wasn't on anyone's list either, but if we are considering Burrows, why not Avery

[Ben Kenobi]

St Louis is older than Iginla by a couple years.

And he's a much better scorer. If we are going with oldies, why not get someone who's better?

[Ben Kenobi]

Sparrow, Avery does dick all wrt to scoring. Burrows is the second-best Canadian leftwinger. Why is he not on the team?

He's better than 6 of the olympians selected.

[Sparrowhawk]

Short answer is his most obvious "qualities" have nothing to do with any of the attributes I want on the team I am cheering for, in hockey or any other sport. Like Avery, I would have difficulty cheering for any team with a player of Burrows "talents" on it, be it hockey or any other sport, be it an Olympic Hockey Team or NHL Hockey team.

Burrows could be the highest scoring left winger, or for that matter, leading the league in scoring, and I would not pick him for team Canada as I would not be proud to be sending him along with our select best to represent what is Canada. I think that players and leaders such as Joe Sakic and Steve Yzerman would have been embarrassed to have a "Alex Burrows" type player on their team in 2002, and were happy to have players such as Jarome Iginla (among others). I think that the intangibles that have been mentioned elsewhere in this thread are among those reasons why they picked the players they did, and Burrows wasn't likely on the list of any of those that mattered.

[action=Sparrowhawk][/action]

[Pekka]

Swiss' played well. They played great with the hand they were dealt.

It's not necessarily all bad for Canada. Sometimes you just need a wake up call. Sometimes the weaker team plays weak and you benefit because you get to try out some stuff you want, something just practiced the other night, and perhaps share the load with the 4th liners, 13th attacker etc. Sometimes there's an upset, and that wakes everyone up.

You look at those lines, it's more likely to be a wake up call and not making the same mistakes again rather than a sign of the team's true level of skills.

[Ben Kenobi]

Short answer is his most obvious "qualities" have nothing to do with any of the attributes I want on the team I am cheering for, in hockey or any other sport.

Oh bull****. You had no problems cheering for Esa Tikkinen, did you?

Look, I get it. Oilers and Flamer fans piss all over Canuck fans. Did you know there's only one Canuck player on the squad, despite Vancouver being the best Canadian team at the moment?

I've had to sit and cheer for asshats just because they happened to be Oilers, I got to watch ****ing Wayne Gretzky light the freaking torch, just another example of how the crap gets shoved down our throats. It would have been no different then say Beliveau lighting the torch in Calgary.

Look, a local figure skater lit it in Calgary, and ya'll have the nerve to ***** and moan about Linden doing the honours here?

Like Avery, I would have difficulty cheering for any team with a player of Burrows "talents" on it, be it hockey or any other sport, be it an Olympic Hockey Team or NHL Hockey team.

Oh please, get off your hobby horse.

Burrows has the talent to play on the squad. Points-wise, just because you hate him with a passion has no impact on the skill that he brings to the table and the effort that he puts out every night. Frankly, I'd rather have Burrows because like Linden, because I know he gives a ****. I don't see that in Iggy.

Burrows could be the highest scoring left winger, or for that matter, leading the league in scoring, and I would not pick him for team Canada as I would not be proud to be sending him along with our select best to represent what is Canada.

On what grounds? I don't get it. The man works his ass off every shift. He's performed well this season, at an olympic style calibre for the team.

I think that players and leaders such as Joe Sakic and Steve Yzerman would have been embarrassed to have a "Alex Burrows" type player on their team in 2002, and were happy to have players such as Jarome Iginla (among others).

Why? Because CBC is in a snit with him at the moment. Look, the 2002 team had Mike Peca, who I don't see as significantly different than Alex Burrows. Same gritty playstyle. I realise that he's not the fave player for Oiler fans.

I think that the intangibles that have been mentioned elsewhere in this thread are among those reasons why they picked the players they did, and Burrows wasn't likely on the list of any of those that mattered.

So plus minus and solid PK work don't matter in your world?

Here are the stats for Mike Peca, through an entire season, the same season that he played on the Olympics.

25 35 60. Burrows has a very similar playing style, and 2002, just happened to be Peca's best season, at 60 points through 82 games. Burrows is on a pace to exceed anything Michael Peca ever did in his career.

So tell me, even by the standards of 2002, Burrows is an Olympic calibre player.

[Ben Kenobi]

You look at those lines, it's more likely to be a wake up call and not making the same mistakes again rather than a sign of the team's true level of skills.

Dunno. I think the Americans are better, and will take the division, and will push the Canadians into the 6th spot.

My prediction is for the shocker, and then Canada getting knocked out by the Czechs again in the quarters.

They should be able to get there even with a loss to USA, as they should have an easy matchup against Norway or Latvia to make the quarters. But past that, this squad hasn't shown any indication that they can match up with the top teams here.