I really hate to say this Tj, but I think you were blinded by the light on a lot of this game. The light being the score that US had on the board or the goose egg Canada had on the score board for the most part of the game (and essentially, because of a way too early whistle, should have ended with a goose egg).
As for US players, I can't believe you didn't say a single thing about Grimaldi. That boy was the spark plug for a lot of the offense IMO. His points may not say it, but every time he got his hands on the puck, he was moving quick and making plays. I was very surprised when he didn't get POG and even more surprised that you didn't mention a thing about him.
As for Canada, I do agree with you about 25% on Subban and the goals that were allowed and him being screened. 25% being the first goal only. On the second goal, he had 1 defenseman in front of him. I don't know how that is being screened. When Binnington came into the game, one of the first shots he saved, he had 3 different people in front of him and he did what a good goaltender does. He looked around and underneath the players to see where the pucks was and made the save. I think Binnington's play will not be forgotten and also think this is why Subban is going to be crucified for his play. I tend to think of how most NHL teams play with loading their own players in front of the net and those goaltenders are able to locate and save the puck. Think the past Stanley Cup Champions. LA was great at putting their own players in front of the net to block shots and Quick was great at being able to locate the puck and stop it. I know, I know. I am comparing a top caliber goaltender in the NHL to a Juniors goalie, but from what I can remember of NHL goaltending (it has been over 6 months since I have watched NHL so I may have forgotten), most of the goalies can make most of those saves WITHOUT throwing their hands in the air while the puck is going by them.
Subban's play reminds me of a goalie that I played with when I was a kid. At first the coaches agreed with the goalie in that people should not get in front of the shot and let the goalie make the save. Eventually, the coaches realized that the goalie himself was not making an effort to see the puck and that is why the pucks were going in. IMO, it wouldn't have mattered if Canada was screening Subban or if US was screening him, he didn't make any effort to see the puck behind the first screen and subsequently, when the puck got passed him, all he could do was throw his arms in the air and blame the defense for screening him. This goes into play with what your assessment of the Canadian coaches were not able to do. They were not able to adapt to the play of the US and therefore lost this game in a major fashion. Same with Subban. He did not adjust to the play of the game and therefore too many goals were scored because he was screened.
As for the 4th goal, the player who scored came down the wing and had 50% of the net to shoot at. If Subban is not on the goal line, then less of the net is visible to this player and most likely this puck does not go in the net. All Subban had to do was move 2 to 3 feet out of the net to cut off the angle. This is something 90% of the goalies in the NHL would have done.
As for other players on Canada, I hate to say this but I don't think there was a single player that deserved a player of the game award. I think they played like spoiled brats and not a single player made the adjustment needed to make their team better. I didn't hear Wotherspoon's name till the 3rd period. This may be a good thing as the first two periods were right offs for everyone and not hearing his name may be because he didn't screw anything up. Danault and Rattie are victims of play throughout the tournament. They didn't get the ice time in the "big push" at the end because they didn't have a big push at the beginning/middle of the tournament. It is the same thing that happens with NHL clubs. If the top 2 lines are what does the scoring all year long, then those are the 2 lines that are depended upon to put a "big push" at the end of a game when their team is down. Danault I believe also took a very stupid penalty in the middle of the third that hurt Canada's comeback chances huge. I may have the wrong person, but I do think it was Danault.
I do believe your assessment of all three Portland players (Wotherspoon, Rattie and Jones) may be a little bit of a case of favortism. In no way shape or form to I think Jones out played Trouba or McCabe. I will say, Jones played a great game, but again, Trouba and McCabe were amazing in this game with the transition game, their pushes up the ice to make odd man advantages and their defensive play in their own end. Going back to my earlier comment, if Grimaldi didn't get player of the game, McCabe or Trouba would have been my next picks. Gibson would have been forth. A few other players would have been 5, 6, 7th and then maybe Jones. Please don't take this as me coming down on a kid that was cocky before the first USvsCanada game. I watched his play today with a want to see him as a player without pre-judging him. He played a great game. So did about 10 other Americans.
All in all, I do agree with your assessment of the Canadian game with the exceptions of what I mentioned above. Canada was not ready for this game, was not willing to change their game plan, and did not adjust when they needed. I do however believe that this was the fast paced game you were looking for in the previous meeting between these two teams and your pre-tournament assessment of the speed of the Americans was spot on. They were faster, smarter, stronger on the puck, and adapted well to the Canadian game and essentially, this is what won the game for the Americans.
I said it once and will say it again, GO USA GO!
Lastly, at least I had the final four teams right and I also had the match ups correct too, just not the positions. New predictions:
Gold - USA
Silver - Sweden
Bronze - Russia
4th - Canada
The train is off the rails for Canada and they will look at Russia's last 2 games and think that this the same team they are going to face. Russians will come out guns a blazing and Canada again will not be able to adapt.
Americans will play the same run and gun style to beat the slower Swedish players and again win pretty easily.
Remember everyone, these are my opinions. In no way shape or form do I know all the answers nor do I think I am a professional scout nor do I think I could do better then any of these kids that are playing on the ice. Remember that, they are just kids and they have tons of growing and improving to do.
Last edited by Golfnut77777
on 2013-Jan-Thu-01-01, edited 1 time in total.