Team USA Article

[SabreFan1]

This seems like a pretty good article about the recent Team USA hockey to me.  I think it's a pretty decent analysis of the current dysfunction that it's going through.

 

The gist of it is.  Team USA hockey needs to put their best players on the ice and not just the players that they believe can beat Canada.  Solely focusing on Team Canada hockey will cause you to not only lose to Canada, but also to other countries in the tournament that the program should rightfully be able to beat.  Canada isn't the only team that Team USA has to play against in international tourneys.

 

Also, they took not so veiled shots at Tortorella's coaching.

 

I didn't realize until now that Team USA was skipping over more talented players in some of these tournaments.

 

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2016/09/23/team-usa-got-the-wake-up-call-it-desperately-needed/

[Odjick_fan]

Tortorella is a dumba$$

 

Why he's still coaching is beyond me!  He is like the Evander Kane of CDC.  You just can't teach or reason with dumb

[MJDDawg]

34 minutes ago, Odjick_fan said:

Tortorella is a dumba$$

 

Why he's still coaching is beyond me!  He is like the Evander Kane of CDC.  You just can't teach or reason with dumb

True.

 

But is starts with Hockey USA and Dean Lombardi.

[Green Building]

" To take that step forward Team USA needs to do two things that are somewhat related: It needs to do dump the mindset that heart-and-soul, blood-and-guts players can be a suitable replacement for talent, and it needs to take its obsession with beating Canada and throw it in the garbage. "

 

That's one of the more intelligent hockey related views I've ever read on NBC. But they still couldn't get through one article without a b-ball reference.

 

" And then Team Europe showed up in the first game and dunked in their faces. "

 

 

[Fanuck]

You put Babcock behind the bench of that exact same US bench - totally different outcome for them.

 

Management,  or whomever picked Torts, made the mistake that doomed them.

[Green Building]

For those who don't click:

 

We found out for certain if Team USA’s crash and bang style of play could work at the World Cup. The answer was an emphatic no.

The U.S. team ended one of its worst and most disappointing showings on Thursday night with a 4-3 loss to the Czech Republic, wrapping up a winless World Cup performance that saw them fail to get out of the first round. The actual performance was probably even worse than it sounds when you consider they only played with the lead for about two minutes for the entire tournament.

If you are an optimist, that kind of showing could turn out to be a huge positive in the long run because it should shed some light on the flawed process and mindset that built this roster. It should serve as a wake up call that the entire approach that went into selecting this group, from the coaching staff, to the roster, to the style of play, needs to change.

Sometimes in sports you need to get knocked down, lose, and maybe even get a little embarrassed before you can take a step forward.

To take that step forward Team USA needs to do two things that are somewhat related: It needs to do dump the mindset that heart-and-soul, blood-and-guts players can be a suitable replacement for talent, and it needs to take its obsession with beating Canada and throw it in the garbage.

When it comes to the latter point, it is no secret that if you want to win an international hockey tournament you are going to have to go through the powerhouse that is Hockey Canada at some point. So that focus on wanting to beat them is at least somewhat understandable. But the focus of the entire team can not be on just Canada.

That is where Team USA lost its way at the 2016 World Cup. Everything was about beating Canada. The entire team was built with Canada in mind and figuring out ways to slow them down and beat them. And only them. Everything they talked about in the lead-up to the tournament was about Canada. Everything else was, at best, secondary.

And then Team Europe showed up in the first game and dunked in their faces.

During their post tournament interviews, coach John Tortorella and general manager Dean Lombardi have talked extensively about how the United States could not match up with Canada’s talent. Their solution for this was to find a different way around them. Specifically, to out-heart and out-grit them. And the players seemed to buy into it.

Here are Tortorella and Lombardi talking about the talent-gap and the way to counter it, via ESPN’s Chris Jones:

“I’ll be honest: We’re not as deep as Canada skill-wise,” he said. “Not sure USA Hockey will like me saying that, but it’s the truth. It’s a situation where I still think, in our mind, we could not just skill our way through Canada.”

So Lombardi decided that his team needed to compensate with heart. He used his hands to show the talent gap between Team USA and Canada. He said he could have picked a different roster that would have narrowed that gap, and he drew his hands closer together. Instead, he purposefully picked a roster that widened that gap, he said. He pulled his hands farther apart.

Their heart, he said, would more than make up the greater distance. In his mind, then, talent has a ceiling, but heart doesn’t. Heart must be exponential.

There are many problems with this approach, but the biggest one is this (and this needs to be bolded for extra emphasis): Canada is not the only team you have to play.

 

 

That's half of it. It goes on to rip choices made by the selection committee. 

[CRAZY_4_NAZZY]

Mike Sullivan should take over the reigns...whenever he is in Tort's shadow, Torts ruins his name...Sullivan has show he is a smart person and thinks the game well.

 

Unlike torts, he refers the puck posession and skill game which got him to where he was with that Stanley Cup with The pens.

[PlanB]

36 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

You put Babcock behind the bench of that exact same US bench - totally different outcome for them.

 

Very likely true. 

[Alflives]

Select your best, and most talented players, who are willing to play any role given.  leaving Johnson, and Kessel off the team was stupid, unless those two were not willing to play any role given to them.  

 

We are lucky to have Toews and Crosby, our two best players, leading the way by playing a very hard two hundred foot game, killing penalties, taking short shifts, and sacrificing offence to win.  Who do the Americans have leading - Kesler?  

[Shift-4]

Tell Ryan I said 'hi'

[Toews]

I have lost a lot of respect for Lombardi watching him flounder through the questions asked of him. Instead of being honest and admitting their failure, a bunch of excuses were made. IMO that 2010 final has really cost USA hockey, they actually think that these dinosaurs have it right and they can take on Canada with a bunch of plugs.

[Neversummer]

As I mentioned in another thread, don't think the players had respect and confidence in the coach.  It's hard to when the name is Tortorella.  If Sullivan was head coach, maybe.  Bylsma was another suggestion.  Players probably tuned him out after the first game.   

[oldnews]

Phil Kessel sure as hell wasn't going to float and cookie them to any victories.

 

The problem wasn't the lineup - it was the tone set by Torture-fella (and his systems probably didn't help either).

 

Flat out destroyed head to head by Babcock et al.

 

Torts went into the tournament ripping his players from the get-go.  Typical ballbusting that produced predictable, divisive results.  Torts aint the only man in the room.  Until he realizes that, he's gonna do little more than alienate any veterans that don't need his particular parenting approach.

[Rocky Balboa]

Their game plan seemed to focus on shutting out Crosby.  But they forget we have other stars 

[cripplereh]

Phil is Phil and slow but what ever they want to say is fine with me as team Canada is better!

[IBatch]

To me they went with one plan knowing they had a slim chance at beating Canada and fell flat on their face.  They picked Torts the same way they risked a less talented roster, but the outcome wouldn't have been any different, at least they knew his face already had egg on it and he has a Mike Keanesque ability to get more chances than anyone else in their system after something blows up.  

 

Lombardi admitted as much in his post game interviews as well as saying that Canada's murderers row of centers and multiple Norris winning defenseman was the reason for them taking a different angle from the start.  In other words they knew they were screwed...taking a couple of guys out of their line-up from Team NA and slotting in Kessel wouldn't have been enough either.

 

What bothers me about the US program is the lack of respect from former NHL'ers in their system making abnoxious tweets - Roenick, at 51, no you wouldn't be able to score 5 goals against Team Europe.  Chara would hit you so hard because you couldn't skate around him.  Maybe it's because those players were part of the best this country has ever iced (96')...but it's shameful.  

[Boudrias]

10 hours ago, oldnews said:

Phil Kessel sure as hell wasn't going to float and cookie them to any victories.

 

The problem wasn't the lineup - it was the tone set by Torture-fella (and his systems probably didn't help either).

 

Flat out destroyed head to head by Babcock et al.

 

Torts went into the tournament ripping his players from the get-go.  Typical ballbusting that produced predictable, divisive results.  Torts aint the only man in the room.  Until he realizes that, he's gonna do little more than alienate any veterans that don't need his particular parenting approach.

I would not have had Kessel on the team either.

 

Playing a physical game against Canada kind of makes sense as the USA was not going to out talent them. That said Canada as the ability to play whatever style is required. A physical game requires contact and Canada was way to fast for it to be effective. I would not have wanted a Kessel but I sure would have taken a Shattenkirk.

[oldnews]

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

I would not have had Kessel on the team either.

 

Playing a physical game against Canada kind of makes sense as the USA was not going to out talent them. That said Canada as the ability to play whatever style is required. A physical game requires contact and Canada was way to fast for it to be effective. I would not have wanted a Kessel but I sure would have taken a Shattenkirk.

I agree - there are enough good players left off these teams that anyone can second guess particular roster decisions.

 

There is no way in hell I'd have Jay Bouwmeester on my team Canada blueline - with players like Mark Giordano (or the more publicized Subban) not on the team.

But in the end, it's a team game and Canada's players may be more talented, but they also performed far better as units - and approached the game like they actually intended to win.

The Americans looked like an uninspired, lifeless team that had no real identity.  That runs deeper than simply picking the most 'skilled' lineup - and imo that comes down to their 'leadership', particularly their bench boss - whose patented ballbusting was public off the bat.   But that's not exactly unpredictable or uncharacteristic of Tortorella, is it, so the criticism can climb up the ladder imo to the people that decided to roll with his approach.

 

Bottom line - you're not going to bully team Canada.  That's one hell of a weak game-plan. 

Canada was simply superior - not only in talent - but from top to bottom - character, systems, team-first orientation, the way they conceived their lines and pairings - virtually all aspects of the game.

[Boudrias]

On ‎9‎/‎25‎/‎2016 at 8:41 AM, oldnews said:

I agree - there are enough good players left off these teams that anyone can second guess particular roster decisions.

 

There is no way in hell I'd have Jay Bouwmeester on my team Canada blueline - with players like Mark Giordano (or the more publicized Subban) not on the team.

But in the end, it's a team game and Canada's players may be more talented, but they also performed far better as units - and approached the game like they actually intended to win.

The Americans looked like an uninspired, lifeless team that had no real identity.  That runs deeper than simply picking the most 'skilled' lineup - and imo that comes down to their 'leadership', particularly their bench boss - whose patented ballbusting was public off the bat.   But that's not exactly unpredictable or uncharacteristic of Tortorella, is it, so the criticism can climb up the ladder imo to the people that decided to roll with his approach.

 

Bottom line - you're not going to bully team Canada.  That's one hell of a weak game-plan. 

Canada was simply superior - not only in talent - but from top to bottom - character, systems, team-first orientation, the way they conceived their lines and pairings - virtually all aspects of the game.

True enough!

 

I kinda got twisted into defending Torts a little bit in a previous thread. I find it humorous that Van fans were so excited when Torts was names coach. No more quarter given to the half hearted play of the Canuck vets. The clubhouse mentality is done! Even now with the addition of Virtanen, Gudbranson, Tryamkin and perhaps Pedan elicits cries of glee for the possible physical retribution.

 

More important than Tort's coaching shortfalls was his year end pressor when he called for a renewal of the roster. During his tenure management thought that Van was a playoff team and they played their season that way. The result does not lie totally in Torterella's plate. Responsibility extends to management, ownership and the fans. A realistic assessment of the Canucks org in 2012 would have concluded major changes had to happen. It has taken 5 years and likely another 5 before the Canucks are contenders again.     

[oldnews]

22 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

True enough!

 

I kinda got twisted into defending Torts a little bit in a previous thread. I find it humorous that Van fans were so excited when Torts was names coach. No more quarter given to the half hearted play of the Canuck vets. The clubhouse mentality is done! Even now with the addition of Virtanen, Gudbranson, Tryamkin and perhaps Pedan elicits cries of glee for the possible physical retribution.

 

More important than Tort's coaching shortfalls was his year end pressor when he called for a renewal of the roster. During his tenure management thought that Van was a playoff team and they played their season that way. The result does not lie totally in Torterella's plate. Responsibility extends to management, ownership and the fans. A realistic assessment of the Canucks org in 2012 would have concluded major changes had to happen. It has taken 5 years and likely another 5 before the Canucks are contenders again.     

Meh, they were a playoff team the next season with a rookie coach, so...yeah, I'd put a whole lot of it squarely on Tortorella (and ownership's obvious intervention to hire him) plate.

Gillis already knew that "major changes" needed to happen - it's simply how you go about that that was the issue.  He was going to transition - ie one move at a time - not tear it down - and he started rebuilding the prospect pool with the Schneider, Luongo deals - right in line with the timeline you're talking about.