|
|
Post by blny on Sept 22, 2016 6:36:06 GMT -5
After being left off the team, both players made comments on twitter that showed how they felt.
Thoughts? Yay, or nay? Backes was interviewed yesterday and he made a thinly veiled threat saying that Kessel's comments "will be remembered". If that's the best you can come up with in response to a couple of well timed digs, best to keep your mouth shut David.
IMO, the underlying comment - especially with Ryan's tweet - is the popularity contest that is the selection process. It's worse than high school, and it's not limited to USA Hockey. It's about picking friends; the cool kid clique.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Sept 22, 2016 9:00:22 GMT -5
There are those who would say Kessel's tweet is a prime example of why he wasn't on the team.
They sure could've used his speed and shot....
Does Ryan suffer from "poor character" branding, too?
Sure, favouritism clouds the selection process...but I think the "character/personality" excuse is overblown in many cases. Some players have off-ice resumes that don't deter selection. Patrick Kane, anyone?
Do you give it everything you have? Do you put the puck in the net?
There might be something in Kessel's case, though. Deemed expendable in Boston....became belligerent and sulky in Toronto....picked last by his peers in an All-Star draft....
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Sept 22, 2016 9:24:14 GMT -5
There are those who would say Kessel's tweet is a prime example of why he wasn't on the team. They sure could've used his speed and shot.... Does Ryan suffer from "poor character" branding, too? Sure, favouritism clouds the selection process...but I think the "character/personality" excuse is overblown in many cases. Some players have an off-ice resume that doesn't haunt them at all. Patrick Kane, anyone? Do you give it everything you have? Do you put the puck in the net? There might be something in Kessel's case, though. Deemed expendable in Boston....became belligerent and sulky in Toronto....picked last by his peers in an All-Star draft.... I'm not sure how anyone in Phil's shoes while in TO wouldn't have become belligerent. 181 goals in 364 games, all while being derided. Think what he might have done with a modestly better supporting cast and a less hostile working environment. His game isn't without its flaws, but the production is undeniable. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Sept 22, 2016 10:00:29 GMT -5
Yes, he carried the mail in Toronto....but he also disappeared for long stretches...which brought about the criticism. Being out of shape, etc. He's not good enough to be THE MAN in turning a team like the Leafs into a contender....(which is why he got sick and tired of the whole Leaf machine).....but he IS a great complementary player on an existing contender....as we've seen in Pittsburgh. He was in the Conn Smythe conversation for a while. Which is why I think he should've been included on Team U.S.A....and likely why HE did, too...  |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Sept 22, 2016 11:16:40 GMT -5
Yes, he carried the mail in Toronto....but he also disappeared for long stretches...which brought about the criticism. Being out of shape, etc. He's not good enough to be THE MAN in turning a team like the Leafs into a contender....(which is why he got sick and tired of the whole Leaf machine).....but he IS a great complementary player on an existing contender....as we've seen in Pittsburgh. He was in the Conn Smythe conversation for a while. Which is why I think he should've been included on Team U.S.A....and likely why HE did, too... I liken him to Steve Shutt. Bowman famously told him one fall, "There's three things wrong with you Steve. 181, 182, and 183" This was referring to the three lbs over Bowman's desired 180 he was. Phil will never be a chiseled guy. He's always had the extra chin. It's just who he is. When you are the lone guy, you're an easy target for everyone - including the other team. Heck, wonder boy Sid has disappeared for long stretches when he was burning through line mates of varying ability. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Sept 22, 2016 11:39:26 GMT -5
There was some discussion as to whether Phil Kessel would be a good fit in Montreal just around the time he went to Pittsburgh ... I'm kind of glad the Habs didn't land him ... I suspect he'd have been in Michel Therrien's dog house all the time ... don't think he's the 'character guy' Marc Bergevin continues to look for if his comments were any indication ... the Americans are out of the tournament, but the bad drama just follows the club ...
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Sept 22, 2016 12:29:04 GMT -5
There was some discussion as to whether Phil Kessel would be a good fit in Montreal just around the time he went to Pittsburgh ... I'm kind of glad the Habs didn't land him ... I suspect he'd have been in Michel Therrien's dog house all the time ... don't think he's the 'character guy' Marc Bergevin continues to look for if his comments were any indication ... the Americans are out of the tournament, but the bad drama just follows the club ... Cheers. At his full cap hit, he'd be difficult to take on. At $6.8 million, I'd have seriously considered it. You're right though, he's not in the style of M&M. Of course, Radulov isn't really either. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Sept 22, 2016 13:18:05 GMT -5
I have always liked Phil Kessel, mostly because all I cared about was what he did on the ice. He's an exceptional sniper with an excellent release and an unpredictable (has become one of my favourite words) sense of timing. Sure, hes out of shape. So out of shape that hardly anyone catches him on the ice. And he has no character. If he doesn't play like he did, the Pens don't win the Cup last year. I think he should have been the Conn Smythe winner, but it's hard to overcome the Sidney press juggernaut. Certainly his tweet was unprofessional, but he really didn't say anything, did he? It is what you take out of it. Backes getting his back up over it is stupid. The tweet was aimed at the guys picking the team, not the guys on it. Perhaps Backes' nose is a little out of joint because he's one of the guys who might not have been picked if other players had been. Lombardi explained the reasoning of the US team in this way: "They looked at the talent level of the available US players and felt they couldn't compete with Canada on skill alone" (Yes, he said that) "They decided to take a different approach based on that premise, and so they went with the grit aspect". Later, Lombardi tweeted that's how the Kings won, but "they had a team". Dean, you also had Drew Doughty, Anze Kopitar, Jeff Carter, and a clutch machine, Justin Williams. It wasn't the gritty guys that got you the Cup on their own. (not to mention they kept winning 7th games at an unheard of rate). There were some decisions made which were unconscionable IMO. You can't not pick Phil Kessel, or Tyler Johnson or Kevin Shattenkirk. They're just too good in comparison to the guys they did pick. Johnson and Kessel are great skaters and great scorers. Two goals in 3 games for the US. That's what grit alone gets you. When I first saw the US choices, I thought someone had gone off the deep end. And it turns out, they had. Kessel will never get picked for a US team again unless there's a really open minded guy in charge. If Burke is involved, no hope in hell for Phil. But Kessel was right. They screwed up the choices. In deference to the guys they picked, they can't come out and say that, but they could at least say they got the mix wrong. There are ways to say that without trashing the players they picked (some of them wouldn't be there, but they'll never know which ones) while placating those they didn't pick. Beware the God of Grit   |
|
|
|
Post by blny on Sept 22, 2016 13:23:55 GMT -5
I have always liked Phil Kessel ... I think he should have been the Conn Smythe winner, but it's hard to overcome the Sidney press juggernaut. Completely agree. Choosing Sid was a farce imo. Kessel's clutch scoring was reminiscent of Cammalleri back in 2010. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Sept 22, 2016 14:28:53 GMT -5
I have a lot of respect for Dean Lombardi, and have long thought that he is one of the best, if not the best, GM out there. So keep that in mind.
Having said that, I get his logic. Would adding Kessel, Johnson and Shattenkirk be enough to beat Canada? While it’s an upgrade on skill it would still leave them far behind Canada in that category. Perhaps put them on par with Finland or Team Europe, but still not at the Canadian level. Arguably not even at the same level as the Russians or Swedes (and from a pure skill perspective, way behind Team North America). So going with a skill team, or what would have passed as a skill team for the Americans, was simply an acknowledgement that they were aiming for silver or bronze. Conceding, as it were, to Canada’s superior talent level. Or hope that they catch lightning in a bottle and fluke out an upset win over Canada (or have somebody else fluke out an upset over Canada), and back their way into the gold.
Which seems like a bit of a longshot to me. So they went in another direction. Can’t beat them on the ice, so let’s beat them in the alley. They went all in on grit, in the hopes that this would be different enough to overcome Canada’s superior skill levels. It obviously didn’t work, but I get the logic. They were never going to beat Canada at a skill game, so why play it? Why not try and dictate that Canada play a different game, that perhaps they weren’t as well suited to play? (I think we would have done just fine in such a game, but I digress). It’s no different than Belarus icing the puck every time they got it, hoping that Tomi Salo would eventually let one in from center ice. Worked then, but I think most people would agree that was a complete fluke.
So the American tactic was a gamble, and it failed, but at least they thought outside the box and went for the gold, instead of playing for silver or bronze.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Sept 22, 2016 14:32:24 GMT -5
Who is this "grit" on the American team?
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Sept 22, 2016 16:42:59 GMT -5
Abdelkader, Kesler, Oshie, Dubinsky, Byfuglien.....perhaps others. From what I saw, they DID try to rough it up. Just didn't work. Skill and speed took them out.
|
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Sept 22, 2016 16:59:28 GMT -5
Abdelkader, Kesler, Oshie, Dubinsky, Byfuglien.....perhaps others. From what I saw, they DID try to rough it up. Just didn't work. Skill and speed took them out. Yeah, they don't impress me much .... And clearly were not gritty enough. Calling Team USA a team built on grit , is like calling the Montreal Canadiens a grinding team |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Sept 22, 2016 20:01:47 GMT -5
Abdelkader, Kesler, Oshie, Dubinsky, Byfuglien.....perhaps others. From what I saw, they DID try to rough it up. Just didn't work. Skill and speed took them out. Yeah, they don't impress me much .... And clearly were not gritty enough. Calling Team USA a team built on grit , is like calling the Montreal Canadiens a grinding team I'm in the choir. |
|
