2010 Winter Olympics: Capitals Hopefuls
by J.P. on Dec 4, 2009 11:00 AM EST
158 comments
With the Olympics barely two months away, let's take a look at which Caps can expect - and hope - to hear their names called when rosters are announced later this month:
Pack Your Bags
Alex Ovechkin, Alexander Semin (Russia)
Ovechkin has represented Russia in at least 80 international matches (including eight in the 2006 Turin Olympics), and Semin brings another 50 games of international experience to the table. The two were instrumental in Russia's gold medal win on Canadian soil in the 2008 IIHF World Championship, both finishing in the top six in the tourney in scoring. The only thing that can keep the pair from hunting for a loonie to dig out of the ice in Vancouver is injury.
Nicklas Backstrom (Sweden)
Only three Swedish NHLers have more points than Backstrom since the Caps pivot made his NHL debut, and he'll play an important role in Sweden's bid to repeat as Olympic champs.
Fairly Safe Bets
Milan Jurcina (Slovakia)
Jurcina's size and durability should make him an Olympian for the second time.
On the Bubble
Mike Green (Canada)
It doesn't get much more bubblicious than Green, whose defensive lapses may prove too much for Steve Yzerman to handle in a single elimination tournament, especially given other, safer puck-moving Canadian blueliners. Is a high-risk/high-reward pick a guy the Canadians are willing to put out on the ice before the home crowd?
Tomas Fleischmann (Czech Republic)
Flash was looking a lot better a few weeks ago and may be a bit one-dimensional for this type of team, but he's still got a shot at making the Czech squad - he's actually eighth among Czech NHL goal scorers over the past two seasons. Ales Hemsky's injury couldn't have hurt his chances either.
Semyon Varlamov (Russia)
Vladislav Tretiak said recently that "It will be difficult for Varlamov because Bryzgalov is playing unbelievable, Nabokov is playing unbelievable, it's a big competition. I told him today he has a chance, because three goalies will come to the Olympic Games." Tretiak also said that he expects his team to be a 50/50 mix of NHLers and KHLers. But if Russia was smart and looking ahead to Sochi in 2014 (as we know they are), they'd bring Varly along for the ride.
Long Shots
Michael Nylander (Sweden)
If Nylander were over in Russia right now lighting up the KHL, he'd have a chance to represent his country in Vancouver in February. Add one more regret to his 2009-10 season.
Oskar Osala (Finland)
Picking Osala would be a surprise pick, to be sure, but as far as long-term investments go, this could be one worth making for the Finns.
0 recs |
158 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
The most interesting thing about that picture is that they’re wearing identical glasses.
52 has not earned a trip to Vancouver. Too many brain farts.
Canada #needsmoreBradley
Brain farts is second among defensemen in points league-wide, and sports a far better +/- than the leader.
Yeah, but there are much safer options with comparable offensive skills.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
And aren’t just racken up assists
by washfan29 on Dec 4, 2009 11:29 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, that’s the thing. If he played for anyone but Canada, it’s a back-door tap-in that he’s on the team. The Canadian blueline is absurdly deep and absurdly good.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 4, 2009 1:59 PM EST up reply actions
No argument that, over the course of the season, Green puts up great offensive and defensive numbers, but I think the single elimination nature of this tourney would make his style of play risky. I’d love to see Green make the squad, but I won’t be surprised if he is passed over.
"So much on my mind I just can't recline. Blastin' holes in the night 'til she bled sunshine."
by Laich It Or Lump It on Dec 4, 2009 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
Shrug, I still stand by that his offensive benefit far outweighs any defensive negatives. That being said, Canada’s offense is stacked and if they’re relying on a “Green” to make the difference, then there’s a problem.
I was merely suggesting he’s still having a good season, regardless of his shooting percentage.
Problem is is assists don’t cut it, when other Dmen are scoring more goals then Greenie then there’s a problem
by washfan29 on Dec 4, 2009 11:35 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Why do you think that? An assist still means a goal was scored and that he contributed offensively. Every goal can’t be a one man effort.
"So much on my mind I just can't recline. Blastin' holes in the night 'til she bled sunshine."
by Laich It Or Lump It on Dec 4, 2009 11:40 AM EST up reply actions
That's what Green is though
Yes a point producing dman but we signed him big because of his goal scoring then his assists
by washfan29 on Dec 4, 2009 11:43 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
There are many reasons he was signed to big money and they are not limited to his offensive production. The way I see it, offensive production is offensive production. Whether a goal or an assist, Green still helped put a goal on the scoreboard, which in the end helps you win games.
"So much on my mind I just can't recline. Blastin' holes in the night 'til she bled sunshine."
by Laich It Or Lump It on Dec 4, 2009 11:57 AM EST up reply actions
Sorry internet died, but anyway you don’t notice greenie when he’s not scoring goals though
by washfan29 on Dec 4, 2009 12:49 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
There are a lot of things that can help you win a hockey game. Being noticeable is pretty far down the list.
by David M. Getz on Dec 4, 2009 12:54 PM EST up reply actions
Greenie seems to play better when he’s scoring though not just a secondary assist here and there though
by washfan29 on Dec 4, 2009 1:03 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I think you’re got the causality reversed. He doesn’t play better when he produces more, he produces more when he plays better.
No one’s disputing that, though. What people are saying is that Green brings a lot to the team – especially on the offensive zone – even when he’s not scoring goals.
Green’s contributions go beyond “a secondary assist here and there”. He’s second among NHL defensemen in assists and he has a 2:1 primary to secondary assist ratio 5-on-5 and a 7:1 primary to secondary ratio 5-on-4.
by David M. Getz on Dec 4, 2009 1:10 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with you DMG, but even providing those stats validates the “second assist” argument. No need to even bother showing he has more primaries because it doesn’t fucking matter.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 1:23 PM EST up reply actions
Well Ive completely lost this arguement
by washfan29 on Dec 4, 2009 1:27 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I'll pick up the banner...sorta
I have no particular problems with an assist, but I don’t think it’s disputable that they are, in general, not as valuable as goals. In some cases a beautiful, difficult pass leads to a layup, but in most cases, actually putting the puck in the net is distinctly more valuable than being the last man to touch the puck before the score.
This leads me to the conclusion that Green is not nearly as valuable this year as he was last year.
Not that he’s not having a nice year: he is. Just not as nice a year as last year.
His 5 v. 5 GF/GA On Ice/Off Ice rating is 0.74 to date – good for 41st in the league among defenseman.
His Corsi number is 3.9 – well down the list.
Those numbers don’t shout out that he’s got to be on the Olympic Team, to me.
"You're gonna eat that g**d**n Koho, three!"
I don’t disagree with any of that. Goals > Assists. Green 08-09 > Green 09-10 so far.
What I took issue with was the second assist stuff, and the idea that he isn’t contributing if he isn’t scoring. He may not be having the same year as last year but he still contributes all over the ice.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 2:13 PM EST up reply actions
HockeyReference.com uses a “Goals Created” metric to measure the greater value of goals relative to assists:
Goals created; calculated by adding goals scored to 0.5 times assists, then multiplying by team goals divided by team goals plus 0.5 times team assists.
By this metric, Green was at 0.42 goals created per game last year and is an 0.29 now, which is actually still relatively fantastic, and if he ended the season with that GC rate, it’d be one of the best seasons by a blueliner since the lockout.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
by J.P. on Dec 4, 2009 2:16 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I had these stats queued up earlier so now I’ll throw them out there. Green ranks first among blueliners with 1.08 primary assists per 60 and third in the league among D with 1.90 points per 60 (link).
Granted, the actual scored goal is the most important thing, but in many cases it’s the setup that created the opportunity in the first place. Assists definitely lose some ground when they are mere technicalities (I’m thinking back to the game where the puck brushed off Pothier’s stick getting him credit for the assist). I still put considerable value in them in Green’s case having seen the quality of his feeds.
"So much on my mind I just can't recline. Blastin' holes in the night 'til she bled sunshine."
by Laich It Or Lump It on Dec 4, 2009 2:53 PM EST up reply actions
And a lot of what Green does is create space and open passing lanes with his speed and skating and the potential for a shot.
by red army line on Dec 5, 2009 4:23 AM EST up reply actions
Hmm…funny how far down you have to go to find last season’s Norris winner…
/still bitter
"Let the rest be scared of us." - Emo Bunny Sasha Semin
by Scott in Shaw on Dec 4, 2009 5:35 PM EST up reply actions
As you should be
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 11:29 PM EST up reply actions
I completely disagree — you notice him when he’s the fastest person on the ice, bringing the puck out of the zone.
That said, I think that what works for the Caps is not necessarily what will work for Team Canada. And I won’t be upset if we don’t send too many players to Vancouver.
"Camaraderie, that's what the Washington Capitals are all about."
by CapitalCentre on Dec 4, 2009 12:56 PM EST up reply actions
Yep, I’d agree that, despite his notable gaffs during a couple games, he is having a solid season so far.
I see Green as a player best evaluated over the long term. You can look at his numbers over 82 games and conclude that he was a very valuable defender. But when it comes down to “all or nothing,” I think there are safer options for Canada.
"So much on my mind I just can't recline. Blastin' holes in the night 'til she bled sunshine."
by Laich It Or Lump It on Dec 4, 2009 11:36 AM EST up reply actions
In general you are definitely correct that Green’s offense far outweighs his defensive lapses. However, in a short tourney with a stacked team that is certainly not struggling for offense on the blueline or otherwise, the offense Green brings is significantly less valuable if he can’t cut down his defensive lapses. Canada may be better off taking someone else that won’t bring the offense Green brings, but won’t be as risky on defense.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Dec 4, 2009 6:31 PM EST up reply actions
This makes no sense to me. Consistency is nice, but I’d rather have talent. In other words, high risk, high reward, means that a lot of the time you get high reward.
I’d rather have Alex Semin than some generic 20-goal scorer. I’d rather have Mike Green than some generic solid-but-unspectacular defensive defenseman. For the Caps or for the Olympics.
If he generates 2 goals and causes 1 goal against, you’re up by one net goal.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Dec 4, 2009 7:58 PM EST up reply actions
But all of the other people that would be chosen over Green aren’t “solid but unspectacular”. They’re all All-Stars.
A bad defensive play/mental lapse is far more likely to hurt a team in a single elimination tournament such as the Olympics, than it is in an 82 game season or even a 7 game series. The point is that Green is known for his offense and (rightly or wrongly) that’s about it. The rest of the people on the list can bring offense from the point as well as being more than solid in their own zone. Canada won’t be looking for offense from the blue line, or shouldn’t be. Scoring won’t be their issue, they’re going to pick D that they think give them the best chance of stopping the puck. And Green is most likely not in the top 6 of people in that list.
Now drink with me deeply of the bourbon, scotch, and rye until such time as we are fighting drunk.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Dec 4, 2009 8:55 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
A bad defensive play/mental lapse is far more likely to hurt a team in a single elimination tournament such as the Olympics, than it is in an 82 game season or even a 7 game series.
And one amazing offensive performance can single-handedly win a game. I just don’t buy that you dilute your talent just because some if it is streaky. With 20some guys, at least some of them will be “on” and can win you that game.
But all of the other people that would be chosen over Green aren’t "solid but unspectacular". They’re all All-Stars.
Yup. And if they’re legitimately better, then they belong on the team. That’s the question — are there 6 players on that list (or otherwise for Canada) that are better players than Green? I don’t think so, but I understand why others might. And that makes sense to me.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Dec 4, 2009 9:29 PM EST up reply actions
The thing is that Canada doesn’t need an amazing offensive performance to win a game. They have goals to burn. They don’t need to risk defensive performance for the sake of offensive output. They could have 6 Robyn Reghers and still have plenty of offense.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 11:33 PM EST up reply actions
I don’t watch Calgary enough to know how well Regher moves the puck, but in 2006 it looked like they were having trouble making breakout passes and getting through neutral with speed. I’d think they’d at least want the ability to do that on the back end.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 4, 2009 11:38 PM EST up reply actions
Regehr is a defense-first D, and I’m not sureh e’s on the shortlist either.
Boyle and Keith are both good enough to make those breakout passes. Nieds and Pronger are no offensive slouches either. It’s really only who they take after… I assume Weber will be there as well, but he’s there for defensive purposes really.
Oh yeah, the actual roster will have plenty of passing ability, but I was more responding to the hypothetical 6 Regher situation.
Canada has the most ridiculous defensive pool:
Pronger
Niedermayer
Boyle
Keith
Regher
Seabrook
Green
Weber
The list actually goes on from there without a significant fall off in talent, it’s just dirty.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 4, 2009 11:44 PM EST up reply actions
Plus I’m pretty sure Jay-Bo has better shot than the last four guys on that list, save maybe Weber.
and even in 2014 there are so, so many Cdn blueliners coming up – Alzner, Doughty, Schenn…
I think there is an excellent argument that Doughty should make it this year. He has had a Norris-caliber start to the season.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Dec 5, 2009 12:33 AM EST up reply actions
I should have been clear, I wasn’t ranking them in order of likelihood, just throwing names out. JBo has been exceptional defensively this season.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 5, 2009 9:39 AM EST up reply actions
Yeah, kind of killing my overrated claims.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 2:28 PM EST up reply actions
I was right there with you, making the same claims.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 5, 2009 5:34 PM EST up reply actions
Who is his D partner this year? Any chance we have a collinearity situation going on?
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 5:39 PM EST up reply actions
According to Dobber, he’s splitting time with Corey Sarich and Mark Giordano.
Sarich:
ESTOI: 14.25
GAON/60: 1.98
GAOFF/60: 1.94
Looks like Sarich is about a wash on ice versus off ice
Giordano:
ESTOI: 14.88
GAON/60: 1.34
GAOFF/60: 2.34
Giordano looks pretty good by those measurements.
Here’s JBo
Bouwmeester
ESTOI: 18.27
GAON/60: 1.34
GAOFF/60: 2.47
Looks like Giordano and JBo have found some serious chemistry.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 5, 2009 6:45 PM EST up reply actions
F JBo.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 6:55 PM EST up reply actions
I picked Regher because he’s one dimensional. Canada doesn’t need help from the back, like J-Lo.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 11:43 PM EST up reply actions
Oh, I know. Probably the single best unit on any team that’ll attend the Olympics. Better than the Russian forwards because of the top-to-bottom depth, imo.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 4, 2009 11:45 PM EST up reply actions
Exactly. They don’t have to give up anything. I don’t think they lose anything by giving up Green.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 12:04 AM EST up reply actions
The thing is (as others have said) Canada has such an excess of talent that they don’t need need to stack up on the top talent for each position. Considering their offensive depth, Green’s likelihood towards defends lapses is much more likely to hurt them than his offensive ability is to help them. For pretty much other nation, their best bet is to go with the top skill at each position, but they also have a much less skilled pool to choose from than Canada.
Now drink with me deeply of the bourbon, scotch, and rye until such time as we are fighting drunk.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Dec 5, 2009 12:18 AM EST up reply actions
A lot of the time you will get high reward, but some of the time you will also get high risk. My point was that on a team of All-Stars like Canada they are going to have plenty of other playmakers that the high reward from Green is less valuable (if Green isn’t there you have several other guys on D and F that can take over a game) than it would be on a less talented team that isn’t already full of game breakers. However, if Green makes a mistake leading to a breakaway in a crucial game it could sink the team. Canada is in a position to be risk averse when it comes to sacrificing Green’s offensive talent to prevent crucial defensive gaffs.
This isn’t to say that I think Green clearly shouldn’t make the team, but I do think that for a short tournament, when you are picking a team from an abundance of all-stars as Canada is doing, things other than pure talent can legitimately come into play. So if there is a defenseman whose play in the long run has the same expected return (or even a slightly lower expected return) than Green, I don’t think it is ridiculous for Team Canada to choose the less risky option even if it is slightly less talented.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Dec 4, 2009 10:55 PM EST up reply actions
Why do you hate freedom GreenLife52?
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 11:36 PM EST up reply actions
Maybe it’s my economics training, but I just don’t see a GA avoided as more valuable than a GF scored. It’s all fungible. You’re trying to outscore the other team. If he’s better overall than someone else in giving you goal differential, isn’t that what matters?
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Dec 5, 2009 12:21 AM EST up reply actions
It’s the same type of thing when building an NHL team: you don’t necessarily need the most talented players, you need different players to fill different roles.
If Canada was hurting for offense Green would fill that void. Since they aren’t they may need the role of consistently steady defense rather than a high risk high reward offensive Dman. As was said above, with the offense Canada has it is less likely that they will in a position where they need Green to save the day offensively than it is that a defensive gaffe will hurt the team in a close game.
And it’s not just the goals for/goals against, it’s the timing of them. Say it’s tied late in the third of the gold medal game: Canada is much better off having their D play a safe defensive game and letting their superstar forwards get the goal than they are taking risks that can lead to sending Ovechkin or Malkin or Datysuk or Zetterberg or Backstrom, etc. on an odd man rush.
For the GF vs. goal avoided aspect, the argument against Green’s risky play is that he is less likely to add extra GF that Canada can’t get elsewhere, but he is more likely than others to lead to GA.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Dec 5, 2009 12:32 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
If I could rec this more than once, I would. Exactly what I was trying to say, but with examples!
Now drink with me deeply of the bourbon, scotch, and rye until such time as we are fighting drunk.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Dec 5, 2009 12:42 AM EST up reply actions
Except that coaches match lines for a reason. Green doesn’t have to be out there for the final minute holding a lead. If Canada is down one with a minute to go, who do they want on the ice?
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 12:49 AM EST up reply actions
Say it’s tied late in the third of the gold medal game
Say they’re down a goal. Wouldn’t it be nice to have Greener out there?
I guess what bothers me here is the assumption that the Olympics are going to be a cakewalk for Canada, so they might as well assume they’ll score 4 goals in the first and then just shut it down.
you need different players to fill different roles
Greener’s the best at what he does. I think diversification makes sense, but that’s an argument for having Green in there. I guess the bottom line is that if Green’s one of the 6 best Canadian D-men, I think he belongs there. And if he isn’t then he doesn’t. But the style of play arguments don’t make sense to me. Babcock’s a good enough coach, he’ll use the players Stevie Y gives him appropriately.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Dec 5, 2009 12:50 AM EST up reply actions
Say they’re down a goal. Wouldn’t it be nice to have Greener out there?
Sure, but with Prongermayer, Boyle, Keith, Iginla, Thornton, Heatley, Crosby, Nash, etc. they won’t exactly be struggling to find an offensive threat in that situation.
As JP said before, on the margins, the extra offense Green provides may not be worth the potential defensive problems.
Again, I don’t think Green should definitely be left off the team. I just think that it is fair to consider things like role and level of risk aversion when deciding Canada’s roster. But I suppose the risk vs. consistency argument would be built into considerations of who the 6 best Dmen are.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Dec 5, 2009 1:32 AM EST up reply actions
Also, another reason why I’m arguing against “the best 6 should go” is that it is far from clear that there what that is for Canada. You have very little variation in the overall abilities of the top 8-10 defensemen, which really muddies the water. That’s why I think it is useful to take more into account rather than just the pure talent of players.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Dec 5, 2009 1:37 AM EST up reply actions
But Canada does have plenty of Cs and D. Maybe they could use Green at wingar….
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 1:39 AM EST up reply actions
It certainly doesn’t help Green that Niedermayer and Keith and bring a better all-around game coupled with a comparable style on offense.
by red army line on Dec 5, 2009 4:27 AM EST up reply actions
Everyone always mentions Green’s defensive liabilities, but on an oversized Olympic rink don’t his skating and offensive abilities more than compensate for the occasional defensive lapse? Leaving him off the team is probably the safe route for Yzerman, but against teams like Russia and Sweden, guys with his speed and offensive instincts could be invaluable. From a purely selfish standpoint, I hope Mike gets snubbed because he’ll be fresher and motivated in the playoffs to prove the Canadian brass they were wrong..
they’re playing on an North American ice sheet this time.
by RedBirdie on Dec 4, 2009 11:45 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Then forget my argument about skating room. Sorry Mike, but your value is a bit diminished. And Canada shoots to the top as the favorite.
Specifically they’re playing in the Canucks’ stadium. Which makes sense logistically, but makes me a little sad.
"Camaraderie, that's what the Washington Capitals are all about."
by CapitalCentre on Dec 4, 2009 12:58 PM EST up reply actions
fwiw, GM Place is a killer venue in one of the dopest cities in N. America.(cueing…)
Support your local bakery!
I adore Vancouver. I’m going in March (after the Olympic crowds leave).
"Camaraderie, that's what the Washington Capitals are all about."
by CapitalCentre on Dec 4, 2009 1:34 PM EST up reply actions
Agreed – loved Vancouver. And to bring things from today together a bit, when I was there I was at the Bertuzzi-on-Moore game (except that I actually was, Jim Kelley, I’m not just saying that).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
I’ve got my ticket stub to prove it (and this post by which to remember it)!
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Canada was already the favorite. Ice size doesn’t matter. The teams that could compete with Canada are primarily going to be stocked with NHL players anyway, regardless of what the Russian PR machine wants to tell you.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 1:02 PM EST up reply actions
52 has not earned a trip to Vancouver. Too many brain farts.
Gotta say, I was expecting to see this “brain farts” argument, but not from Tyler. Green is actually quite a good defensive defenseman, who racks up huge numbers of minutes (12th in the league) during which few goals are scored against. Here are some other Canadians:
GAON/60 ES:
JAY BOUWMEESTER 1.34
CHRIS PRONGER 1.6
BRENT SEABROOK 1.72
DUNCAN KEITH 1.76
DREW DOUGHTY 2.36
SHEA WEBER 2.46
MIKE GREEN 2.57
ROBYN REGEHR 2.64
DAN BOYLE 2.65
LUKE SCHENN 2.85
SCOTT NIEDERMAYER 2.89
DION PHANEUF 2.92
Who cares if the goals that are allowed when he’s on the ice are due to brain farts? They don’t ask how, they ask how many. And in Green’s case, if the question is how many goals against, the answer is “relatively few.” Is he the best defensive defenseman in the league? No. Is he bad? Certainly not.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Dec 4, 2009 4:32 PM EST up reply actions
But if you’re Team Canada, the guys defensively ahead of Green (using this stat only), are all pretty much going to make it, with the only bubble boys being potentially Doughty and Seabrook. Doughty also has that potential 2014 argument on his side and might make a really good 7th. JayBo/Pronger/Keith/Weber are pretty good locks. and I don’t think Canada will say no to Boyle and Niedermayer. So “too many brain farts” is a legitimate argument, if only because it’s “too many brain farts relative to the other olympian blueliner hopefuls.”
Aggregate numbers are great, and they’re certainly applicable to a full NHL season and whatnot.
But when one brain fart can cost you a medal – and you have other, safer options and other ways to create offense, the “how” comes into play, IMO.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
As I said above, this argument doesn’t hold water for me. Russia and Sweden aren’t going to lay down for Canada. They should put together the best team they can, not the most consistent.
Atta dinnin stick a who!
by Gould Old Days on Dec 4, 2009 7:59 PM EST up reply actions
I just don’t think they’re in a position where they have to risk it on Green. The marginal upside he provides over whomever the other option is seems too be outweighed by the potential downside he carries with him. But he could certainly get his head straight and put together a couple of great months that would completely change my mind.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
You are all missing the point
Canada has plenty of Wingars. They don’t need Green.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 11:37 PM EST up reply actions
In a way I suppose the “how” is what we talk about all the time. The Caps could win every 5/8 games against playoff teams in the regular season but then the “how” comes into play in the playoffs, as that success clearly doesn’t translate.
by red army line on Dec 5, 2009 4:30 AM EST up reply actions
Of all the games Stevie Y could have attended to scout Green, he went to the game in Ottawa. Fine with me, the Olympic with NHLer’s are fun as long as it’s not your team thats sending over a bunch of players.
Maybe in order to understand mankind, we have to look at the word itself: "Mankind". Basically, it's made up of two separate words—"mank" and "ind". What do these words mean? It's a mystery, and that's why so is mankind.
-Jack Handey
We’re actually giving Nylander a chance?
"Baseball is drama with an endless run and an ever-changing cast." - Joe Garagiola
Chowdah Chatter - an outlet for my random thoughts and such.
Not a legitimate one – but he was at their camp and I wanted to mention just one more reason his 2009-10 sucks (which is easily countered by 5,500,000 reasons why it doesn’t).
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Why wouldn’t you give Nyls a chance – he’d be the most well rested player coning into the tournement…
by markbona-capsfan99 on Dec 4, 2009 6:42 PM EST up reply actions
Because you want to win?
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 11:37 PM EST up reply actions
It was sarcasm and poor spelling….the dude has made over a million so far this season and as far as I know he’s not even practicing with the team at KCI now…
by markbona-capsfan99 on Dec 5, 2009 3:18 PM EST up reply actions
Slightly related, but has Walton/Leone updated Osala’s status? I saw he had to take a couple personal days and was due in today, wasn’t sure if that was still a go or not.
"Eloquence, brought to you by a peanut butter, egg and dice sandwich."
Huh?
Link?
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 1:03 PM EST up reply actions
Not much more to it than he took a day or two off, did not return to Finland, expected to be with the team this weekend, IIRC.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
The referees are Paul Devorski, Mark Joannette, Dennis LaRue, Bill McCreary, Dan O’Halloran, Chris Rooney and Brad Watson.
- barfs *
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Dec 4, 2009 1:16 PM EST up reply actions
action fail…why did it put a bullet there instead of an asterisk?
Ron and Fez 11 to 3
by YvonLabresMoustache on Dec 4, 2009 1:17 PM EST up reply actions
Brad Watson was the one who had the infamous “intent to whistle” in the WC semis last season (Ducks-Wings, I think)
Definitely Ducks/Wings. Either game 1 or 2 but I don’t recall the ref.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 2:15 PM EST up reply actions
You forgot
Potsy and Clark on Team USA, of course.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 3:38 PM EST reply actions
and Poti! Tipping the puck past your own goalie is a really underrated skill that Team USA doesn’t have enough of.
Eff Poti
If he’s on the team we are toast.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 3:53 PM EST up reply actions
More toast than currently, I think you mean.
The US is going to need some serious good fortune to medal.
"You're gonna eat that g**d**n Koho, three!"
I dunno. Going in I think we are the 4th best team on paper. That means we should at least play for a medal. Our goaltending should be there, our D is much deeper than it appeared we’d be. We have more high power offensive players than we’ve had in over a decade so we’ll be able to score more than the last few Olympics. Sure, we don’t have the same as Canada or Russia or even Sweden but we are going to have 2 lines that can score on anyone. Our third line is going to be a beast (I’m picturing Kessler with Brown and either Rolston, Drury, or maybe Pavelski). I don’t think the stars have to align for us to get bronze. Gold is a big stretch but I think we can medal.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 4:22 PM EST up reply actions
I haven’t seen it if it is.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 4:43 PM EST up reply actions
http://www.vancouver2010.com/olympic-hockey-schedule-results/
Canada plays Norway first. USA plays Swiss.
Thanks.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 4:58 PM EST up reply actions
I think USA can play for a medal, but I think Finland might give USA a good run for the title of 4th best.
I think USA has a good edge especially bc of the rink size this year – more of the USA players will be NHLers (as opposed to Sweden or Russia). I think it’ll depend heavily on how Miller does. Or do you think Anderson will get the job done?
I thought Sweden was going to be 98% NHLers, plus Gus has been over here to watch, strategize, and prep for the smaller sheet.
I think Russia’s bluffing on this KHL thing, and most of their KHLers will have been NHLers at some point, anyway.
I think Russia’s bluffing on this KHL thing
According to Ken Campbell over at THN, there are only 28 Russians playing in the NHL right now, so there’s probably a strong non-NHL contingent attending. That said, just about all the best players are going to come from the NHL, but seeing 8 or 9 out of the KHL wouldn’t shock me.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 4, 2009 6:30 PM EST up reply actions
I’m confident in Anderson and Miller. Both are having tremendous years, but especially Miller. Unfortunately, they both have question marks as well.
I think the U.S. has just as good goaltending as the Finns, and far more depth; both F and D. I haven’t taken a close look but I don’t think the Finns will have an all-NHL lineup, and I know USA will.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 4:59 PM EST up reply actions
the reason why I brought up the Finns was really because if i’m not mistaken – the top four teams after prelims get a bye.. so really logically we’ve got RUS/CAN/SWE getting the first three… who gets the fourth? Finland or USA?
and Finland gets to rack points up against Belarus and Germany – USA has to win points against the Swiss and Norway. Who knows? Maybe the Czech Republic will get the bye.
You should never underestimate Belarus and I’m not just saying that b/c I’m still bitter about Salt Lake City. Belarus is much better then Norway and at least as good as Switzerland.
That’s because his doctor told him to. Now he’s checking his prostate. Breakout years at 34 aren’t normal. Just like lumps on your balls. Query friend: why is there a RoY candidate at the same position as the reigning Vezina winner? Surely it’s not because of a stout Vezina defense.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 11:39 PM EST up reply actions
Friends of mine here in Maine don’t like it when I take pleasure in Thomas doing terribly (regardless of my opponent having him in fantasy hockey.)
Now drink with me deeply of the bourbon, scotch, and rye until such time as we are fighting drunk.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Dec 5, 2009 12:19 AM EST up reply actions
Maybe you shouldn’t make friends in Maine.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 12:49 AM EST up reply actions
Distinct possibility. I don’t exactly have a choice.
Literally, I do have a choice. But deciding to not make friends with every Boston/New England fan makes my college career significantly less fun.
Now drink with me deeply of the bourbon, scotch, and rye until such time as we are fighting drunk.
by Steckel Me Elmo on Dec 5, 2009 12:57 AM EST up reply actions
My bad
Didn’t realize I was the one that sent you to Maine. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 1:15 AM EST up reply actions
Nah, you have to go to the belly of the beast. Corrupt them from the inside.
Or laugh at them when they fail and root for the Caps. Hey, you could even go to some Boston games just to root against them :P
They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
And I don’t think the ice size matters. The contenders are all made up of NHL guys that know how to play on the smaller ice. And to be honest, the teams that are not as good will benefit a little because they won’t have to skate as much (their biggest disadvantage).
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 5:00 PM EST up reply actions
But that could lead to the difference goal against Russia’s 4th line or Finland’s 4th, for example.
by red army line on Dec 5, 2009 4:34 AM EST up reply actions
Finnland
The Finn’s goaltending talent pool is almost as sick as the Canada’s blueline…
by markbona-capsfan99 on Dec 5, 2009 3:21 PM EST up reply actions
Only the best in the group of the goaltenders really counts and I think you have to give the nod to King Henrik of Sweden for that one.
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 5, 2009 5:38 PM EST up reply actions
But Kipper won’t be there so it is definitely not as deep as it appears at first blush. I like Team USA’s goaltending over the Finns.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 5:40 PM EST up reply actions
He’ll be there if he gets the starting job, which certainly isn’t out of the question.
Of all our iniquities ignorance may be the worst
by Killer_Carlson on Dec 5, 2009 5:52 PM EST up reply actions
You think they’ll guarantee him that job? Basically tell Backstrom he has to be the back up because Kipper is a whiny bitch? That’s not right. They should go into it saying both will play and whoever plays better in pool play gets to play the elimination games. I don’t think Kipper goes for that, so he probably won’t go.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 5, 2009 6:15 PM EST up reply actions
Not my best work...
"And next year it will be ours."
by Ovechwin on Dec 4, 2009 9:40 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I’ve seen this format before : “Pack your bags”, “Fairly Safe Bets”, etc.
Who is that credited to?
(Sorry, I’m a developer. It’s in my blood to expect people give credit where credit is due!)\
Also, hilarious picture.
Winterion Game Studios
Visit us online at : http://winterion.com
I saw it on From the Rink, but I don’t know if it started there.
"Camaraderie, that's what the Washington Capitals are all about."
by CapitalCentre on Dec 4, 2009 8:44 PM EST up reply actions
It’s the format that the SBN Hockey managers told us to use.
Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world
Skeptical of what? That Mirtle et al sent around a template and asked that it be used discussing Olympic picks?
Only YOU can prevent idiots from commenting!
by Knee high to a duck on Dec 5, 2009 12:06 AM EST up reply actions
Speaking about that loonie
This is Ovie rocking his half of the fabled loonie that you read about in this interview.
As a matter of fact, the picture is of that interview, but it’s a screencap from the Swedish TV show HockeyKvall that was following Nicky Backstrom around on the same night Mike Richards’ dad was treated to this:
You can say a lot of things about the Capitals, but you can NOT say they are a boring team. Or that they aren’t having a great time being unboring.
BTW, if any video-type people are following this thread, how can we archive that HockeyKvall video? The link will die on December 9.
FЯEE ALEX
by EmilyB on Dec 4, 2009 8:59 PM EST reply actions 2 recs
I'm a cheap date
I’ll rec that gif anytime.
Listen to Ol' Hank Murphy and eat your damn onions.
by Fehr and Balanced on Dec 4, 2009 11:41 PM EST up reply actions
Stupid question but
who has the other half?
by CaptainAwesome on Dec 5, 2009 12:29 AM EST up reply actions
I hope that Russia takes Varly for the ride. I think it will greatly help his mental development, representing his country and being involved in the biggest sporting event. It’ll make him realize that to win, he must be the best, IMO.
Even if he is a little tired for the spring, we’ve got Theo, who isn’t going to Vancouver. I definatley don’t mind giving him a load of games. His inconsistancy will prob keep him out of the playoffs, along with Varly’s heroics last season.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Japers' Rink
Related FanShots on Japers' Rink
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
Southeast Standings
| GP | W | L | OTL | PT | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Washington
|
82 | 54 | 15 | 13 | 121 |
|
Atlanta
|
82 | 35 | 34 | 13 | 83 |
|
Carolina
|
82 | 35 | 37 | 10 | 80 |
|
Tampa Bay
|
82 | 34 | 36 | 12 | 80 |
|
Florida
|
82 | 32 | 37 | 13 | 77 |
(updated 4.12.2010 at 9:21 AM EDT)
The Vault
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Trending Topics: Odd arbitration decisions; more NHLers Tweeting
- Ovechkin wins fifth Kharlamov Trophy, talks Talbot
- Puck Headlines: Witt hits waivers; Kovalchuk grievance details set
- Jersey Fouls: Sharks get creatively awful; hockey movie pass/fail
- White, Flames agree to one-year deal; Bruins sign Wheeler
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
