fanaticV3.0 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Considering he and Carter have virtually the same amount of points, he's a better player, and the fond feelings some here have about him, I'm surprised nobody is upset he didn't make the Olympic roster. Him not making it is a bigger deal that Giroux imo. Giroux was considered elite just a few seasons ago and while still pretty darn good, has taken a step back. Richards, while not anywhere near offensively skilled as Giroux, is more established. He actually has more points than his teammate who got selected too. What is Yzerman on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irishjim Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 whose richards Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Considering how good richards was in 2010 on a line with Toews - arguably Canada's best, most consistent line - and considering both his pedigree (he's won everything) and his versatility (kills penalties, can play the PP), it is mind boggling to me that they could pick Carter. I simply don't get it. Perhaps Frosted Tips bribed Yzerman et al with Jersey Shore skanks or something. 'Cause it doesn't make sense to me his selection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 Big ice = faster skaters I guess. Richards would be a lock on a NA rink,,,so would Lucic IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 My guess is that Carter was picked over Richards because he is bigger, a better and faster skater, has been playing wing, and is a goal scorer. When you have Toews, Crosby, Getzlaf, and Bergeron down the middle, you don't really need Richards. Probably more or less the same calculus that leaves Giroux off the team. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted January 9, 2014 Share Posted January 9, 2014 (edited) If you look over Canada's roster it really seems like they wanted size and skating. The only two guys on the roster under 6 feet are Crosby (height irrelevant) and Matt Duchene.http://www.tsn.ca/canadian_hockey/feature/?id=1131 Edited January 10, 2014 by JackStraw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 @JackStraw I know Carter can skate fast - once he gets going - but I wouldn't classify him as quick at all, or agile. So I'd still prefer someone other than Carter. The notion that Richards can't play wing as well as Carter, which you imply, is also wrong. Richards played the wing on Toews's line in Vancouver in 2010. And played it well. Anyway, that's about as far as I care to go in pumping Richards's tires. He would still be a Flyer if he wasn't such an idiot who cared more about partying and living in Center City than he did about the team of which he was Captain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I might have gotten around to kvetching about Richards, but it's Olympic hockey, so I've already lost interest. I don't understand, though, how you pick Nash based on 2010 accomplishments but leave Richards off despite 2010 accomplishments. When you start mixing and matching arguments, things make absolutely no sense. I'll go back to maintaining that Nash, Carter, and Kunitz don't belong and Giroux, Richards, and MSL do. Ultimately, though, I'll take a 3 week hockey hiatus while the Olympics are going on and return when the NHL resumes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samifan Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) Relax, Richards will be in Sochi because Carter is bringing him as his +1! Edited January 11, 2014 by Samifan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Ultimately, though, I'll take a 3 week hockey hiatus while the Olympics are going on and return when the NHL resumes. That's usually the time of year you hit the Amish-palooza Festival isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 That's usually the time of year you hit the Amish-palooza Festival isn't it? Funny you mention that. No, that's not until late May, but we do have committee meetings to prepare and some bake sales and quilt sales to raise money for it. Do you need a quilt with a picture of a Lexus? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 @ruxpin C'mon, how many Amish quilts does one man need. My house is wallpapered in Amish quilts. Lexus you say.... Not really....you got one with a big screen plasma theme....say, about a 52 footer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 @Podein25 - I didn't mean to suggest that Carter plays better on the wing than Richards. Porbably should have just left that out, it was just an observation that he is now a winger not a center. In any case I think the main factors he was picked were that he's a goal scorer (main reason) and that he's big and can skate. He's such a different kind of player than Richards that I doubt it was one or the other. If you were going to take Richards over Carter, why wouldn't you take Giroux over Richards? I think they just hit their quota for playmakers and felt they needed some scorers like Nash and Carter. And Carter has shown that he can be a very good defensive player, so I don't think he'll be a liability in that regard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 Richards will be in Sochi because Carter is bringing him as his +1! You are brilliant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanaticV3.0 Posted January 10, 2014 Author Share Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) I might have gotten around to kvetching about Richards, but it's Olympic hockey, so I've already lost interest. I don't understand, though, how you pick Nash based on 2010 accomplishments but leave Richards off despite 2010 accomplishments. When you start mixing and matching arguments, things make absolutely no sense. I'll go back to maintaining that Nash, Carter, and Kunitz don't belong and Giroux, Richards, and MSL do. Ultimately, though, I'll take a 3 week hockey hiatus while the Olympics are going on and return when the NHL resumes. I'm normally on board with that, but since people are so upset about Giroux and that many still have a crush on him, I'd have think there would have been some discussion about it. Plus, him not making the team stands out to me more than Giroux. Yzerman made some really bizarre picks and omissions. @JackStraw I know Carter can skate fast - once he gets going - but I wouldn't classify him as quick at all, or agile. So I'd still prefer someone other than Carter. The notion that Richards can't play wing as well as Carter, which you imply, is also wrong. Richards played the wing on Toews's line in Vancouver in 2010. And played it well. Anyway, that's about as far as I care to go in pumping Richards's tires. He would still be a Flyer if he wasn't such an idiot who cared more about partying and living in Center City than he did about the team of which he was Captain. I mean this in the most non-homosexual (NTTAWWT) way possible, but I think I have a crush on you. Good player who couldn't hack it as "the man" and excels in an environment where the pressure is off him and I'm sick of people who can't get over the fact he's gone. Completely agreed with your first post too. I don't know what the hell Yzerman is thinking with some of those picks. Edited January 10, 2014 by fanaticV3.0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mojo1917 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I don't know enough about the type of year he is having to say Richards deserves the butthurt over not playing on an Olympic team. I will say this. the guy wins, does what it takes to win and i wonder about the X factors with that roster, I don't see a lot of Richards and Pronger types . there are unknowns and some guys that don't lead their own teams very well let alone a collection of the finest talent around... so i guess we'll see how well Hockey Canada did with building it's team. when the playing matters in the playoffs we'll see if MR has lost a step i suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 If you were going to take Richards over Carter, why wouldn't you take Giroux over Richards? I think they just hit their quota for playmakers and felt they needed some scorers like Nash and Carter. And Carter has shown that he can be a very good defensive player, so I don't think he'll be a liability in that regard I would prefer Giroux. I guess what I find odd in the whole thinking is the way the brass at Team Canada has taken what you might call a very "traditional" approach to things: taking D-men who all play their strong side (LH playing LD, RH playing RD etc), taking "natural" wingers to play wing (ignore for a second the silly notion that Jeff Carter is a "natural" winger - hell, he's not even a natural blonde apparently - he feels the need to frost those tips). I just find it anachronistic thinking. As if Mike Richards, or Giroux, can't play wing at the NHL or Olympic level. As if Brent Seabrook can't play the off-side - he does every night! Anyway, my point about Carter is not that he is a defensive liability - he's shown that he can play responsibly in that regard. My complaint is that he is one-dimensional and often plays the game without the required intensity, often soft. If it's a pure goal scorer they wanted, why would they not take Neal? At least he hits the net when he shoots. But why not take a guy who can score as well as make plays, i.e. Giroux? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 Anyway, my point about Carter is not that he is a defensive liability - he's shown that he can play responsibly in that regard. My complaint is that he is one-dimensional and often plays the game without the required intensity, often soft. If it's a pure goal scorer they wanted, why would they not take Neal? At least he hits the net when he shoots. But why not take a guy who can score as well as make plays, i.e. Giroux? Understandably understandable. Totally. I was actually surprised that Neal wasn't on the team. Maybe Stevie Y thinks he's a dbag like everyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 @JackStraw There must be view like that about Neal - although as far as d-bags go, you can't go wrong with Carter. It was just the other day that I heard a TSN analyst say that he felt Neal had the best shot in the NHL. Better than Stamkos even as far as quickness of release, accuracy etc. You'd think a guy like that would get a serious look by Team Canada, but it's not clear that he did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruxpin Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I'd have think there would have been some discussion about it. Plus, him not making the team stands out to me more than Giroux. Completely agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 @JackStraw There must be view like that about Neal - although as far as d-bags go, you can't go wrong with Carter. It was just the other day that I heard a TSN analyst say that he felt Neal had the best shot in the NHL. Better than Stamkos even as far as quickness of release, accuracy etc. You'd think a guy like that would get a serious look by Team Canada, but it's not clear that he did. On the other hand, if Stevie Y is looking for a "wingman" to explore the nightlife of Sochi, well, Carter is the guy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 On the other hand, if Stevie Y is looking for a "wingman" to explore the nightlife of Sochi, well, Carter is the guy... I have to think that's where this "natural winger" nonsense came from... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted January 10, 2014 Share Posted January 10, 2014 I'm one of the biggest Richards fans around, and I think they made the right choice leaving him off the team. Looking at the make up of the team, as others have mentioned, they went for speed and size, with the big ice surfaces over there, it was the right way to go. Mike makes up for the lack of blazing speed with heart, determination and hard work, but it was not enough to overcome the wicked talent on this team. The fact Bergeron and Toews are two of the best 2 way centermen in the entire world worked against Mike big time. They can get the defense they needed from these two elite talents, without sacrificing one iota of offense. The other kiss of death was going for natural wingers (Carter notwithstanding...lol)...they made the right call. I know Mike plays a specific role, but if you are not the *man* on your on team, the chances of cracking this ultra talented team are nil. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 @jammer2 Dan Hamhuis is The Man on his team? Bergeron? Carter? Kunitz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jammer2 Posted January 11, 2014 Share Posted January 11, 2014 @flyercanuck I do think Bergeron is the man on the Bruins, but yeah...the other guys like Hamhuis and Kunitz make my point kinda silly. Still puzzled how Hamhuis is one of Canada's 8 best d-men....odd selection. I would have rather had Girardi or Seabrooke, but maybe that is just me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.