World Cup Hockey 2016

[Peter_Doherty]

Really even period 1, high tempo and high intensity. Both Hank and Rask have had to be sharp.

[CJ]

Really even period 1, high tempo and high intensity. Both Hank and Rask have had to be sharp.

A tiny edge to Finns I'd say (of course ?!) We're playing A LOT better now. If we'll lose, I'd still be pleased as we at least tried... but 2 periods left, too early to say! Sweden really focuses to take out Laine's PP shot.

[Peter_Doherty]

The stats agree with you, SLIGHT edge 5v5 for Finland (15-14 in CF)

[Peter_Doherty]

Sweden with a great second period, tilting the ice really hard towards Rask and scoring the 1-0 goal. 41-29 in Even Strength CF now which tells the story pretty well.

[nino33]

Sweden with a great second period, tilting the ice really hard towards Rask

Really? I know Sweden scored the only goal, but the stats show Finland outshot Sweden 12-9 (I'm not watching the game or listening to it either, just checking the game report online periodically)

[Manimal]

Sweden won but wasn't great tonight. I am worried the offense isn't working well.
Sweden was good enough but then you don't have to be perfect to beat the finns...

Really? I know Sweden scored the only goal, but the stats show Finland outshot Sweden 12-9 (I'm not watching the game or listening to it either, just checking the game report online periodically)

Shot attempt stats are always better to look at than shots on goal.
Paints a better picture of the game.

[Peter_Doherty]

What Manimal said, my stats were also 5v5 only, Finns had some shots on the PP which scews the shot numbers. Sweden were dominant in 5v5 in the second period.

[CJ]

It was an even game! Could easily been a tie.

If the Sweden wants a chance at winning Canada in the finals they have to be a lot better.

Shot attempt stats are always better to look at than shots on goal.

That really depends on the team strategy. A lot of teams are just going for the shot on goal and hope for a rebound kinda style/deflection.

[Peter_Doherty]

Using shot attempts isn't perfect, but it's alot better then using shots on goal, it shows a decently accurate picture of how the play on the ice was. 1st and 3rd periods were even and in the 2nd period Sweden dominated which was enough to win the game today.

[CJ]

Using shot attempts isn't perfect, but it's alot better then using shots on goal, it shows a decently accurate picture of how the play on the ice was. 1st and 3rd periods were even and in the 2nd period Sweden dominated which was enough to win the game today.

Why are you Swedes only talking about shots? Don't you have anything else positive of the game? Sounds pretty sad then in my ear.

U.S. to 1-0 but didn't take long for Canada to take a 3-1 lead.

[nino33]

I wonder what the "Fenwick" was? I read it's a better indicator of scoring chances (while Corsi is more about puck possession)

I think CJ's got a point about strategy (especially with so many blocked shots, I think some teams take less shots just to get less blocked shots/they're more focused on "making their chances count" & many teams nowadays play defensively and look to "counterattack" so strategically they're still looking to win, but not necessarily to get lots of shots at the net)

To be clear, as a big fan of numbers/data I'm not against advanced stats and I definitely think advanced stats have some value...

[ClassicSwarley]

I'll admit that I wasn't expecting Team USA to not make it out of their group but their management group made poor selection choices that led them to losing their games against Europe and Canada. I feel like they have this stupid mentality to not field the best team possible and try to pull off some 'Miracle on Ice' type of stuff. Grit is not better than skill, at least nowadays.

[Peter_Doherty]

Using shot attempts isn't perfect, but it's alot better then using shots on goal, it shows a decently accurate picture of how the play on the ice was. 1st and 3rd periods were even and in the 2nd period Sweden dominated which was enough to win the game today.

Why are you Swedes only talking about shots? Don't you have anything else positive of the game? Sounds pretty sad then in my ear.

U.S. to 1-0 but didn't take long for Canada to take a 3-1 lead.

Was just painting a picture about how the game looked, no need to the snippy

[Peter_Doherty]

I wonder what the "Fenwick" was? I read it's a better indicator of scoring chances (while Corsi is more about puck possession)

I think CJ's got a point about strategy (especially with so many blocked shots, I think some teams take less shots just to get less blocked shots/they're more focused on "making their chances count" & many teams nowadays play defensively and look to "counterattack" so strategically they're still looking to win, but not necessarily to get lots of shots at the net)

To be clear, as a big fan of numbers/data I'm not against advanced stats and I definitely think advanced stats have some value...

5v5 Fenwick 38-35 for the game it evens it up quite a bit in the second period aswell where Finland blocked (Sweden +3 in Fenwick in 2nd period) alot of shots. The reason why people use Corsi over Fenwick is because it's a better stat to use to show which team is driving the play and tilting the ice ("possession")

[nino33]

I wonder what the "Fenwick" was? I read it's a better indicator of scoring chances (while Corsi is more about puck possession)

I think CJ's got a point about strategy (especially with so many blocked shots, I think some teams take less shots just to get less blocked shots/they're more focused on "making their chances count" & many teams nowadays play defensively and look to "counterattack" so strategically they're still looking to win, but not necessarily to get lots of shots at the net)

To be clear, as a big fan of numbers/data I'm not against advanced stats and I definitely think advanced stats have some value...

5v5 Fenwick 38-35 for the game it evens it up quite a bit in the second period aswell where Finland blocked (Sweden +3 in Fenwick in 2nd period) alot of shots. The reason why people use Corsi over Fenwick is because it's a better stat to use to show which team is driving the play and tilting the ice ("possession")

I myself don't think of it as preferring one over the other, but rather different stats showing different things (and actually what I was reading indicated the NHL in general prefers Fenwick as it's a better representation of scoring chances); as mentioned, possession can have a lot to do with team strategy

[nino33]

Phil Kessel's tweet last night (after the US loss/elimination) was pretty funny - "Just sitting around the house tonight w my dog. Felt like I should be doing something important, but couldn't put my finger on it." http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nh ... /90767642/

[Peter_Doherty]

nino - That's more or less what i meant, might have worded it badly. Both are good stats, they just show different things. Corsi is more mainstream and used more to see which team 'runs the play' so to speak, which is why i used it yesterday. Personally i kind of like Corsi more since i think adding in blocked shots adds more to paint the picture then not adding them does.

The Kessel tweet was epic

[Primis]

I'll admit that I wasn't expecting Team USA to not make it out of their group but their management group made poor selection choices that led them to losing their games against Europe and Canada. I feel like they have this stupid mentality to not field the best team possible and try to pull off some 'Miracle on Ice' type of stuff. Grit is not better than skill, at least nowadays.

It's not that they're not trying to ice the best team, instead it's more the same mentality the caused Team Canada to once pick Rob Zamuner at C for the Olympics. They end up trying to create actual, normal 3rd and 4th lines and specialists, which is kinda' dumb. Abdelkader is a fine guy to select for say the Worlds, but I don't know that he has any business in a tourney like this.

It also doesn't help that USA has a tendency to churn out the exact same player over and over again. A lot of #2 and #3 centers, no real #1 anywhere to be found. Gone are the days when USA could field a team with 2 or 3 legit #1 centers, as an example (Modano, Roenick, etc). There's not a single center of Modano or Roenick's caliber right now.

It *also* didn't help that the Team North America selections were more a loss for USA than Canada. You could name 3 or 4 forwards that maybe would have been with USA instead, as opposed to just maybe one with Canada. It took some of the legs/speed out of the team. Eichel, Larkin, and Saad are 3 I can think of offhand that maybe would/should have been on the team instead. Some wheels might have helped.

That being said, excluding Kessel was a bone-headed move they'll never live down. Though I don't know if it would have actually mattered much,

[philou21]

Phil Kessel's tweet last night (after the US loss/elimination) was pretty funny - "Just sitting around the house tonight w my dog. Felt like I should be doing something important, but couldn't put my finger on it." http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nh ... /90767642/

Lmao that's brilliant!

[ClassicSwarley]

Explosive start to the game from Team NA, already up 2-0 in the first minutes of the game.

[Ukko]

Great game it was ! I watched the two first periods before playing some other game, now I'm looking for a replay to watch the end, it seems the ending was wild !

[CJ]

The overtime was really entertaining! And MacK's goal was awesome!

[Peter_Doherty]

Hank showing that he's still the best goalie in the world and close to GOAT, some of those saves were just

[CJ]

Ovechkin suddenly a playmaker?! What a pass to Tarasenko. 1-0 vs Finland.

[Alessandro]

Ovechkin suddenly a playmaker?! What a pass to Tarasenko. 1-0 vs Finland.

Shipachyov's pass to Telegin was also a beauty, had like half of a half of a second to spot Telega on the left, that was a great goal as well.