The Hockey PDOcast - Postgame Show Breaking Down Canada’s Win in the Four Nations Final

Episode Date: February 21, 2025

Dimitri Filipovic is joined by Thomas Drance to do a postgame show following Canada's win in the Four Nations Final, breaking down how they were able to beat Team USA in overtime, and the lasting takeaways following this tournament. If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

dressing to the mean since 2015. It's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filippovich. Welcome to the Hockey PEDEOCast. My name is Dmitra Vilippovich and joining me here in studio on a Thursday evening, even though it's supposed to be a Sunday special, we're doing on Thursday anyways, because big games call for big shows. It's my good pal, Thomas Strance. Tom, what's going on, man?

That wasn't just a big game. That was the biggest game. That was as fun as it gets, as nervy as it gets. And you know what? I'm so used to watching hockey and not feeling the stakes, right? Covering it and watching it with a level of professional detachment that I've honed and etched and hardened over the years. And then Canada's senior men's team gets playing and I'm a full-blown laundry bro. We're watching this game.

I'm like pacing anxiously. I'm standing up for large segments of the game. And I mean, that was, you know, heart in your throat hockey. the entire way through. You get the McDavid, overtime winner, Mitch Marner and Jordan Binnington redemption stories.

I mean, what a tremendous evening of hockey. And we watched it here together in the SportsNet Studio. We got together. We watched it live, and we decided we were going to do a post game show

right after some people are saying it's the best post game show in the biz. We're recording right after the final whistle. I feel like I need a smoke after that. Honestly, I'm going to try to compose myself here. And we're going to try to turn out a show we're going to be holding, as always, to a 50-minute limit for radio.

I'm sure for the podcast feed, we're going to blast right by that because there's so much for us to discuss here. I mean, this was the perfect cap for this tournament as a whole, right? Everything we've come together and talked about after all these games, the quality, the play, the pace, the speed of it, the physicality, just how competitive it was and how involved everyone it was. This was at the highest level, and so it's very fitting that it concluded with a dramatic overtime winner by Connor McDavid to, to finish off the tournament. It's almost remarkable to think that, you know, typically for games like this of this magnitude with this much on the line, it ends.

And then we have all summer to kind of like decompress a little bit. And obviously we jump into the off season, but like we have a chance to kind of like let it marinate, whereas we have this and then in like 40 something hours, we're going to just jump back into regular NHL play as if nothing really happened. And so that's going to be quite a test for us just like after watching this product to be like, all right, we're watching Nashville versus. St. Louis on a Wednesday night. It's going to be interesting.

Well, we're not used to gearing down. You know, I mean, it's been a long time since the NHL went to the Olympics, for example. We're not used to gearing down in mid-season. You know, things ramp up from the preseason to the regular season. You get the stretch run. You get the occasional game, like, where a team's on a huge winning streaker, like it matters for divisional reasons. You get these sort of momentary eruptions of meaning over the course of, you know,

what can be a lengthy hamster wheel of an NHL season? And then you get the playoffs and everything hits this higher gear and that gear keeps amping up, even as the attrition factor sets in throughout the Stanley Cup playoffs, and then it's a full stop. You know, what we're not used to is, like, watching these games that were played, let's be honest, at a level beyond playoff intensity over the course of the past week,

and then having to gear down for like a crowded slate of games on Saturday. It's going to be a whiplash effect, I think, for most of your listeners and probably for us, too. It was also very fitting. I think you spoke about this last Sunday when we talked about the meeting, the first meeting between these two teams, about sort of comparing this and the essence of it, I guess, compared to your typical international event, right? And some of the differences between it. I think you noted, like, obviously, just it being played on an NHL ice surface. but even it was very representative, I think, of an NHL postseason setting as well from the perspective of the officiating. We only got one penalty call in this entire game on a tripping by Vincent Trojeck early on.

The overtime itself, right? Team USA was controlling the run of playoffs. And Matthews had at least three by my account, great A chances in the first five minutes. The Jordan Bennington stopped. And then Canada comes back and wins it kind of against the run of play. I feel like these are all sort of hallmarks, typically of like an NHL post-average. season setting, like this type of style. The thing that I loved about this tournament at this game was most emblematic of it was it really felt like it was sort of the truth serum of all truth

serums from the perspective of which players belonged on the ice in this setting. And that became very evident to anyone watching right away. And I think eventually to the two respective coaches as well, because you saw the way they tightened their benches, how certain guys just got played off of the ice, maybe not even to the degree that you or I watching this would have hoped for, because especially from Canada's perspective, as it went along, every time we saw Colton Braco, Travis Zanheim's shift, we were like, this is hold on. This is sketch. Yeah, this is very sketchy.

Obviously, Team USA, their first line. Chris Kreider played less in this game than Matthew Kachuk did by the end of it, and Matthew Kachuk didn't essentially play from early on in the second period after he had his injury. And, you know, I don't want to spend too much time on this because there's much bigger story. to talk about, but I do think this played a role in the outcome of this game. I feel like it was a mistake from Team USA's perspective, not that I'm going to come here and be the biggest Kyle Connor defender by any means. I think anyone that's isn't to the show knows my feelings on him as a two-way player. But Team USA entered this game knowing that both Kachukes

were banged up based on where they left off with them, right? And Brady Kachuk was obviously able to play a big role in this game, scored the goal early on, managed to play his way through it, Matthew Kuchuk, re-injured himself and only played six and a half minutes or so. And so that left him without the option of another guy who could kind of play in a high leverage scoring role. And so what that forced him to do, I think, was overextend J.T. Miller and certainly overextend Brock Nelson. And he was on the ice at the end for Canada's goal against. He was playing a lot as this game progressed with a guy like Jack Hughes. And so when you watch it and you're like, man, Jack Hughes was pretty uninvolved offensively to my eye. He didn't hear his name

that much. It's like, well, yeah, they just kind of ran out of forwards. Reliable forwards who could play at the level that they needed to. And so I think it was partly unfortunately, but I think it was partly also self-inflicted on their part. It was, yeah. And it was a fascinating dynamic because, you know, even in a situation where if it had gotten uglier for Canada, right, like Sanheim and Pereko, honestly, I thought both performed fine individually. It's just that as a pair, they didn't have enough umph to move the puck as cleanly as certainly the Americans were, which was, I thought one of the defining features of this game was how cleanly Brock Faber and, and Jacob Slavin and Sanderson, you know, we're just getting out,

we're getting out and sort of clearing any Canada dumpins, right? Like their work on retrievals and just getting north fast, they were spotless all night long. The Canadian forecheck very rarely played, and when it did, it was usually Sam Bennett or Seth Jarvis that were actually managing to cause the Americans some duress. It was a very different story for Canada's back end. You know, I thought like Drew Doughty and Thomas Harley played great. Obviously, McCar and Taves were great, but I did think you saw the seams a little bit in those Sanheim Paraco minutes, especially with them together.

but you know you can navigate around that like if Canada had needed to right you could easily start double shifting your top four with one of those guys you know what I'm saying and in sort of that manner create a third pair effectively in the aggregate still get people rested on and on once you're down to 11 forwards a couple of whom you know in vincent trocheck and chris Crider, they were pretty reluctant to actually utilize and play in sort of a regular shift. That becomes harder to navigate, tougher to navigate. I mean, Brock Nelsen played 14, 43 of 5-1-5-1 in this game. Shots on goal were 13 to 1 Canada at that time.

Highly-hanty. Chances, 8-0. Vincent Trojik, 9 and a half minutes, shots on goal, 10 to 2 for Canada. And you compare that to Canada's fourth line heading into this game, right? And then what they got from Bennett, Jarvis and Marchand, and the difference they made. and Bennett's goal came playing higher up in the lineup. He was out there with Mitch Marner, but you could see just the juice they were playing with. He was able to on that play makes J.D. Miller look pretty silly along the wall,

wins a puck battle, gets it around him. Mitch Marner comes in, does a really nice deceptive job of kind of dragging Adam Fox along with him and then kind of- He managed that lane. He dishes it off to Bennett and he has a nice finish. What a Mitch Marner game. Mitch Marner was incredible, and obviously the primary assist on the overtime winner, Well, and with three guys, you know, there's basically three defenders coming to take his space, and that's just a cool, calm, collected pass to find McDavid who had gotten hopelessly lost from an American perspective in the offensive zone.

Actually, oddly enough, sort of a paying tribute to Kyle Connor. That was like a very Kyle Connor goal on the winner. Well, and even late in regulation, right, Mitch Martner had that play where he kind of sold a shot, and I don't know why anyone would bite on it, because if you watch Rich Martner, he was obviously, he's going to pass that off, but he sort of held onto it, makes his brilliant cross-scene pass, and J.T. Miller got there in time, read it, and intercepted it, and almost actually put it into his own end,

but prevented what would have been a game-clinching goal, really had in the regulation. So, yeah, I thought he was phenomenal. I mean, this was an incredible game. Like, there were so many, I was, as the game was going along, and we're sitting here in the studio, I'm kind of making notes throughout, and every time we'd see some sort of a standout play like that,

I'd kind of, like, make a note of it, and I was going to keep a running tally. And then there were so many of them in succession that at some point I was like, All right, well, I'm just going to forget this exercise. Or every moment. So one thing, one place I do want to start is... By the way, we're 10 minutes in.

I know. Okay. One place I do want to touch on. All right, let's kick off today's episode of the Hockeypedia case. One thing I want to hit on is watching this game and there were these moments where you'd find, you know, you'd see an American defender and they'd get down on the ground and they'd, like, seen the passing lane before the Canadian puck carrier, right? And we're talking about, you know, 12 of the top 30 forwards in the NHL.

And this defender had out anticipated them and was, like, already blocking the lane. And it was just time and time again, these like, oh, moments of frustration as a heavily partisan Canadian hockey fan. And every time you squint to see who'd done it, and it was always number 74. Like the two pads stack to block the rush shot, who was that rush shot taken by? Okay, so I actually did jot that down. It was very, it was on Seth Jarvis. And it reminded me of, I don't know if you remember that, like, family guy's seen where, like, the guy in prison goes to shank someone and Peter's already left. And so then he's like, all right, well, I'll have all this free time.

And he stabs himself. And he's like, oh, I've been doing that to people. That's awful. I can't believe I've been doing that. That was Jacob Slavin doing that to Seth Jarvis. And St. Jarvis was like, man, he's doing this all the time to other teams. This is horrible feeling. Like, he just completely erased a three on two right down the middle.

I mean, it was a brilliant defensive play. He had so many of those throughout the game. I think it was the second period. maybe where a puck bounce of Cindy Crosby and he just like out bustled them and knocked him away with his stick like he had so many of those he had a he stuffed mckinan on a one-in-one battle off of an entry he had the play that I'm talking about I wish I remembered the Canadian puck carrier but he literally the the Canadian puck carrier got it he was outnumbered two to one down low basically and he just got on the ground

immediately like even before the Canadian forward had a moment to like look up and see that he had a guy play was already dead like it was already dead he didn't he the the Canadian attacker just didn't know it yet. Yeah, I mean, there is no world where this guy is not the best defensive defenseman in the sport right now. And I thought he was especially, I mean, the minutes with him in favor were, you know, I like to use the word oppressive, but I mean, I don't even know if that's a sufficiently harsh description for just how unlikely it felt throughout that game that Canada was ever going to score in Slavin's

minutes. There's got to be no more comforting feeling than seeing that he's the last man back for your team, right? It feels like that's why almost a lot of these, and I know typically because of Carolina's style of play and just generally the environment, he shows up pretty well in a lot of the underlying metrics as well. So this isn't like going against the grain to that. But even in games like this where you look and it's like, all right, well, the other team had more shot attempts or whatever when Jacob Slavin was on the ice. It's like all of those are fake. Like those numbers don't mean anything to me because you actually watch it. And every time he was out there, there was no feeling that it.

anything bad was going to happen. He played 2831. Brock Faber played 2849 in this game. Both were highs for the game for either team. I was going to ask you this. Do you think that Jacob Slavin, out of anyone involved in this game or even stretching into this tournament, do you think anyone improve their stock league-wide more than he did? I think you can make a pretty compelling case for a guy like Dylan Larkin, right? Because especially you reflect back to the start of this tournament. and in the opener he's barely playing against Finland, I believe he was on the fourth line. And then he works his way up in this game. He's playing with Boldie.

There were a bunch of shifts where they were using him with Matthews. He's killing penalties. Early on, it felt like every single Dylan Larkin rush was looming danger, right? He was incredibly dynamic. So I would say that maybe Larkin, just from the start of the tournament, improved his stock the most league-wide in terms of, like, your opinion on him, especially in this setting because we haven't gotten to see Dylan Larkin play in a competitive postseason setting like that. hopefully we will this year for his sake. But we have seen Slaven, yet still,

I think this is an entirely different animal in terms of the workload he ate up against the quality of competition he did and just how seamless he made it look. He was exceptionally dangerous. I think a couple of other candidates for it, for me anyway, I do think Jake Sanderson would have to rank pretty highly.

Obviously Thomas Harley. I think Jake Gensel, you can make the argument for it. Now, I know Gensel's, we know that Gensel is a big game player. We know that Gensel is an elite player. You know, I think going to Carolina and producing at 120 point pace down the stretch helped reinforce that he was always additive to what Sidney Crosby was doing as opposed to being a product of Sidney Crosby's greatness.

I think we knew that anyway. I think his performance in Carolina reinforced it. I think we've seen nothing to disabuse ourselves of that notion anyway over the course of this season in Tampa Bay. I mean, I thought he was the most dangerous consistently skater for either team tonight. And I still think that's a level of form where, you know, I still think that's a rarefied error versus the conversation. It's usually for like pure stars that he's not typically considered when that conversation. Exactly right.

Like there's... He's more of a complimentary star, certainly, at least in the way he's described generally. Totally. And I think we should probably stop that. I mean, I thought, you know, in a game with 10 of the top 20 forwards on the planet in it, he was maybe the best of them in terms of consistently generating up. He's just always open in the home plate area. He's so shifty.

He's so crafty. You know, he was shedding checks constantly. And then I do think the other guy we got to talk about is Mitch Marner. I mean, this was the game of Mitch Marner's life. Big game, Mitch. Big game Mitch. Well, and that's the thing. Like the knock against Mitch Marner.

has been so specific. And we've even seen it play out at this tournament. Like he had the missed pass in the six on five that led to the Canada losing possession. And then it's 3-1 during the round, Robin round. You know, he started the tournament on a line with McDavid. They didn't seem to have chemistry until the overtime goal gets dropped down. But he was going so evidently early on in this contest and ends up getting reunited. with McDavid. It was a tough night. McDavid was fighting the puck all evening in a really uncharacteristic way,

but Marner brought some juice, some venom to that line ultimately makes, you know, the winning play in the game or the winning setup in the game. It was a brilliant shot by McDavid and some brilliant work to get lost. So full credit to the best hockey playing human on the planet. The conversation around him is not changing, but Marner, I thought, you know, I mean, if you're a Maple Leafs fan, are you like, where's that been? Where's that been, man? Yeah, imagine him and Austin Matthews are going to have a different vibe coming out of this tournament. Like Matthews was, I thought, was awesome in this game, right?

Like, he had the chances in overtime. He probably should have won it, yeah. His 5-1-5 metrics in this game were awesome. He was kind of, he lost that assignment on McDavid on the overtime winner. It's hilarious because we were watching it, and McDavid gets named the player of this game, right? And if you had to watch the first 68 minutes or so of this game, that would have seemed unbelievable because there were so many instances where he just did not look like himself. Like the feet were moving, but the hands almost weren't keeping up with it the way we typically

see from him. And there was one play in the third period where he's behind TV USA's net. And there isn't he even a defender on him pressuring. The puck gets kind of rimmed to him. And he's standing there to just hops over a stick and they lose the possession. It's like, what is going on from him in this game? Shots on goal were 9 to 4 USA in his 5-1-5 minutes heading into overtime through regulation. And so it was a bizarre performance, but ultimately score. is the golden goal and that's all the matters right and so um big players make big plays like that in the big moments and so that's what got it done when we're talking about guys stock up

we should include thomas harley here as well because without doubt he was playing on that pair with dowdy he wound up being canada's third player in terms of usage in this game so doughty sorry with doughty and harley every time harley touched the puck all night long it was so calming it was like having a sort of throw it and you put in a lozenger, like, I feel relieved instantly. He was, he was like adding honey to your tea when you're sick. Like, yeah, exactly right. He was exactly the sort of calming presence. It felt like Canada needed all night long.

And then you see Travis Sandheim and we praised and I still think like his like involvement and stuff and he clearly wasn't afraid, but it was like the exact opposite from a chaos perspective where it felt like everything was being ramped up in terms of like sketchiness and just erratic energy. I do think it was the stylistic fit of him. and Pereco in this specific game that was at issue as opposed to either of their individual contributions. I, you know, I thought Sandheim had a lot of moments that I liked. And maybe if he was with a more mobile righty and likewise with Pareko, who, you know, has straight line speed once

he gets those tree trunks moving, but isn't necessarily as quick, especially if, you know, you need to like sort of make a move to to deak out the first four checker. You know, I thought both of them played well, honestly. Just not, I didn't like the calibration of their pair. Well, and it's always tricky with a defense pair like that, right? Because you never know what to do with them. Because we agree that every time they were caught in their own zone against team USA, and it felt like it was against Matthews' line.

It felt like impending doom. Yes. And it was like so sketchy in terms of them, just always being a step behind the play. So then I think the natural reaction is, all right, We need to avoid those, like kind of like by triage, avoid those most high dangerous minutes for them. So we're going to get them out in the offensive zone. And then you kind of squander opportunities with your top players where you should be able to sort of leverage it and double down and try to score. And they're just not the right guys to be out there.

You talk about Perico's mobility at that size. And that's true. But he had a hilarious rush early on the game, right, where he kind of like gets out and transition on a two-on-one, keeps the puck and he shoots it. It was a wrist shot. And you and I were joking, wondering whether he's ever even out. I was like, has he ever scored one of these? And then you're like, has he ever attempted one of them? And so there were moments like that.

I thought there was a play, what was it, with like a minute left in the second period where Team Canada had a great offensive zone shift. And it felt like Team USA was kind of scrambling and just holding on for dear life to get to the intermission. And the puck gets out of the zone into the neutral zone. It's the long change. And they're just not equipped to do the Colorado Avalanche type of thing,

that Macar and Taves do so well where it's like immediately quick get up again and just attack with a second wave, and instead they allow Team USA to get fresh bodies on, and that sort of dissolved whatever the threat was looming. And so there was just no real way to play them. And the reason why I brought up Harley here, and you mentioned Sanderson earlier, and I completely agree, he was so smooth with the puck, retrieving it,

getting it out of danger. And it's remarkable to think that heading into this tournament, neither guy was cast as playing a meaningful role in his team, right? Harley wasn't even with New Canada. Jake Sanderson was the seventh defenseman. He wouldn't have played if Charlie McAvoy had a gun. He wouldn't have been on the team if not for Quinn Hughes' late injury. Exactly.

And so what does that say? I mean, I think everyone knows that both guys, at least they're paying attention, were both great players. And obviously, you're kind of dealing with really high-level players to begin with just to make this team. So it's not necessarily a slight against them. But I think it is kind of reflective of the way we sort of analyze defensemen in this sport, maybe that neither guy was pinpointed for a key role in this.

And yet in the biggest game of the tournament, both guys just look awesome and you can't even envision them not being in it. it. Yeah. So I think one thing it speaks to is the depth of defensive quality that both countries are churning out, right? You know, I'd, so I, I, I, I, I'm tweeted after the game and, and it's being widely misinterpreted as we speak. But I just said, the hard truth is that effectively Team USA was without two of their top three skaters, because Quinn Hughes wasn't there and Matthew Kuchuck wasn't in much of the final game tonight. And it still took overtime and, and been in, becoming possessed by prime Dominic Hachick for Canada to eke out of victory. And, you know, I think the one common reply is, well, Canada was down two of their three best defensemen because Morrissey obviously ended up missing today. And, you know, obviously, Che Theodore was out of the tournament. You know, the thing is, though, is I think for both countries, you could have had two or three

more blue line injuries before it actually messed up with, messed with either team's level, provided that the injuries weren't two McCar and Quinn Hughes, right? Like those are the two guys, and one I'd probably add slab into that list. And it's, so it's like there was, there's the level of talent that both of these countries have, you know, guys like Bouchard and on and on who aren't even, who weren't even there and are just incredible players. I think there's just a wild level of defensive talent. I also think there's this moment right now where very clearly, seen in both of the games that these two teams contested,

the margin between these two sides right now is virtually nil, right? And I know that that's often cast as like the rise of USA hockey, and it should be, right? There's a lot for the U.S. National Development Team Program and a variety of like coaching and player development initiative. of the border to take a lot of pride in, given the state of where their game is nationally. Which, by the way, I'm not here for like Canada is our, or hockey is our game, Canadian jingoism. I want as many people to like and play hockey as possible. I think that's the best possible thing for the sport.

But I do think where we're at is like you sort of look through this short window of draft classes, right? Like where Jack Hughes enters the league and then, you know, the Lefrenier and Byfield draft, but that's the draft with Matt Boldy, right? And it's like, so the Americans sort of grab a, there's, there was this like two or three year window where, you know, Canada effectively didn't like bridge generations, right? There's not like the 25 year old player who's at the level of McDavid or Crosby or McKinnon on this Canadian team at the moment. And so I do think there's this window of opportunity for USA hockey. And it's one that ultimately, you know, in terms of

the big picture, like balance of power in the hockey world conversation stemming from this tournament, I just think it's like an opportunity that America narrowly missed to sort of win one when they're at relative parity with Canada power-wise, because I don't know that that lasts either, given that Canada has Bedard and Celebrity coming, given that Canada's very likely, especially with Schaefer and McKenna and DuPont, to be the next three first, overall picks, you know, very likely in a run of seven Canadian first overalls over an eight-year stretch, right? So this gap is going to be very difficult for the USA to continue to narrow or close. But I feel like at this tournament, honestly, you sort of saw this moment where the parity

between these two great hockey nations is like neck and neck. And I think that added to the stakes and sort of what we saw, the spectacle that we were able to witness tonight. I got to save you because you've been saying Slavin a lot, and it is Slavin. And I only say that because the PDO guest discord has been having a field day with it. Now, I had Jack Conner earlier this week, and he called him Yakub, and he's not a check forward.

No. So it is Jacob Slavin. Jacob Slavin. For those scoring home. Yeah, the final owner Harley, we talked about how calming he was. I thought in the Sportsnet broadcast, we obviously were in Privy to the ESPN, anyone, although I did hear or see a clip that Ray Ferraro was just praising the aforementioned Jacob Slavin and then he said something like, I don't mean to be glazing him too much and it was hilarious.

The Sportsman broadcast did a really good job of highlighting Harley's role on the first goal by McKinnon, right? And I think that is exactly the concept we talk about with modern defensemen and what a guy like Harley excels at, his movement in the offensive zone off the puck where not only does he pass it to McKinnon, but instead of just standing there and being kind of chained to the blue line, he makes a middle lane cut, he causes a miscommunication, he drags defenders with him, opens up that lane atop the offensive zone, and Nathan McKinnon loves to kind of drift into and shoot from,

and then you have all these bodies with Ryan Hart in front of the net, causing a screen, and that's why that beat Connor Hallibuck. I know you had a note, do you want to get into the way we sort of frame a lot of these goals, especially it feels like in big games, whether it's Stanley Cup playoffs or at the end of, a tournament like this where for whatever reason, and I feel like this is kind of unique to hockey,

because generally from my following of basketball and football, it feels like those sports maybe appreciate like the high level successful play more and focus on that, whereas in hockey it feels like maybe it's just because it's such a sort of mistake-driven sport maybe. We tend to gravitate on, oh, the goalie should have had that one. Or oh, this is a defensive breakdown. And you saw that in the overtime winner, for example, not to speak out of both sides of our mouth, but there's no way, obviously, the Connor David, despite how much he was struggling up until that point, should be wide open in the slot like that. You'll rarely ever

going to see that. That was a clear defensive breakdown. But even on that first goal, the Canada scored, right? I saw people talking about, like, oh, Connor Hallibuck's giving up this shot from the point, and it's not even tipped, and it's like, you go back and watch it. And you're totally missing the narrative of that goal. It's really the traffic and the layer traffic at that. The Canada was able to sort of utilize. And sometimes the other team just out-executes you. And it feels like plays like that are exactly where that's the case. And so much still needs to go right for that to be a goal. You've got Thomas Harley, you know, he does sort of a center lane drive that he spins off of in the high slot.

But by taking that lane, Brady Kachuk goes to him and then Brady Kachuk realizes, oh, McKinnon, you know, in the high slot is actually more dangerous. So he spins off. He spins off and you've got this congested sort of, you know, eight bodies almost between McKinnon and the high slot is actually. the net. Good luck to Connor Hellebuck seeing through that. You've got Sam Reinhart paying the price to stand in the lane. And you've got Nathan McKinnon somehow sending a seeing-eye shot that basically hits a postage stamped top corner. I mean, how often are you getting a shot through that many bodies untipped, undeflected? You know, it helps if you're Nathan McKinnon and you're one of the best true talent shooters we've seen ever. But, you know, even there, so much has to go right.

You have Reinhart paying the price. You have Harley with the motion. You know, that's a brutally difficult save. That wasn't a low danger shot, despite what the distance will tell you. That is a maximum danger shot. If it hits, especially the top half of the net, not to go all clear site analytics on everybody, but that's as difficult to save as, you know, Hellebuck's going to make all night if he were to make it. You know, I think the, yeah, I think it's important.

Like Matthew's sort of losing McDavid. I mean, that's a great playoff face off. It's a great play by Marner. It looked kind of like a set play off the draw, right? It looked like there was a set playoff. Well, it was a set play off the draw, but I think the set sort of broke down once McDavid missed the shot, right? So it's a set play to set up that inner slot shot that McDavid puts wide.

Puck comes back to Marner. Three guys go to him. And yeah, that was a little bit. too aggressive, but also it's a difficult defensive read to make. And McDavid recognized exactly what it was, got a perfect pass for Marner, and made an absolutely perfect shot top corner over Helibuck. I mean, now a historic shot. I just think it makes sense sometimes to tip your cap.

I thought this with the Larkin goal, too, right? The Larkin goal was a, and I'm talking about the round robin victory for Team USA. You can't shoot it better than that, going a million miles per hour. Sometimes I just think we'd be better off instead of sort of immediately going back and watching a highlight and assigning blame, enjoying the incredible skill and awareness on display. You know, the truth is, is that Austin Matthews had a brilliant defensive tournament throughout and was brilliant defensively again tonight and had multiple instances where he probably deserved to win the game, given the chances that he generated, that he created, you know, the anticipation on the Brady Kachos. for example, to sort of jump the lane and then make that play out front of the net.

You know, I don't know that it's reasonable for us to just be like, but he lost the best player in the world on a pretty tricky defensive read in overtime. You know, it happened, but I think it makes more sense to focus on the Marner Pass with three guys collapsing and just the brilliance of that McDavid shot, the location of it, the way he got open, the awareness to get lost in the slot the way he did. Just something I'd like to see more of in terms of how we... It's a to our analysis, yeah. Yeah, just like more positive analysis,

because I think that's what really matters and actually better reflects, if Matthews had stuck with McDavid there, it would have been, A, incredible, but B, also would have opened up a lane for Marner to skate toward the net anyway. It's not like the duress ends if Matthews does something different. Sometimes great players make great players.

And that's the thing with great players, too, right? All it takes is a guy who had a horrible game by his standards. All it takes is one slight opening there and a breakdown and he's able to capitalize on it. And nothing else matters from that, from before that point. Yeah. To put a pin on this conversation, then we can go to break here. They were talking on the broadcast, and I think part of why we're so obsessed with Harley's

performance, I think in general, like without devoid of any context, it was incredible, and he was clearly Canada's third best defenseman in the two games he played. But they were talking about how he found out after his afternoon nap, on the game day that he was playing, right? Because I think everyone was expecting that Josh Morris, he was going to be active, considering the role he'd been playing on this team, and then he came down with the illness

that's been passing around this tournament. And I was just thinking, I was like, man, I don't know if you're like this, but the 45 minutes or so after everyone on my naps are like me at my absolute worst, and I'm just not ready or receptive for any sort of information or action following my nap. So I kind of imagine just being in his shoes

where it's like, you get up from that nap, and it's like, oh, by the way, you're playing in this game. What a story for Thomas. Harley. All right, Tom, let's take our break here. And then when we come back, we'll jump right back into it. Everyone to close out today's show. You're listening to the Hockey P.D.Ocast streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network. The show podcast, joined by Thomas Trans. We're doing our Sunday special except on a Thursday because it's following the conclusion of the Four Nations tournament. We've talked a little bit

about goaltending in passing here, right? And I think we can certainly spend a bunch of time praising Jordan Binnington's performance. I thought that early on in this game, even though he was making the saves and keeping the score either tied or within one goal at various points. You and I both felt like his footwork, not to get too Kevin Woodley and too technical on this, but was a mess, right? There were a couple plays where especially off of rebounds, and I feel like Larkin was involved in both of them where he could have almost banked it in off him because he was just completely out of position following the initial save.

And yet in overtime, he essentially just stares down Austin Matthews three times in a row, makes a couple glove saves, I believe, a follow-up on Brady, Chakuch as well, the one with his blocker where it felt like Matthews actually had lifted it enough and it should have been a goal off a beautiful play by Jake Gensel on the goal line. He was awesome. I thought Hala Buck was incredible early on, right? Like it felt like his pad was just the force field because after that first goal by Nathan McKinnon, there were a couple, right, like Seth Jarvis had a few, then Sam Bennett taking it to the net where there were these scrambles around the net and you're like, surely this is going to find its way through. And then you watch the replay and it's just

like them jamming away at it and him just holding his ground and he was remarkable early on to keep this one-nothing. Then when Team USA tied it and went up to 1, you and I were both commenting about how this felt like a carbon copy of the first meeting between these two teams from a game script perspective where Team USA would be able to settle in defensively and essentially just suffocate all the juice out of this game. And then San Ben, it had that shift with a Bishmarner where they bounced back and scored. And that feels like it was a turning point obviously not only because it tied the game

and wind up sending it to overtime, but just totally changed the dynamic of the way this game could be played by both teams. I would say that was the most important. Obviously, the game winners, not to take away from it, but from a, from a, from a influencing our experience watching it perspective and saving Canada from being in a in a game state where team USA could have, you know, effectively packed the paint, right? Where, you know, playing trocheck and, and Brock Nelson wouldn't have been as costly,

where where they could have gone conservative. They have the personnel to do it so well, right? The way that they're able to manage retrievals and get the puck moving, especially if there's no incentive for them to actually carry it, to actually try to break you down. I mean, they are the way that that team was built. I think you wanted absolutely nothing to do with trailing against them with time running off the clock.

So for Bennett to get the game-tying goal and lift that puck over Hellebuck, which was nasty. I mean, absolutely filthy. in such a crucial moment in that game, that just influenced everything else we saw. And I thought gave Canada a chance. As much skill as Canada had, I'm not saying they wouldn't have found a way to get one necessarily, but I think it would have been a much taller task if they hadn't found an equalizer before the second. So I do think that game influenced or that goal heavily influenced what we saw over the balance of the game.

Well, not to get too lost in the weeds here, but it does feel like in sort of recapping this game and telling the story of how it played out, the fourth line discrepancy, which we hinted at earlier on the show, was such a massive edge for Canada here, right? Where Team USA had a couple guys that when they were on the ice, we're just getting absolutely cratered. And then as the game progressed, Mike Sullivan and his staff felt very uncomfortable,

playing them, whereas Canada's fourth line was earning more and more minutes and being even vaulted up in the lineup for some of those plays. And Sam Bennett, to his credit, was phenomenal, right? Like he brought the energy similar to what he did in the first meeting between these two teams, but this one in an even larger role with more usage. And he was flying around. He had that high skill level play. You were kind of commenting on, like, when we saw him at his best, right?

His high watermark was that 21, 22 season when Florida was the rush team that took the league by storm in regular season and obviously flamed out in round two against Tampa Bay. But in that season, he was playing with Jonathan and Hubertoe, who was this brilliant downhill passer that was able to get it to him in space. and then Bennett was able to kind of capitalize on that. And that's exactly what we saw on that goal, except Mitch Martiner playing the role of Jonathan Hubertoe, where he basically like a master, like a puppeteer,

just pulls Adam Fox, who by the way, struggled big time. Not only this game, but this term as a whole, I think just the pace all these games were ratcheted up to really gave him a difficult time, especially in comparison to TMUSA's other defenders who could be sped up and still not really feel like they were out of it. And then Marna gets it over. And so seeing that sort of like plug-in-play chemistry in terms of that particular skill set was very satisfying as well because hockey, there's so many moving parts.

And it's not as simple as like in basketball, for example, it's like, all right, we're going to have a pick and roll and this guy's going to be a lob catcher. And so if this guy can pass it to him, that's going to be a match made in heaven. There's more moving parts and more intricacies in hockey. But in this case, just adding a guy with that type of in-space passing skill set to Bennett almost harken back to the days where he scored 28 goals and was the best version of himself. Yeah. I mean, I've often been critical, frankly, of Bennett, for what I've tended to perceive as him being pretty clearly a complementary offensive piece, right? I've always loved the defensive game, the work rate, the physicality that he plays with. How could you not? But, man, I thought he was a player that was indispensable to Canada at this tournament. I mean, I truly don't think they win it without him. I thought, not just because of that huge goal tonight, but I thought his performance in Montreal in the round robin game too was phenomenal.

I mean, there is no world. There's no world where you don't want that guy on your team going in any fight. And I knew that, but it was really reinforced for me by this tournament. I'd imagine it was reinforced too for a variety of NHL general managers. And given that he's a pending UFA, you know, he might be one of the sneaky winners of this tournament frankly, because, I mean, he was, again, I thought he was an indispensable part of what Canada was able to pull off here. I want to quickly, you've brought it up as when whenever we've been talking about this tournament,

but the idea of what the impact of participation might be for some guys as they go back to their NHL teams. And on that, to sort of spotlight another winner, how about the Ottawa Senators? Now, I know Brady Kachuk probably leaves this tournament with some bumps and bruises that he might not otherwise have had. Yeah. But, I mean, both of their guys in this game score huge goals for, I mean, both, both Team USA goals scored by Ottawa senators. And, you know, Senate's always been an American institution anyway. And the, and the truth is, is like, who should come out of this tournament with a different

level of swagger and understanding of sort of their true powers than Brady Kachuk, who was just an absolute. absolute force throughout this game and Sanderson who, you know, I mean, was better than Adam Fox in this game. You never would have, you would have been laughed out of a room for suggesting such a thing was possible a week ago. And now he's going to go back to the senators and it's going to be like, man, you, you were unbelievable in that game. You'd have to think there's a boost in confidence and a boost in understanding for those two gentlemen about, about precisely what level they're at now. Well, especially when we're talking about Larkin and how he never has had a taste of this type of setting and this type of competition. Same goes for Brady-Cuchak at this point of his career.

I thought Sanderson was incredible. He had a player early on against Nathan McKinnon where he's one-on-one on an island, and he just sticks with him stride for stride. Brain points coming at him with speed, and he just forces him to dump it in, and it's like he's able to just play in space this way. The retrievals. I thought TBSA's defense in general and part of why I think they were such a difficult matchup for Canada compared to what Sweden and Finland were able to do. do against them was they really struggled to generate any sort of forecheck pressure or turnovers now in the first period they actually got a few including sam reinhardt jump in the lane beating wrenski behind the net and then setting up that goal we described in detail but for the most part

there were so many one and duns right and they were just perfectly equipped i think to handle that and that really frustrated Canada because it felt like they would have to attack off the rush or off of set plays if they were going to create any sort of traction offensively and that's a test to the way all these team USA defenders played. So I thought Sanderson was full marks to go along with all those other guys. I mean, I don't know, what other notes do you have from this game in terms of either who stood out to you or any sort of lasting impressions or takeaways? Because obviously, we don't want to get too bogged down in just one game here in terms of

making any sort of definitive statements about like the trajectory changing for anyone. But it does feel like this could be, you know, heading into the tournament, we were kind of wondering what kind of crossroads moment it would provide for people, right? Because I feel like for guys like a Kuchrov or a Pasternak or a Dreisaito who didn't get to participate, it was a blessing because they shoulder such immense workloads for their teams. Just getting 10 to 12 days off, resting and recuperating, and then coming back, they're going to be in full form against some of these guys who might have more bumps and bruises. Yet at the same time for some of these younger guys, getting a taste of this,

maybe this is just the sports writer in me and the podcast. broadcaster trying to kind of weave this story that's very compelling and also neat, and it might not play this way. We might not see the immediate fruits of it. But you'd like to think that for some of these young players, going from this type of competition and this level of play, jumping back into the NHL for their teams, it's going to represent like a real sort of shot in the arm

in terms of whatever swag or juice or however we want to describe it, for them coming back in and just like carrying it over and helping lead their teams to playoff runs, especially for teams like Detroit and Ottawa, who have been struggling over the past couple of years to get over that hump and now are in a pretty good position to do so. I wonder about Matt Boldie, too. I mean, he was the Americans most used forward tonight. And he was electric.

Yeah, he's awesome. He's an incredible player. So I'd sort of throw him into the mix in this conversation. You want to throw Brock Nelson into this mix? Oh, I think we should absolutely. Look. Luz, like, I really hope that it was past everyone's bedtime the way it was mine and no one got to see this game because it started late.

I went into overtime. Well, but, but that Slavin Werenski, Brock Faber, um, Sanderson, yeah, four. Yeah. And just the way that they were able to, like honestly, it felt like they were, you know, that robot in Wally that follows them around and just like, they were able to keep it so clean in, in the American end of the ice.

I thought given, especially given that it's international hockey played, best on best international hockey played on an NHL sheet, their ability to just consistently break Canada's forecheck, especially with Canada built to apply pressure, right, given the speed of Canada's forwards, how rarely they were bothered. Yeah. I mean, that's just a tremendous, like, testament to their skill level, their awareness, their speed as a group. I mean, I just thought that American Top 4 looked and felt all evening like they were just about

impenetrable. And obviously Canada was able to get, yeah, I mean, like, they weren't able to get slaving and favor at any point, but they Werenzky and Sanderson were both on for a goal against. But, I mean, it felt like that required the grace of God to accomplish. That's so for me more than anything, it's just like, you subtracted Quinn Hughes from that American blue line and they still performed at that level. That to me is an astonishing thing. And frankly, I do think also sets the stage for Team Canada's roster building process and selection in Milan. Because let's be real.

Like one of the reasons why this game was so tight, despite Canada having more elite forward skill, was just the way that, like they had an edge, a meaningful edge in terms of the play of their blue line. Even with Kail McCar, you know, exerting some, um, some puck on a string control, especially in the latter stages of the second period. There were some moments where it felt like he was ramping up and it was like, it felt like a matter of time and it never really wound up happening in that way. But there were, yeah, there were some downhill shifts where it was like he was just building up momentum and he was just taking on a larger and larger workload. I also kind of think, I kind of wonder about Doughty. I know it's not like he feels like, you know, the meme where it's like adult splinter holding the baby turtle's hands and then old splinter holding the full grown teenage mutant Ninja Turtles hands.

You know, I know that we're going to regard him as something of a gray beard in this tournament. You know, passing the torch from like that Duncan Keith handed him once upon a time to Thomas Harley. But he's missed so much of the season. Yeah. And you could tell, like he was a gamer tonight, right? Like this was his best game of the tournament. So you can tell that he's kind of still finding his legs. What a crash course for him and for the L.A. Kings.

for him to be thrust into this environment, get better as the tournament goes on, and now he's got 10 or 11 games down instead of just six, and then back on ice for two weeks. You know, this King's team, we know, has performed really well all season. They hit a bit of a swoon over the course of the month before the Four Nations break, but they're one of the elite defensive teams in hockey. They're one of the elite five-on-five just controlling play teams in this league. and now they're adding this version of Doughty to it.

I mean, that feels potent to me. And I do think he's one of those guys, again, who we actually should probably put aside like our ageism on and say he's a guy who the trajectory of his season may fundamentally alter because he got to participate in this. I still can't help. I know Canada won this tournament. I can't help but feel that guys like Weiger and Brandon Montour

just skill set-wise are so well suited for this type of play. you just talk about everything that's separated Team USA defensively from the guys they were able to send out there consistently to retrieve pucks to break down Canada's forecheck to to just make plays in space and those are guys whose skating ability excels right and so regardless of whether it's on NHL ice or on international ice it just feels like that type of movement and having guys you can join the play right because you think about it I know that McDavid had that highlight real goal in the round robin game there were a few instances where either him or McKinnon would get behind the defense and a guy like Matthews or Slavin would as a last-ditch effort knock a puck down or prevent

them from getting out on a breakaway all alone. But those instances were so few and far between considering the speed of those guys and the game-breaking ability and what we've come to expect from their games. And so finding ways to supplement that rush with some defensive reinforcements, I feel like, would go a long way. But that's a conversation for another day. We're going to have another, what, 350 days or so until the next batch of best on best hockey to talk about.

I do think, though, it's important to note how NHL-ish these games were officiated, especially like NHL postseason. Yes. Where, I mean, the Trocheque one was like a blatant trip on a guy breaking the puck out. It felt like it probably would have needed to either be a clear. The too many men. That it was just like go. I mean, it felt like it would even need to be like a high stick that drew blood that just had to be called because it had to be reviewed or a guy's shooting it over the boards.

Or that engagement. I loved the engagement between Brady Kachuk and Sam Reinhart in the first period where, you know, Reinhardt ends up getting hauled down, which you don't see very often. In the moment, in real time, I was just like, oh, man, like that was just a stick battle. And Brady Kachuk's just a monster of a man. And then you see the highlight. And it's like, oh, no, he held him and they don't care. I think Kevin BX on the Sportsnet broadcast referred to it as prison rules, which drew a chuckle for me. I, you know, one thing I loved about the entirety of this tournament, Dim, was how little we talked about the referees at all. No off-sides reviews. No off-sides reviews.

No questionable, like goal got scored after a puck in the net or something silly like that. No, no anticlimactic moments. And the referees stayed out of the way. I mean, I don't know that the league could have had a better officiated seven-game run or whatever it was throughout this tournament, then what they got. It was perfect. And I actually think that is one of the reasons

why we're coming out of this sort of week, this scintillating week of hockey, thinking so fondly of it. There was no bad hits discourse. Like it was truly just distilled to its essence the best players playing fast competitive hockey for the sake of it. Invested in this tournament,

just sort of for pride and that created the stakes that we all just kind of collectively agreed were there. Look, there's political context to it too, of course, that can't be ignored. But fundamentally, we took our cues from the guys on the ice who played this tournament

like it was life and death, like it mattered so much. And as a result, this tournament mattered so much. So hat tip to everyone involved, because this was, you know, as memorable and thrilling a week of hockey as we ever could have reasonably expected. I mean, it was hockey at its purest. It was played at its highest level.

And talking about this game and even the one that came before between these two teams and the stage, it was on as well from a scheduling perspective, right? With nothing really to compete with in the sports world on a meaningful perspective and just like the amount of attention it got, the amount of eyeballs it drew, and then anyone that was tuning in that might not have otherwise been what they were treated to,

I feel like even if you aren't a hockey fan who's tuning in to a random regular season game that St. Louis national game that I described midweek, you might still not be tuning into that by any means, but I feel like this actually sort of portrays why we love NHL hockey, right? And so I think that was incredibly cool. I want to shout out Brandon Hagel as well. I don't think we've mentioned them at all in this episode. For his hard bars and just dope performance. I mean, what an incredible show. And you talk about guys who raise their stock. Obviously, anyone who listens to this show, he's been on our my guys list for years now, so it's nothing new. Just his compete level, how involved he is,

how much dog he has in him. He had that play where he tipped him a car shot and I think it hit the bar, right? It really could have gone in and that would have won the game earlier on. He was incredible. They were playing him with Sorrelia and Marner for a while, and that was a legitimately potent line as well. So I thought Hegel was incredible. And, you know, playing in Tampa might not necessarily, especially with all the other guys they have in there. You might get lost in the shuffle a little bit. even though he's up there, especially in even strength scoring, but then you watch this, and it's impossible to come away without feeling like he's one of the best players in the world, right?

And so this is what it's all about. A guy like that getting to not just make this team because it's like, oh, his NHL club coach is also the head coach of his team, and that's why he's making it. It's like, no, he's just an incredible player who just every time he's on the ice does something impactful for his team. Well, and John Cooper, because if Canada doesn't win this tournament, he probably still coaches the Olympics,

given that they made the final, but, you know, could have been a little bit touch and go, but now he's going to get another run, a chance to win an Olympic gold medal and add that to his already well-stocked trophy case. And I'm excited for that. You know, the winners and gamers, right, the bringing his three Tampa Bay dogs and the consistency.

Point was awesome, too. Point was so many battles. Just chasing the pocket was incredible. And I also think the way that Point needed, demanded, given his performance to be moved up the lineup. You know, the fact that watching these games, it was pretty clear that after the McKinnon-McDavid tier, it's Braden Point as the third best Canadian forward in the league right now.

I mean, again, that's a new tier for him, right? That's a new, the public will understand Braden Point's greatness in a different way. But also I think there's a fundamental shift in evidence there in terms of how the senior Canadian men's national team approaches winning, right? This emphasis on skill, but also speed, but also guts, right? Winners and gamers and sort of exemplified by the three players from his own team that Cooper brought. You know, I think that's a fascinating shift in and of itself away from sort of the more like size-based, measured, composed negative style of game, frankly, that the Canadian national team played under Mike Babcock.

Now we'll get a sort of longer runway to see Cooper express and adjust to that. And I'm excited about that, frankly, because I think it's fun. Like, I think it's a more fun way of playing, and I think it's a cool way for us to think about what actually works and what actually matters in hockey. I think we covered it. I feel like, you know, this had such a big game feel. Do we need more Bennington in overtime? He was incredible.

I mean, he was awesome. He was incredible. What else do you say? I mean, talk about going against the grain in terms of the run of play. Like, in those first five minutes, the looks Matthews got, or like, it's almost unfathomable what they didn't score on one of them. Especially considering how well he was playing and what a shooter he is and he just stood his ground. It was one-on-one. He made some incredible saves until Canada was able to come down and score.

So that was the difference. It's just got to be shouted out that for all the conversation around Bennington, leading into that overtime period, the fact that we were nervous about him throughout the game. Well, and yet, I talked about his footwork earlier on, and watching this game, it did feel like probably Team USA, I imagine, went to the locker room during the second intermission and saw exactly what we saw, because you saw them come out, and I feel like they changed their offensive approach. They were much more aggressive in just getting pucks on net. They were trying to shoot from everywhere. Now, the looks they got in overtime were all grade A, so it wasn't necessarily a matter of them,

of Carolina hurricanesing this and just trying to throw everything on net when it mattered most. But in that third period, they kind of changed their offensive approach and went to more of a quantity-based type of tactic. And he still made the saves and held in there and obviously didn't give up a goal against, even if it might have looked sketchy at times. So I thought that was an incredibly interesting, just from like an in-game adjustment perspective and what maybe the two teams were seeing. This was awesome.

This was really fun. This tournament was incredible. It's weird to think that we're going to jump back into NHL hockey now. but we are going to do so. We're going to keep doing the show, of course. I'm looking forward to that. You got any parting shots here or other notes that we haven't covered? Just what a great tournament and what a fun experience for, you know,

certainly for me to just be a fan. You know, I really felt like this tournament sort of took me out of my cold, rational beatwriter mode of watching hockey and just sort of let me feel the, like, emotional, roller coaster of high stakes hockey. And man, it's been too long. It had been too long since I watched Best on Best. That was just such a thrill. I know USA was one goal away from winning it all, and they felt like they're a better

team, especially as the game progressed right into that third period and then it's overtime. Yet, man, describing what we talked about, especially after losing Matthew Kuchuk, and that sucks so much for him that he wasn't able to play after he said this was the biggest game of his life months after he had just won game seven. of the Stanley Cup finals at home. But then being exposed that way and, you know, some of our questions heading in and we should acknowledge that the ones we had for Canada were like,

should Sam Bennett be on this team? And then we talked about the outsized impact he had for Team USA. I was like, hmm, why are guys like Trocheck and Kreider on this team? And then just thinking about the potential of having a guy like Tage Thompson or Clayton Keller or Cole Cawfield, especially as his game progressed and having someone to play with Jack Hughes and giving him a bit of a life raft offensively instead of what they had to deal with as an alternative.

That's something I would be thinking about and being like, man, that was a missed opportunity if I was Team USA. A huge missed opportunity. And I think that's also part of the fun. You know, you have the Canadian team put in Jarvis over Kineckney, really doubling down on the winners and gamers speed thing. You have Team USA taking Kyle Connor out and putting in Chris Kreider,

really doubling down on the size and sort of grinding his thing. Now, Criders obviously also an elite skater, but nonetheless, I think that told you a lot about how these two teams thought they would win, or these two coaching staffs anyway, thought they would win. And, you know, I think what's sort of funny to reflect on is that what felt most impactful for the Americans in this game was the speed of their back end. And I think Canada is going to need to take some steps to address. What I actually see is a gap in quality between the American Blue Line right now

in Canada's before the 2026 Olympics in Milan. Meanwhile, I think the U.S. needs to sort of have the opposite thought process or go through the opposite process when it comes to their forward group. Like they, you know, you're never going to have McKinnon and McDavid, unfortunately, despite your annexation attempts. But you do need to make sure you're not at a skill deficit. You really do. And I think ultimately it did feel like that at times tonight.

All right, buddy. Well, this was fun. The tournament was great. Tonight was great. I'm really grateful that your travel plans go to Vegas to resume NHL action and cover the Vancouver Canucks got postponed for a day so we were able to watch us together and do this postgame show. It's always a fun experience doing these right after the final whistle too because you haven't had a chance to rewatch it or kind of reflect on it or think about it. We're just doing it right off the cuff. So hopefully people enjoyed that. Everyone check out Thomas's work, Canucks Talk on the Sports Night Radio Network, his coverage of the Canucks at the athletic.

We're going to have them back on, as usual, for Sunday specials moving forward. We'll be back with one more episode this week of the Hockey PEOCast to close things out. Thank you for listening to us here on the Sportsnet Radio Network.