Best Canadien player in Europe

Who's the best Canadien player playing in Europe?

:help:

Who's the best Canadien player playing in Europe?

:help:

Last year Kevin Dallman was one of the top, if not the top player in the KHL. I believe he is the leading scorer on defense again this year. Unfortunately I think most of the North Americans that don't make the NHL end up retiring instead of going to play in Europe.

Last year Kevin Dallman was one of the top, if not the top player in the KHL. I believe he is the leading scorer on defense again this year. Unfortunately I think most of the North Americans that don't make the NHL end up retiring instead of going to play in Europe.

Yeah right and that´s why such a small number as 181 Canadian players alone play in the top 6 European leagues and that is while some of those leagues have restrictions on imports.

Btw Dallman was NOT the best player in the KHL last year.:shakehead

Yeah right and that´s why such a small number as 181 Canadian players alone play in the top 6 European leagues and that is while some of those leagues have restrictions on imports.

You do realize that Canada has more people playing hockey than all of Europe and Asia combined. If Canadians had both equal access to and the desire to be in the European leagues, then you would see approximately the same numbers of Canadians and Europeans in these leagues. Clearly with 181 players that is not the case now.

Btw Dallman was NOT the best player in the KHL last year.:shakehead

As a Dman he finished 5th in league scoring, out scored all other defencemen and outscored 99% of the leagues forwards, I'd say that deserves consideration as one of the best.

You do realize that Canada has more people playing hockey than all of Europe and Asia combined. If Canadians had both equal access to and the desire to be in the European leagues, then you would see approximately the same numbers of Canadians and Europeans in these leagues. Clearly with 181 players that is not the case now.



As a Dman he finished 5th in league scoring, out scored all other defencemen and outscored 99% of the leagues forwards, I'd say that deserves consideration as one of the best.

From what I understand, Dallman was a sideshow on a bad team. The team's style was centered around getting him points as an attraction.

You do realize that Canada has more people playing hockey than all of Europe and Asia combined. If Canadians had both equal access to and the desire to be in the European leagues, then you would see approximately the same numbers of Canadians and Europeans in these leagues. Clearly with 181 players that is not the case now.



YOu do realize that not all of Canada´s players are equal? You were mentioning those that don´t make it to the NHL and with that I meant that at least somehow cam close to that and most of those do either end up in NA minor leagues and Europe. If most of those that don´t make it retire why does Canada have over 147 000 men´s players? And the claim that if Canadian´s had equal acces that they would be the same number of Europeans and Canadians is nonsense. The reason why there are restrictions on imports is that there is not a high number of those imports that would actually be better than the home players. Just look at DEL- 94 Canadian players, the most from the 6 counted leagues and surprise, surprise it is the worst one of those 6 and no limit on imports is one of the reasons why German hockey has struggled in the past few years. Another thing is, I mentioned only the 6 leagues, but you realize that in Europe there are less developed leagues in almost all countries and those countries tend to have way more Canadians than most of the top leagues minus DEL:

EBEL 51
Al-Bank Ligaen 21
Serie A 49
Ligue Magnus 38
EIHL 55

Just a few examples.

If most of those that don´t make it retire why does Canada have over 147 000 men´s players?

Maybe because Men's recreational hockey is very popular in Canada, I obviously meant retiring from competitive hockey.

And the claim that if Canadian´s had equal acces that they would be the same number of Europeans and Canadians is nonsense.

I said if they had equal access AND the desire to play in Europe. I realize who the Slovak's were allied with 70 years ago, but please drop this master race bs. One for one Canadian players are just as good as anyone else.

The reason why there are restrictions on imports is that there is not a high number of those imports that would actually be better than the home players.

This statement is clearly not true and it shows either you are not all there or you have an anti Canadian political agenda.

Just look at DEL- 94 Canadian players, the most from the 6 counted leagues and surprise, surprise it is the worst one of those 6 and no limit on imports is one of the reasons why German hockey has struggled in the past few years. Another thing is, I mentioned only the 6 leagues, but you realize that in Europe there are less developed leagues in almost all countries and those countries tend to have way more Canadians than most of the top leagues minus DEL:

EBEL 51
Al-Bank Ligaen 21
Serie A 49
Ligue Magnus 38
EIHL 55

Just a few examples.

I'm not arguing against the import rules in Europe. Clearly the rules are there to help develop domestic players, just simply stating that it is one factor which effects the number of foreign players in Europe.

Maybe because Men's recreational hockey is very popular in Canada, I obviously meant retiring from competitive hockey.



I said if they had equal access AND the desire to play in Europe. I realize who the Slovak's were allied with 70 years ago, but please drop this master race bs. One for one Canadian players are just as good as anyone else.



This statement is clearly not true and it shows either you are not all there or you have an anti Canadian political agenda.



I'm not arguing against the import rules in Europe. Clearly the rules are there to help develop domestic players, just simply stating that it is one factor which effects the number of foreign players in Europe.

:laugh:

First of all, if I have any political agenda then it is oriented on the West and if I have any anti-political agenda then it is against Mr. Putin´s Russia and his autocrative regime. You remember these "allies" of ours sent us tanks for 30 years over here, right?:shakehead

I´ve got nothing against Caniadians, but I hate it when you guys believe that every single one of your players is better or equal with Europeans. I clearly showed you an example with the DEL as the league with the most Canadians in Europe and the leagues is one of the worst when you consider the ecnomical possibilities Germany has. And it´s not like those Canadian players are some garbage ones, they often have years of NHL and AHL experience.

:laugh:
I´ve got nothing against Caniadians, but I hate it when you guys believe that every single one of your players is better or equal with Europeans.

I am arguing that on average we are equal, if that bothers you then I don't know what to say.

Unfortunately I think most of the North Americans that don't make the NHL end up retiring instead of going to play in Europe.

That is simply wrong, and you know it. Most of them don't retire, in fact, hardly anyone does. Obviously those who were far away from getting anywhere in professional hockey do retire, but those were never anywhere close to making the NHL in the first place, thus they have no place in the discussion.

Those who can't make it to the NHL usually toil as a veteran in the AHL or go to Europe to make more money, sometimes going back and forth.

Apart from that, this has absolutely nothing to do with the question that was asked, so why bring it up in the first place?


To go back on topic, that question is hard to answer. There is a difference between being the most skillful and the most successful. Not to mention that you also have to look at the style of play. Player A may be better than player B in North America, but that doesn't mean that he is the better player in Europe.

That is simply wrong, and you know it. Most of them don't retire, in fact, hardly anyone does. Obviously those who were far away from getting anywhere in professional hockey do retire, but those were never anywhere close to making the NHL in the first place, thus they have no place in the discussion.

Those who can't make it to the NHL usually toil as a veteran in the AHL or go to Europe to make more money, sometimes going back and forth.


The vast vast majority of Canadian Major Junior and NCAA players who don't get drafted into the NHL end up retiring from competitive hockey once they are finished in those programs. Just because they didn't get drafted into the NHL doesn't mean that they could not make it in a European league, but for most North Americans their dream is to be in the NHL and once they realize that it is likely not going to happen they move on with their lives. Yes there are players who keep going and play in Europe, but to say that the majority of them do this is simply wrong.

In Finland the best Canadien players IMO are Steve Kariya, Colby Genoway and Dale Clarke.

In the DEL in my opinion

Fred Brathwaite, gk, Mannheim
Brandon Reid, c, Düsseldorf
Steve Walker, lw, Berlin

Jeff Friesen still has to adjust.

Hpefully Ross Lupaschuk :D

Ric Jackman :laugh:

I found this article

http://www.eurohockey.net/playingineurope/expectations.html

The Abbott twins in Luleå (SHL) are great. I think they're Canadian at least.

The Abbott twins in Luleå (SHL) are great. I think they're Canadian at least.

Yah, they are from Sarnia

Lee Goren in Färjestad (SHL)

Lee Goren in Färjestad (SHL)

Not a bad player but certainly not the best Canadian in Europe. Guy kept producing great numbers in Tappara with Lehterä, but did nothing when he was placed in the 2nd line. He was a top-5 Canadian in Finland though.

Canadians in SM-liiga IMHO:

1. Kurtis McLean
2. Steve Kariya
3. Shayne Toporowski
4. Ross Lupachuk
5. Lee Goren (if he still played in Finland)
6. Colby Genoway
7. Dale Clarke
8. Tyler Redenbach
9. Scott Barney
10. Darcy Campbell

That is simply wrong, and you know it. Most of them don't retire, in fact, hardly anyone does. Obviously those who were far away from getting anywhere in professional hockey do retire, but those were never anywhere close to making the NHL in the first place, thus they have no place in the discussion.

Those who can't make it to the NHL usually toil as a veteran in the AHL or go to Europe to make more money, sometimes going back and forth.


Correct.

Most competitive players don’t retire because their NHL dream is over; they retire because they lack the skills to earn a solid living from the game (meaning they’re not good enough for upper Euro leagues anyways).

With the average AHL salary of around $60+K and with almost double that to be made in Europe, your typical AHL talent is NOT retiring once the NHL is out of reach - especially considering the “hockey first” competitive player probably lacks the education to make that $$ in another line of work.

It’s the hoards of ECHL level players that are quitting....but like you said, they have little relevance to this discussion.

Correct.

Most competitive players don’t retire because their NHL dream is over; they retire because they lack the skills to earn a solid living from the game (meaning they’re not good enough for upper Euro leagues anyways).

With the average AHL salary of around $60+K and with almost double that to be made in Europe, your typical AHL talent is NOT retiring once the NHL is out of reach - especially considering the “hockey first” competitive player probably lacks the education to make that $$ in another line of work.

It’s the hoards of ECHL level players that are quitting....but like you said, they have little relevance to this discussion.

So why is it that relative to our overall participation numbers there are so few North Americans playing professionally in Europe?

So why is it that relative to our overall participation numbers there are so few North Americans playing professionally in Europe?

It’s due to a combination of import restrictions and players not being good enough. Remember, an import has to be better than a domestic player to earn a job. Those that aren't generally stay as career AHLers.

As slovakiaforever illustrated, the proof is with the DEL and NLA which are the leagues with weakened and no import restrictions. These 2 leagues house the largest amount of North Americans and generally the best North Americans not in the NHL (aka the players who’d be tearing up the AHL but lack the potential of the younger AHL prospects).....and yet they are 2 of the weaker European leagues.
Also take into consideration there's not much need for the 3rd/4th line 'grinder' type which makes up a sizeable chunk of NA playing population.

It’s due to a combination of import restrictions and players not being good enough.

So how is it that there are so many more people playing hockey in NA and yet so few that are good enough to play in Europe? Why do the European leagues need to restrict the number of foreign players, sounds to me that you are saying it is not necessary anyway?

The truth is that if North Americans had free access to and the desire to play in Europe then they would be represented in numbers proportional to overall player participation, just as Europeans are in the NHL. Yes there would be a variance of a few percent either way, but once again your claim that North Americans aren't good enough is just another dose of your zealous nationalism.

There are very few Canadians in the SEL (Sweden), at this moment only 16 (as seen in the link below). Sweden only allows two non-Europeans per team to dress up for each game (unless they have dual citizenship and also hold a European passport), that could be part of the reason. Of these guys I'd probably rank the Abbott brothers and Lee Goren highest at the moment. Not sure about the other leagues listed below though as I don't follow them.

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player_nationalities_in_league.php?LeagueID=Elitse rien&NationID=3

Other leagues have more Canadian players, for example the German DEL has as many as 95 Canadians at the moment, and the Swiss NLA has 37.

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player_nationalities_in_league.php?LeagueID=DEL&NationID=3

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player_nationalities_in_league.php?LeagueID=NLA&NationID=3

The KHL has relatively few Canadians at 26, and the Finnish SM-Liiga only 11.

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player_nationalities_in_league.php?LeagueID=KHL&NationID=3

http://www.eliteprospects.com/player_nationalities_in_league.php?LeagueID=SM-Liiga&NationID=3

Its two different games played on two different rinks in which said players grow up playing a different style.

The truth is that if North Americans had free access to and the desire to play in Europe then they would be represented in numbers proportional to overall player participation, just as Europeans are in the NHL. Yes there would be a variance of a few percent either way, but once again your claim that North Americans aren't good enough is just another dose of your zealous nationalism.

Evidence suggests otherwise.

If non-NHLers had equal access, Euro leagues would NOT be proportional to overall player nor NHL participation numbers.
With so few North Americans in Europe and a supposed outrageous advantage in talent depth based on participation numbers, the AHL (full of NAs) should be exceedingly better than any European league, particularly depth wise. But it’s not….actually far from it.

Honestly, how could this scenario mirror NHL participation/talent breakdown when a large collection of best non-NHL Canadian talent is basically only equal to European club level (as seen during Spenglar Cup tournament)? And we’re not even getting into the previously stated DEL/NLA example.

If anything, this illustrates that using NHL participation numbers as a barometer for measuring overall talent depth is extremely faulty logic.

Evidence suggests otherwise.

If non-NHLers had equal access, Euro leagues would NOT be proportional to overall player nor NHL participation numbers.
With so few North Americans in Europe and a supposed outrageous advantage in talent depth based on participation numbers, the AHL (full of NAs) should be exceedingly better than any European league, particularly depth wise. But it’s not….actually far from it.

Honestly, how could this scenario mirror NHL participation/talent breakdown when a large collection of best non-NHL Canadian talent is basically only equal to European club level (as seen during Spenglar Cup tournament)? And we’re not even getting into the previously stated DEL/NLA example.

If anything, this illustrates that using NHL participation numbers as a barometer for measuring overall talent depth is extremely faulty logic.


Side note

the Canadian team at the Spengler in not the best non-NHL canadian talent. The best non-NHL canadian talent is in the AHL. 20 of the 22 guys on the roster play in Europe.

So taking that and the fact that the Canadians have been in the final 12 of the last 14 years with not having the best non-NHL canadian talent. Imagine what would happen if they DID have the best non-NHL canadian talent.

Evidence suggests otherwise.

If non-NHLers had equal access, Euro leagues would NOT be proportional to overall player nor NHL participation numbers.
With so few North Americans in Europe and a supposed outrageous advantage in talent depth based on participation numbers, the AHL (full of NAs) should be exceedingly better than any European league, particularly depth wise. But it’s not….actually far from it.

Honestly, how could this scenario mirror NHL participation/talent breakdown when a large collection of best non-NHL Canadian talent is basically only equal to European club level (as seen during Spenglar Cup tournament)? And we’re not even getting into the previously stated DEL/NLA example.

If anything, this illustrates that using NHL participation numbers as a barometer for measuring overall talent depth is extremely faulty logic.

Well some how the overall participation numbers found in the IIHF's Survey of Players are directly proportional to the number of arenas in each country and is directly proportional to the number of players in the world's top league. If you don't think that in a free and open system that would extend to Europe then I suggest you keep on drinking the bigot cool-aid.
:shakehead

Its two different games played on two different rinks in which said players grow up playing a different style.

The difference in the NA and European games is often greatly understated. Look at how long it takes some players to adjust to playing for a new team, let alone playing in a completely new league, with different sized ice, different rules and reffing, etc. The adjustment time works the same both ways, but it obviously gives the Europeans a HUGE advantage at most international tournaments.

Side note

the Canadian team at the Spengler in not the best non-NHL canadian talent. The best non-NHL canadian talent is in the AHL. 20 of the 22 guys on the roster play in Europe.

So taking that and the fact that the Canadians have been in the final 12 of the last 14 years with not having the best non-NHL canadian talent. Imagine what would happen if they DID have the best non-NHL canadian talent.

By and large, Spengler Cup team IS made up of a lot of the best non-NHL talent.
Many are low level NHLers who decide to play in Europe for a paycheck. Others are veterans who've 'maxed out' potential wise but are still currently better than top prospects in AHL.

Here's last years roster.....a team with nearly 4,000 games of NHL experience.
http://www.hockeycanada.ca/index.php/ci_id/58778/la_id/1.htm

I don't see how they'd be any worse than an AHL all-star team.

Well some how the overall participation numbers found in the IIHF's Survey of Players are directly proportional to the number of arenas in each country and is directly proportional to the number of players in the world's top league. If you don't think that in a free and open system that would extend to Europe then I suggest you keep on drinking the bigot cool-aid.
:shakehead


No it’s not proportional.

Canada produces NHLers at a high rate per player (438 current NHLers according to NHL.com, per 499,625 participants via IIHF.com).
Per player produced, that’s nearly twice the number of NHLers as Russia; 3x that of Finland; roughly twice that of Czech Republic. Ironically, the only country that produces a higher rate of NHLers per player is Slovakia.

If total NHLers mirrored a country's player participation, these rates would generally be even amongst all countries; however they’re not.
Right now there’s a sizable exodus of European NHL talent due to increased salaries elsewhere and cap limitations…..and this is amongst players who initially choose to play in the NHL. And let’s not forget NHL is a North American league whereby it's generally easier for North Americans to flourish.
Even America's participation numbers are skewed because a good size of it is in underdevloped hockey places (USA has low NHL player/participant ratio).

If IIHF figures were directly proportional across the board (if everybody produced at Canada’s rate because they had equal access and equal want for NHL) the total number of Canadian NHLers would drop from from its current 54% to just below 39%.
Put these numbers in a European league setting where Canadians are more disadvatnaged than NHL and it drops even more....perhaps as low as 30%.

Although it may give us some basic insight, NHL participation is NOT a solid barometer for accurately measuring overall talent depth. On the surface it appears to be, but dig deeper and we find some extremely faulty and/or biased logic.....there are just too many factors that could corrupt results.

By and large, Spengler Cup team IS made up of a lot of the best non-NHL talent.
Many are low level NHLers who decide to play in Europe for a paycheck. Others are veterans who've 'maxed out' potential wise but are still currently better than top prospects in AHL.

Here's last years roster.....a team with nearly 4,000 games of NHL experience.
http://www.hockeycanada.ca/index.php/ci_id/58778/la_id/1.htm

I don't see how they'd be any worse than an AHL all-star team.

2009 Canadian AHL All Star Team
Forwards
Steve Downie, Norfolk
Alexandre Giroux, Hershey
Claude Giroux, Philadelphia
Cody Franson, Milwaukee
Mike Iggulden, Bridgeport
Jason Krog, Manitoba
Corey Locke, Houston
Brett MacLean, San Antonio
Mark Mancari, Portland
Chris Minard, W-B/Scranton
Cal O’Reilly, Milwaukee
Teddy Purcell, Manchester
Martin St. Pierre, Providence
Mike Santorelli, Milwaukee

Defensemen
Johnny Boychuk, Providence
Kyle Cumiskey, Lake Erie
Bryan Helmer, Hershey (”C”)
Derek Joslin, Worcester
Andrew MacDonald, Bridgeport
Brett Palin, Quad City
Danny Syvret, Philadelphia

Goaltenders
Mike Brodeur, Rochester
Barry Brust, Houston
Brian Elliott, Binghamton


you would take the Spen over this team?

No it’s not proportional.

Canada produces NHLers at a high rate per player (438 current NHLers according to NHL.com, per 499,625 participants via IIHF.com).
Per player produced, that’s nearly twice the number of NHLers as Russia; 3x that of Finland; roughly twice that of Czech Republic. Ironically, the only country that produces a higher rate of NHLers per player is Slovakia.

If total NHLers mirrored a country's player participation, these rates would generally be even amongst all countries; however they’re not.
Right now there’s a sizable exodus of European NHL talent due to increased salaries elsewhere and cap limitations…..and this is amongst players who initially choose to play in the NHL. And let’s not forget NHL is a North American league whereby it's generally easier for North Americans to flourish.
Even America's participation numbers are skewed because a good size of it is in underdevloped hockey places (USA has low NHL player/participant ratio).

If IIHF figures were directly proportional across the board (if everybody produced at Canada’s rate because they had equal access and equal want for NHL) the total number of Canadian NHLers would drop from from its current 54% to just below 39%.
Put these numbers in a European league setting where Canadians are more disadvatnaged than NHL and it drops even more....perhaps as low as 30%.

Although it may give us some basic insight, NHL participation is NOT a solid barometer for accurately measuring overall talent depth. On the surface it appears to be, but dig deeper and we find some extremely faulty and/or biased logic.....there are just too many factors that could corrupt results.

The main reason for this anomoly is that todays NHL numbers are relative to the overall participation numbers of ~20 years ago. I expect that participation in the US has increased considerably since then and in Czechoslovakia (particularily Slovakia) it likely has decreased. Yes the NA players will have a slight advantage in the NHL and viceversa, but given time to adjust that advantage decreases. At the peak Europeans represented around 31% of NHLers, which was very close to their overall participation rate. This shows that it is possible for players to adjust and come close to representing their overall participation numbers in a foreign pro league.

The main reason for this anomoly is that todays NHL numbers are relative to the overall participation numbers of ~20 years ago. I expect that participation in the US has increased considerably since then and in Czechoslovakia (particularily Slovakia) it likely has decreased. Yes the NA players will have a slight advantage in the NHL and viceversa, but given time to adjust that advantage decreases. At the peak Europeans represented around 31% of NHLers, which was very close to their overall participation rate. This shows that it is possible for players to adjust and come close to representing their overall participation numbers in a foreign pro league.



It’s not an anomaly, it’s another reason why NHL participation numbers aren't reliable; unless, that is, you can prove a correlation between current NHLers and the IIHF participation rates of 15-20 years ago…numbers you probably don’t even have.

You can’t use a study and claim #s as legitimate for one country and outdated for another and come to a conclusion based on what you 'expect'.
Basically, you’re picking and choosing evidence to fit your hypothesis.
And it’s not just the USA and Czechs, this anomaly still doesn’t explain Canada’s higher average compared to Russia and Finland.

2009 Canadian AHL All Star Team
Forwards
Steve Downie, Norfolk
Alexandre Giroux, Hershey
Claude Giroux, Philadelphia
Cody Franson, Milwaukee
Mike Iggulden, Bridgeport
Jason Krog, Manitoba
Corey Locke, Houston
Brett MacLean, San Antonio
Mark Mancari, Portland
Chris Minard, W-B/Scranton
Cal O’Reilly, Milwaukee
Teddy Purcell, Manchester
Martin St. Pierre, Providence
Mike Santorelli, Milwaukee

Defensemen
Johnny Boychuk, Providence
Kyle Cumiskey, Lake Erie
Bryan Helmer, Hershey (”C”)
Derek Joslin, Worcester
Andrew MacDonald, Bridgeport
Brett Palin, Quad City
Danny Syvret, Philadelphia

Goaltenders
Mike Brodeur, Rochester
Barry Brust, Houston
Brian Elliott, Binghamton


you would take the Spen over this team?


Truthfully, I'd probably take the upper half of each team to make the true All-Star team.
Basically the same as what I said earlier that a lot of the best non-NHL talent is on Spenglar Cup team.

Janick Lehoux playing for SSK (SEL) is pretty good as well, disapear sometimes but does have good offensive hockey sence + pretty good shot.

Truthfully, I'd probably take the upper half of each team to make the true All-Star team.
Basically the same as what I said earlier that a lot of the best non-NHL talent is on Spenglar Cup team.

It doesnt really matter what you would take, 3/4 of the All-star team are just more talented. Maybe you could slide 1/4, realistically less the that, of the Spen team and have the best non-NHL canadian talent but this All-star team is more talented across the board the the Spen team which means the Spen is not made up of the best non-NHL Canadian talent. It is made up of the best Canadian talent in Europe. I wouldnt even go that far tbh.

Big difference

It doesnt really matter what you would take, 3/4 of the All-star team are just more talented. Maybe you could slide 1/4, realistically less the that, of the Spen team and have the best non-NHL canadian talent but this All-star team is more talented across the board the the Spen team which means the Spen is not made up of the best non-NHL Canadian talent. It is made up of the best Canadian talent in Europe. I wouldnt even go that far tbh.

Big difference

At this point, talent is nothing more than potential for many of those AHL all-stars; it does not mean they’re all better players at this moment.
Go through the rosters. More Spenglar players have been NHL regulars in recent years.

BTW, I never said Spenglar Cup team has all the best non-NHL Canadian talent. I said it had a lot of the best non-NHL talent....especially in terms of proving it in a higher than AHL setting. And that’s 100% correct.

At this point, talent is nothing more than potential for many of those AHL all-stars; it does not mean they’re all better players at this moment.
Go through the rosters. More Spenglar players have been NHL regulars in recent years.

BTW, I never said Spenglar Cup team has all the best non-NHL Canadian talent. I said it had a lot of the best non-NHL talent....especially in terms of proving it in a higher than AHL setting. And that’s 100% correct.

I thought we were talking about the players being the best non-NHL canadian talent at the time they play on the Spen. Not at some point in the past of their careers.

AHL Canadian All-star team 2009 is filled with with better non-nhl canadian talent across the board then the 2008 Spen team. That is my whole point.....

"I don't see how they'd be any worse than an AHL all-star team."

1. Thats how the Spen team would be worse then the AHL Canadian all-stars,

"when a large collection of best non-NHL Canadian talent is basically only equal to European club level (as seen during Spenglar Cup tournament"

2. The best non-NHL canadian talent does not play for the Canadian Spen team. The best non-nhl canadian talent is in the AHL and dont compete at the Spen. Once again, Canada has been in the finals 12 of the last 14 years with the non-best, non-NHL canadian talent. Imagine how ridiculously dominant they would have been with the best non-NHL canadian talent.

It’s not an anomaly, it’s another reason why NHL participation numbers aren't reliable; unless, that is, you can prove a correlation between current NHLers and the IIHF participation rates of 15-20 years ago…numbers you probably don’t even have.

You can’t use a study and claim #s as legitimate for one country and outdated for another and come to a conclusion based on what you 'expect'.
Basically, you’re picking and choosing evidence to fit your hypothesis.
And it’s not just the USA and Czechs, this anomaly still doesn’t explain Canada’s higher average compared to Russia and Finland.

In terms of measuring overall national depth, in my opinion the IIHF survey of players is probably the best sample area, followed by NHL statistics, probably followed by WJC results, followed by the results of the men's tournaments that had a high participation rate by the top players from each country, and so on. The reason I say the WJC is because it is played relatively frequently and generally the participation rate is high for the top players of that age group.

There is no such thing as the perfect statistical source, there will be anomalies in every one of them, but the key is to find the broadest source of data available. The essence of my argument is that on average people are inherently equal, to which I hope you'd agree.

If you feel you have a better source of data, then please share it with us.

2. The best non-NHL canadian talent does not play for the Canadian Spen team. The best non-nhl canadian talent is in the AHL and dont compete at the Spen. Once again, Canada has been in the finals 12 of the last 14 years with the non-best, non-NHL canadian talent. Imagine how ridiculously dominant they would have been with the best non-NHL canadian talent.
You are yet to provide any evidence that the AHL All stars are any better than the Spengler Cup team. After all many players in the Spengler Cup teams are former AHL all stars.

You are yet to provide any evidence that the AHL All stars are any better than the Spengler Cup team. After all many players in the Spengler Cup teams are former AHL all stars.

Look at the two rosters ffs. Canada Spen team 2008, AHL Canadian All-star team 2009. It is quite obvious where the most talent is.


Keyword: FORMER.

Look at the two rosters ffs. Canada Spen team 2008, AHL Canadian All-star team 2009. It is quite obvious where the most talent is.

Keyword: FORMER.
Why would you assume current all stars are any better than all stars from 4 years ago? It's only the AHL, you're not any worse simply because you leave the league.

Why would you assume current all stars are any better than all stars from 4 years ago? It's only the AHL, you're not any worse simply because you leave the league.

Its not an assumption, it is the way it is. OBVIOUSLY an Allstar NOW is better then and All-star from 4 years ago. If the All-star from 4 years ago was still that good he would be an All-star NOW.
What part doesnt make sense to you?
You are worse when your talent is worse. If you dont know who these players are who have been listed, take a few minutes and look it up.

pretty simple

Its not an assumption, it is the way it is. OBVIOUSLY an Allstar NOW is better then and All-star from 4 years ago. If the All-star from 4 years ago was still that good he would be an All-star NOW.
No he would not, for the very simple reason that he's not in the league anymore.

Its not an assumption, it is the way it is. OBVIOUSLY an Allstar NOW is better then and All-star from 4 years ago. If the All-star from 4 years ago was still that good he would be an All-star NOW.
What part doesnt make sense to you?
You are worse when your talent is worse. If you dont know who these players are who have been listed, take a few minutes and look it up.

pretty simple

AHL All-stars come to Europe because theres more money than in AHL, simple? Many if not most of the current AHL all-stars will be in Europe four years from now.

AHL All-stars come to Europe because theres more money than in AHL, simple? Many if not most of the current AHL all-stars will be in Europe four years from now.

The North American AHLers generally won't go to Europe unless they are sure they will never make it to the NHL. That may start to change as the leagues in Europe improve, but for now I don't think your statement is true.

in hockey skill is relative to rink size so it's almost impossible to guess which "league" has more skilled players because they are basically playing 2 different sports.

I believe that an NLA-Team-Canada would defeat an AHL-Team-Canada simply because of their experience advantage because the most talented AHLers are significantly younger.
Experienced AHLers are not good enough for both the NHL and Europe that is why they are AHLers.

Apart from what I believe who would win one can compare the two hypothetical teams based on their stats that they had when playing in juniors. Might be interesting.

the kariya brothers (martin and steve) have led pretty much every league they've played in (SEL, finnish, swiss,) Golden helmets, mvps, league scoring, team scoring... no matter what team they've played in/on they've been amongst the team or overall leaders in scoring

No he would not, for the very simple reason that he's not in the league anymore.

Exactly

Exactly
So you agree the 2009 all star is not any better than him then, or what? :huh:

Look at the two rosters ffs. Canada Spen team 2008, AHL Canadian All-star team 2009. It is quite obvious where the most talent is.


Keyword: FORMER.





There’s nothing to suggest many Spengler Cup players wouldn’t be all-stars if they played in AHL…..especially considering many were NHL level when they left for Europe.

In fact, one could say many current AHL all-stars are only in that position because many former all-stars decided to play in Europe.

In terms of measuring overall national depth, in my opinion the IIHF survey of players is probably the best sample area, followed by NHL statistics, probably followed by WJC results, followed by the results of the men's tournaments that had a high participation rate by the top players from each country, and so on. The reason I say the WJC is because it is played relatively frequently and generally the participation rate is high for the top players of that age group.

There is no such thing as the perfect statistical source, there will be anomalies in every one of them, but the key is to find the broadest source of data available. The essence of my argument is that on average people are inherently equal, to which I hope you'd agree.

If you feel you have a better source of data, then please share it with us.


I agree somewhat then. Problem is you were claiming NHL/IIHF correlation as being fact (i.e. ‘it’s directly proportional’) when it really isn’t. I think it can be used as a starting point, but anything beyond that is off the mark.


Of course people are inherently equal. However, I believe some countries have better development systems for producing skill sets that conform to a certain style of game......and that ultimately effects 'talent depth' based on what style of game is being played.

I agree somewhat then. Problem is you were claiming NHL/IIHF correlation as being fact (i.e. ‘it’s directly proportional’) when it really isn’t. I think it can be used as a starting point, but anything beyond that is off the mark.


Of course people are inherently equal. However, I believe some countries have better development systems for producing skill sets that conform to a certain style of game......and that ultimately effects 'talent depth' based on what style of game is being played.

I agree that naturally some countries will have better development systems than others and also that over time it will change back and forth with whoever is doing the best job. My only concern is that people have to be realistic about how much better one development program is over another. Probably 5, 10 or even 15% better is achievable, but too often people on these boards make claims that would have their countries per capita development system 200, 300, or 400% better than others which in my mind is a load of bs.

In terms of measuring overall national depth, in my opinion the IIHF survey of players is probably the best sample area, followed by NHL statistics, probably followed by WJC results, followed by the results of the men's tournaments that had a high participation rate by the top players from each country, and so on. The reason I say the WJC is because it is played relatively frequently and generally the participation rate is high for the top players of that age group.

There is no such thing as the perfect statistical source, there will be anomalies in every one of them, but the key is to find the broadest source of data available. The essence of my argument is that on average people are inherently equal, to which I hope you'd agree.

If you feel you have a better source of data, then please share it with us.

My reply from the main board regarding that data:

"Those Numbers have to be somewhat incorrect. Finland has only 27 outdoor rinks?!

Senior player numbers and their % of total players:

Canada 88,954 17,8%
Czech Republic 62,487 64,3%"

"There would have had to been over 200 000 more Czech players 20 years ago to explain the difference when comparing to Canada. That would make 3% of the Czech population hockey players which really doesn´t sound right. Also today you would see abandoned hockey rinks everywhere"

My reply from the main board regarding that data:

"Those Numbers have to be somewhat incorrect. Finland has only 27 outdoor rinks?!

Senior player numbers and their % of total players:

Canada 88,954 17,8%
Czech Republic 62,487 64,3%"

"There would have had to been over 200 000 more Czech players 20 years ago to explain the difference when comparing to Canada. That would make 3% of the Czech population hockey players which really doesn´t sound right. Also today you would see abandoned hockey rinks everywhere"

I tried finding past results of the IIHF Survey of Players, but for some reason it looks like the IIHF has erased all the old ones. It would be interesting to see if the Czech numbers have always looked like this.

As I mentioned before for obvious reasons the number of outdoor rinks is not a reliable category in this survey. However I expect that the number of indoor rinks is a very reliable number. By the looks of it, relative to the number of indoor rinks the Czech's senior numbers are quite over inflated. The number of Czech junior players looks about right relative to the number of indoor rinks.

Indoor rinks are expensive to build, so I expect the player / rink ratio will be higher in Russia and Czech R. than they are in Canada, US, Sweden, Finland.

I don't know why the Czech senior numbers are inflated, but as a whole the close correlation between the number of indoor rinks and players suggests that the survey is relatively accurate.

Off topic: I was looking over that Ahl allstar list and it has Cody Franson listed as a forward, has he been converted to forward?

Thanks