HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   International Tournaments (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Where would you say each major national team is in cyclical terms. (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1298673)

saskriders 11-27-2012 07:28 PM

Where would you say each major national team is in cyclical terms.
 
I think we can all agree that development, and therefore success, is cyclical. Where would you place each of the major national teams? Who is at a peak? Who is in a valley? Who is declining? Who is on the rise?

Statsy 11-27-2012 07:50 PM

There is a lot to cover with this question, and sadly I don't have the time to go as in depth as I would like, but the two key ideas that come of the top of my head are that:

1) Canada is in a down cycle for goaltending at the moment. It seems like it has been for a few years in the NHL and even our junior goalies outside of Subban seem to be of lower quality. There seems to be a depth issue across the whole spectrum for the country, currently.

2) The U.S has been increasing its hockey enrollment rate and it's only a matter of time until they greatly out number any other country. Success in a sport is largely about the amount of people that play it, and though it will still take a few years, they will definitely put up the numbers. Frequent success is already starting to role in for this team at different levels and thanks to their NTDP they are already a dominant force at the U18 levels. The US is the biggest riser on the international hockey scene.

KevyD 11-27-2012 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Statsy (Post 56078229)
There is a lot to cover with this question, and sadly I don't have the time to go as in depth as I would like, but the two key ideas that come of the top of my head are that:

1) Canada is in a down cycle for goaltending at the moment. It seems like it has been for a few years in the NHL and even our junior goalies outside of Subban seem to be of lower quality. There seems to be a depth issue across the whole spectrum for the country, currently.

2) The U.S has been increasing its hockey enrollment rate and it's only a matter of time until they greatly out number any other country. Success in a sport is largely about the amount of people that play it, and though it will still take a few years, they will definitely put up the numbers. Frequent success is already starting to role in for this team at different levels and thanks to their NTDP they are already a dominant force at the U18 levels. The US is the biggest riser on the international hockey scene.

I disagree, Statsy.

I don't think Canada is in a down cycle. However, after almost 7 years (2003 - 2009) of exceptional drafts, we are having an "average" spell.

As for the "biggest riser"... I have been hearing all that since the early 1990's and yet, in the last 12 years, the Americans have had one exceptional draft (2003), one great draft (2005), one above average draft (2007) and one average draft (2010). The rest have been duds.

Statsy 11-27-2012 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KevyD (Post 56080803)
As for the "biggest riser"... I have been hearing all that since the early 1990's and yet, in the last 12 years, the Americans have had one exceptional draft (2003), one great draft (2005), one above average draft (2007) and one average draft (2010). The rest have been duds.

But they HAVE been rising since the early 90's. I seem to recall a World Cup victory in there somewhere. You just don't realize how far behind they were in the 80's. Flash forward to 2010 when they were a goal away from winning the Olympics. They've improved a lot and in another 20 years, look out!

saskriders 11-27-2012 10:06 PM

I think Russia has pretty much peaked, and is going to start going into a down cycle (but they are at the highest point of the peak so they still have lot's of years left on that peak).

I think that Slovakia is starting to transition from valley to peak.

KevyD 11-27-2012 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Statsy (Post 56081299)
But they HAVE been rising since the early 90's. I seem to recall a World Cup victory in there somewhere. You just don't realize how far behind they were in the 80's. Flash forward to 2010 when they were a goal away from winning the Olympics. They've improved a lot and in another 20 years, look out!

Hi Statsy,

Unfortunately, at my age, I do realize how far they have come. :) Also, the World Cup win was in 1996 - 16 years ago. In fact, one could easily make the case that while the quantity of American players has increased, the quality has not. Look at the depth and talent on that 1996 team and compare it to today's team. I would take the 1996 team in a blink.

Statsy 11-27-2012 10:21 PM

I was really thinking more about their results at the U20, U18, and U17 levels which is a good indicator of where they're heading.

KevyD 11-27-2012 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Statsy (Post 56081859)
I was really thinking more about their results at the U20, U18, and U17 levels which is a good indicator of where they're heading.

Fair enough. :)

Xokkeu 11-28-2012 03:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Statsy (Post 56081299)
But they HAVE been rising since the early 90's. I seem to recall a World Cup victory in there somewhere. You just don't realize how far behind they were in the 80's. Flash forward to 2010 when they were a goal away from winning the Olympics. They've improved a lot and in another 20 years, look out!

Since this is a thread asking about Cyclical terms, this post provides a perfect segue.

The US has not been slowly rising since the 1990s. The US saw what is often described in the soccer world as a Golden Generation come out in the early 1990s. The 1980 Gold Medal win inspired a whole group of kids to lace up skates and start playing. That did not last. Look no further than the 2006 Olympic roster.

Rick DiPietro
Robert Esche
John Grahame
Chris Chelios – C
Derian Hatcher
Jordan Leopold
John-Michael Liles
Aaron Miller
Brian Rafalski
Mathieu Schneider
Jason Blake
Erik Cole
Craig Conroy
Chris Drury
Brian Gionta
Scott Gomez
Bill Guerin
Mike Knuble
Mike Modano
Mark Parrish
Brian Rolston
Keith Tkachuk
Doug Weight

If you look at the names on there of players who are notable, you'll quickly realize that they were getting past your sell on dates.

Weight was 35
Tkachuk 34
Modano 36
Guerin 36
Schneider 37
Chelios 44
Hatcher 34


The new generation was Scott Gomez, Brian Gionta, Craig Conroy, Erik Cole, Jason Blake, John Liles, Jordan Leopold.... I don't think I need to go on.


What we saw was not a steady climb since the 1990s. On the contrary, there was a giant spike in the early 1990s, followed by a fallow period when that generation phased out after the 2002 Olympics, until the new generation burst on the scene in 2010. What the 1990s did was the lay the groundwork for a steady rise that started around the 2003 draft class in this last decade.

KevyD 11-28-2012 04:34 PM

^^^^^

Accurate and well written post.

Mr Kanadensisk 11-28-2012 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saskriders (Post 56081491)
I think Russia has pretty much peaked, and is going to start going into a down cycle (but they are at the highest point of the peak so they still have lot's of years left on that peak).

I think that Slovakia is starting to transition from valley to peak.

I would say that the Russian men peaked statistically in around 2010 and are now on a bit of a downward trend. However I don't think it will be too long before they start to trend upwards again.

Xokkeu 11-29-2012 02:38 AM

The Russians seemed to have a fallow period after the Oveckin/Malkin draft.

There highest drafted player in 2005 was Vitaly Anikeenko.

In 2006 they had Varlamov and Vishnevsky.

In 2007 they had Cherapanov (RIP) but after that its all sorts of meh. Sergei Korosten, Evgeny Dadonov, Maxim Mayorov. Ugh

2008: Vyacheslva Voynov, Kirill Petrov, Nikit Filatov, Viktor Tikhonov, Evgeny Grachev

2009 started to turn around with players like Dmitry Kulikov, Dmitry Orlov followed up by Kuznetsov, Burmistrov and Tarasenko. Now Yakupov and Grigorenko will join that group.


There was a significant gap of talent coming out of Russia from 2005 to 2008 but the rest opening of the pipeline should bode well for them.

Muuri 11-29-2012 06:39 AM

We are still suffering from awful '04-'08 drafts.

joe89 11-29-2012 08:19 AM

Sweden's peak ended 2006, went down the valley, but is definitely on the rise. Around 2018(give or take a few years), Sweden should be approaching the peak again.

With genererational(nation-wise) talent calling it quits, the new promising talent is still too young to cover the losses at this point. There are some good "stop gap" players(e.g. Edler, Enström and Eriksson), but almost all countries have those(Koivu, Filppula for Finland etc.). In 2014 we'll be relying on mentioned players plus Sedins and Zetterberg who are well over 30. The young, but great D core is just that, young. Especially the new crop of forwards needs more time, however. By 2018 we should have a balanced team. A couple of veterans with the rest of the team stretching from early 20s to early 30s.

Yakushev72 11-29-2012 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saskriders (Post 56081491)
I think Russia has pretty much peaked, and is going to start going into a down cycle (but they are at the highest point of the peak so they still have lot's of years left on that peak).

I think that Slovakia is starting to transition from valley to peak.

It sounds like you're not very familiar with Russian hockey below the surface. Russia spent about 13 years in a deep down cycle brought on mostly by deep economic problems that forced hockey programs to be abandoned or deeply cut back, but economic revitalization has coincided with a strong and possibly long-term surge in the number and quality of Russian players. If you are only looking at what is plainly visible on the surface, then you won't see it coming until its on you.

Yakushev72 11-29-2012 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xokkeu (Post 56110057)
The Russians seemed to have a fallow period after the Oveckin/Malkin draft.

There highest drafted player in 2005 was Vitaly Anikeenko.

In 2006 they had Varlamov and Vishnevsky.

In 2007 they had Cherapanov (RIP) but after that its all sorts of meh. Sergei Korosten, Evgeny Dadonov, Maxim Mayorov. Ugh

2008: Vyacheslva Voynov, Kirill Petrov, Nikit Filatov, Viktor Tikhonov, Evgeny Grachev

2009 started to turn around with players like Dmitry Kulikov, Dmitry Orlov followed up by Kuznetsov, Burmistrov and Tarasenko. Now Yakupov and Grigorenko will join that group.


There was a significant gap of talent coming out of Russia from 2005 to 2008 but the rest opening of the pipeline should bode well for them.

This period was pre-KHL and pre-MHL. Those are the building blocks for a Russian program on the rise.

Atas2000 11-29-2012 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saskriders (Post 56077687)
I think we can all agree that development, and therefore success, is cyclical. Where would you place each of the major national teams? Who is at a peak? Who is in a valley? Who is declining? Who is on the rise?

I don't think it applies to the major national team. There are of course generational talents like Datsyuk or Crosby. When they are gone, they are hard to replace even on a national team. And as we have the luxury of having Datsyuk, Kovalchuk, Ovechkin, Malkin in Russia right now there is a chance of having some vacuum on offence after the 2014 Olympics. But behind those superstars there is always a pipline of talent for the NT good anough tio deliver some high level rosters. At least for the top 6 nations in hockey. Below that it's different.

I'm surprised the Swiss can't really make the jump. There's talk now for years how they should close the gap to the top nations.

Atas2000 11-29-2012 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xokkeu (Post 56110057)
The Russians seemed to have a fallow period after the Oveckin/Malkin draft.

There highest drafted player in 2005 was Vitaly Anikeenko. (RIP)

In 2006 they had Varlamov and Vishnevsky.

In 2007 they had Cherepanov (RIP) but after that its all sorts of meh. Sergei Korosten, Evgeny Dadonov, Maxim Mayorov. Ugh

2008: Vyacheslva Voynov, Kirill Petrov, Nikit Filatov, Viktor Tikhonov, Evgeny Grachev

2009 started to turn around with players like Dmitry Kulikov, Dmitry Orlov followed up by Kuznetsov, Burmistrov and Tarasenko. Now Yakupov and Grigorenko will join that group.


There was a significant gap of talent coming out of Russia from 2005 to 2008 but the rest opening of the pipeline should bode well for them.

Thank God we haven't lost more...

SirloinUB 12-04-2012 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atas2000 (Post 56114849)
I don't think it applies to the major national team. There are of course generational talents like Datsyuk or Crosby. When they are gone, they are hard to replace even on a national team. And as we have the luxury of having Datsyuk, Kovalchuk, Ovechkin, Malkin in Russia right now there is a chance of having some vacuum on offence after the 2014 Olympics. But behind those superstars there is always a pipline of talent for the NT good anough tio deliver some high level rosters. At least for the top 6 nations in hockey. Below that it's different.

I'm surprised the Swiss can't really make the jump. There's talk now for years how they should close the gap to the top nations.

They just can't seem to produce the truly high end players or stars. It would seem they have a handful or so of decent players that simply hold them above the relegation teams. Their is no game breakers that can elevate them to the next level

TheNeutrality 12-04-2012 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atas2000 (Post 56114849)
I don't think it applies to the major national team. There are of course generational talents like Datsyuk or Crosby. When they are gone, they are hard to replace even on a national team. And as we have the luxury of having Datsyuk, Kovalchuk, Ovechkin, Malkin in Russia right now there is a chance of having some vacuum on offence after the 2014 Olympics. But behind those superstars there is always a pipline of talent for the NT good anough tio deliver some high level rosters. At least for the top 6 nations in hockey. Below that it's different.

I'm surprised the Swiss can't really make the jump. There's talk now for years how they should close the gap to the top nations.

The curse of a well paying domnestic league. A lot of players, who could make it in NA, don't want to take the risk to be sent to the AHL. They earn much more over here, have the star status, relatively low taxes and a great quality of life.

But more and more guys start to go to NA at a very young age (Nino, Baertschi, Andrighetto, Martschini (came back, though), Richard, etc.), which is a good sign.

We are still rising, but not in a spectacular way. And the last few tournaments have shown that we are able to outplay many teams, but winning the game is a whole different story.

Fulcrum 12-04-2012 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNeutrality (Post 56238687)
The curse of a well paying domnestic league. A lot of players, who could make it in NA, don't want to take the risk to be sent to the AHL. They earn much more over here, have the star status, relatively low taxes and a great quality of life.

But more and more guys start to go to NA at a very young age (Nino, Baertschi, Andrighetto, Martschini (came back, though), Richard, etc.), which is a good sign.

We are still rising, but not in a spectacular way. And the last few tournaments have shown that we are able to outplay many teams, but winning the game is a whole different story.

no need to go anywhere, just make or have a team join KHL and bring over the rich Swiss hockey roots to the rest of Europe. ;)

TheNeutrality 12-04-2012 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fulcrum (Post 56238935)
no need to go anywhere, just make or have a team join KHL and bring over the rich Swiss hockey roots to the rest of Europe. ;)

Wasn't even something like this planned? The Helvetics? :laugh:

http://www.helveticshockey.ch/

Big Phil 12-05-2012 02:57 PM

I have a hard time believing Russia can ever be like they were in the 1970s/1980s. These were years when their best was more or less neck and neck with Canada in a short tournament. Throw in a couple of blowout wins like the 1981 Canada Cup in there. I can't see them ever getting there again.

I agree with an earlier post. The USA almost seemed to spike back in the 1990s. The USA could ice a pretty good roster in 1996, 1998 and even 2002 (although the core was aging at the time). Their best do not compare to the era of the Modano, Leclair, Hull, Roenick, Tkachuk, Chelios, Leetch, Richter era. Not even close quite frankly. It will take a long time to see the USA have that type of top notch talent again.

Sweden went so long with terrible World Junior results I have to wonder if they ever can get back to what they were. You think of all those Silver medals they won in the 1990s with the WJC and then look at their placings in the 2000s. They won gold last year for the first time in 31 years so who knows.

Rabid Ranger 12-05-2012 03:51 PM

I think the U.S. on the rise again (at least in goal and on defense). The one exception is at forward-in particular center. We haven't had an elite player at that position since prime Gomez. Hopefully Galchenyuk can be that guy, but he isn't exactly "home grown."

Fulcrum 12-05-2012 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Phil (Post 56268365)
I have a hard time believing Russia can ever be like they were in the 1970s/1980s. These were years when their best was more or less neck and neck with Canada in a short tournament. Throw in a couple of blowout wins like the 1981 Canada Cup in there. I can't see them ever getting there again.

Why?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:58 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.