Kids who don't want to get hit would never become good pros. I played a few seasons in travel, and every single person on that team was wrecked at least 5 times those seasons. It's part of the ****ing game.
Actually Siberian, I think the point is fair. Canada's development system has been overhauled and quite improved, and the recent Junior success is a symptom of that. Remember the late 90s, when the Russian juniors were clearly more skilled than Canada? That has changed.
If the question is depth, there is no better measure than a narrow demographic slice. Where countries like Sweden and Russian (and almost the US) match Canada is in producing a handful of elite-level talent across age groups. So, the parity at the Olympic level.
But don't argue against the depth of Canadian talent; the numbers belie your point.
Actually Siberian, I think the point is fair. Canada's development system has been overhauled and quite improved, and the recent Junior success is a symptom of that. Remember the late 90s, when the Russian juniors were clearly more skilled than Canada? That has changed.
If the question is depth, there is no better measure than a narrow demographic slice. Where countries like Sweden and Russian (and almost the US) match Canada is in producing a handful of elite-level talent across age groups. So, the parity at the Olympic level.
But don't argue against the depth of Canadian talent; the numbers belie your point.
Juniors are not followed in Russia. I distantly remember what kind of results team Russia and team Canada had in juniors in 90s (of course I could look up) forget about the average non-canadian hockey fan. Perhaps the success of the juniors for Canada is much more important than having elite talent AMONG MEN, then just forget about this whole thread.
Juniors are not followed in Russia. I distantly remember what kind of results team Russia and team Canada had in juniors in 90s (of course I could look up) forget about the average non-canadian hockey fan. Perhaps the success of the juniors for Canada is much more important than having elite talent AMONG MEN, then just forget about this whole thread.
The junior run started a few years back with players like Richards, Crosby, Getzlaf, Weber, Carter. etc... I guess the point I am trying to make is that Juniors (who are, really only a year or two from the pros) are a good indicator of depth. There's clearly an upward trend in the skill level of Canadian hockey players, and some of those recent juniors are now among the elite players in the world.
But, you know what, it's time we stop splitting hairs and just talk about the coming Olympics. New thread perhaps?
I'm picking Canada (no surprise) but the Russians and Swedes could easily take the gold.
Yep, new thread.
And hey, by the way, very very cool stand by AO re: 2014. What a patriot. The only negative thing I can say about the guy is that, sadly, he was born on the wrong side of the Berlin Wall! Tant pis pour nous!
Most of this thread seems to be an argument about whether or not Canada has proportionate depth, but I'm not really sold on the initial argument. Hitting starts earlier in Canada thus is the reason for Canada's supposed lack of depth?
Proof please. Because while this is obviously anecdotal and kind of irrelevant (I'm American,) it seems to me that the small players who were already slow and unskilled were the ones hit hardest by hitting. To be fair and at the same time anecdotal, the kid who scored 350 pts in a season in Squirts while simultaneously being the smallest player on the ice was devastated by the introduction of hitting. He was never the same player.
I see both sides, but surely a problem like this is not merely the result of one thing.
I spoke with a Canadian parent who had three kids who all play hockey. He basically said that a lot of kids like hockey but do not like hitting at svery young age and that's one of the main reasons they lose interest in the game, so they quit. In Russia hitting at young age basically is not accepted. The coaches want the kids to develop their skating, puck handling. In reality many Russian players see hitting when they start playing international tournaments when they are around 16 years old.
So a couple of things that is a big negative of the hitting-
1. The talented kids drop out before they are discovered by the local scouts.
2. The kids are slowed down in their development of real skills.
I have an idea Siberian, why don't you actually make a statement based on fact rather than citing the opinion of one family? Opinion is not fact and one opinion is not a large enough sample size. Topping it off you come up with this harebrained idea based on the opinion of this one family, the supposed ‘lack of talent’ in Canada is because some kids don’t like hitting. So instead of having facts you make up your argument as you go, a pretty weak strategy.
Why do you imply hitting is not a ‘real’ skill? Anything you learn to gain a competitive edge is a skill, skills you acquire in your specific skill set. I am pretty sure that by age 8-10 people involved in the local hockey scene know which kids have some talent and which ones don’t, so I am not worried about the more talented kids losing interest or quitting because most are already recognized.
Siberian every time I see your threads they are always just Canada Vs Russia, “oh Canada is not the best blah blah blah”. You are always just looking to start a fight over nothing and troll these boards. I don’t understand why you do it, just to be an a****le?
Siberian
There maybe some that may not like hitting.But there are some who may like the contact of hockey.By banning contact sure you may get some player who left because of the contact.But at the same time you could lose player because they like the contact.
Ok, Canada is fine. Hitting is fine. Just look at the world of hockey, outside of Crosby who are the Canadian players who are exciting to watch? Nobody! Keep up the good job with great checkers! Let them shove around when europeans skate, handle the puck and keep shooting. It's slight exaggeration but only slight.
Ok, Canada is fine. Hitting is fine. Just look at the world of hockey, outside of Crosby who are the Canadian players who are exciting to watch? Nobody! Keep up the good job with great checkers! Let them shove around when europeans skate, handle the puck and keep shooting. It's slight exaggeration but only slight.
There are a good amount of canadian players younger and older in the nhl that are fun to watch.
Ok, Canada is fine. Hitting is fine. Just look at the world of hockey, outside of Crosby who are the Canadian players who are exciting to watch? Nobody! Keep up the good job with great checkers! Let them shove around when europeans skate, handle the puck and keep shooting. It's slight exaggeration but only slight.
See that's what makes you an a******. You know you are full of s*** yet you continue to say these things in the hopes of having some heated argument.You aren't interested in debating you are interested in just pissing people off.
hitting is a part of the game, and frankly you carry yourself diffently when contact is present. You may never throw a body check in your entire career but you have to be aware of how to carry yourself when people are trying to hit you. To that i think we can all agree upon. Its not so much about how to throw a body check,as it is learning to keep your head up; learning that moves that work in scrub hockey wont work when someone is trying to take your head off.The earlier players start learning what works vs what doesnt work the better they'll be going forward. Not to mention the chl is drafting players as young as 14, thats a huge hurdle for a player to undertake in a calender year(from no bc to playing against players up to 21), also how are scouts expected to do their job properly drafting players that are essentially new to how the game is expected from said point going forward. As to all the lost talent; ive known alot of talented players that fell off when contact was introduced, but the fact if you cant handle the contact as a peewee how are you going to suddenly be able to handle it in junior and even further extrapolated how are you expected to handle it as a pro. Pond hockeys great but it isnt the nhl. And lastly how can you say that canada apart from crosby doesnt produce elite players; is mike richards not elite(poll nhl gms on that one and find me someone outside of the big 3 in recent years youd rather build a team around), is ryan getzlaf not elite, is mike green not elite(for your european emphasis on speed and skill you should fall all over him), what about jeff carter, eric staal, corey perry, phaneuf, weber. All guys from the same draft that are cornerstones of nhl franchises. Is canadas development system perfect no, but to suggest its not exceptional is absurd. Canada delivers more than its share of upper echelon talent along with its abundance of "matt cooke" role players and to that i think you should tip your hat. If theres one thing that the history of hockey has taught us its that for every wayne gretzky theres a bob gainey, and that while both are valuable the russians have never understood the value of the latter and have yet to produce one. Alexander Semin has all the talent Bob Gainey wish he had, but he'll never amount into half the player bob was(break out your calculators=?).
hitting is a part of the game, and frankly you carry yourself diffently when contact is present. You may never throw a body check in your entire career but you have to be aware of how to carry yourself when people are trying to hit you. To that i think we can all agree upon. Its not so much about how to throw a body check,as it is learning to keep your head up; learning that moves that work in scrub hockey wont work when someone is trying to take your head off.The earlier players start learning what works vs what doesnt work the better they'll be going forward. Not to mention the chl is drafting players as young as 14, thats a huge hurdle for a player to undertake in a calender year(from no bc to playing against players up to 21), also how are scouts expected to do their job properly drafting players that are essentially new to how the game is expected from said point going forward. As to all the lost talent; ive known alot of talented players that fell off when contact was introduced, but the fact if you cant handle the contact as a peewee how are you going to suddenly be able to handle it in junior and even further extrapolated how are you expected to handle it as a pro. Pond hockeys great but it isnt the nhl. And lastly how can you say that canada apart from crosby doesnt produce elite players; is mike richards not elite(poll nhl gms on that one and find me someone outside of the big 3 in recent years youd rather build a team around), is ryan getzlaf not elite, is mike green not elite(for your european emphasis on speed and skill you should fall all over him), what about jeff carter, eric staal, corey perry, phaneuf, weber. All guys from the same draft that are cornerstones of nhl franchises. Is canadas development system perfect no, but to suggest its not exceptional is absurd. Canada delivers more than its share of upper echelon talent along with its abundance of "matt cooke" role players and to that i think you should tip your hat. If theres one thing that the history of hockey has taught us its that for every wayne gretzky theres a bob gainey, and that while both are valuable the russians have never understood the value of the latter and have yet to produce one. Alexander Semin has all the talent Bob Gainey wish he had, but he'll never amount into half the player bob was(break out your calculators=?).
Why did you bring Bob Gainey into this discussion? Because Tikhonov said nice things about him? So what, Tikhonov also said that in the NHL (of that era) majority of games look similar to the level of Soviet Pervaia Liga, which means that Tikhonov really never thought that the NHL of those years was particularly skilled. The NHL became really good when a lot of Europeans started playing in that league. So saying that Semin will never amount half the player Bob was is just "homerism".
And no, I do not consider Mike Richards elite, I don't really care what GM's in the NHL say, NHL is business first and sports second as was indicated again today how they were covering all the failed doping tests in Fleury book. Getslaf is not elite and don't get me started on Green, nice offensive player but with huge defensive holes in his game. Everybody else you inlcuded are good NHL players but come on, how are they elite?
Why did you bring Bob Gainey into this discussion? Because Tikhonov said nice things about him? So what, Tikhonov also said that in the NHL (of that era) majority of games look similar to the level of Soviet Pervaia Liga, which means that Tikhonov really never thought that the NHL of those years was particularly skilled. The NHL became really good when a lot of Europeans started playing in that league. So saying that Semin will never amount half the player Bob was is just "homerism".
And no, I do not consider Mike Richards elite, I don't really care what GM's in the NHL say, NHL is business first and sports second as was indicated again today how they were covering all the failed doping tests in Fleury book. Getslaf is not elite and don't get me started on Green, nice offensive player but with huge defensive holes in his game. Everybody else you inlcuded are good NHL players but come on, how are they elite?
Isn't that the problem with every Russian player not named Datsyuk?
You're a funny dude.
Seeing as how the Canadians won the Olympic tournament with no high level talent outside of Crosby, and a team full of scrubs, I think we can now agree that Canada winning was a great upset? Especially beating all those skilled Russians 7-4, that was a huge HUGE upset as well?
Lastly, this is where you are completely wrong on your premise. You talk about skill and fundamentals as if skating, stickhandling and shooting are the only fundamental skills. Hitting/Getting hit, cycling and defensive positioning are all fundamentals as well.
The difference between Canadian skill in shooting/stickhandling and skating with the Russians is not that great. The difference between Canadian skill in hitting/cycling/defensive positioning with the Russians is far greater. That's why we won. Everything you've denounced as non-skill won vs. the Russians.
Also, I'll leave you with some quotes from Larionov about Canadian hockey.
Quote:
"We are trying to prove to ourselves that hockey [in North America] is bad and primitive, that we don't need what they are doing here. But look what the Canadians did to us. In almost every game situation, there was tremendous support for each other throughout the ice. In every zone there were people who were ready to fight and help out a teammate."
"One person has a bad day - so what? There are 20 on the team. In the Stanley Cup playoffs it often happens that in the beginning, the stars step back in the shadows and it's up to [players like the Detroit Red Wings'] [Kirk] Maltby and [Kris] Draper and [Darren] McCarty to carry the team."
Isn't that the problem with every Russian player not named Datsyuk?
You're a funny dude.
Seeing as how the Canadians won the Olympic tournament with no high level talent outside of Crosby, and a team full of scrubs, I think we can now agree that Canada winning was a great upset? Especially beating all those skilled Russians 7-4, that was a huge HUGE upset as well?
Lastly, this is where you are completely wrong on your premise. You talk about skill and fundamentals as if skating, stickhandling and shooting are the only fundamental skills. Hitting/Getting hit, cycling and defensive positioning are all fundamentals as well.
The difference between Canadian skill in shooting/stickhandling and skating with the Russians is not that great. The difference between Canadian skill in hitting/cycling/defensive positioning with the Russians is far greater. That's why we won. Everything you've denounced as non-skill won vs. the Russians.
Also, I'll leave you with some quotes from Larionov about Canadian hockey.
Canada has 100 times more rinks and who knows how many more players than Russia and still it takes an absolute best as far as coaches, GM's and players in order to win. You win in your own home, on your own rink, with your own crowd (not to mention with your own referees) and all of a sudden what I wrote is wrong? Absolutely not.
Look, I gave Canada props for a fantastic effort and admitted Canada took it to another level when it all mattered but puhlease let's not go there again and rehash the flaws in Canadian hockey. The early hitting in the young age is a big minus for Canadian hockey, at least in my opinion.
But I must say that Canada also made some positive strides in one aspect, the young Canadians now skate much better than they used to. I believe Hockey Canada and the Canadian coaching actually made adjustments in their training process and do prepare better skaters, which makes the difference in the important games.
As much as one can say that a player needs to learn the fundamentals like skating, passing, shooting, etc. - they should also learn about hitting. Hitting is a fundamental aspect of hockey. Europeans are soft as butter and don't like to hit/get hit themselves and that's why they view it as 'bad'.
