HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > International Tournaments
International Tournaments Discuss international tournaments such as the World Juniors, Olympic hockey, and Ice Hockey World Championships, as they take place; or discuss past tournaments.

Has Russia overtaken the #1 spot in World Hockey?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-28-2012, 04:09 AM
  #101
Mr Writer
Registered User
 
Mr Writer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xokkeu View Post
I think the season starts in January, but that's just me. That said the Swedes, American, Canadians and Russians all look to have immensely talented squads going into Sochi and I'm pretty excited about the young talent coming from those countries as well as others.
Ya well, if they want a season, then it better be post Christmas and hands off the juniors, as I want a full squad going this year... it's the only positive for Canadians in an NHL lockout, our A team all available... (or something close it) Really anxious to see if Nugent-Hopkins is on the list of camp invitees. I get a feeling Edmonton will not make him available. The list comes out on either Friday or next Monday.

Mr Writer is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 04:29 AM
  #102
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Writer View Post
Ya well, if they want a season, then it better be post Christmas and hands off the juniors, as I want a full squad going this year... it's the only positive for Canadians in an NHL lockout, our A team all available... (or something close it) Really anxious to see if Nugent-Hopkins is on the list of camp invitees. I get a feeling Edmonton will not make him available. The list comes out on either Friday or next Monday.
The US may be in a similar situation with JT Miller who is also in the AHL. I frankly will be P-Oed beyond belief if the Rangers hold him from the World Juniors so that he can play for the Whale. I imagine I'd be the same if the Oilers said no to Canada with Nugent-Hopkins.

Xokkeu is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 04:37 AM
  #103
Dosing
Registered User
 
Dosing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ivösjön
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
That is an impressive celebration, but it isn't by itself a measure of the day-to-day level of interest. I would like to hear from some of our Swedish posters to get their opinion on the level of interest in their country in comparison to what they see in Canada.
Probably wont be as much excitement should we win this time, most people already think "ok, so we're the best at this to now" And last year the excitement was more about swedish triumph then hockey triumph. There were reporters running around at the celebration trying to find someone who knew a name of a player in the team or had seen the game, i wager most people think it was finland we beat in the final.

Dosing is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 08:07 AM
  #104
Fulcrum
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 2,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garl View Post
Rinne is helping his team. Put any goalie in his place, he will not have great numbers.

Yeremenko played good for Dynamo? Has there been a bad goalie for Znarok's team? He had Garnett, who was goalie of 2010 PO. Now, same strory with Yeremenko.
He is what he is, an average goalie, who can play decent on a defensivly sound team. On a team with bad defense he's not even decent. Ersberg or Rinne for example are.

And Yezhov. You know there are tons of goalies out there who have decent stats and play rather good for a team that is doing rather well? Should we say that all this guys like Salak, Wesslau, Engren, Ortio, Stana, Ahonen are NHL level? Yezhov isn't even up there with those guys, he's a clear back up Would Metallurg trade Ahonen for him for example? Laughabale, and Ahonen is dime a dozen player in Finland.

I expected you would mention Barulin.)))

And Makarov, do you really think that he's something special compared to all his canadian collegues in CHL?
Goalie prospects are hard to predict. Usually I say, wait until he starts playing in a big league.


P.S. I don't even think the situation with goalies in Russia is bad. Russia indeed has Varlamov, Bryzgalov, Bobrovsky, Barulin, Nabokov. But while this group isn't hopeless it's definately far from best in the World.
I did mention Barulin, if you read my original post. There is a reason why all those guys are in the spectrum for Bilyaletdinov, and that fact that he just recently praised this selection is a respectable opinion. It may not be the best, but it's not far off and certainly not outclassed by anyone either.

Fulcrum is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 09:43 AM
  #105
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
Pretty misleading information here, and not just when you say that Russia has been badly outplaying Canada at this tournament. Canada generally sends a handful of the best players each year, at best. When Stamkos played he was still a teenager, and fresh after being left off the Olympic team. Tavares wasn't really an elite player who would make the actual team Canada until the last tournament. Perry I will give you, he has actually shown up for Canada for the most part. Unfortunately, he is the exception rather than the rule. The only other player from this last year who would definitely have made Canada is Keith. When you get a Russian team sending out most of their optimal roster against a Canadian team sending maybe three of the players from their optimal roster, you'll have to forgive us for taking the results with a grain of salt.
Your argument appears to be that Canada didn't have ALL of their best players at these tournaments. Who did? Yours is not a valid excuse, because no nation ever has all of their best players at the WJC.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 09:57 AM
  #106
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
I trust the words of the Russian posters on here to assess their own players, and they generally say that the KHL players that are at the tournament are among their very best. Am I wrong that Russia has been sending most of their optimal team? Also, I do believe that there are some elite KHL players, the people who call it a beer league are ignorant.



Bob Nicholson's job is to guide Canada to success in tournaments, I would expect him to be disappointed. The average person in the country is not going to share his feelings. The results are what they are, but the grain of salt I spoke of would refer to using those results to compare nations who are sending teams of differing strength proportionally. As far as it being bad, I guess we will just have to disagree that Canada has been bad, and also what that would mean.
The argument that Canada has no interest in the WC's has been repeated ad nauseum, but the fact is, and we all know it - Canada has a sudden surge of interest in any hockey tournament that they win. Look at how the attendance overflowed in Quebec for the 2008 WC after Canada won in 2007. But after a spate of consecutive losses dating back to 2008, now Canada has the attitude "we want to take our ball and go home because its not fair that we didn't win." To hear that repeated over and over gets really tedious.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 10:11 AM
  #107
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,379
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
The argument that Canada has no interest in the WC's has been repeated ad nauseum, but the fact is, and we all know it - Canada has a sudden surge of interest in any hockey tournament that they win. Look at how the attendance overflowed in Quebec for the 2008 WC after Canada won in 2007. But after a spate of consecutive losses dating back to 2008, now Canada has the attitude "we want to take our ball and go home because its not fair that we didn't win." To hear that repeated over and over gets really tedious.
As does the Canada Cup means nothing or was rigged. There's plenty of tedium to go around on both sides.

They don't mean attendance. Canadians will pay tickets to see just about any hockey. They mean player interest, and there's no doubt players interested in going to the worlds are far fewer in North America than in Europe and particularly Russia. It's just the way it is and what makes the worlds less than it should be.

Macman is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 10:14 AM
  #108
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman View Post
So the ONLY tournament ever played before '98 that allowed all the best players in the world to take part was designed for only one nation to win? That's silly. You only say that because Canada won all but one and the only way to justify all those losses is to discredit everything about the tournament. It has to be rigged because the truth is unacceptable.
Wrong. I say it because in 1984, Alan Eagleson of Canada and the NHLPA decreed that no European referee would be ever again be allowed to referee a medal round game. Dag Olsson from Sweden refereed the final in 1981 and the round robin match between Canada and Russia in 1984 - in both games, the Soviet team beat the Canadian team pretty badly. I don't argue that Eagleson didn't have the exclusive right to arrange the rules for the tournament in whatever way it made it possible for the Canadian team to win and the Canadian fans to be entertained, but it makes the tournament itself a joke!! No Russian (or probably other European fan) considers the Canada Cup to be a vaild international tournament.

Now, if you want to talk about the 1972 series, that's a different matter. I think that was a fair best on best tournament.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 10:20 AM
  #109
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fulcrum View Post
Russia struggled a bit with production of top talent between 2006 and 2009, esp. with death of Cherepanov (R.I.P.) but they are right back at it now. They've now fielded 3 very deep offensive teams in WJC and even more coming for 94, 95 and 96 born players. We've now went from barely finding players good enough for WJC to having up to 50 players competing for spots, and it's pretty fierce for some positions.

There are going to be 70-80 minor pro junior teams next year, probably split between two leagues. I think they are on the brink of surpassing the talent production of Canada, if they haven't already. The countries population and the speed of expansion, and the fact that it's becoming the #1 sport in the country is already visible for those who follow jrs. This time around, there are no limitations of communism in developing professionals either (like CSKA Red Army limitations in USSR)
I agree that the trend appears to favor Russia over the long term. The explosion in opportunities for young players and the improvements at the senior level can't help but create more and more hockey talent, and fairly soon. In the 1990's and early 2000's, Russia's hockey system had been gutted, and it was impossible to produce enough quality players to win major international tournaments. All of that is changing dramatically.

Also impressive is the strides that have been made in Sweden. Its seems that their youth programs just keep getting better and better.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 10:26 AM
  #110
Macman
Registered User
 
Macman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,379
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Wrong. I say it because in 1984, Alan Eagleson of Canada and the NHLPA decreed that no European referee would be ever again be allowed to referee a medal round game. Dag Olsson from Sweden refereed the final in 1981 and the round robin match between Canada and Russia in 1984 - in both games, the Soviet team beat the Canadian team pretty badly. I don't argue that Eagleson didn't have the exclusive right to arrange the rules for the tournament in whatever way it made it possible for the Canadian team to win and the Canadian fans to be entertained, but it makes the tournament itself a joke!! No Russian (or probably other European fan) considers the Canada Cup to be a vaild international tournament.

Now, if you want to talk about the 1972 series, that's a different matter. I think that was a fair best on best tournament.
See what I mean by tedium?

Please show me the source for this ref business. I watched the '87 Canada Cup final again a few weeks ago and the play-by-play guy Dan Kelly said during Game 1 that the Soviets had the option for a neutral ref and chose Koharski because they liked the way he did an earlier game of theirs. Was he wrong or lying?

A Canadian worked the final of the Vancouver Olympics. Did the IOC and IIHF issue a similar decree?

Macman is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 11:41 AM
  #111
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,829
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
The argument that Canada has no interest in the WC's has been repeated ad nauseum, but the fact is, and we all know it - Canada has a sudden surge of interest in any hockey tournament that they win. Look at how the attendance overflowed in Quebec for the 2008 WC after Canada won in 2007. But after a spate of consecutive losses dating back to 2008, now Canada has the attitude "we want to take our ball and go home because its not fair that we didn't win." To hear that repeated over and over gets really tedious.
You're right that Canada becomes more interested in a tournament when it's won... but we are talking about a pretty small increase in attention and only really among the vast majority who hardly pay attention at all. I don't really see your point. The WC did not become much bigger in Canada after two consecutive golds in the early 2000s. As far as the attendence for 2008 goes, you put any quality tournament in a big Canadian city, particularly one with no NHL team, and the attendence will be huge. That's the way things are in Canada, and there is no reason at all to think that it was related to the 2007 tournament win. The fact is, this is not a tournament that people pay particular attention to in Canada regardless of whether or not the team wins. Appropriate or not, you are many times more likely to hear people talking about a big loss or win in the WJCs than about a big loss or win at the WCs. There is no issue about fairness at the WCs, the issue is that it makes little sense to compare nations based on a tournament that sees nations send teams of varying proportional strength.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Your argument appears to be that Canada didn't have ALL of their best players at these tournaments. Who did? Yours is not a valid excuse, because no nation ever has all of their best players at the WJC.
I'm sure quite a few nations had all of their best players available to them. Let's play a little game though. We will look at last year, and I will list the players that Canada was missing. You can list the players that were missing for Russia or for any other country you desire. Then we can compare.

Canada: Seguin, Skinner, Couturier, Johansen, Gudbranson, Nugent-Hopkins.

Canada was missing the top defenceman and essentially the whole top 6. I am anxiously awaiting the list of countries that were similarly disadvantaged.

JackSlater is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 12:01 PM
  #112
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman View Post
As does the Canada Cup means nothing or was rigged. There's plenty of tedium to go around on both sides.

They don't mean attendance. Canadians will pay tickets to see just about any hockey. They mean player interest, and there's no doubt players interested in going to the worlds are far fewer in North America than in Europe and particularly Russia. It's just the way it is and what makes the worlds less than it should be.
Do you understand why Europeans in general and Russians in particular might feel a bit of resentment when Canadians argue that Russians don't deserve credit for winning the WC because it doesn't have Canada's best players, and then admit in the same breath that the best Canadians don't go (that premise alone is suspect) because they are disinterested and it would be uncomfortable and inconvenient for them to represent their country (i.e., less time on the golf course).

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 12:10 PM
  #113
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
You're right that Canada becomes more interested in a tournament when it's won... but we are talking about a pretty small increase in attention and only really among the vast majority who hardly pay attention at all. I don't really see your point. The WC did not become much bigger in Canada after two consecutive golds in the early 2000s. As far as the attendence for 2008 goes, you put any quality tournament in a big Canadian city, particularly one with no NHL team, and the attendence will be huge. That's the way things are in Canada, and there is no reason at all to think that it was related to the 2007 tournament win. The fact is, this is not a tournament that people pay particular attention to in Canada regardless of whether or not the team wins. Appropriate or not, you are many times more likely to hear people talking about a big loss or win in the WJCs than about a big loss or win at the WCs. There is no issue about fairness at the WCs, the issue is that it makes little sense to compare nations based on a tournament that sees nations send teams of varying proportional strength.





I'm sure quite a few nations had all of their best players available to them. Let's play a little game though. We will look at last year, and I will list the players that Canada was missing. You can list the players that were missing for Russia or for any other country you desire. Then we can compare.

Canada: Seguin, Skinner, Couturier, Johansen, Gudbranson, Nugent-Hopkins.

Canada was missing the top defenceman and essentially the whole top 6. I am anxiously awaiting the list of countries that were similarly disadvantaged.
Seguin - not good enough to be invited to a world class tournament. Skinner was an ineffective passenger against Russia at the 2011 WC's. Couterier, Johanson and Gudbransen were invisible and excess baggage against Russia in the 2011 WJC. Nugent-Hopkins was cut from the WJC team in 2011. Please list some players that could potentially make a difference!!

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 12:41 PM
  #114
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macman View Post
See what I mean by tedium?

Please show me the source for this ref business. I watched the '87 Canada Cup final again a few weeks ago and the play-by-play guy Dan Kelly said during Game 1 that the Soviets had the option for a neutral ref and chose Koharski because they liked the way he did an earlier game of theirs. Was he wrong or lying?

A Canadian worked the final of the Vancouver Olympics. Did the IOC and IIHF issue a similar decree?
The Eagleson decree is not something I learned in a book or in Wikipedia. I remember when it happened, and it happened exactly the way I described it. To document it, you would probably have to go the Archives section in your library and dial up the Toronto Globe and Mail, circa September 1984. If you don't want to make the effort, you could just choose not to believe it - whatever. It might be easier to check and see how many European refs worked Medal Round games at the Canada Cup, beginning in 1984. I promise you won't find Dag Olsson's name.

Kelly was telling the truth. Eagleson offered the Soviets the choice of Don Koharski or Mike Noeth of the United States to referee the best of 3 final (European refs were prohibited). Koharski worked the semifinal between the Soviets and Sweden in 1987, and seemed to be very fair toward the Soviets, as opposed to the other choice that the Soviets had for the final, Mike Noeth. I won't go into the whole Mike Noeth issue, but the bottom line is, given an either-or choice, Koharski was definitely the more competent and accomplished ref of the two. The problem is that it is one thing to be absolutely neutral when you are working a game involving two foreign countries, and quite another to work a game involving your native land - the flag that you bear allegiance to - and a foreign "enemy" as the Soviets were viewed in those days. Especially when at least half of the population of the country was living or dying based on the results of the best of 3 final. It was totally unfair to Koharski, but even more unfair to the Soviets. Game 3 was where the alleged bias manifested itself most heavily. Tiny, skinny Slava Bykov "dragging down" the huge Mario Lemieux 3 times, for 3 minor penalties, with the replays clearly showing Lemieux grabbing Bykov's stick, wrapping it around himself, and throwing his skates into the air. Koharski knew it was physically impossible for Bykov to drag Lemieux down, but the crowd demanded that he make the calls, and he gave in. On the series winning goal, I believe it was Hauerchuk who hooked Bykov down as he was about to catch up to and check Lemieux, but Koharski swallowed his whistle. By that time the crowd was going wild, and he didn't have the guts to spoil the party. It was an absolute farce!


Last edited by Yakushev72: 11-28-2012 at 12:49 PM. Reason: omission
Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 12:45 PM
  #115
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,829
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Seguin - not good enough to be invited to a world class tournament. Skinner was an ineffective passenger against Russia at the 2011 WC's. Couterier, Johanson and Gudbransen were invisible and excess baggage against Russia in the 2011 WJC. Nugent-Hopkins was cut from the WJC team in 2011. Please list some players that could potentially make a difference!!
You're losing any semblance of credibility here with this absurd post. Seguin wasn't good enough to be invited to a world class tournament? THAT is the criteria for being a quality WJC player? Pathetic. It's ridiculous criteria given that even the most dominant junior players very rarely ever play in senior tournaments. Even then, Seguin would have been invited to the WC for Canada (and for the vast majority of nations) if he hadn't been injured. I believe it was a wrist injury, but I don't remember. Either way, you are completely wrong. Seguin was very likely the best player eligible for the tournament from any nation, given how ridiculously good he was for a 19 year old player in the NHL. I honestly can't believe you posted this.

Your excuse for Skinner is also absurd. Skinner was not good in one game against almost the full Russian national team when he was 18... and thus Skinner at 19 would not have been a difference maker in the WJCs? He had played at a level well above what any U20 player in the world had reached, having had the most successful professional season of anyone and also having actually played, with significant minutes, for a senior national team. Skinner would have dominated, easily.

Couturier, Johansen, Gudbranson and Nugent-Hopkins I will lump together as I don't want to spend the rest of my day dissecting the insanity I've quoted. Johansen was named a tournament all star in the previous year, but I'm sure he would not have made a difference when he was a whole year older, with NHL development. Couturier held his own against Malkin in the 2012 playoffs, and of course once again was far more advanced than the previous year, but I'm sure he would not have made a difference. Gudbranson actually was good for Canada in 2011, and in 2012 he was much improved as any player is when gaining another teenage year. Nugent-Hopkins would not have made a difference because he was cut from the most talented WJC team as a 17 year old? He was extremely good against NHL players, plus he had an extra year of development which is always massive for players this young. He wouldn't have made a difference? That's laughable.

The fact is that Canada was without one of their top defencemen and their 5 best forwards. No other team had to deal with anything close to that. I honestly hope that you are being facetious, otherwise nothing you say from this point forward can be taken seriously.

Finally, would you mind actually doing as I requested and posting the list of missing players from Russia? I would love to compare them

JackSlater is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 12:59 PM
  #116
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
You're losing any semblance of credibility here with this absurd post. Seguin wasn't good enough to be invited to a world class tournament? THAT is the criteria for being a quality WJC player? Pathetic. It's ridiculous criteria given that even the most dominant junior players very rarely ever play in senior tournaments. Even then, Seguin would have been invited to the WC for Canada (and for the vast majority of nations) if he hadn't been injured. I believe it was a wrist injury, but I don't remember. Either way, you are completely wrong. Seguin was very likely the best player eligible for the tournament from any nation, given how ridiculously good he was for a 19 year old player in the NHL. I honestly can't believe you posted this.

Your excuse for Skinner is also absurd. Skinner was not good in one game against almost the full Russian national team when he was 18... and thus Skinner at 19 would not have been a difference maker in the WJCs? He had played at a level well above what any U20 player in the world had reached, having had the most successful professional season of anyone and also having actually played, with significant minutes, for a senior national team. Skinner would have dominated, easily.

Couturier, Johansen, Gudbranson and Nugent-Hopkins I will lump together as I don't want to spend the rest of my day dissecting the insanity I've quoted. Johansen was named a tournament all star in the previous year, but I'm sure he would not have made a difference when he was a whole year older, with NHL development. Couturier held his own against Malkin in the 2012 playoffs, and of course once again was far more advanced than the previous year, but I'm sure he would not have made a difference. Gudbranson actually was good for Canada in 2011, and in 2012 he was much improved as any player is when gaining another teenage year. Nugent-Hopkins would not have made a difference because he was cut from the most talented WJC team as a 17 year old? He was extremely good against NHL players, plus he had an extra year of development which is always massive for players this young. He wouldn't have made a difference? That's laughable.

The fact is that Canada was without one of their top defencemen and their 5 best forwards. No other team had to deal with anything close to that. I honestly hope that you are being facetious, otherwise nothing you say from this point forward can be taken seriously.

Finally, would you mind actually doing as I requested and posting the list of missing players from Russia? I would love to compare them
Aside from a few guys like Kovalchuk and Radulov who have played in the NHL, the rest are guys that play in the KHL that you don't know, have never seen play, and have no basis to "compare" anyway. How can you do a comparison when your only parameter is experience in the NHL? Bottom line is that nobody would conclude that if Canada had Gudbranson or Seguin that they would have gotten past the Quarterfinals last year.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 01:03 PM
  #117
cska78
Registered User
 
cska78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: USA
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 10,630
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to cska78 Send a message via Yahoo to cska78
who started this idiotic thread? the answer is - absolutely NOT.

cska78 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 01:15 PM
  #118
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,829
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Aside from a few guys like Kovalchuk and Radulov who have played in the NHL, the rest are guys that play in the KHL that you don't know, have never seen play, and have no basis to "compare" anyway. How can you do a comparison when your only parameter is experience in the NHL? Bottom line is that nobody would conclude that if Canada had Gudbranson or Seguin that they would have gotten past the Quarterfinals last year.
You do realize that the WJC was the topic of discussion in that post, right? Who was Russia missing at the 2012 WJC? I would like to see their names. Other than Sweden missing Larsson and Landeskog (great players) I can't think of anyone outside of Canada missing players. Once again, you claimed that all nations are missing players at the WJC, and I would like you to prove it for the most recent tournament at least.

JackSlater is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 01:47 PM
  #119
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
You do realize that the WJC was the topic of discussion in that post, right? Who was Russia missing at the 2012 WJC? I would like to see their names. Other than Sweden missing Larsson and Landeskog (great players) I can't think of anyone outside of Canada missing players. Once again, you claimed that all nations are missing players at the WJC, and I would like you to prove it for the most recent tournament at least.
Obviously, I thought we were talking about the WC's, but the excuse is exactly the same, so I guess it doesn't matter. Still, you have consistently failed to prove to a level of scientific certainty, the degree of improvement from 18- to 19-years of age for male hockey players. Until you can prove that, you can't prove with certainty that the result would have been different if Seguin et al. would have been there. Its just speculation on your part that Canada would have won. Canada was favored to win at the outset in 2011 and 2012, but because that result wasn't achieved, now you are searching for an excuse about someone who wasn't there.

As I look back on this thread, you were responding to my comment about the WC, not the WJC. I have no way of knowing all of the Russian players who might have been missing from last year's WJC, but to my knowledge, none were in the NHL.


Last edited by Yakushev72: 11-28-2012 at 02:08 PM. Reason: omission
Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 02:19 PM
  #120
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,829
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Obviously, I thought we were talking about the WC's, but the excuse is exactly the same, so I guess it doesn't matter. Still, you have consistently failed to prove to a level of scientific certainty, the degree of improvement from 18- to 19-years of age for male hockey players. Until you can prove that, you can't prove with certainty that the result would have been different if Seguin et al. would have been there. Its just speculation on your part that Canada would have won. Canada was favored to win at the outset in 2011 and 2012, but because that result wasn't achieved, now you are searching for an excuse about someone who wasn't there.

As I look back on this thread, you were responding to my comment about the WC, not the WJC. I have no way of knowing all of the Russian players who might have been missing from last year's WJC, but to my knowledge, none were in the NHL.
I responded very clearly to this comment:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Your argument appears to be that Canada didn't have ALL of their best players at these tournaments. Who did? Yours is not a valid excuse, because no nation ever has all of their best players at the WJC.
It seems like you've admitted that Russia had access to all of their best players. I respect your attempts at dodging though, a valiant effort.

If you really think that the improvement of players from 17-18-19 needs to be proven then you are clearly grasping at straws. It is pretty obvious to anyone that players improve over that span, and often drastically. In any event, this in no way proves that Canada was certain to win with all of the best players, because they weren't. It only demonstrates that it is faulty to compare teams that are complete with teams that are not and pretend that the results are genuine.

JackSlater is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 03:23 PM
  #121
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
I responded very clearly to this comment:



It seems like you've admitted that Russia had access to all of their best players. I respect your attempts at dodging though, a valiant effort.

If you really think that the improvement of players from 17-18-19 needs to be proven then you are clearly grasping at straws. It is pretty obvious to anyone that players improve over that span, and often drastically. In any event, this in no way proves that Canada was certain to win with all of the best players, because they weren't. It only demonstrates that it is faulty to compare teams that are complete with teams that are not and pretend that the results are genuine.
I told you that I thought we were talking about the WC, since your original response was to a post I made about the WC. You are the one grasping at straws when you argue that it is proven that all players improve significantly after age 17. There is no such proof. Some players mature physically at an early age, and don't improve at all, or only slightly improve. If you can show differently, I'm waiting for the specific evidence. I'll give you an example: Nathan MacKinnon. He may be 17, but he clearly matured physically at an early age, and he has the physical strength of a 20- or 21-year old. He may improve in technique to a degree over the next few years, but I wouldn't look for major increments of physical growth and development. He looks like he's close to being fully developed physically.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 03:32 PM
  #122
SH15
Registered User
 
SH15's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Canada Cups do not count as best on best tournaments because they were Canadian owned and operated invitational tournaments that were not sanctioned by IIHF and, starting in 1984, only Canadian and American referees were permitted to work medal round games. You can't count it as best on best if it is designed for one nation to win.
Also, just for your information, the 1976 Canada Cup could not be a best on best because the Soviets decided to leave their best players (Kharlamov, Yakushev, Petrov, Mikhailov, etc.)
Best-On-Best Winners since '76 Canada Cup

1976 - Canada
1981 - Soviet Union
1984 - Canada
1987 - Canada
1991 - Canada
1996 - USA

1998 - Czech Rep
2002 - Canada
2004 - Canada
2006 - Sweden
2010 - Canada

Ok then, let's remove all Canada Cups. Now Russia has ZERO titles in best on best tournaments. LOL. Is that better for your argument? Let's try this...

Last 10 years

Canada - 2 Olympic Gold, 5 WJC
Russia - 0 Olympic Gold, 2 WJC

What exactly IS the argument to state that Russia is currently the top hockey nation? I'm just not seeing it. What is supposed to impress the hockey world? I'm shocked Russia hasn't ever won a best on best tournament to be honest, but the facts speak for themselves.

A country that has NEVER won a best on best can't possibly be considered the top hockey nation. 2014 is their chance at home to change that. Just a bit of pressure on them...

SH15 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 03:45 PM
  #123
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,829
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
I told you that I thought we were talking about the WC, since your original response was to a post I made about the WC. You are the one grasping at straws when you argue that it is proven that all players improve significantly after age 17. There is no such proof. Some players mature physically at an early age, and don't improve at all, or only slightly improve. If you can show differently, I'm waiting for the specific evidence. I'll give you an example: Nathan MacKinnon. He may be 17, but he clearly matured physically at an early age, and he has the physical strength of a 20- or 21-year old. He may improve in technique to a degree over the next few years, but I wouldn't look for major increments of physical growth and development. He looks like he's close to being fully developed physically.
My post was broken up, with clear indications that I was responding to two different posts you had made, one of which referred to the WJC alone.

Who is talking about physical development? They developed as hockey players, obviously. Some may have developed physically to a great degree, others not, but they all improved as players, which is the point. This is veering far from the actual thread topic though so I won't pursue this foolishness further.

JackSlater is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 03:56 PM
  #124
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SH15 View Post
Best-On-Best Winners since '76 Canada Cup

1976 - Canada
1981 - Soviet Union
1984 - Canada
1987 - Canada
1991 - Canada
1996 - USA

1998 - Czech Rep
2002 - Canada
2004 - Canada
2006 - Sweden
2010 - Canada

Ok then, let's remove all Canada Cups. Now Russia has ZERO titles in best on best tournaments. LOL. Is that better for your argument? Let's try this...

Last 10 years

Canada - 2 Olympic Gold, 5 WJC
Russia - 0 Olympic Gold, 2 WJC

What exactly IS the argument to state that Russia is currently the top hockey nation? I'm just not seeing it. What is supposed to impress the hockey world? I'm shocked Russia hasn't ever won a best on best tournament to be honest, but the facts speak for themselves.

A country that has NEVER won a best on best can't possibly be considered the top hockey nation. 2014 is their chance at home to change that. Just a bit of pressure on them...
I never made the argument that Russia was No. 1 in world hockey. I said that I believe things are headed in that direction, but I was careful to say that they're not there yet. However, I do think Russia will have a good chance to claim the World title at Sochi.

Yakushev72 is offline  
Old
11-28-2012, 04:11 PM
  #125
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SH15 View Post
Best-On-Best Winners since '76 Canada Cup

1976 - Canada
1981 - Soviet Union
1984 - Canada
1987 - Canada
1991 - Canada
1996 - USA

1998 - Czech Rep
2002 - Canada
2004 - Canada
2006 - Sweden
2010 - Canada

Ok then, let's remove all Canada Cups. Now Russia has ZERO titles in best on best tournaments. LOL. Is that better for your argument? Let's try this...

Last 10 years

Canada - 2 Olympic Gold, 5 WJC
Russia - 0 Olympic Gold, 2 WJC

What exactly IS the argument to state that Russia is currently the top hockey nation? I'm just not seeing it. What is supposed to impress the hockey world? I'm shocked Russia hasn't ever won a best on best tournament to be honest, but the facts speak for themselves.

A country that has NEVER won a best on best can't possibly be considered the top hockey nation. 2014 is their chance at home to change that. Just a bit of pressure on them...
What do results of 10 years ago have to do with anything? They don't relate to the current hockey world, nor relate to the topic of this thread - i.e. who is currently #1.


Anyhow, I think there is a difference between best hockey nation and best national team. Canada will always be the #1 hockey nation.....but that doesn't ensure they always have the best national teams at all times.

Zine is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:32 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.