IIHF World ChampionshipDiscuss International Tournaments like the WJC, Olympics, and World Cup, as they take place, or discuss past tournaments. performances.
Ok so its like this. You dnt care about the world championship, but you want to be ranked as number 1. U know that u have to win a few tournaments to gain that 1st place, but u dnt bother. When the IIHF then releases the new world ranking u are furious that u are not on the top. To me it just sound stupid. U have to work hard to be number one and the fact is that the canadian national team dosent play with heart.
Its like the student that dosent do the homework. "Im the best, I dnt need to read. Reading is stupid, because we all know that im the smartest and best in class. I dnt care if mr X got an A and i got a D, because im still better than mr X. We all know it."
I even said that they deserve the #5 ranking. Any negatives that come from the 5th rank... they'll have to deal with them. Do I believe they're the 5th best country? No.
Again, I'm not asking IIHF to rank Canada as the best nation.
I think you need to reread my post. It is a preposterous hypothetical situation, but according to the IIHF it would make Canada #1.
The IIHF's ranking are the random musings of another Euro-centred sports body.
well based on your hypothetical scenario canada would reach the finals, something that hasn't happened in awile and if it did happen it would mean canada had a good team. and i don't want to look at the numbers for a troll but i don't think canada would jump from 5 to 1 just because they got the gold medal especially since russia is getting the silver medal.
When Canada's best went up against Russia's best at the 2010 Olympics, the Russian team was run out of the building. It wasn't close, and I can't justify any other country ahead of Canada.
yeah russia has the superstar forwards, but canada has the deep solid D and goaltending (oh wait, i forgot, HF lore is that Canada won inspite of its goaltending that year)
I think most people with a clue about hockey will remember the game.
==
Let's make it even more clear. We'll say Canada made the finals by beating Denmark, Italy and China. The Russians beat Sweden, Czech and the US. Now it really doesn't matter what you think you may or may not remember, we are discussing the ratings after the result. Would this scenario make Canada the better team when they clearly were not?
IIHF bases its rankings on the results within a 4 year span. That 1 particular game or tournament is added into the equation and is not sufficient enough (in and of itself) to change the rankings without the influence of other year's results.
Ok so its like this. You dnt care about the world championship, but you want to be ranked as number 1. U know that u have to win a few tournaments to gain that 1st place, but u dnt bother. When the IIHF then releases the new world ranking u are furious that u are not on the top. To me it just sound stupid. U have to work hard to be number one and the fact is that the canadian national team dosent play with heart.
Its like the student that dosent do the homework. "Im the best, I dnt need to read. Reading is stupid, because we all know that im the smartest and best in class. I dnt care if mr X got an A and i got a D, because im still better than mr X. We all know it."
I can't imagine ANYONE in Canada cares where the IIHF ranks us. That really isn't the discussion. It's the premise of the rankings that is the discussion. The only people that should really care about the IIHF rankings are the teams that are forced to play a weaker "5th seed".
IIHF bases its rankings on the results within a 4 year span. That 1 particular game or tournament is added into the equation and is not sufficient enough (in and of itself) to change the rankings without the influence of other year's results.
I know that, there seems to be a team of nitpickers desperate to prove something. In the absurd example I provided, is Canada the better team?
You mean if Russian played Canada, outshot us 67-13, had 4 goals disallowed, hit 5 posts, dominated the game in every area but lost on a fluky bounce you'd declare Canada #1 because the IIHF says so?
There are not nearly enough results to give the IIHF rankings a squirt of merit.
Unfortunately, and this isn't only in the IIHF, its true in the NHL as well, there are no points allowed for shots on goal, no points allowed for goals disallowed, no points allowed for hitting goal posts, and no points allowed for territorial dominance. Both the IIHF and the NHL only count goals scored as a measure of who won the game. The best way to cope is to do what everyone else does - rely on the Olympic result in February of 2010.
I even said that they deserve the #5 ranking. Any negatives that come from the 5th rank... they'll have to deal with them. Do I believe they're the 5th best country? No.
Again, I'm not asking IIHF to rank Canada as the best nation.
Yeah but results is all that mathers. Personally ive allways been among the best in history, but on a few tests i failed big time. Back then I just had to admit that i didnt work hard enough and that I sucked.
Canada got enough NHL 1st liners to crush allmost every team in the WHC, but still they lost to Slovakia. A Slovakia team without Halak, Budaj, Hossa, Gabby etc. Still canadians are complaining and whining. And who do they blame? The players? Oh no the sacred players cant be blamed. Well they blame the IIHF and Russia. Because the Russian players are willing to play for their national team. I also read somewhere that NA fans thinks that russian players play bad during the playoffs, so that they can play in the WHC. Like its a huge conspiracy.
And yes Canada got depth and no other team comes close to Canadas depth. Still Canada gets beaten in the qf. I would argue that Canadas B-team would be able to beat Canadas A-team any day. Why? Because Canada got ALOT of stars! Even Canadas C-team should be able to beat Canadas A-team, but they need luck, good coaching etc. Canada got alot of talent and wouldve been number 1, if the players worked hard enough. If u dnt work, u dnt get.
Canada and Russia are pretty much even IMO. I think a lot of Canadians forget that there is probably at least 50 Russian players in the KHL that are good enough to make the NHL if they wanted to and were willing to get their feet wet at the AHL level.
I can't imagine ANYONE in Canada cares where the IIHF ranks us. That really isn't the discussion. It's the premise of the rankings that is the discussion. The only people that should really care about the IIHF rankings are the teams that are forced to play a weaker "5th seed".
With this post, you basically justified what that poster was saying. Essentially, "We don't care where IIHF ranks us, we're #1 regardless".
Unfortunately, and this isn't only in the IIHF, its true in the NHL as well, there are no points allowed for shots on goal, no points allowed for goals disallowed, no points allowed for hitting goal posts, and no points allowed for territorial dominance. Both the IIHF and the NHL only count goals scored as a measure of who won the game. The best way to cope is to do what everyone else does - rely on the Olympic result in February of 2010.
I didn't ask who won the game. I am asking which team do you think is better.
Yeah but results is all that mathers. Personally ive allways been among the best in history, but on a few tests i failed big time. Back then I just had to admit that i didnt work hard enough and that I sucked.
Canada got enough NHL 1st liners to crush allmost every team in the WHC, but still they lost to Slovakia. A Slovakia team without Halak, Budaj, Hossa, Gabby etc. Still canadians are complaining and whining. And who do they blame? The players? Oh no the sacred players cant be blamed. Well they blame the IIHF and Russia. Because the Russian players are willing to play for their national team. I also read somewhere that NA fans thinks that russian players play bad during the playoffs, so that they can play in the WHC. Like its a huge conspiracy.
And yes Canada got depth and no other team comes close to Canadas depth. Still Canada gets beaten in the qf. I would argue that Canadas B-team would be able to beat Canadas A-team any day. Why? Because Canada got ALOT of stars! Even Canadas C-team should be able to beat Canadas A-team, but they need luck, good coaching etc. Canada got alot of talent and wouldve been number 1, if the players worked hard enough. If u dnt work, u dnt get.
Yes, Canada has depth of good players, but not depth of great players. Thats why their B team (or perhaps C team in some years) has a hard time surviving the Quarterfinals of the WHC. Once you get beyond their top 10 or so, everybody is about the same in terms of talent and skill, and no better than the Europeans, and in many years, not as good. Lack of depth of top level players is the reason why Canada needs to have all of its players available in order to show itself to be No. 1.
With this post, you basically justified what that poster was saying. Essentially, "We don't care where IIHF ranks us, we're #1 regardless".
Actually, I just said I don't care what the IIHF thinks. How could anyone take a ranking system that is based on teams playing without their best players or coaches?
I didn't ask who won the game. I am asking which team do you think is better.
Given the overwhelming numbers that you postulated (e.g., 67-13 shots on goal), you could say that that team had a really strong night. But there is nothing that you can extrapolate beyond that single game because the next night the statistics could be reversed.
Yes, Canada has depth of good players, but not depth of great players. Thats why their B team (or perhaps C team in some years) has a hard time surviving the Quarterfinals of the WHC. Once you get beyond their top 10 or so, everybody is about the same in terms of talent and skill, and no better than the Europeans, and in many years, not as good. Lack of depth of top level players is the reason why Canada needs to have all of its players available in order to show itself to be No. 1.
Russia is currently the best hockey nation on earth in tournaments played in Europe on big ice after the NHL season but during the NHL playoffs.
I wish the Soccer WC worked like this. Most of the world's best players would be committed to their club teams while all of the best Canadians would be free to play anywhere at anytime.
This is not a dumb nor a troll thread. The opinion voiced is based on actual results shown by the national teams on different levels and not on hypothetical things proposed over and over again in this thread.
And the results show that Canada has not won ANYTHING since 2010 Olympics. Something that is hard to imagine, but Canada hasn't even won a WJHC or an U18 WJHC. And that's considering all of the WJHC were held in North America.
I understand you all keep bringing the Olympics result from almost 3 years ago, the draft numbers, the number of NHLers, but on the ice, Canada is not winning. Plain and simple.
Since 2010 was so long ago to merit discussion let's look closer at the other events that Canada has played in:
WHC'S - B tourney (not relevant)
U18's - see above
WJC's - Lost two gold medal games after winning five gold in a row.
Summer U18's - Three gold (five in a row total)
Nothing to indicate that Canada has lost it's #1 position.
Yes, Canada has depth of good players, but not depth of great players. Thats why their B team (or perhaps C team in some years) has a hard time surviving the Quarterfinals of the WHC. Once you get beyond their top 10 or so, everybody is about the same in terms of talent and skill, and no better than the Europeans, and in many years, not as good. Lack of depth of top level players is the reason why Canada needs to have all of its players available in order to show itself to be No. 1.
U need 2 scoring lines. Players like Brad Richards, Jordan Staal, Neal, RNH etc are often not included in the Canadian A team according to canadian posters. Ive read alot of posts from Canadians here on Hfboards and alot of my favorite players are not included. Personally i love players like Clutterbuck, David Jones, Asham etc. Players that got alot of heart. A Canadian B team would have two fantastic scoring lines, a rly good PK line and a good grinder line. What more can u ask for? The Canadian B team will have a few natural leaders, while the A team will have about 10 NHL captains. That might cause problems.
Since 2010 was so long ago to merit discussion let's look closer at the other events that Canada has played in:
WHC'S - B tourney (not relevant)
U18's - see above
WJC's - Lost two gold medal games after winning five gold in a row.
Summer U18's - Three gold (five in a row total)
Nothing to indicate that Canada has lost it's #1 position.
The IIHF gives the exact same weight to the 2010 WHC as it does to the 2010 Olympics. It gives more weight to the 2011 WHC than the Olympics. It makes perfect sense.
Yes, Canada has depth of good players, but not depth of great players. Thats why their B team (or perhaps C team in some years) has a hard time surviving the Quarterfinals of the WHC. Once you get beyond their top 10 or so, everybody is about the same in terms of talent and skill, and no better than the Europeans, and in many years, not as good. Lack of depth of top level players is the reason why Canada needs to have all of its players available in order to show itself to be No. 1.
Hahaha, you really don't know how our "B" or "C" team looks like.
U need 2 scoring lines. Players like Brad Richards, Jordan Staal, Neal, RNH etc are often not included in the Canadian A team according to canadian posters. Ive read alot of posts from Canadians here on Hfboards and alot of my favorite players are not included. Personally i love players like Clutterbuck, David Jones, Asham etc. Players that got alot of heart. A Canadian B team would have two fantastic scoring lines, a rly good PK line and a good grinder line. What more can u ask for? The Canadian B team will have a few natural leaders, while the A team will have about 10 NHL captains. That might cause problems.
Well, at the 2010 olympics, this really was not a problem.
Well, at the 2010 olympics, this really was not a problem.
True, but still leadership problems happens from time to time. Like the dutch national soccer team during the euros (soccer) and the french national team during last WC (soccer).
I believe that it is an advantedge to have a few natural leaders and not to many.
I don't think so. The Russians are arguably the best at producing dynamic, offensive threats. Perhaps even one of the better countries at producing puck moving defencemen.
But the mediocre goaltending and lack of stud defencemen in recent years is indicative of an asymmetrical Russian development program. Kulikov is the closest thing Russia's produced to a stud NHL defenceman since the 90s. In net they've got Bryz, a declining Nabokov, and a handful of young guys with potential (Varlamov, Bobrovsky, Khudobin, Vasilevski).
I think Canada is the best when you look at the depth of talent across all positions. Canada's got star talent at every position that gets cut from its final roster. Most other countries don't have that kind of star depth.
I don't like using the IIHF or even Olympic tournaments as a barometer because the round robin format means a single aberration can have significant impact in the final standings.
__________________ CanadianHockey________ __ __________Sens, Oilers, and Team Canada
Last edited by CanadianHockey: 12-14-2012 at 08:26 PM.
Yes, Canada has depth of good players, but not depth of great players. Thats why their B team (or perhaps C team in some years) has a hard time surviving the Quarterfinals of the WHC. Once you get beyond their top 10 or so, everybody is about the same in terms of talent and skill, and no better than the Europeans, and in many years, not as good. Lack of depth of top level players is the reason why Canada needs to have all of its players available in order to show itself to be No. 1.
So... what you're saying is, when everyone is available to play in tournaments, Canada is the clear #1.
