IIHF World ChampionshipDiscuss International Tournaments like the WJC, Olympics, and World Cup, as they take place, or discuss past tournaments. performances.
Do we have a long list of Norris contenders? Weber! Not sure if he's having a norris like year. Keith seems to be playing the best right now out of all our TOP 7. Is AP in the running this year? I don't think so. Is Doughty in the running this year?
I wouldn't disregard the chances or Weber, Pietrangelo, Letang or Keith depending on how the rest of the season goes. Doughty plays to that level when he wants to, so I'm not concerned about him either. Canada and Sweden are both a fair bit ahead of USA when it comes to defencemen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Writer
Not that it means anything in the long run, but based on my rankings I have Canada ranked only slightly higher than the US, by only the slightest of margins. But that's only because of Crosby Stamkos and Giroux (arguably 3 of the Top 5 players in the league on any given night) That's the difference.
You are incredibly pessimistic then. USA has only 3 forwards I would even consider for Canada, and Kesler would be a big question mark depending on how well he recovers from his injury. Parise and Kane are the other two, and neither would be a lock at this point. A guy like Spezza has basically no chance of making Canada, and he would be the unquestioned #1 centre for USA. There is a big gap here.
I wouldn't disregard the chances or Weber, Pietrangelo, Letang or Keith depending on how the rest of the season goes. Doughty plays to that level when he wants to, so I'm not concerned about him either. Canada and Sweden are both a fair bit ahead of USA when it comes to defencemen.
You are incredibly pessimistic then. USA has only 3 forwards I would even consider for Canada, and Kesler would be a big question mark depending on how well he recovers from his injury. Parise and Kane are the other two, and neither would be a lock at this point. A guy like Spezza has basically no chance of making Canada, and he would be the unquestioned #1 centre for USA. There is a big gap here.
I don't disagree with any of that. Perhaps I over-compensate for trying to avoid national bias. it's not uncommon. ) There's no question, there isn't a country out there that can match Canada's depth at center ice.
I don't want to derail a Canada thread, but since the U.S. being mentioned......
There's no doubt that the U.S. depth at forward-at least at center, lags a bit behind countries like Canada. That said, the winger depth is good and there are several quality playmaking options there. To me, the U.S. brass will probably follow a template that led the WJC to success this year:
* Quality goaltending that can allow the defense to take chances
* A mobile, offensively gifted defense that will have few if any bangers
* Scoring by commitee up front
* A tenancious and physical forecheck
I think we have the pieces to execute that style of play and do well.
I don't want to derail a Canada thread, but since the U.S. being mentioned......
There's no doubt that the U.S. depth at forward-at least at center, lags a bit behind countries like Canada. That said, the winger depth is good and there are several quality playmaking options there. To me, the U.S. brass will probably follow a template that led the WJC to success this year:
* Quality goaltending that can allow the defense to take chances
* A mobile, offensively gifted defense that will have few if any bangers
* Scoring by commitee up front
* A tenancious and physical forecheck
I think we have the pieces to execute that style of play and do well.
I agree, that is the approach that USA should and presumably will take. Canada traditionally just runs around and hopes that talent wins out, at this level anyway, so it must be nice to have an obvious strategy ready to go.
I agree, that is the approach that USA should and presumably will take. Canada traditionally just runs around and hopes that talent wins out, at this level anyway, so it must be nice to have an obvious strategy ready to go.
Up through 2010, for sure. I think this changed in 2010 though (for the better), with Yzerman and the executive team being in-sync with Babcock and the coaching staff in employing a puck-possession gameplan which the key members of that group (Yzerman and Babcock) had found success with in Detroit.
We had the talent and size to execute it successfully on the NHL-sized ice surface too, and when overlayed with overriding focus on chemistry (and here I'm thinking of the Thornton and Getzlaf lines, which both play that style effectively in the NHL, and were effective, to varying degrees, in the Olympics), strong two-way play from the forward and defence groups, and seemingly minor things like faceoff prowess from both sides (ie, the Bergeron selection), I'd have to say that we came with a fairly well-thought out and actionable gameplan, with the right roster pieces in place to execute it effectively.
Why are you trolling a Team Canada thread with your usual anti-USA Hockey nonsense?
What are you doing here RR??? I guess it just shows you how little a restraining order is worth nowadays...
Anyway... all I was saying was... the U.S. will be weak(er than usual) up front, both Miller and Quick are have less than stellar seasons and the games are being played on the big ice. Add it up and the U.S. may be lucky to medal.
Also, my post triggered a lot of responses so it couldn't have been all that bad.
It always makes me smile when so many posters equate talented individuals with a gold medal. In a short tournament such as this, with little to no preparation time, having the most talented players is no where near equal to having a group of players that can quickly gel as a team and execute a system to perfection.
The most talented team at the recent W.J.C. was not the gold medal winning team (the U.S.) but the 4th place non-medal team whose players sported a maple leaf logo.
Do not count the U.S. out because what USA Hockey has been showing over the past few years (since 2010) is that it can assemble a team whose players, while certainly not the best, can however,compete and win against the best when it matters.
I know this has probably been said repeatedly over and over again. But...
Crosby
Stamkos
Toews
Tavares
...holy ****!!! (Pardon my language )
Forgot to mention Giroux - who you could argue was one of the best 3 players in the NHL last year. The most offensively talented team since the 76 Canada Cup. And to think, 20 years ago, we had a Hockey Summit based on the fear that would could not produce players who could score. Now we need one for goalies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by VOB
It always makes me smile when so many posters equate talented individuals with a gold medal. In a short tournament such as this, with little to no preparation time, having the most talented players is no where near equal to having a group of players that can quickly gel as a team and execute a system to perfection.
The most talented team at the recent W.J.C. was not the gold medal winning team (the U.S.) but the 4th place non-medal team whose players sported a maple leaf logo.
Do not count the U.S. out because what USA Hockey has been showing over the past few years (since 2010) is that it can assemble a team whose players, while certainly not the best, can however,compete and win against the best when it matters.
I would love to see Duchene, Hall, Seguin, Skinner, RNH and/or Eberle on a "Kid Line". On the big ice their speed and skill would be scary.
But, at the end of the day, we may not see any of them.
Sidney Crosby
Steven Stamkos
John Tavares
Claude Giroux
James Neal
Eric Staal
Jonathan Toews
Rick Nash
Patrice Bergeron
Martin St. Louis
Corey Perry
I believe they will want to keep the "Nash - Toews - Richards" line together so... that makes 12 forwards.
Again, I want to see a "Kid Line" but who do you drop?
Perry - who had 87 goals in the last 2 years and was awesome in 2010.
Richards - who has won everything and was great with Nash and Toews.
Nash - who has excelled on the international stage for Canada.
St Louis - who is older than dirt but has endless chemistry with Stamkos.
Sidney Crosby
Steven Stamkos
John Tavares
Claude Giroux
James Neal
Eric Staal
Jonathan Toews
Rick Nash
Patrice Bergeron
Martin St. Louis
Corey Perry
I believe they will want to keep the "Nash - Toews - Richards" line together so... that makes 12 forwards.
Again, I want to see a "Kid Line" but who do you drop?
Perry - who had 87 goals in the last 2 years and was awesome in 2010.
Richards - who has won everything and was great with Nash and Toews.
Nash - who has excelled on the international stage for Canada.
St Louis - who is older than dirt but has endless chemistry with Stamkos.
Ya, you set off a semi-**** storm. That's alright, you are not high on the Americans. I'm not high on the Russians. But with regards to your question on who to drop, drop Perry and Richards. I really don't think you should give any consideration to who did what with whom at the Olympics 4 years ago or who scored 50 goals in the NHL season in 2010-11. Who are the best players playing in December 2013 when the team is picked? Some consideration I guess for Richards-Towes and Nash but be it only a fraction of what needs to be considered. At this point in time, I say no to Richards.
Ya, you set off a semi-**** storm. That's alright, you are not high on the Americans. I'm not high on the Russians. But with regards to your question on who to drop, drop Perry and Richards. I really don't think you should give any consideration to who did what with whom at the Olympics 4 years ago or who scored 50 goals in the NHL season in 2010-11. Who are the best players playing in December 2013 when the team is picked? Some consideration I guess for Richards-Towes and Nash but be it only a fraction of what needs to be considered. At this point in time, I say no to Richards.
Thought I share your sentiments about Perry, I don't see him being dropped. There was a large push if I remember correctly last time around to guarantee him a roster spot. Since then his NHL play has only improved. This is the fundamental question that Canada is having right now. How much turnover to expect or to deal out this time around?
Ideally what we really are going to see is like you said, who's playing next December and how well you are playing then. One could argue that if I player is playing above their current level at that point, they are just vying for a spot. That's not a negative thing but I have to wonder if that plays into the thought process at all.
Thought I share your sentiments about Perry, I don't see him being dropped. There was a large push if I remember correctly last time around to guarantee him a roster spot. Since then his NHL play has only improved. This is the fundamental question that Canada is having right now. How much turnover to expect or to deal out this time around?
Ideally what we really are going to see is like you said, who's playing next December and how well you are playing then. One could argue that if I player is playing above their current level at that point, they are just vying for a spot. That's not a negative thing but I have to wonder if that plays into the thought process at all.
I have my own personal philosophy and it often doesn't jive with what Hockey Canada has in mind. There's no way in hell (if I were the one making the decisions) Perry would be on the Sochi team. Zero chance, he is not a big ice player and he's liability defensively and he loves to rack up the penalty minutes. Plus I'm just not a big fan of one Mr. Perry. II'd have a 50% turnover from Olympics to Olympics and I'd always have the average age around or near 25. Thanks Perry for your 4 goals in Vancouver. Much appreciated. Now if there's a World Cup 3 years from now in Montreal and you are still a 40 goal scorer, then I'll you'll get consideration. but big ice in Europe. Forget it. Luckily for Perry and a few of the other vets, Hockey Canada doesn't think like I do. and Getzlaf I like even less than Perry.
I would love to see Duchene, Hall, Seguin, Skinner, RNH and/or Eberle on a "Kid Line". On the big ice their speed and skill would be scary.
But, at the end of the day, we may not see any of them.
I would add Kane to that list as well. It would be a big mistake to leave all of those young guys off the team in my opinion, somewhat like the 2006 decision. Duchene, Kane, Hall and Seguin are all tremendously fast, offensively talented players. They have all looked good internationally, to varying degrees. Skinner, Hopkins and Eberle are all quite agile and have shown themselves to be quite capable on international ice. I will be shocked if none of them make the team, particularly with 14 forwards. I would rather take one of these guys for a strictly observational role than someone like Getzlaf who might chafe at being reduced to such a role.
Personally, I still expect Seguin to heat up this year and to make the team. Stanley Cup experience, chemistry with Bergeron, can easily play wing and was great for half a season in Europe. Hopkins and Skinner are the only ones listed above that I would guess have a limited chance to make the team, though Duchene would be much better off if he could prove that he had the ability to play wing.
Forgot to mention Giroux - who you could argue was one of the best 3 players in the NHL last year. The most offensively talented team since the 76 Canada Cup. And to think, 20 years ago, we had a Hockey Summit based on the fear that would could not produce players who could score. Now we need one for goalies.
When you're right, you're right.
i care to differ on that statement. you will never have a more offensively talented team then 87, with lemiuex, gretzky in there primes, with messier, hawerchuk gilmour down the middle.
I have my own personal philosophy and it often doesn't jive with what Hockey Canada has in mind. There's no way in hell (if I were the one making the decisions) Perry would be on the Sochi team. Zero chance, he is not a big ice player and he's liability defensively and he loves to rack up the penalty minutes. Plus I'm just not a big fan of one Mr. Perry. II'd have a 50% turnover from Olympics to Olympics and I'd always have the average age around or near 25. Thanks Perry for your 4 goals in Vancouver. Much appreciated. Now if there's a World Cup 3 years from now in Montreal and you are still a 40 goal scorer, then I'll you'll get consideration. but big ice in Europe. Forget it. Luckily for Perry and a few of the other vets, Hockey Canada doesn't think like I do. and Getzlaf I like even less than Perry.
I gotta agree with you. I wouldn't want either player on the team if I were Canadian other than the fact that 3 minutes and all ye are fallen may be the greatest line ever.
I've got
Nash----Stamkos----Tavares
Neal------Crosby------Giroux
Sharp-----Toews-------E Staal
Marchand--Bergeron--Simmonds
B. Schenn
Stamkos, Crosby and Giroux are basically obvious picks. Elite playemakers and scorers, the only question I have is whether Stamkos or Tavares play wing? I like Stamkos' skating so I'm keeping him there. I like Nash, Neal and Staal because they are big bodies who skate well and can score. Even though Neal doesn't play with Crosby on a line, as teammates you can hope to replace some of that chemistry that Canada used well in 2010 with Marleau-Thornton, Perry/Getzlaf line combos.
With Sharp, Toews, Marchand and Bergeron you get the two top penalty killing cores in the NHL right now, plus offensively talented players. Brayden Schenn probably seems like an odd choice but the guy can play wing or center, he can score, he can kill penalties and he seems like the perfect final forward. Wayne Simmonds probably makes some people go but I like his game. He can skate, he plays hard ever shift and has some underrated skill.
I gotta agree with you. I wouldn't want either player on the team if I were Canadian other than the fact that 3 minutes and all ye are fallen may be the greatest line ever.
I've got
Nash----Stamkos----Tavares
Neal------Crosby------Giroux
Sharp-----Toews-------E Staal Marchand--Bergeron--Simmonds
B. Schenn
Stamkos, Crosby and Giroux are basically obvious picks. Elite playemakers and scorers, the only question I have is whether Stamkos or Tavares play wing? I like Stamkos' skating so I'm keeping him there. I like Nash, Neal and Staal because they are big bodies who skate well and can score. Even though Neal doesn't play with Crosby on a line, as teammates you can hope to replace some of that chemistry that Canada used well in 2010 with Marleau-Thornton, Perry/Getzlaf line combos.
With Sharp, Toews, Marchand and Bergeron you get the two top penalty killing cores in the NHL right now, plus offensively talented players. Brayden Schenn probably seems like an odd choice but the guy can play wing or center, he can score, he can kill penalties and he seems like the perfect final forward. Wayne Simmonds probably makes some people go but I like his game. He can skate, he plays hard ever shift and has some underrated skill.
Worst 2 selections i have seen so far, schenn and simmonds
I saw your roster and admittedly had the exact same thought, but to expand on it a BIT more, I could literally fill out three good Canadian 14-man forward groups before getting to Schenn or Simmonds. Not to say that they aren't good players, because they are - it just comes down to the fact that Canada has a bucketload of better players than those two guys and even, in Simmonds' case, guys who can fill that role a bit better than him (not to mention the role that Simmons plays is quite a bit less valuable in international play).
I saw your roster and admittedly had the exact same thought, but to expand on it a BIT more, I could literally fill out three good Canadian 14-man forward groups before getting to Schenn or Simmonds. Not to say that they aren't good players, because they are - it just comes down to the fact that Canada has a bucketload of better players than those two guys and even, in Simmonds' case, guys who can fill that role a bit better than him (not to mention the role that Simmons plays is quite a bit less valuable in international play).
Thank you. I expected disagreement and appreciate discussing the merits of alternatives. I'd like to hear your better options.
I also disagree these players aren't valuable in international play. The US junior team beat Canada because Canada played like a disorganized all star team while the US team had players who knew their roles and fit the place. I will gladly hear your better options.
I would add Kane to that list as well. It would be a big mistake to leave all of those young guys off the team in my opinion, somewhat like the 2006 decision. Duchene, Kane, Hall and Seguin are all tremendously fast, offensively talented players. They have all looked good internationally, to varying degrees. Skinner, Hopkins and Eberle are all quite agile and have shown themselves to be quite capable on international ice. I will be shocked if none of them make the team, particularly with 14 forwards. I would rather take one of these guys for a strictly observational role than someone like Getzlaf who might chafe at being reduced to such a role.
Personally, I still expect Seguin to heat up this year and to make the team. Stanley Cup experience, chemistry with Bergeron, can easily play wing and was great for half a season in Europe. Hopkins and Skinner are the only ones listed above that I would guess have a limited chance to make the team, though Duchene would be much better off if he could prove that he had the ability to play wing.
From what I've heard (as I'm sure others have also heard), Kane has quite the attitude on him which I'm not sure would mesh well in a Team Canada context and with some of the veteran players who will be on the team. Obviously a hugely-talented player, and he's playing really well this year, but there may be a bit more risk than reward with him. I still personally have Hall and Benn on my team over Kane at LW.
Thank you. I expected disagreement and appreciate discussing the merits of alternatives. I'd like to hear your better options.
I also disagree these players aren't valuable in international play. The US junior team beat Canada because Canada played like a disorganized all star team while the US team had players who knew their roles and fit the place. I will gladly hear your better options.
Here goes:
Team 1:
Tavares - Crosby - Neal
E. Staal - Stamkos - St. Louis
Nash - Toews - Giroux
Benn - Bergeron - Seguin
Hall, Eberle
Team 2:
Kane - Getzlaf - Perry
Duchene - Spezza - Clarkson
Marleau - Thornton - Skinner
Sharp - M. Richards - Carter
J. Staal, Couture
Neither Simmonds nor Schenn beat out any of those 28 forwards; that's two complete teams. Other alternatives at wing for Team 3 who'd I have ahead of Simmonds and Schenn would include Iginla, Marchand, Perron, Lucic, and Ladd; at center (competing with Schenn) would be Brad Richards, Nugent-Hopkins, O'Reilly, and probably even Henrique and Zajac. So perhaps Simmonds finds a spot on the bottom-six on Team 3, but I honestly can't see Schenn any higher than Team 4.
)
but I like his game. He can skate, he plays hard ever shift and has some underrated skill.
