HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > World Junior Championship
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
World Junior Championship Discuss international tournaments such as the World Juniors, Olympic hockey, and Ice Hockey World Championships, as they take place; or discuss past tournaments.

If pros were always allowed at the Olympics...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-20-2013, 08:40 AM
  #26
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
We've been through this a million times.
Soviets and Canadians never played under equivalent conditions in the NHL. That's why a guy like Jimmy Carson was a better NHLer than both Krutov and Makarov, but in no universe was he ever a better hockey player.

But, hey, if it fits your NA-centic agenda, Jimmy Carson>>>KLM!
There is a good chance Krutov and Makarov would have been great NHLers if they had played here in their primes. For example there are many players who right now are better than Jagr, but that doesn't mean they will have careers anywhere close to his.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2013, 04:09 PM
  #27
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
There is a good chance Krutov and Makarov would have been great NHLers if they had played here in their primes. For example there are many players who right now are better than Jagr, but that doesn't mean they will have careers anywhere close to his.
Yep. Shoulda coulda woulda....

It just goes to show that judging a player solely on NHL performance is quite biased, insufficient and rudimentary....especially for players of that time period.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-20-2013, 05:31 PM
  #28
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
Yep. Shoulda coulda woulda....

It just goes to show that judging a player solely on NHL performance is quite biased, insufficient and rudimentary....especially for players of that time period.
I don't think I ever said that for example Krutov's performance in the NHL was a good measure of his career, he just came to the NHL too late.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2013, 10:56 AM
  #29
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
I don't think I ever said that for example Krutov's performance in the NHL was a good measure of his career, he just came to the NHL too late.
...as was the case for most Soviet players born in the 1960s.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 08:49 AM
  #30
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
...as was the case for most Soviet players born in the 1960s.
Yes, most players, no matter where they were from, that were born in the 60's were past their prime at that point.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 03:40 PM
  #31
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Yes, most players, no matter where they were from, that were born in the 60's were past their prime at that point.
...then your point is mute (i.e. judging Soviets on NHL play) as a ton of players who played on the teams you listed were born in the 1960s.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 10:10 PM
  #32
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
...then your point is mute (i.e. judging Soviets on NHL play) as a ton of players who played on the teams you listed were born in the 1960s.
Nothing moot about it, other players were coming into their prime then. It doesn't change the fact that the league provided a snapshot each year of the relative depth of each nations top players.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 03:50 AM
  #33
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Nothing moot about it, other players were coming into their prime then. It doesn't change the fact that the league provided a snapshot each year of the relative depth of each nations top players.

So the early 1990's NHL Soviets are a fair and equitable representation of all Soviet generations? Riight. Also laughable considering the criteria used to judge these Soviets has a heavy North American bias.



Like I said...your theory is biased, insufficient and rudimentary and fails to take into account Canadian development and training was well behind that of the Soviets during most of the 1970s and 1980s.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 10:38 AM
  #34
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
So the early 1990's NHL Soviets are a fair and equitable representation of all Soviet generations? Riight. Also laughable considering the criteria used to judge these Soviets has a heavy North American bias.

Like I said...your theory is biased, insufficient and rudimentary and fails to take into account Canadian development and training was well behind that of the Soviets during most of the 1970s and 1980s.
As I showed earlier in the thread the Soviets of the late 1980's and early 1990's were still experiencing team success as they had for the two decades prior. Obviously the players who were adults in the early 90's were developed during Soviet times. I never said the late 80's was the peak period for USSR hockey, but relatively speaking they were not far off. As I have said all along the Soviets had great players and a great development program but their limiting factor has always been their infrasctructure and the number of kids they have playing the sport.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 11:32 AM
  #35
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
As I showed earlier in the thread the Soviets of the late 1980's and early 1990's were still experiencing team success as they had for the two decades prior. Obviously the players who were adults in the early 90's were developed during Soviet times. I never said the late 80's was the peak period for USSR hockey, but relatively speaking they were not far off. As I have said all along the Soviets had great players and a great development program but their limiting factor has always been their infrasctructure and the number of kids they have playing the sport.
Ever since I started posting a couple of years ago, I have noticed that you are absolutely obsessed with this issue of how easy it was for the Soviets, using a tiny amount of resources and a tiny percentage of the total talent pool, to become fully equal to Gretzky, Lemieux, LaFleur, Messier, Bourque, Coffey, and the other best players in Canadian hockey history; and to meet them on the ice face-to-face and force them to what was essentially a draw on their home ice. The Soviets exposed these heroes for what they are and were - great players in their own country, but no better than players from other countries who have a similar hockey structure and devote some effort to it. As many times as the NHL and Canada tried, under as many formats designed to give them the decisive advantage, they were never able to separate themselves from the Soviets. They were never able to demonstrate that "we're better than these guys." All of these series (look at the records yourself) were absolutely even, with Canada winning the home controlled Canada Cup by half a hair on a mouse's head. Since the record is permanent, nothing you can say or imply will make the facts go away.

Yakushev72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:10 PM
  #36
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
Ever since I started posting a couple of years ago, I have noticed that you are absolutely obsessed with this issue of how easy it was for the Soviets, using a tiny amount of resources and a tiny percentage of the total talent pool, to become fully equal to Gretzky, Lemieux, LaFleur, Messier, Bourque, Coffey, and the other best players in Canadian hockey history; and to meet them on the ice face-to-face and force them to what was essentially a draw on their home ice. The Soviets exposed these heroes for what they are and were - great players in their own country, but no better than players from other countries who have a similar hockey structure and devote some effort to it. As many times as the NHL and Canada tried, under as many formats designed to give them the decisive advantage, they were never able to separate themselves from the Soviets. They were never able to demonstrate that "we're better than these guys." All of these series (look at the records yourself) were absolutely even, with Canada winning the home controlled Canada Cup by half a hair on a mouse's head. Since the record is permanent, nothing you can say or imply will make the facts go away.
Even with all their prep time the Soviets / Russia have only won one tournament in the last +40 years where Canada sent their top players, while in the same time Canada has won seven. As I have said countless times, the Soviets were great, just not the best. I'm sure you have an excuse for every loss, but the history is what it is.

Look, hopefully the NHL will participate in Sochi and Russia will have a great team with a shot at the gold. If you're lucky maybe they will win and then maybe you can put some of your illusions about the past behind you and start enjoying the present.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 12:43 PM
  #37
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
Even with all their prep time the Soviets / Russia have only won one tournament in the last +40 years where Canada sent their top players, while in the same time Canada has won seven. As I have said countless times, the Soviets were great, just not the best. I'm sure you have an excuse for every loss, but the history is what it is.

Look, hopefully the NHL will participate in Sochi and Russia will have a great team with a shot at the gold. If you're lucky maybe they will win and then maybe you can put some of your illusions about the past behind you and start enjoying the present.
I respect your knowledge of hockey, although you may not be as strong in World history. The Soviet Union was actually abolished 22 years ago, so I am at a loss to figure out how including the last 22 years in the discussion has any bearing on the issues. I only dispute 2 outcomes involving Canada/NHL and the Soviets as being bogus: the 1984 and 1987 Canada Cups.

Yakushev72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 02:15 PM
  #38
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
I respect your knowledge of hockey, although you may not be as strong in World history. The Soviet Union was actually abolished 22 years ago, so I am at a loss to figure out how including the last 22 years in the discussion has any bearing on the issues. I only dispute 2 outcomes involving Canada/NHL and the Soviets as being bogus: the 1984 and 1987 Canada Cups.
The Russian hockey program was born out of the Soviet hockey program so to say the two are totally unrelated is obviously not accurate, and for the most part Canada hasn't changed either so I think the comparison is fair. NHL officials have been used numerous times since 1987 to referee games involving both Canada and the USA yet the whole cheating and conspiracy topic only really comes up when Russian or Soviet fans get involved so I'm sorry but I do think all of the last 40 years are relevant.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-01-2013, 02:37 PM
  #39
Yakushev72
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
The Russian hockey program was born out of the Soviet hockey program so to say the two are totally unrelated is obviously not accurate, and for the most part Canada hasn't changed either so I think the comparison is fair. NHL officials have been used numerous times since 1987 to referee games involving both Canada and the USA yet the whole cheating and conspiracy topic only really comes up when Russian or Soviet fans get involved so I'm sorry but I do think all of the last 40 years are relevant.
In the Soviet Union prior to 1991, there were no private companies to donate funds to build rinks, buy skates, sticks, pucks and everything else associated with hockey. All hockey funding came from the state. When the Soviet Union disbanded in 1991 (actually, the process of defunding began as early as 1985), funding for hockey simply disappeared, period. Hockey clubs which were previously funded by government organs (the military, the police, aviation, etc.) lost all funding, and hockey players often went 3 to 4 months without paychecks, unless they didn't get paid at all. Those players left over from the Soviet era who were good enough came to NA. So no, its not close to accurate to compare post-Soviet Russia to the Soviet Union. In the 1990's through about 2005, Russian teams weren't good enough to beat Finland and Switzerland, much less Canada. After 2005, funding started returning to Russian hockey at a faster rate than in Soviet times, but its going to take a while to rebuild from the wreckage. No one is saying that Russia could provide good competition to Canada from 1994-2006.

Yakushev72 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-02-2013, 02:06 PM
  #40
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yakushev72 View Post
In the Soviet Union prior to 1991, there were no private companies to donate funds to build rinks, buy skates, sticks, pucks and everything else associated with hockey. All hockey funding came from the state. When the Soviet Union disbanded in 1991 (actually, the process of defunding began as early as 1985), funding for hockey simply disappeared, period. Hockey clubs which were previously funded by government organs (the military, the police, aviation, etc.) lost all funding, and hockey players often went 3 to 4 months without paychecks, unless they didn't get paid at all. Those players left over from the Soviet era who were good enough came to NA. So no, its not close to accurate to compare post-Soviet Russia to the Soviet Union. In the 1990's through about 2005, Russian teams weren't good enough to beat Finland and Switzerland, much less Canada. After 2005, funding started returning to Russian hockey at a faster rate than in Soviet times, but its going to take a while to rebuild from the wreckage. No one is saying that Russia could provide good competition to Canada from 1994-2006.
Between 1988 and 1992 the USSR finished in the top 2 every year in the World Juniors and won twice. If this team success accurately reflected individual talent then we should have seen the same when these juniors played as adults. While I understand these years were tough for everyone in the USSR they don't explain the lack of inidividual Russian talent in the early and mid 1990's.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2013, 07:51 AM
  #41
Patchy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskriders View Post

I think we can all agree that in the early days Canada had the best players AINEC
I stopped reading after that.

Boy does it feel good to be a European who has knowledge both about North American and European hockey.

Patchy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2013, 09:15 AM
  #42
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patchy View Post
I stopped reading after that.

Boy does it feel good to be a European who has knowledge both about North American and European hockey.
Please enlighten us all about the quality of European hockey compared to Canadian hockey in, say, 1924.

JackSlater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2013, 02:50 PM
  #43
Xokkeu
Registered User
 
Xokkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Frozen
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 4,638
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
Please enlighten us all about the quality of European hockey compared to Canadian hockey in, say, 1924.
Indeed. My knowledge of early 20th century European hockey history is spotty, but I do see that before 1956 Canada and the US won every Gold and Silver medal on offer except 3. Sweden grabbing a 1928 Silver (a year when the US didn't even send a team) and the Czechoslovaks grabbing a 1948 Silver. The Brits grabbing their only gold, with a team mostly made up of Canadian players. In 1928, the year of the only pre war European silver medal, Canada's team (only made up of one club's members) beat Sweden 11-0, going 3-0 with a combined scoring record of 38 goals for and 0 against. Canada's pre war record includes only one loss, to the aforementioned British Canadian team and one tie, against the US in a dead rubber game.


Indeed I am quite curious to learn more about European pre war Hockey.

Xokkeu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 04:20 PM
  #44
PaulieVegas
Registered User
 
PaulieVegas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Country: United States
Posts: 675
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Kanadensisk View Post
I'm sorry, but what you have written here is a load of bunk. Only once did the USSR (or Russia for that matter) win a tournament when Team Canada brought their best players. What made the Soviets great was that they played together way more often than any other national team, with the possible exception of Czechoslovakia. The number of people playing hockey in Canada has always dwarved that of the USSR or Russia and as you would expect Canada's talent pool and skill was always much deeper.

One thing that makes the USSR - Canada rivalry so interesting is that you had one team (Canada) with considerably better individual talent but almost zero experience playing together vs the Soviets who had a very limited talent pool to draw from but almost unlimited team preparation time.

The Soviet teams were great, but not for the reasons you stated above.
No, it's you who are wrong. What he wrote was far from a "load of bunk," and only a biased Canadian would make that kind of comment. The Soviets in ther prime were far from having a "limited talent pool." Well into the 1990's former Soviet players like Larionov, Kasatonov, Makarov, and Fetisov were making a significant individual impact at the NHL level. All at a time when they were past their prime and their minds were distracted by what the Russian mob might be doing to their families back home. And while he never played in the NHL, Tretiak was considered the best goalie in the world for much of his career. At that time the best Canada could produce in net was Grant "don't worry that I gave up 5 goals for the sixth game in a row, because Gretzky and the boys will score 7" Fuhr. The Soviets had good players, not just average players that fit into a good system.

Any attempt to say that no one would be able to compete with Canada during that time period is just Canadians preaching that hockey begins and ends at their boarders and the rest of us should be grateful that Canada even allows us to play their game.

PaulieVegas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 04:31 PM
  #45
PaulieVegas
Registered User
 
PaulieVegas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Country: United States
Posts: 675
vCash: 500
This is just like every other international hockey debate on these boards that's ever been had before, and the arguments are exactly the same:

Canadians: "No one, no matter what year or tournament, is better than Canada. We are better/meilleur. And if we lose, it's only because we didn't have our best players...or because we don't care about that particular tournament...or we were still the better team despite the outcome and we just ran into a hot goalie...or we would have won if overtime was 5-on-5 instead of 4-on-4...or we have no legit excuse but we should get the all the credit because Canada lets everyone else's players play in their junior system."

The rest of the world: "(something sensical and logical that doesn't involve kissing Canada's you-know-what)"

PaulieVegas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 10:07 PM
  #46
fly4apuckguy
Mr. Old School
 
fly4apuckguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,254
vCash: 500
For every post I see claiming that the Soviet teams of the 60's and 70's (even 80's)could have beaten Team Canada on a fairly consistent basis, I just think of how in 1980 the best that the USSR had to offer was defeated by a bunch of no-name (at the time) kids, many of whom had no real NHL career once the Games were over.

With all due respect to the Soviets, who did ice some great teams, that would never have happened to the best Canada had to offer. I think that loss speaks far louder than any win that the Soviets had over a bunch of minor pros and cast-offs that were sent to the Olys by Canada for so many years. Yeah, it was just one game, but could that team have beaten the best Team Canada had to offer in 1980?

With all due respect to the Miracle men, whom I think orchestrated a great win, no way.

fly4apuckguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:17 PM
  #47
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fly4apuckguy View Post
For every post I see claiming that the Soviet teams of the 60's and 70's (even 80's)could have beaten Team Canada on a fairly consistent basis, I just think of how in 1980 the best that the USSR had to offer was defeated by a bunch of no-name (at the time) kids, many of whom had no real NHL career once the Games were over.

With all due respect to the Soviets, who did ice some great teams, that would never have happened to the best Canada had to offer. I think that loss speaks far louder than any win that the Soviets had over a bunch of minor pros and cast-offs that were sent to the Olys by Canada for so many years. Yeah, it was just one game, but could that team have beaten the best Team Canada had to offer in 1980?

With all due respect to the Miracle men, whom I think orchestrated a great win, no way.

How is that different that Switzerland shutting out the best Canada had in 2006? At least 1980 USA had a bunch of player who went on to play NHL. Switzerland?...no way.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 03:56 AM
  #48
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
How is that different that Switzerland shutting out the best Canada had in 2006? At least 1980 USA had a bunch of player who went on to play NHL. Switzerland?...no way.
This, one game is too small a sample size

saskriders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 06:13 AM
  #49
Mr Kanadensisk
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulieVegas View Post
No, it's you who are wrong. What he wrote was far from a "load of bunk," and only a biased Canadian would make that kind of comment. The Soviets in ther prime were far from having a "limited talent pool." Well into the 1990's former Soviet players like Larionov, Kasatonov, Makarov, and Fetisov were making a significant individual impact at the NHL level. All at a time when they were past their prime and their minds were distracted by what the Russian mob might be doing to their families back home. And while he never played in the NHL, Tretiak was considered the best goalie in the world for much of his career. At that time the best Canada could produce in net was Grant "don't worry that I gave up 5 goals for the sixth game in a row, because Gretzky and the boys will score 7" Fuhr. The Soviets had good players, not just average players that fit into a good system.

Any attempt to say that no one would be able to compete with Canada during that time period is just Canadians preaching that hockey begins and ends at their boarders and the rest of us should be grateful that Canada even allows us to play their game.
That is not even close to what I said. The Soviets did produce great players, just not in the same volume.

I know you are another one of those guys who tries to diminish or discredit Canada's accomplishments whenever you can but if you try to step back and look at things objectively you will see that what I am saying is perfectly logical.

Canada has historically had, by a large margin, the most kids playing hockey and the biggest hockey infrastructure (i.e. number of arenas, etc.). Only recently has the US started to catch up in this regard. The number of top level players a country produces will naturally relate to the volume of kids they have playing the game. This is why when Canada assembles its top mens team they almost always have the best team, player for player, on paper. The only exception I can think of is the 96 USA World Cup team which player for player was also stacked.

However having the best team on paper doesn't guarantee anything in terms of team results, especially in a short tournament. The best team on paper will probably win more often, but certainly not all of the time.

International tournaments are a lot of fun but if you think they are the best indicator of which country has the most talented players then you are missing something fundamental about how the game works.

Mr Kanadensisk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 11:07 PM
  #50
fly4apuckguy
Mr. Old School
 
fly4apuckguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
How is that different that Switzerland shutting out the best Canada had in 2006? At least 1980 USA had a bunch of player who went on to play NHL. Switzerland?...no way.
How is it different?

Prelim round game. Not a must-win game. That simple.

fly4apuckguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 05:30 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.