HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

2002 Team Canada vs. 2010 Team Canada

View Poll Results: What would the result of an 8-game series be?
Team Canada 2002 wins 8-0 2 12.50%
Team Canada 2002 wins 7-1 0 0%
Team Canada 2002 wins 6-2 0 0%
Team Canada 2002 wins 5-3 5 31.25%
They split at 4-4 2 12.50%
Team Canada 2010 wins 5-3 7 43.75%
Team Canada 2010 wins 6-2 0 0%
Team Canada 2010 wins 7-1 0 0%
Team Canada 2010 wins 8-0 0 0%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-07-2012, 11:59 PM
  #1
joe_shannon_1983*
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,518
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to joe_shannon_1983*
2002 Team Canada vs. 2010 Team Canada

2002 TEAM CANADA

Record:

4 wins - 1 loss - 1 tie

GF - GA:

22 goals for (3.67 per game) - 14 goals against (2.33 per game)

Schedule:

Canada 2 - Sweden 5
Canada 3 - Germany 2
Canada 3 - Czech Republic 3
Canada 2 - Finland 1
Canada 7 - Belarus 1
Canada 5 - U.S.A. 2

Paul KariyaSteve YzermanMario Lemieux
Simon GagneJoe SakicJarome Iginla
Ryan SmythEric LindrosOwen Nolan
Brendan ShanahanJoe NieuwendykTheoren Fleury
Michael Peca  

Ed JovanovskiRob Blake
Chris ProngerAl MacInnis
Scott NiedermayerAdam Foote
Eric Brewer 

Martin Brodeur
Curtis Joseph
Ed Belfour


VS.


2010 TEAM CANADA

Record:

6 wins - 1 loss - 0 ties

GF - GA:

35 goals for (5.00 per game) - 16 goals against (2.29 per game)

Schedule:

Canada 8 - Norway 0
Canada 3 - Switzerland 2
Canada 3 - U.S.A. 5
Canada 8 - Germany 2
Canada 7 - Russia 3
Canada 3 - Slovakia 2
Canada 3 - U.S.A. 2

Eric StaalSidney CrosbyJarome Iginla
Patrick MarleauJoe ThorntonDany Heatley
Brenden MorrowRyan GetzlafCorey Perry
Mike RichardsJonathan ToewsRick Nash
Patrice Bergeron  

Scott NiedermayerShea Weber
Drew DoughtyDuncan Keith
Chris ProngerDan Boyle
Brent Seabrook 

Roberto Luongo
Martin Brodeur
Marc-Andre Fleury


Last edited by joe_shannon_1983*: 01-08-2012 at 01:18 AM.
joe_shannon_1983* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 01:03 AM
  #2
Gobo
What's Your Issue?
 
Gobo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Wild Rose Country
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,217
vCash: 500
If it's in their primes, it's 2002 everyday. If it's at that time, it's a lot closer.

I like 2002's top-six much better, but 2010's bottom six much better. Defense is close, i'd give the edge to 2010 (How they performed at the Olympics themselves, not in general). Goaltending i'd give to 2002. Brodeur was unreal back then.

Overall edge would go to 2002 IMO.

Gobo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 01:15 AM
  #3
joe_shannon_1983*
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,518
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to joe_shannon_1983*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gobo View Post
If it's in their primes, it's 2002 everyday. If it's at that time, it's a lot closer.

I like 2002's top-six much better, but 2010's bottom six much better. Defense is close, i'd give the edge to 2010 (How they performed at the Olympics themselves, not in general). Goaltending i'd give to 2002. Brodeur was unreal back then.

Overall edge would go to 2002 IMO.
It is how the teams/players were, in their respective years.

So consider how the players were in those years.

I agree that the 2002 team probably had more HHOF-worthy players. But some of them weren't in their primes/peaks by 2002.

The 2002 team was full of veterans, and the 2010 team was full of younger players.

joe_shannon_1983* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 01:16 AM
  #4
SauceHockey
Retired
 
SauceHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: p
Country: Tokelau
Posts: 4,005
vCash: 500
2002 has better forwards (especially bottom 6) and better goaltending but 2010 has a slight edge in defense.

SauceHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 10:55 AM
  #5
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnp117 View Post
I agree that the 2002 team probably had more HHOF-worthy players. But some of them weren't in their primes/peaks by 2002.
I think at the end of the day both teams will have their fair share of HHOFers.

I chose a 4-4 split but to be honest I might lean more towards a 5-3 win for 2002. The reason I say this is because while both teams had an eye opening loss in the round robin it was 2002 who I felt steadily improved better. By the time they played the US in the gold medal game you got the feeling that they wouldn't have lost that game in 100 tries. The 2010 team had some moments of brilliance by blowout wins against Norway, Germany and Russia but only Russia was an elite team and that was an elimination game too.

The 2010 team certainly made me feel more nervous. They let Slovakia and US get back into the game with sloppy play and suspect goaltending. And let's face it, a lot of people on here still don't give Luongo credit for winning the gold since he helped make those last two games as close as they were.

In reality the 2002 team played a far better US team than the 2010 did and yet they beat them by a wider margin. I get the feeling the 2010 team wouldn't let overtime happen again against the US if they replayed it over, but it did happen and one bad play and we are talking about this team with disdain.

Definitely the forwards in 2002 were older but more seasoned and experienced. I think we saw that evidenced. I don't think they let the 2010 US team come close to tying them, which is what we assumed the 2010 team would do, but didn't. The defense again is more seasoned in 2002 but not a whole lot better. 2002 goaltending is definitely better. Brodeur was more solid and trustworthy than Luongo who made me nervous the whole time.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 11:06 AM
  #6
GuineaPig
Registered User
 
GuineaPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Montréal
Posts: 2,135
vCash: 500
I'm a bit bemused to hear that the goaltending in 2002 was soooo much better than goaltending in 2010.

Revisionist history.

GuineaPig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 01:38 PM
  #7
MadLuke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,302
vCash: 500
Hard to tell, I prefer a lot more the dept bottom 6 of the 2010 team, but prefer 2002 Brodeur to 2010 Luongo for sure.

2002 team never had a game close of the 2010 against Russia and a very easy tournament to the last game with soso result until the last game.

So all will come to, how many game will take the 2002 team to get to the finals game level and be able to win games against the 2010 canada team.

Both team had somewhat slow start, but 2010 was better in the quaterfinal and 2002 in the final imo.

MadLuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 01:41 PM
  #8
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,592
vCash: 500
I'll take 1987 Canada Cup Canadian team over both

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 02:03 PM
  #9
GuineaPig
Registered User
 
GuineaPig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Montréal
Posts: 2,135
vCash: 500
I say the 2010 team. Better offense and better goaltending makes up for the inferior defense. There are a lot of big names on the 2002 team, but they're mostly past their prime, and quite a few weren't producing all that well when they were picked.

GuineaPig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 02:06 PM
  #10
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,699
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuineaPig View Post
I'm a bit bemused to hear that the goaltending in 2002 was soooo much better than goaltending in 2010.

Revisionist history.
It's only revisionist history to those who didn't watch the games.

In the third period of the Gold Medal game of 2010, NBC's announcers kept mentioning that Luongo looked uncomfortable in net and if the US kept shooting, good things would happen. And they were right (until Iginla and Crosby bailed him out in OT).

Edit: Brodeur was looked at as a stabilizing factor for the 2002 team. I don't think you can say the same about Luongo.

And I'd take Joseph's mediocre play in 2002 over Brodeur's awful play in 2010....


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 01-08-2012 at 03:47 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 05:55 PM
  #11
tony d
The Future
 
tony d's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Behind A Tree
Country: Canada
Posts: 36,550
vCash: 500
The 2010 team wins 5-3.

__________________
tony d is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 06:06 PM
  #12
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
It's only revisionist history to those who didn't watch the games.

In the third period of the Gold Medal game of 2010, NBC's announcers kept mentioning that Luongo looked uncomfortable in net and if the US kept shooting, good things would happen. And they were right (until Iginla and Crosby bailed him out in OT).

Edit: Brodeur was looked at as a stabilizing factor for the 2002 team. I don't think you can say the same about Luongo.

And I'd take Joseph's mediocre play in 2002 over Brodeur's awful play in 2010....
I will say that Brodeur in 2002 was somewhat better than Luongo in 2010. I watched every game of both Olympics and felt that both goalies were lacking but still played well enough For Canada to have the chance to win.

I really felt that Canada won in spite of their goaltending in both Olympics. Granted Brodeur did make one key save in the final in 2002. However, what I most remember about the early stages of that game was that Canada was outplaying the USA big time yet it is 2-2 and Brodeur doesn't look good.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-08-2012, 07:52 PM
  #13
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
2010 maybe 6-2, but likely 5-3.

Both teams are amazing but the 3rd line for the 2010 team could go against Gretzky, Howe and Lemieux and hold them to mortal numbers. It just clicked. It dominated.

I think they shut down Lemieux and Yzerman and make the difference. Otherwise both teams are elite all-round.

charliolemieux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-09-2012, 04:00 AM
  #14
Uncle Rotter
Registered User
 
Uncle Rotter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Kelowna, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
In the third period of the Gold Medal game of 2010, NBC's announcers kept mentioning that Luongo looked uncomfortable in net and if the US kept shooting, good things would happen. And they were right (until Iginla and Crosby bailed him out in OT).
Don't forget Luongo bailing out Niedermayer in OT

Uncle Rotter 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 07:39 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.