Toggle sidebar

WJC: 2016 — Canada Roster Talk (Part II)

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I see them trotting out something like this...

Dal Colle- Point- Konecny
Crouse- Strome- Marner
Beauvillier- Barzal- Gauthier
Perlini- Quenneville- Hawryluk
Dubois

Fleury- McKeown
Hickey- Juulsen
Sanheim- Hicketts
Dermott

Blackwood
McDonald

Mix and match the lines how you wish, but I think that is the roster HC will go into the tournament with before the performances at camp.
 
Ekblad played his underage year so it's not like he's just automatically not gonna make it because he's 17, but he'll need to have a good camp.

I'd make it probably 50/50, there are only 3 cuts, and he's pretty well developed physically. 6'2, 194 pounds.

But the bottom end of the D on this roster are very good so lots of competition.
 
Canada4Gold said:
Ekblad played his underage year so it's not like he's just automatically not gonna make it because he's 17, but he'll need to have a good camp.

I'd make it probably 50/50, there are only 3 cuts, and he's pretty well developed physically. 6'2, 194 pounds.

But the bottom end of the D on this roster are very good so lots of competition.
Click to expand...

A 17 year old is considered double underage. 18 would be underage, as the Hockey Canada and Bob McKenzie mantra goes, it's a tournament for players who are 19 year old.

And as a 17 year old, Ekblad didn't have a great tournament in Malmo. He was okay, but nothing to write home about. And Ekblad was/is a better prospect than Chychrun. So, if Chychrun makes the cut, I'm not expecting much from him either.
 
Last edited:
Mr Writer said:
A 17 year old is considered double underage. 18 would be underage, as the Hockey Canada and Bob McKenzie mantra goes, it's a tournament for players who are 19 year old.

And as a 17 year old, Ekblad didn't have a great tournament in Malmo. He was okay, but nothing to write home about. And Ekblad was/is a better prospect than Chychrun. So, if Chychrun makes the cut, I'm not expecting much from him either.
Click to expand...

I don't consider 18 underage, even though it is 1 year younger(I had this same discussion about age yesterday from the opposite side I don't want to have it again), underagers are usually referred to as the ones who has to wear the full face shield, i.e. 17 year olds.
 
Canada4Gold said:
I don't consider 18 underage, even though it is 1 year younger(I had this same discussion about age yesterday from the opposite side I don't want to have it again), underagers are usually referred to as the ones who has to wear the full face shield, i.e. 17 year olds.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good what people consider underage to be or not be, but a player ages out of this tournament once he plays as a 19 year old, therefore, a 17 year old with 2 years of eligibility remaining makes him a "double underager". The rule regarding at which age a player is allowed to play without a cage is irrelevant in my book.

McDavid would be an underage player in this tournament by the simple fact that he has one more year of eligibility remaining after this year. The fact that he can play in the 2016 tournament without a cage is a non-factor.
But you stick with your definition and I'll stick with mine.
 
Mr Writer said:
That's all well and good what people consider underage to be or not be, but a player ages out of this tournament once he plays as a 19 year old, therefore, a 17 year old with 2 years of eligibility remaining makes him a "double underager". The rule regarding at which age a player is allowed to play without a cage is irrelevant in my book.

McDavid would be an underage player in this tournament by the simple fact that he has one more year of eligibility remaining after this year. The fact that he can play in the 2016 tournament without a cage is a non-factor.
But you stick with your definition and I'll stick with mine.
Click to expand...

Mr Writers definition is the one that is exc
epted by the entire hockey World

a 17 year old is a double underager
an 18 year old is an Underage
a 19 year old is the majority of players

it is the u20s But we all have our own thoughts i suppose !
 
To me it just feels like, since there is no U19 tournament 18 year olds are already in their proper age group tournament, as it being a 2 year age gap.

I get that they're a year younger, and 19 year olds are favoured and the 18 year olds can come back next year, but I've always heard the 17 year olds as being the under agers because they're still eligible for a tournament below the U20's being the U18 level, and they have to wear the full cage.

Just what I've been familier with.
 
Dodospice said:
I see them trotting out something like this...

Dal Colle- Point- Konecny
Crouse- Strome- Marner
Beauvillier- Barzal- Gauthier
Perlini- Quenneville- Hawryluk
Dubois

Fleury- McKeown
Hickey- Juulsen
Sanheim- Hicketts
Dermott

Blackwood
McDonald

Mix and match the lines how you wish, but I think that is the roster HC will go into the tournament with before the performances at camp.
Click to expand...

This is one of the best rosters 4th line is a perfect blend of speed size skill and compete
3rd line is very skilled and Gauthier add an element of grit
2nd line say no more skill size strength and finish
top line skill grit and finish if Virtanaen returned exchange him with Dal Colle and Canada
Medals.

Player for Player this Roster is Better than USA not sure why all the Hype
last year everyone loved the USA as well

at end of tourney Canadas grit will win out because this group is loaded with skill
 
Atomos2 said:
Are you putting up the same lineup every time or are you putting different lines every day. You've had at least 5 different lineups in this thread already.[/QUOT

You put up a new team every day Barzal wont play number 1 centre maybe 3
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Does anybody know if the Canada vs CIS All-Stars games will be televised? The CIS is bringing a more competitive nation-wide team this year.
 
Dodospice said:
I see them trotting out something like this...

Dal Colle- Point- Konecny
Crouse- Strome- Marner
Beauvillier- Barzal- Gauthier
Perlini- Quenneville- Hawryluk
Dubois

Fleury- McKeown
Hickey- Juulsen
Sanheim- Hicketts
Dermott

Blackwood
McDonald

Mix and match the lines how you wish, but I think that is the roster HC will go into the tournament with before the performances at camp.
Click to expand...

I like this. I would replace Hickey with Chabot on D and either Hawryluk or Dubois with Watson, but other than that, looks solid top to bottom.
 
Watson - Point - Marner
Beaullivier - Barzal - Gauthier
Crouse - Strome - Konecy
Perlini - Quenneville - Hawryluk
Dal Colle

Hicketts - Dermott
Sanheim - Fleury
Chabot - Mckeown
Chychrun

Blackwood
McDonald
 
FLYguy3911 said:
Considering they took 10 D to camp last year, he probably didn't "take" a roster spot away from anyone.
Click to expand...

McKenzie said that Canada was going to take 10 or 11 defencemen to camp at the same time that he said Hockey Canada was deliberating on Walman. Seems clear that the 11th invite was either Walman or no one, especially since they aren't inviting anyone else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom