WJC: 2016 — Russia Roster Talk

[sqw3r]

But how come the Finns and Americans come out skating faster (on average) than the Russian team? That points to the fact that this element is not being trained well enough.

yeah, so FHR should look into finnish and american ways of development and try to implement what are they doing right in our system, instead of looking at outdated (though very successful at the time) soviet system. Same with the defencemen and Sweden. Look at Sweden's defence in 2006 olympics and look at it now. They absolutely doing something right and it could be implemented (though i'm sure Lidstrom has played a significant role in it, being the greatest role model anyone could ever want). There are many different ways our development system could be improved, but it's all in Tretiak's hands and we all know how it goes usually with him.

 

[Raptor1990]

Man, you're just sitting around here bashing Russian players, where is team Slovakia? I mean, your trolling is getting pretty obvious.

I really don`t care about Slovak hockey for long time, those noobs will end in A group sooner or later, even our senior team was not far from it in 2008.

 

[wings5]

I don't think Finland necessarily produces better skaters, the US yes they are known for their speed and skating emphasis in their youth programs. Sweden has some of the fastest players in the NHL as well ( Hagelin, Stalberg, Paajarvi ) and several fast prospects as well. The home crowd probably helped Finland alot and you're starting to see a generation of players where skill development and skating was emphasized. I think with Russians they start skating when they want, I remember watching the Super Series in the last game against the Q, and the Russian players literally doubled their speed and effort instantly late in the game when trying to get the tying goal.

 

[llwyd]

You mean at senior level ?

Yeah, I mostly meant men's tournaments - you read the talented Russian names on paper, but you almost automatically make a mental adjustment: "oh, but they won't play well as a team, very beatable against a disciplined Finland" - whereas with a strong team from say Canada, you don't think like that but assume that they will be quite disciplined and well functioning team.

 

[Alessandro Seren Rosso]

KHL has 60 matches like Finland. So I dont know what is a point here. SHL has 55 matches, not a big deal.

Both leagues, however, have much much shorter trips

 

[Jussi]

Both leagues, however, have much much shorter trips

Yeah, in Finland most road trips are 1-2 hour bus rides and the teams are back home the same day. Only trips to Oulu are usually done by plane and it's still a short trip.

ABout the training, back when Jokerit were still playing in the Finnish league, in non-game days they would have skills training and off-ice stuff (mostly gym) in the morning session and the usual skating and tactical stuff in the afternoon session. That's the usual routine for most Liiga clubs even now. Westerlund has said that they don't have time for that in KHL, most of the training now has to be done in the off-season.

 

[Yakushev72]

Since no team makes profit at the moment and increasing the number of games only means players want to get paid more, the math doesn't add up.

As for the bolded part, I don't know why you would start comparing NHL club teams and the old Soviet teams? Also "general strategies" kind of shows again that you don't watch much NHL. You really should try to Blackhawks games for example and read what Panarin has said about their playing style.

I don't get your point! More games means more revenue, but you seem to be implying that they should reduce the number of games, because, by your assertion (please cite specific, credible information on which teams are losing money, and how much), the more games they play, the more money they will lose. Since the only source of revenue are games and other fees associated with them, it doesn't make sense to me to suggest that they should strive to play fewer games. The NHL is making a big profit playing 82 regular season games per year (theoretically, up to 110 games for teams in the Stanley Cup finals). There has been some suggestion that the NHL would like to expand up to 90 or 94 regular season games, because they're making money.

I don't watch much NHL, that's true, but I watch enough to know that you only have to be conversant with 2 concepts to coach the Chicago Black Hawks or any other NHL team: (1) Dump (when the puck crosses center ice, slap it into the offensive zone), and (2) Chase (chase it!). That's it. Period. And let's face it, with 82 regular season games in all the time zones of North America, its not as if the NHL affords itself any more time than the KHL to hold extensive, highly pedagogical practices. They just put on the skates and slap the puck around a little bit to get the kinks out of their muscles. Period.

As for the words of Panarin, he is a highly compensated employee of the Black Hawks, so I'm sure he speaks in worshipful, butt-kissing terms when talking about the wondrous ways of his employers.

 

[BlitzSnipe]

I don't get your point! More games means more revenue, but you seem to be implying that they should reduce the number of games, because, by your assertion (please cite specific, credible information on which teams are losing money, and how much), the more games they play, the more money they will lose. Since the only source of revenue are games and other fees associated with them, it doesn't make sense to me to suggest that they should strive to play fewer games. The NHL is making a big profit playing 82 regular season games per year (theoretically, up to 110 games for teams in the Stanley Cup finals). There has been some suggestion that the NHL would like to expand up to 90 or 94 regular season games, because they're making money.

I don't watch much NHL, that's true, but I watch enough to know that you only have to be conversant with 2 concepts to coach the Chicago Black Hawks or any other NHL team: (1) Dump (when the puck crosses center ice, slap it into the offensive zone), and (2) Chase (chase it!). That's it. Period. And let's face it, with 82 regular season games in all the time zones of North America, its not as if the NHL affords itself any more time than the KHL to hold extensive, highly pedagogical practices. They just put on the skates and slap the puck around a little bit to get the kinks out of their muscles. Period.

As for the words of Panarin, he is a highly compensated employee of the Black Hawks, so I'm sure he speaks in worshipful, butt-kissing terms when talking about the wondrous ways of his employers.

Well, I think you're oversimplifying - NHL hockey is not all dump and chase. They probably do that a bit more than in the KHL, but they have smaller rinks and they have a slightly different approach to hockey. But there's still plenty of awesome skillful players in the NHL, on average the NHL in terms of skill is stronger than the KHL.

 

[wings5]

I don't get your point! More games means more revenue, but you seem to be implying that they should reduce the number of games, because, by your assertion (please cite specific, credible information on which teams are losing money, and how much), the more games they play, the more money they will lose. Since the only source of revenue are games and other fees associated with them, it doesn't make sense to me to suggest that they should strive to play fewer games. The NHL is making a big profit playing 82 regular season games per year (theoretically, up to 110 games for teams in the Stanley Cup finals). There has been some suggestion that the NHL would like to expand up to 90 or 94 regular season games, because they're making money.

I don't watch much NHL, that's true, but I watch enough to know that you only have to be conversant with 2 concepts to coach the Chicago Black Hawks or any other NHL team: (1) Dump (when the puck crosses center ice, slap it into the offensive zone), and (2) Chase (chase it!). That's it. Period. And let's face it, with 82 regular season games in all the time zones of North America, its not as if the NHL affords itself any more time than the KHL to hold extensive, highly pedagogical practices. They just put on the skates and slap the puck around a little bit to get the kinks out of their muscles. Period.

As for the words of Panarin, he is a highly compensated employee of the Black Hawks, so I'm sure he speaks in worshipful, butt-kissing terms when talking about the wondrous ways of his employers.

I really don't think you watch Chicago or much NHL tbh with these statements you sound bitter. The NHL rink size is smaller and the players are fast and well coached defensively you simply cannot try and go coast to coast or enter the zone so easily because you're going to turn the puck over 9 times out of 10. These same " garbage " NHL players and even the US team when they field a WC team full of college or fringe NHL players still somehow manage to do well and beat European teams on their own ice surface. Panarin is not butt-kissing , Kuznetsov said the same thing about the style Chicago plays a European-esque puck possession brand of hockey, I don't know why these things are so hard for you to believe.

 

[Yakushev72]

I really don't think you watch Chicago or much NHL tbh with these statements you sound bitter. The NHL rink size is smaller and the players are fast and well coached defensively you simply cannot try and go coast to coast or enter the zone so easily because you're going to turn the puck over 9 times out of 10. These same " garbage " NHL players and even the US team when they field a WC team full of college or fringe NHL players still somehow manage to do well and beat European teams on their own ice surface. Panarin is not butt-kissing , Kuznetsov said the same thing about the style Chicago plays a European-esque puck possession brand of hockey, I don't know why these things are so hard for you to believe.

I'm not bitter, I just don't see anything much different from other NHL teams, other than the fact that Chicago has better, more skilled players than other teams. They've got Kane, Toews, and Panarin, and obviously with guys that talented, you're probably going to skate rings around other NHL teams. Jussi was somehow trying to argue that NHL teams, even though they actually travel more and play more games than KHL teams, somehow have the time to set up a system similar to the Soviet program. That's just not possible because of the number of games and the travel schedule. They pretty much have a "morning skate" to loosen up, and that's it.

 

[wings5]

I'm not bitter, I just don't see anything much different from other NHL teams, other than the fact that Chicago has better, more skilled players than other teams. They've got Kane, Toews, and Panarin, and obviously with guys that talented, you're probably going to skate rings around other NHL teams. Jussi was somehow trying to argue that NHL teams, even though they actually travel more and play more games than KHL teams, somehow have the time to set up a system similar to the Soviet program. That's just not possible because of the number of games and the travel schedule. They pretty much have a "morning skate" to loosen up, and that's it.

Well yeah it depends on the schedule at the time, but practice is mostly systems, coaches are paid to win. It's pretty much the same in the CHL which shouldn't be the case imo but it is. With the NHL players though they are so skilled usually and have honed that skill since a young age that putting on skates and just touching a puck is enough to shake off the rust and prevent from them from losing their hands. Many players will do their own thing before and after practice too.

 

[Jussi]

I don't get your point! More games means more revenue, but you seem to be implying that they should reduce the number of games, because, by your assertion (please cite specific, credible information on which teams are losing money, and how much), the more games they play, the more money they will lose. Since the only source of revenue are games and other fees associated with them, it doesn't make sense to me to suggest that they should strive to play fewer games. The NHL is making a big profit playing 82 regular season games per year (theoretically, up to 110 games for teams in the Stanley Cup finals). There has been some suggestion that the NHL would like to expand up to 90 or 94 regular season games, because they're making money.

I don't watch much NHL, that's true, but I watch enough to know that you only have to be conversant with 2 concepts to coach the Chicago Black Hawks or any other NHL team: (1) Dump (when the puck crosses center ice, slap it into the offensive zone), and (2) Chase (chase it!). That's it. Period. And let's face it, with 82 regular season games in all the time zones of North America, its not as if the NHL affords itself any more time than the KHL to hold extensive, highly pedagogical practices. They just put on the skates and slap the puck around a little bit to get the kinks out of their muscles. Period.

As for the words of Panarin, he is a highly compensated employee of the Black Hawks, so I'm sure he speaks in worshipful, butt-kissing terms when talking about the wondrous ways of his employers.

You know very well that exact information isn't public. You also know that no tam is makign profit. Jokerit losses for the first season have been estimated between 8-13 million euros, it shouls be made public sooner or later since they are required to do so). In the history of the KHL only two teams have reported to have made profit, Riga and Slovan. Righa did it because they didn't use 80K euro of their sponsorship money and Slovan made profit in their first season because they could sell tickets at ridiculous prices (needless to say that isnt' the case anymore). It doesnt' matter if the NHL as a league is making if not all teams don't have a chance of making it. KHL as a league jsut announced they made profit for the firts time and shared revenue to some teams, eg. Jokerit a gota whopping 35 euros... NHL teams get "slightly" more and it's not only because of the ticket revenue but the tv deals in the US (national and reguional) and Canada.

You are so wrong about the Blackhawks part. Feel free to make that statement on the main board even prepare to be ridiculed even non-Blackhawks fans.

You should read the Kuznetsov interview that was talked about recently here. He mentioned his team and the Blackhawks when talking about the puck possession style teams.

 

[Jussi]

I'm not bitter, I just don't see anything much different from other NHL teams, other than the fact that Chicago has better, more skilled players than other teams. They've got Kane, Toews, and Panarin, and obviously with guys that talented, you're probably going to skate rings around other NHL teams. Jussi was somehow trying to argue that NHL teams, even though they actually travel more and play more games than KHL teams, somehow have the time to set up a system similar to the Soviet program. That's just not possible because of the number of games and the travel schedule. They pretty much have a "morning skate" to loosen up, and that's it.

Please point the exact post/sentence.

 

[Yakushev72]

You know very well that exact information isn't public. You also know that no tam is makign profit. Jokerit losses for the first season have been estimated between 8-13 million euros, it shouls be made public sooner or later since they are required to do so). In the history of the KHL only two teams have reported to have made profit, Riga and Slovan. Righa did it because they didn't use 80K euro of their sponsorship money and Slovan made profit in their first season because they could sell tickets at ridiculous prices (needless to say that isnt' the case anymore). It doesnt' matter if the NHL as a league is making if not all teams don't have a chance of making it. KHL as a league jsut announced they made profit for the firts time and shared revenue to some teams, eg. Jokerit a gota whopping 35 euros... NHL teams get "slightly" more and it's not only because of the ticket revenue but the tv deals in the US (national and reguional) and Canada.

You are so wrong about the Blackhawks part. Feel free to make that statement on the main board even prepare to be ridiculed even non-Blackhawks fans.

You should read the Kuznetsov interview that was talked about recently here. He mentioned his team and the Blackhawks when talking about the puck possession style teams.

Even if they are losing money, it is reasonable to assume that some teams are losing more than others. This is a new league, and it has been repeated over and over that some teams are going to fall out because of lack of resources. But my point was, as a revenue-seeking enterprise, the solution is not to freeze the number of regular season games, or reduce the number of games, but instead to increase the number of games. Some of the teams are filling their arenas up every night, and so the goal is to create more opportunities to reap the profits from full arenas. The alternative is to cut back or fold up, which would be suicidal for a young league. Cut down or cut back on expansion, yes. Reduce the number of games, no way!

As for the Blackhawks, I like what they are doing, and I am in no way specifically criticizing them. The fact that they would pursue a player like Panarin, and allow him to flourish, speaks highly for them. But I do want to rebut your argument that the KHL doesn't allow sufficient practice time, while the NHL supposedly has sufficient time to practice to install new systems. The travel schedule in the NHL is every bit as (maybe more) brutal than the KHL's, and they play 25% more games by volume. Whether one is a doing a better job than the other, the point is that the KHL is equally capable of developing systems, and any deficiencies of KHL players in a national team setting has nothing to do with the KHL schedule.

 

[Jussi]

Even if they are losing money, it is reasonable to assume that some teams are losing more than others. This is a new league, and it has been repeated over and over that some teams are going to fall out because of lack of resources. But my point was, as a revenue-seeking enterprise, the solution is not to freeze the number of regular season games, or reduce the number of games, but instead to increase the number of games. Some of the teams are filling their arenas up every night, and so the goal is to create more opportunities to reap the profits from full arenas. The alternative is to cut back or fold up, which would be suicidal for a young league. Cut down or cut back on expansion, yes. Reduce the number of games, no way!

As for the Blackhawks, I like what they are doing, and I am in no way specifically criticizing them. The fact that they would pursue a player like Panarin, and allow him to flourish, speaks highly for them. But I do want to rebut your argument that the KHL doesn't allow sufficient practice time, while the NHL supposedly has sufficient time to practice to install new systems. The travel schedule in the NHL is every bit as (maybe more) brutal than the KHL's, and they play 25% more games by volume. Whether one is a doing a better job than the other, the point is that the KHL is equally capable of developing systems, and any deficiencies of KHL players in a national team setting has nothing to do with the KHL schedule.

I didn't say that. I said the NHL clubs do have systems (more than dump & chase), majority of the work is done in pre-season though. As an example, Teuvo Teräväinen said that during the Stanley Cup finals, the only thing they scouted about the Lightining during video sessions were their special teams. They trusted that they knew their own system and that they didn't have to make any adjustments to it and that they could beat the Lightining by relying on their own system.

 

[Yakushev72]

I didn't say that. I said the NHL clubs do have systems (more than dump & chase), majority of the work is done in pre-season though. As an example, Teuvo Teräväinen said that during the Stanley Cup finals, the only thing they scouted about the Lightining during video sessions were their special teams. They trusted that they knew their own system and that they didn't have to make any adjustments to it and that they could beat the Lightining by relying on their own system.

The KHL has a preseason period of approximately equal length, and is not in any way prohibited from using that period to develop and install team systems. If you are saying that NHL teams are doing a better job of it, then you are entitled to make a value judgment and exercise your personal opinion. But there seems to be no appreciable difference in league structure in that regard.

 

[Jussi]

The KHL has a preseason period of approximately equal length, and is not in any way prohibited from using that period to develop and install team systems. If you are saying that NHL teams are doing a better job of it, then you are entitled to make a value judgment and exercise your personal opinion. But there seems to be no appreciable difference in league structure in that regard.

KHL training camps began this season in early July and the season in early September. NHL training camps only last about a month, so no.

Again, I made no such claims, so please stop putting words into my mouth.