Toggle sidebar

WC: 2017 Team Sweden

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bloomfield said:
Lo Eriksson ek is not ahead of alex nylander. They are comparable but alex is the bigger talent.
Click to expand...

I think Alex is a much bigger talent, and in wjc 20 Alex was much much better. But the fact is that Eriksson Ek is more proven at senior level, and if we should show up anyone it should be Dahlin.

Eye of Ra said:
Nylander is not a player for the bottom 6. Eriksson EK is a nice fit on bottom 6 with his size and grit.
Click to expand...

This i do not agree with at all, this is very old way of thinking, in todays hockey you should simple play with the best players in all lines. Even NHL with salary cap is moving away from that way of thinking, so absolutly no good reason to put that sort of reasoning in the national team that do not have salary cap.

The reason Eriksson ek shall be there but not Alex is simple because Eriksson ek is more proven at senior level, it has nothing to do with playstyle.
 
LiveeviL said:
Brodin not contacted yet but positive according to sources. Well the D-is as good as it can get now without EK.
Click to expand...

Yes, but if the newspaper is right, it is only because they have not been able to reach him yet. I say that because what you are saying could be interpreted as they are waiting with asking him in hope of getting someone else. No point in hoping for Karlsson, he is injured and will most certaintly say no even if Ottawas gets eliminated.

"Brodin har vi inte fått tag på ännu, säger Grönborg."
 
ulvvf said:
Yes, but if the newspaper is right, it is only because they have not been able to reach him yet. I say that because what you are saying could be interpreted as they are waiting with asking him in hope of getting someone else. No point in hoping for Karlsson, he is injured and will most certaintly say no even if Ottawas gets eliminated.

"Brodin har vi inte fått tag på ännu, säger Grönborg."
Click to expand...

Keyword in my post "yet", no disambiguity.
 
ulvvf said:
I think Alex is a much bigger talent, and in wjc 20 Alex was much much better. But the fact is that Eriksson Ek is more proven at senior level, and if we should show up anyone it should be Dahlin.
Click to expand...

He really wasnt though..
 
ulvvf said:
This i do not agree with at all, this is very old way of thinking, in todays hockey you should simple play with the best players in all lines.
Click to expand...

I know this kind of new mindset has gotten popular. I hear it a lot listening to different podcasts and you see it everywhere on HFboards, but I tend to disagree. I'll explain...

For instance, people often seem to draw the conclusion that grinders and stay at home defensemen automatically are bad players, and often confuse skilled player for automatically being good.

When people talk about grinders and how they are outdated, they will typically bring up Tanner Glass. That's a poor example. One might as well complain about snipers being outdated and use Teemu Pulkkinen as an example.

I also think it's essential that you have different player types. Having three playmakers on one line and three snipers on another would rarely work. Are there instances where two playmakers or two offensive defensemen play well together? Sure there are exceptions. But I think Ryan Getzlaf this season is a good example. See what putting Patrick Eaves on his line did for his season? Sometimes less is more and Eaves keeps things simple, shoots early and often, and goes to the net all the time.

So when it really comes down to it, I think think you need the "right players", not the "best players". The tricky part is of course for GM's (or in this case Gronborg & co) to figure out who the right players are for the style of game they want to play.
 
ulvvf said:
I think Alex is a much bigger talent, and in wjc 20 Alex was much much better. But the fact is that Eriksson Ek is more proven at senior level, and if we should show up anyone it should be Dahlin.



This i do not agree with at all, this is very old way of thinking, in todays hockey you should simple play with the best players in all lines. Even NHL with salary cap is moving away from that way of thinking, so absolutly no good reason to put that sort of reasoning in the national team that do not have salary cap.

The reason Eriksson ek shall be there but not Alex is simple because Eriksson ek is more proven at senior level, it has nothing to do with playstyle.
Click to expand...

Playstyle matters much. Would you want the player that is skilled small non-physical with bad defense or the player with skill, grit, size and good defense? I would choose the skilled player with grit, size and defense since that player brings more to the team.
 
Last edited:
Elvs said:
I know this kind of new mindset has gotten popular. I hear it a lot listening to different podcasts and you see it everywhere on HFboards, but I tend to disagree. I'll explain...

For instance, people often seem to draw the conclusion that grinders and stay at home defensemen automatically are bad players, and often confuse skilled player for automatically being good.

When people talk about grinders and how they are outdated, they will typically bring up Tanner Glass. That's a poor example. One might as well complain about snipers being outdated and use Teemu Pulkkinen as an example.

I also think it's essential that you have different player types. Having three playmakers on one line and three snipers on another would rarely work. Are there instances where two playmakers or two offensive defensemen play well together? Sure there are exceptions. But I think Ryan Getzlaf this season is a good example. See what putting Patrick Eaves on his line did for his season? Sometimes less is more and Eaves keeps things simple, shoots early and often, and goes to the net all the time.

So when it really comes down to it, I think think you need the "right players", not the "best players". The tricky part is of course for GM's (or in this case Gronborg & co) to figure out who the right players are for the style of game they want to play.
Click to expand...

Ideally you want a fourth liner with good wheels, good PK and that can with skill and strength score important goals now and then. But that's ideally...

And it's true, you don't build a line with three snipers or three playmakers. If you know what your doing...
Most NHL players have good skating, defense and some form of skill. That's why they play in the NHL and some are not.
 
Svanstrom said:
Ideally you want a fourth liner with good wheels, good PK and that can with skill and strength score important goals now and then. But that's ideally...

And it's true, you don't build a line with three snipers or three playmakers. If you know what your doing...
Most NHL players have good skating, defense and some form of skill. That's why they play in the NHL and some are not.
Click to expand...

Joakim Nordstrom is a good example and I think he'll be a nice fit on the Swedish team in this role. If you have 4th liners who can kill penalties, it allows your top six forwards to stay more fresh at even strenght and on the power play.

The way this Swedish roster is being structured, guys like Rask, Lindholm and (if he comes) Wennberg can focus on offense and really work on the power play. Guys like Kruger, W. Karlsson and Nordstrom should do the heavy lifting on the penalty kill.

I'm not gonna say someone like Alexander Nylander could never work out on a 4th line. To me, it comes down to how the team is structured. If the 4th line left winger is Joakim Nordstrom and the 4th line center is Marcus Kruger, than slotting Alexander Nylander on the right wing would make no sense to me. It totally kills the whole identity of that line. It wouldn't be fair to Alex either, because he wouldn't be able to play to his strengths in that enviroment.
 
Svanstrom said:
I don't think Wennberg will show, good chance on Nylander coming.
If Wennberg comes I want top 6 like this:

Landeskog - Wennberg - Nylander
Omark - Rask - Lindholm

I think It's good to spread out the two big bodies Landeskog and Rask.
These are also good potential PP lines, with (probably) 4 D playing on the PP (Hedman, Strålman, Klingber, OEL).
Click to expand...

Seems like Wennberg and Nylander would fill the same role on that line. Would consider swapping Wennberg/Nylander with Rask/Lindholm.
 
Elvs said:
Joakim Nordstrom is a good example and I think he'll be a nice fit on the Swedish team in this role. If you have 4th liners who can kill penalties, it allows your top six forwards to stay more fresh at even strenght and on the power play.

The way this Swedish roster is being structured, guys like Rask, Lindholm and (if he comes) Wennberg can focus on offense and really work on the power play. Guys like Kruger, W. Karlsson and Nordstrom should do the heavy lifting on the penalty kill.

I'm not gonna say someone like Alexander Nylander could never work out on a 4th line. To me, it comes down to how the team is structured. If the 4th line left winger is Joakim Nordstrom and the 4th line center is Marcus Kruger, than slotting Alexander Nylander on the right wing would make no sense to me. It totally kills the whole identity of that line. It wouldn't be fair to Alex either, because he wouldn't be able to play to his strengths in that enviroment.
Click to expand...

Well clearly many of the NHL player are obviously very underestimated by some here.
Eriksson Ek's toolbox is way bigger than Alex Nylander, plus older and more experienced with seniors. I actually have no complaints about the players Grönborg added so far.
Krüger has 2 Stanley Cups under his belt...
 
Last edited:
Elvs said:
I know this kind of new mindset has gotten popular. I hear it a lot listening to different podcasts and you see it everywhere on HFboards, but I tend to disagree. I'll explain...

For instance, people often seem to draw the conclusion that grinders and stay at home defensemen automatically are bad players, and often confuse skilled player for automatically being good.

When people talk about grinders and how they are outdated, they will typically bring up Tanner Glass. That's a poor example. One might as well complain about snipers being outdated and use Teemu Pulkkinen as an example.

I also think it's essential that you have different player types. Having three playmakers on one line and three snipers on another would rarely work. Are there instances where two playmakers or two offensive defensemen play well together? Sure there are exceptions. But I think Ryan Getzlaf this season is a good example. See what putting Patrick Eaves on his line did for his season? Sometimes less is more and Eaves keeps things simple, shoots early and often, and goes to the net all the time.

So when it really comes down to it, I think think you need the "right players", not the "best players". The tricky part is of course for GM's (or in this case Gronborg & co) to figure out who the right players are for the style of game they want to play.
Click to expand...

First off i think most playeras at this level are not that one dimensional, so they can only shoot or only pass. I think similar player can work just fine with eachother, plus this was mostly about top 6 vs bottom 6, not line formation. What would you rather have in the 4th line, McDavid - Crosby - Kane or Lundqvist - Kruger - Eriksson Ek? If you can build a powerhouse with stars in all the lines, you simple do it.

Who is best comes first, what playstyle they have is secondary. BUT, the thing is, that you usually find different playstyle among the best anyway, so it is usually not a issue. But for some reason people tends to ignore that when it comes the star players, that they also can have all those attributes like grit etc. So even if we would have tons of grit among the star players, we still go far down to look for some non star player that happens to have grit to put into the team. I would say we have more of a obsession of forcing in players that are not good enough to balance it up, rather than forcing in players with grit.

Getzlaf have been a star for a long time now, he is hardly a product of Eaves.;)
 
Last edited:
Eye of Ra said:
Playstyle matters much. Would you want the player that is skilled small non-physical with bad defense or the player with skill, grit, size and good defense? I would choose the skilled player with grit, size and defense since that player brings more to the team.
Click to expand...

I want the best, no matter how he looks like. I rather add Gaudreau than Eriksson ek to the team.

But i have nothing against eriksson ek on this team, he is probably good enough. WHC is little different, you take what you get from NHL basically, plus Eriksson ek have some experince from tre kronor and have done it well there.
 
If Nylande come.

Nylander - Rask - Landeskog
Lindholm - Karlsson - Söderberg
Omark - Kruger - Lindblom
Nordström - Lundqvist - Eriksson Ek


Hedman - Klingberg
OEL - Strålman
Edler - Brodin
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom