Are you sure about that, because Poland have been in either the 2nd or 3rd division for a long time now, whereas Hungary have mostly been in the 3rd or 4th, it was only last year they made the 2nd division.
WJC: 2018 Division I, II, III
- Thread starter kaiser matias
- Start date
-
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
Are you sure about that, because Poland have been in either the 2nd or 3rd division for a long time now, whereas Hungary have mostly been in the 3rd or 4th, it was only last year they made the 2nd division.
SoundAndFury
Registered User
- May 28, 2012
- 12,284
- 6,274
Dare I turn attention to the fact you are contradicting yourself here? But sure, with Kazakhstan (who have played in D1B for 4 years in a row as well after division split) and France (who have seen their share of D1B action as well) having such a strong teams there was little room to impress for a small nation like Hungary. And yet, like you said in the earlier post, they really didn't do too bad.
Indeed I am. It's a mixture of 1) taking some years for dust to settle in the IIHF system after split into 1A and 1B; 2) luck playing a factor in such a short tournament; 3) benefits of Polish preparation system (their U20 mostly played together as a team in the Polish league over the season much like Slovaks do with their U20s);
All these things meant that over the years there were some weird results. In 2014, for example, Poland finished 3rd, even above France while Hungary got relegated. Hungary had very talented players like Gallo or Erdely but a very young team, at the same time. Poland had Fraszko, Wronka and Sawicki who were all 19 and it made the difference, peaking at the right time. Year later, Poland somehow finished even higher, 2nd, while having talent level which is currently struggling even at the Polish league. So sure, unexpected happens but Hungary, in general, is long way above Poland.
Last edited:
I thought you might say that, but I'm actually not as I'm comparing 2 different things, the 1st point is comparing how Poland would perform vs. Hungary in the 2nd division, the 2nd point was that you were saying how much stronger Hungary are than Poland, yet Hungary did get relegated too, so it looks as though they did not put up much opposition afterall, though you could make the case that Hungary were very young this year as to why they did not do better.
Germany were the oldest team and they did not get promoted, not good for them, they probably needed to since they only have 4 returning players, next year could be tough for them.
Interesting discussion, but Hungary is indisputably better. In terms of domestic leagues, in terms of foreign contacts, in terms of just player development in general. I always root for Poland, there have been some big games like in the Olympic Qualifications in the big house, but I think it's very clear who the favorites and who the underdogs are.
Not really. Germany always brings a super old team because as a federation they exercise extreme age discrimination. It's probably why they always choke. All our federations do it to some extent but they're on the far end of the spectrum. There are two national team selecting philosophies, one is the meritocracy and the other is exceptional status. Meritocracy means anyone can make the team by virtue of being better than the other people trying to make the team. Exceptional status, like with the CHL, is this idea that young players, especially double underagers or younger, should have to be "exceptional" to make the team. That simply being better than is not good enough, you need to be an exceptional talent. The idea behind this is that the people in their last year have waited their turn and they deserve the experience etc. Usually no team is completely one or the other, it's a spectrum and Germany bends to the extreme on one end.
Well, I think the exceptional status idea is a damn stupid idea. However, they will be locked and loaded for next year as well, no doubt.
Not really. Germany always brings a super old team because as a federation they exercise extreme age discrimination. It's probably why they always choke. All our federations do it to some extent but they're on the far end of the spectrum. There are two national team selecting philosophies, one is the meritocracy and the other is exceptional status. Meritocracy means anyone can make the team by virtue of being better than the other people trying to make the team. Exceptional status, like with the CHL, is this idea that young players, especially double underagers or younger, should have to be "exceptional" to make the team. That simply being better than is not good enough, you need to be an exceptional talent. The idea behind this is that the people in their last year have waited their turn and they deserve the experience etc. Usually no team is completely one or the other, it's a spectrum and Germany bends to the extreme on one end.
Well, I think the exceptional status idea is a damn stupid idea. However, they will be locked and loaded for next year as well, no doubt.
The goal should be to make the best team for the event, to have a coaching and playing philosphy to perform over the event, making the best team does not mean to bring the best players, as in you can have a team with nice players, but how well do they actually fit, or oldest, generally, just how the players fit into the team puzzle and if they can play the role the coach wants them to, its a tournament, it's short, so the goal should be to try and do the best.
This all sounds nice, perhaps a little cliche, but let's look at the data.
This year, top teams by age (tiebreaker: youngest prospect):
Germany: 3
France: 4
Kazakhstan: 1
Latvia: 2
Hungary: 6
Austria: 5
The year before, top teams by age:
Austria: 5
Germany: 2
Norway: 6
France: 3
Belarus: 1
Kazakhstan: 4
The year before:
Norway: 4
Germany: 5
Austria: 2
Kazakhstan: 3
Latvia: 1
Italy: 6
Even if we go back another year:
Belarus: 1
Italy: 4
Austria: 5
Norway: 2
Slovenia: 6
Latvia: 3
There's absolutely no correlation between having an older team and doing the best. In fact, if we had a metric to factor for skill, I think there's a very strong correlation between being older and underperforming. Germany and France (by some people) were favorites for promotion this year. Austria, Germany, and Norway were considered contenders along with Belarus. Norway and Germany were favorites the year before as well, along with Latvia.
This is less true for Germany than for some of the smaller mid-minors like say France, Austria, Kazakhstan, but it's still true and holds some weight. We don't have classes. We have prospects. The vast majority of the athletes who play in our national teams will not play a substantial amount of senior level hockey in any top tier league. This, not for lack of opportunity but simply because they aren't good enough. The drop-off between say the best 3-4 athletes in each class and the next 3-4 athletes in each class is huge.
When teams commit to making, not a 4 man roster, not an 8 man roster, a 22 man roster mostly out of players from a single birth year, there are going to be a lot of athletes that straight up aren't very good. So it sounds very nice, "oh we'll see how they fit, schemes this, tactics that, maybe he could play this role, maybe we need some effort guys etc." Some of these guys will have wood boards for hands, they have 20/40 vision, and 30 kph shots that will miss the net altogether 2 in 3 times. To keep someone from the top 4 of the next class or even the top 4 of the following class off the roster because of seniority, you're not swapping out a skilled piece for a slightly less skilled piece, you're proverbially exchanging William Nylander with Zach Hyman.
SoundAndFury
Registered User
- May 28, 2012
- 12,284
- 6,274
That is absolutely true to the point where I get the feeling Lithuanian management is favoring young players over older ones just to groom them for the future. We had 2 16 year-olds this year and average age of 17,6 years. At U20 championship. And you can say "oh the goal should be to ice best team possible" but in Lithuania's positions, for example, that's pretty short-sighted. Taking part in such event gives young guys both useful experience and exposure needed to find club abroad, etc. So we are kind of opposite of Germany, if we have a choice between 19 y.o. and 16 y.o. the later will be the one picked.
Interesting. I'm not sure I 100% agree with going so far as to favor younger guys but at least they should be given a same shot. Lukas Vascho is pretty good though, he would definitely make our U17 team, and Krasilnikovas seems as good if not better.
The problem is very apparent with our team. All the hype was about "such a young team, such a young team" but the reality was it should have been even younger. Tim Harnisch (01) for example, scored in the pre-championship tournaments and scored in the championship itself. Indisputably one of our better forwards, perhaps top 6. He made the team because, basically, he was short and kind of fast (but not really). On his same rookie cup team, Paul Huber (00) is scoring at almost triple the clip, and also outscored him 6 points to 1 in the Finland tournaments. 6'3", indisputably better than an indisputable top 6 forward. Huber didn't make the team. Max Rebernig (00), same team, same clip as Tim, but 6'3" and pretty fast, good physically, didn't make the team. I'm not statgazing either, I follow the teams closely and the difference between Huber and Harnisch is indisputable. Different types of players, I'll grant that, but one is better at almost everything. Gregor Pilgram (98) made the team, despite having 3 points in 22 games in Elite A and being 5'7". Patrick Stuckler, 8 points in 25 games in the same league, but unfortunately for him was over 6'0" and 99' born, didn't make the team. Also not statgazing, Stuckler is big and physical, can be irresponsible defensively but moves the puck much better. Pilgram is good for...I really don't know, and that's not for lack of viewings. Among the players, the biggest joke was Hammerle making the team, and he turned out just as bad as advertised. 4 points in 17 games, but 01 born Fabian Hochegger on the same team has 4 points in 6 games.
So that's a big problem with our team. There are a bunch of guys who aren't even remotely coherent as hockey players, but coaches keep trying to include them because they're older. It'll probably happen next year too.
The problem is very apparent with our team. All the hype was about "such a young team, such a young team" but the reality was it should have been even younger. Tim Harnisch (01) for example, scored in the pre-championship tournaments and scored in the championship itself. Indisputably one of our better forwards, perhaps top 6. He made the team because, basically, he was short and kind of fast (but not really). On his same rookie cup team, Paul Huber (00) is scoring at almost triple the clip, and also outscored him 6 points to 1 in the Finland tournaments. 6'3", indisputably better than an indisputable top 6 forward. Huber didn't make the team. Max Rebernig (00), same team, same clip as Tim, but 6'3" and pretty fast, good physically, didn't make the team. I'm not statgazing either, I follow the teams closely and the difference between Huber and Harnisch is indisputable. Different types of players, I'll grant that, but one is better at almost everything. Gregor Pilgram (98) made the team, despite having 3 points in 22 games in Elite A and being 5'7". Patrick Stuckler, 8 points in 25 games in the same league, but unfortunately for him was over 6'0" and 99' born, didn't make the team. Also not statgazing, Stuckler is big and physical, can be irresponsible defensively but moves the puck much better. Pilgram is good for...I really don't know, and that's not for lack of viewings. Among the players, the biggest joke was Hammerle making the team, and he turned out just as bad as advertised. 4 points in 17 games, but 01 born Fabian Hochegger on the same team has 4 points in 6 games.
So that's a big problem with our team. There are a bunch of guys who aren't even remotely coherent as hockey players, but coaches keep trying to include them because they're older. It'll probably happen next year too.
This is a super early prediction, but I'll make it now and catch me next year. Norway should, almost indisputably, be the favorites for relegation. However, I think there's a chance, and I'm leaning towards confidence, that Latvia might be the one to go down.
SoundAndFury
Registered User
- May 28, 2012
- 12,284
- 6,274
Wouldn't necessarily apply it this year but taking Macijauskas (who was only 15 at the time) and Kudrevicius in 2015 would be the classic case of this.
Also, what does impress you so much about Krasilnikovas? He's considered pretty meh in Lithuania and didn't even make our U18 last year (4 forwards younger than him did). Vashco sure, he is an exceptional talent by Lituanian standards.
Let's be clear about one thing first. I'm a homer
I'm aware of it. We were the youngest team this year though and we would have been even younger if not for a few key injuries (Lanzinger and Payr, both 00')
There's an atmosphere of excitement after the result this year because we knew 98 was our worst class, probably in a decade at least, and we still weathered the storm. Most our fans think we'll be really good next year.
But we do return a lot of young talent, and the younger talent will likely improve at a much faster rate than older talent will. 2000 and 2001, those are our best years by far. Coaches can of course still ruin this because Austrian coaches like having tall players on the squad about as much as white nationalists like having POC at their rallies. We will be led by a lot of 00' and 01' kids but if this year is any indication I think they'll be good.
It is certainly uncommon but forwards have made the Belorussian U18 team with his clip or similar clips. I must make the caveat that I have not seen him play personally.
SoundAndFury
Registered User
- May 28, 2012
- 12,284
- 6,274
Well that's mostly because your production depends a lot on the opportunities you are given. Energija is super bad this year so guys like him get ice time and consequently can produce but that's because they play for Energija. He wouldn't make the Belarus U18 because even Belarus U17 destroyed Energija 1-9 last time they played.
filip85
Registered User
- Feb 7, 2017
- 1,589
- 780
Here you have croatian entry roster http://khl-mladost.hr/images/2017-2018/documents/poziv_U20_2018_klubovi.pdf
Favourites are Serbia, Spain for promotion, then Croatia and Belgium for 3rd place, while Mexico and Turkey will decide who stays and who goes to D3A.
HungryFrank
Registered User
- Jun 20, 2015
- 414
- 271
Not really, I think we might see Spain in D2A, don't think that others are ready for a promotion, from what I saw in Slovenian championship... I could only compare Croatia and Serbia.
Croatia has more experienced players (there should be at least two lines of players active in IHL - men's league) while Serbia has few players in better development environments (Hungary, Slovenia (it's a joke), ...), but, for example, doesn't have a single defender playing in men's league?!
On the other hand, Serbia is a lot better in U18 level... Tight matchup.
Looking for a promotion candidate here is like scraping the bottom of the barrel and having players playing in real hockey countries is really the biggest advantage one can have.
filip85
Registered User
- Feb 7, 2017
- 1,589
- 780
I may need new "očala", but can you introduce me these two lines ? AFAIK only Fičur is regular there.
HungryFrank
Registered User
- Jun 20, 2015
- 414
- 271
I said active, not regular or top players, and if you want me to quantify it, let's say its over half of games played:
Medveščak (17 games overall) : Fičur (16 games), Nikolić (11), Paulović (9)
Mladost (16) : Trstenjak (13), Šutevski (13), Kramarić (16), Cerovečki (15), Dobrić (10)
Zagreb (17) : Čizmadija (15), Selitaj (14), Stančić (14), Crnec (12), Joja (11), Tadić (15)
while Serbia has:
Crvena Zvezda (16) - Đumić (15), Vukičević (12)
Maribor (18) - Španjević (15), Filipović (14), Bugarski (16)
Kazakhstan's best scorer at the tournament was Artur Gatiyatov, who's 2018 draft eligible. He has 27 points in 30 games in the MHL right now, not bad for a kid, who started the season as 17 yo.
filip85
Registered User
- Feb 7, 2017
- 1,589
- 780
Although this looks nice on paper, it is questionable how much minutes they have and in what type of situations they play. I have very very low expectations for upcoming tourney.
tony d
New poll series coming from me in June
Division II B will be interesting as always. Wonder if Croatia will go back to the old level where they got relegated from last year or if another nation will step up.
