WJC: 2021 Russia Roster Talk

[Yakushev72]

You misunderstand me. You suggested that 98% of American kids that play ice hockey stop playing at the 8-13 level, and that is far too low a number. I used the example of the high school having two teams to show that it is a larger proportion than that. Obviously 2% of the entire country's population doesn't play.

Enough with the business about tropical climates. You can cut out that entire part of the country and just focus on the northern tier of states. That is still ~80 million people, and within that region a much higher proportion of boys play organized ice hockey than they do in Russia where it is only 1% of 5-20 year old boys that play. Are you disputing the IIHF numbers? They have ~80k Russian U20 players, and more than 200k American U20 players. I'm not entirely sure what is being argued here, those numbers are either correct and the United States has a much larger player base, or they are incorrect and biased in some way. But pointing out regions of the United States where people don't play hockey is meaningless. If Canada annexed Brazil, would they be a worse hockey nation? No they would be exactly the same!

I think you misunderstood me as well. My original point was that Russia should be doing much better than the results show, mainly because of lack of investment, organization, coaches, and failure to initiate or expand the involvement of vast regions that have all the properties necessary to produce large numbers of talented hockey players. If anything, I was criticizing Russia, and not the USA, which you so patriotically defend.

As for the numbers in the USA, they still basically focus on the three states that maintain an ongoing hockey capability - Minnesota (mainly), Michigan, and Massachusetts - plus a couple of other states that contribute an occasional player. As for the IIHF numbers, I have no reason to suspect that they are inaccurate, but from what I gather, they are more or less irrelevant. Among the number of "registered" players counted are included approximately 50,000 "beer league" players - teams of guys roughly of age 35-60 who register, and rent ice time at local rinks to have a little fun, and then drink themselves into oblivion after the game. I am with them in spirit, but they don't add anything to the overall power of the American hockey program (certainly not the WJC team). Russia doesn't have anything like that kind of registration to really count the leisurely players. Let's see what happens next year.

 

[wings5]

I would say that overall Larionov deserves most of the blame this year for sure as he showed an inability to make necessary adjustments during the game. However, also Askarov provided mediocre at best goaltending which will never lead to a Gold medal . Hopefully he can make improvements to his game or Russia might have to look to another goalie who gives them a better chance of winning

 

[majormajor]

I think you misunderstood me as well. My original point was that Russia should be doing much better than the results show, mainly because of lack of investment, organization, coaches, and failure to initiate or expand the involvement of vast regions that have all the properties necessary to produce large numbers of talented hockey players. If anything, I was criticizing Russia, and not the USA, which you so patriotically defend.

Yes I know. I also want Russia to do better, I was defending the U.S. player base as a way of showing that Russia has a lot of room for growth against the United States. I root for Russia in international tournaments and largely follow Russian prospects. I'm a Canadian living in the U.S. and I rarely root for either one of those teams.

As for the numbers in the USA, they still basically focus on the three states that maintain an ongoing hockey capability - Minnesota (mainly), Michigan, and Massachusetts - plus a couple of other states that contribute an occasional player. As for the IIHF numbers, I have no reason to suspect that they are inaccurate, but from what I gather, they are more or less irrelevant. Among the number of "registered" players counted are included approximately 50,000 "beer league" players - teams of guys roughly of age 35-60 who register, and rent ice time at local rinks to have a little fun, and then drink themselves into oblivion after the game. I am with them in spirit, but they don't add anything to the overall power of the American hockey program (certainly not the WJC team). Russia doesn't have anything like that kind of registration to really count the leisurely players. Let's see what happens next year.

The 200k figure is all U20. If you count beer leaguers it goes way up over 500k. You could maybe subtract 10-20k girl players from the U.S. U-20 numbers. Either way it is much bigger than the Russian total of 80k U20 players. Here's the IIHF survey I've been using.

 

[Yakushev72]

According to Wikipedia, there are approximately 265 high school hockey teams and 6,500 high school hockey players in Minnesota. I don't think any other state can match those totals for high school leagues and total players. Junior leagues in the US are very few in number, so I am guessing that 98% of the U20 in the USA are little kids 6-12. I am very skeptical of the number 200,000 for older than 11 or 12 years old. Russia doesn't have organized community leagues for those young age groups where kids could register, but they have quite a few kids playing at ages 16-20. Canada lists almost 500,000 U20 players, but I would think that there are less than 1,000 players in the CHL. Kids don't start playing in international tournaments until they are at least 15 years old, and at that age, the number of players really thin out. To me, the far more relevant statistic on the IIHF website is indoor rinks. Russia is increasing the number by the year, but still far behind.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Team for next year. Goaltending is very strong, as is the defense (includes a right-shot!). Forward group is young, but pretty strong up the middle.

Yurov-Khusnutdinov-Michkov
Kisakov-Ponomaryov-Pashin
Chibrikov-Ovchinnikov-Poltapov
Zlodeyev-Tyutnev-Trineyev
Didkovsky

Mukhamadullin-Kuznetsov
Chayka-Kirsanov
Grushnikov-Kostenko
Lukasevich

Askarov
Guskov
Motorygin

 

[Zine]

According to Wikipedia, there are approximately 265 high school hockey teams and 6,500 high school hockey players in Minnesota. I don't think any other state can match those totals for high school leagues and total players. Junior leagues in the US are very few in number, so I am guessing that 98% of the U20 in the USA are little kids 6-12. I am very skeptical of the number 200,000 for older than 11 or 12 years old. Russia doesn't have organized community leagues for those young age groups where kids could register, but they have quite a few kids playing at ages 16-20. Canada lists almost 500,000 U20 players, but I would think that there are less than 1,000 players in the CHL. Kids don't start playing in international tournaments until they are at least 15 years old, and at that age, the number of players really thin out. To me, the far more relevant statistic on the IIHF website is indoor rinks. Russia is increasing the number by the year, but still far behind.

That's what was lost in the 1990s. In Soviet times there existed makeshift rinks everywhere. Kids would make due with whatever they had and grassroots leagues were everywhere culminating in the golden puck. All that is gone today. Youth hockey is extremely 'professional'. If a kid wants to play, parents need to invest heavily in money and time.
I suppose this phenomenon exists everywhere nowadays, but it has hit Russia the hardest.

 

[Fantomas]

Team for next year. Goaltending is very strong, as is the defense (includes a right-shot!). Forward group is young, but pretty strong up the middle.

Yurov-Khusnutdinov-Michkov
Kisakov-Ponomaryov-Pashin
Chibrikov-Ovchinnikov-Poltapov
Zlodeyev-Tyutnev-Trineyev
Didkovsky

Mukhamadullin-Kuznetsov
Chayka-Kirsanov
Grushnikov-Kostenko
Lukasevich

Askarov
Guskov
Motorygin

Should be a much more dynamic group. They will make Larionov's job much easier next year.

Of course talent on paper doesn't guarantee good chemistry.

P.S. Don't think Kisakov and Pashin are a good match. Two small wingers on the same line might not work. Kisakov isn't a great skater either. Zlodeev would be a good 3rd or 4th line C. I would also be disappointed if Miroshnichenko isn't ready next year (but not surprised). Finally, I'd add Koromyslov, subtract Grushnikov.

 

[majormajor]

According to Wikipedia, there are approximately 265 high school hockey teams and 6,500 high school hockey players in Minnesota. I don't think any other state can match those totals for high school leagues and total players. Junior leagues in the US are very few in number, so I am guessing that 98% of the U20 in the USA are little kids 6-12.

From that same article, those Minnesota numbers are varsity only. A decent sized school will have a varsity team and a junior varsity team. I went to a high school in Ohio that had both. And outside of Minnesota, which is school-centric, high school age kids often play on "midget" teams that take them through age 16-17. Those teams are not rare at all. You'll often see a city with a varsity team, a junior varsity team, a traveling midget team, and a small midget house league.

. I am very skeptical of the number 200,000 for older than 11 or 12 years old. Russia doesn't have organized community leagues for those young age groups where kids could register, but they have quite a few kids playing at ages 16-20. Canada lists almost 500,000 U20 players, but I would think that there are less than 1,000 players in the CHL. Kids don't start playing in international tournaments until they are at least 15 years old, and at that age, the number of players really thin out. To me, the far more relevant statistic on the IIHF website is indoor rinks. Russia is increasing the number by the year, but still far behind.

Even supposing the pyramid of players is greatly narrowed by the time they reach junior age (though it narrows much less than you suggest), do you not see my point that getting a broad base of players at an early age is very important? The ones that continue on and pay the expense are usually the best players.

The proportion of indoor rinks to registered players looks to be roughly the same from country to country, so I don't see any reason to doubt the general accuracy of the numbers.

That's what was lost in the 1990s. In Soviet times there existed makeshift rinks everywhere. Kids would make due with whatever they had and grassroots leagues were everywhere culminating in the golden puck. All that is gone today. Youth hockey is extremely 'professional'. If a kid wants to play, parents need to invest heavily in money and time.
I suppose this phenomenon exists everywhere nowadays, but it has hit Russia the hardest.

Yes, it is definitely a growing problem in North America too. There are now more Canadian kids playing soccer/football than hockey, mostly because it's often all that parents can afford. The winters are warming too, so much of Canada and almost all of the U.S. can't reliably play outdoor hockey anymore.

 

[Yakushev72]

From that same article, those Minnesota numbers are varsity only. A decent sized school will have a varsity team and a junior varsity team. I went to a high school in Ohio that had both. And outside of Minnesota, which is school-centric, high school age kids often play on "midget" teams that take them through age 16-17. Those teams are not rare at all. You'll often see a city with a varsity team, a junior varsity team, a traveling midget team, and a small midget house league.



Even supposing the pyramid of players is greatly narrowed by the time they reach junior age (though it narrows much less than you suggest), do you not see my point that getting a broad base of players at an early age is very important? The ones that continue on and pay the expense are usually the best players.

The proportion of indoor rinks to registered players looks to be roughly the same from country to country, so I don't see any reason to doubt the general accuracy of the numbers.



Yes, it is definitely a growing problem in North America too. There are now more Canadian kids playing soccer/football than hockey, mostly because it's often all that parents can afford. The winters are warming too, so much of Canada and almost all of the U.S. can't reliably play outdoor hockey anymore.

Junior varsity, midget, little squeakies, diaper donnies, there is no question that in terms of organized, highly funded pre-pubescent "hockey players," the US far surpasses Russia. These are youth levels where parents get to dress their kids up in authentic looking hockey uniforms, take their picture, and even if they lose 100-0, reward them with a lollipop. Because they have to share indoor ice with all other levels, they are limited to about 4 hours of ice time a month. Until 90% of them get tired of being awakened at 2:45 am to drive to the indoor rink and quit hockey. Russia has nothing like that.

But if you were to measure the number of hours kids are on skates, playing hockey with their friends in the neighborhood, Russian kids might log more ice time 10:1 Like Wayne Gretzky, who became a great player in the backyard of his house in Ontario, where his father flooded the yard so he could skate for the entire winter season. Once he had developed his skating and stickhandling to an unbelievably high level, he was ready for indoor ice. If you are talking about fun and lollipops, this is all relevant. But if you are talking about international competition, then only the ones who make it to the "varsity" are relevant to the discussion. In other words, the 16-19 year olds are the only ones who have a small chance to represent the US in a world championship.

In terms of US hockey success, it is non-existent at the Olympic and World Championship level, but, solely because of the US National Development Program, the US is dominant at the younger ages of junior hockey (U16-U18). You can make a direct line between US hockey success and the National Team Development Program. Forget the diaper donnies!

 

[Fantomas]

Too many people from this year ... Mukhamadullin, Kuznetsov, Chayka ...defensemen seem pretty bad. The potential's probably not too high, who's going to be doing the scoring? Askarov as goalie again ... meh.

There will be many scorers next year.

 

[Fantomas]

Ovechinnikov and Svechkov have both played C this year. Many decent options at pivot for next year. Tyutnev, Zlodeev too.

 

[BlitzSnipe]

Ovechinnikov and Svechkov have both played C this year. Many decent options at pivot for next year. Tyutnev, Zlodeev too.

We'll see. Let's hope that at least some conclusions will be made and that some form of system/strategy will be followed to achieve concrete results.

 

[GermanSpitfire]

Any chance Michkov makes it next year?

 

[Fantomas]

Any chance Michkov makes it next year?

Very high chance.

 

[majormajor]

Junior varsity, midget, little squeakies, diaper donnies, there is no question that in terms of organized, highly funded pre-pubescent "hockey players," the US far surpasses Russia. These are youth levels where parents get to dress their kids up in authentic looking hockey uniforms, take their picture, and even if they lose 100-0, reward them with a lollipop. Because they have to share indoor ice with all other levels, they are limited to about 4 hours of ice time a month. Until 90% of them get tired of being awakened at 2:45 am to drive to the indoor rink and quit hockey. Russia has nothing like that.

But if you were to measure the number of hours kids are on skates, playing hockey with their friends in the neighborhood, Russian kids might log more ice time 10:1 Like Wayne Gretzky, who became a great player in the backyard of his house in Ontario, where his father flooded the yard so he could skate for the entire winter season. Once he had developed his skating and stickhandling to an unbelievably high level, he was ready for indoor ice. If you are talking about fun and lollipops, this is all relevant. But if you are talking about international competition, then only the ones who make it to the "varsity" are relevant to the discussion. In other words, the 16-19 year olds are the only ones who have a small chance to represent the US in a world championship.

In terms of US hockey success, it is non-existent at the Olympic and World Championship level, but, solely because of the US National Development Program, the US is dominant at the younger ages of junior hockey (U16-U18). You can make a direct line between US hockey success and the National Team Development Program. Forget the diaper donnies!

I would be surprised if outdoor players were half of the number of indoor players, in any country, no matter how cold. Do you have intel to suggest otherwise for Russia? They would need 2 times as many outdoor players as indoors in order for them to have the same number of players as the United States has, counting U.S. indoor only.

Yes of course, we are discussing this in the context of the strength of national teams at the 17-19 year old level. The point is that Russia has a much smaller talent base and that means a lot of talent is missing at the 17-19 year level. Those American kids just having fun at age 8 matter. The best athletes continue on playing so they have better athletes at age 17-19 than countries with smaller player bases do. The number of rinks and the skills training at younger ages is far more important than any age 17-19 development program could possibly be.

 

[SoundAndFury]

Yeah, it was a really weird flex to pretty much say that it's good that Russian kids are forced to play outside rather than inside. And that 10:1 ratio definitely didn't just fall down out of clear blue sky.

 

[Yakushev72]

I would be surprised if outdoor players were half of the number of indoor players, in any country, no matter how cold. Do you have intel to suggest otherwise for Russia? They would need 2 times as many outdoor players as indoors in order for them to have the same number of players as the United States has, counting U.S. indoor only.

Yes of course, we are discussing this in the context of the strength of national teams at the 17-19 year old level. The point is that Russia has a much smaller talent base and that means a lot of talent is missing at the 17-19 year level. Those American kids just having fun at age 8 matter. The best athletes continue on playing so they have better athletes at age 17-19 than countries with smaller player bases do. The number of rinks and the skills training at younger ages is far more important than any age 17-19 development program could possibly be.

Our disagreement is limited exclusively to the question of the size of talent pools. The strongest part of your argument is the premise that hockey is a sport that applies to rich kids who can afford to pay money to skate only on indoor ice and to fund their own travel all over the world on excursions to find competition, as is common for American kids from warmer weather climates. If you analyze the top 5 hockey powers in the World, only Russia falls outside of the category of a very wealthy country by per capita income (United States, Canada, Sweden, Finland and Russia). The weakest part of your argument is that a country's talent pool is limited to rich kids who can afford to purchase ice time at fancy indoor rinks and to travel the world with their youth teams. That is particularly true of the United States, where the talent pool for hockey is embarrassingly thin in comparison to the major American sports like football, basketball, baseball, etc.

I am not suggesting that hockey players can progress to the top level on outdoor ice alone, far from it! I used the example of Wayne Gretzky, who described himself as a skinny and muscle-free kid who would never have made it to the NHL without the skills he developed by constant repetition skating 35-40 hours per week during the winter on his backyard rink in Ontario. I think I am being generous by estimating that only about 10% of American kids could skate outdoors 40 hours per week for 5-6 months per year (on the other hand, about 90% of Russian kids can skate on makeshift rinks for half of the year). The rest of the "talent pool" is limited to getting up in the middle of the night and having mom drive them to a rink 30 km away for a one-hour skate, twice a week. And they won't be alone, it will be very crowded when they get there. Instead of just having fun with their buddies, these middle of the night practices are regimented (some complain that they are too regimented) and parent-oriented (some complain they are too parent-oriented). Ten percent of the US population is 33 million; ninety percent of the Russian population is 130 million. So by my measurement, outs is bigger than yours!

As I have said before, Russia lags far behind their hockey competitors in indoor ice rinks, although new construction is steady! The last I checked the IIHF website, I think there were about 600 rinks. By the time a Russian kid reaches age 13, 600 rinks is more than enough to accommodate talented young kids who want to enroll in advanced hockey schools. The famous "Russian hockey skills" are developed in these schools. Admission to the schools is done on the basis of a "tryout" in which a kid can demonstrate skating and stickhandling skills, with the hope of being admitted to the schools. In some cases they may have to pay for their own skates and sticks, unfortunately, but they are not required to fund skating fees or travel. There are some really excellent schools (Traktor is one of the best), but there are more rinks than there are high quality schools. More good hockey schools are needed.

 

[majormajor]

Our disagreement is limited exclusively to the question of the size of talent pools. The strongest part of your argument is the premise that hockey is a sport that applies to rich kids who can afford to pay money to skate only on indoor ice and to fund their own travel all over the world on excursions to find competition, as is common for American kids from warmer weather climates. If you analyze the top 5 hockey powers in the World, only Russia falls outside of the category of a very wealthy country by per capita income (United States, Canada, Sweden, Finland and Russia). The weakest part of your argument is that a country's talent pool is limited to rich kids who can afford to purchase ice time at fancy indoor rinks and to travel the world with their youth teams. That is particularly true of the United States, where the talent pool for hockey is embarrassingly thin in comparison to the major American sports like football, basketball, baseball, etc.

I think you have stretched my argument somewhat. That hockey is very expensive and exclusive is an increasingly big problem for the sport. But most players are still in American terms "middle class". Perhaps that would make them modestly rich in Russian terms but still not the type that can afford to fly all over the world. Traveling the world to play and hiring multiple skills coaches is something that perhaps the Hughes' and Zegras' did as boys but I would expect that most Americans in the NHL do not come from that kind of money. All that is necessary at age nine, for the possibility of future stardom, is a team and a regular coach that can teach them how to skate properly.

I am not suggesting that hockey players can progress to the top level on outdoor ice alone, far from it! I used the example of Wayne Gretzky, who described himself as a skinny and muscle-free kid who would never have made it to the NHL without the skills he developed by constant repetition skating 35-40 hours per week during the winter on his backyard rink in Ontario. I think I am being generous by estimating that only about 10% of American kids could skate outdoors 40 hours per week for 5-6 months per year (on the other hand, about 90% of Russian kids can skate on makeshift rinks for half of the year). The rest of the "talent pool" is limited to getting up in the middle of the night and having mom drive them to a rink 30 km away for a one-hour skate, twice a week. And they won't be alone, it will be very crowded when they get there. Instead of just having fun with their buddies, these middle of the night practices are regimented (some complain that they are too regimented) and parent-oriented (some complain they are too parent-oriented). Ten percent of the US population is 33 million; ninety percent of the Russian population is 130 million. So by my measurement, outs is bigger than yours!

Do you have any stories of current Russian players learning to play outside? It is a little bit hard to believe that it is the norm. And perhaps I have overestimated my understanding of Russian geography, but very few notable players come from south of Moscow or from the Lower Volga. Nikita Kucherov was born in the old oil town of Maykop, but I would be surprised if he learned to play outdoors there. Surely he learned to play in Moscow in an indoor rink.

The bit about "middle of the night" and "long drives" is true for some American hockey parents. Ice time is hard to get. But you would expect it to be a bigger problem in Russia, where you have far fewer rinks spread across a wider area. It is true that rinks are very spread out in the South and West of the United States, but in the North and Northeast they are far denser than in any part of Russia.

As I have said before, Russia lags far behind their hockey competitors in indoor ice rinks, although new construction is steady! The last I checked the IIHF website, I think there were about 600 rinks. By the time a Russian kid reaches age 13, 600 rinks is more than enough to accommodate talented young kids who want to enroll in advanced hockey schools. The famous "Russian hockey skills" are developed in these schools. Admission to the schools is done on the basis of a "tryout" in which a kid can demonstrate skating and stickhandling skills, with the hope of being admitted to the schools. In some cases they may have to pay for their own skates and sticks, unfortunately, but they are not required to fund skating fees or travel. There are some really excellent schools (Traktor is one of the best), but there are more rinks than there are high quality schools. More good hockey schools are needed.

At least in the North American context, thirteen would be seen as very late to start formal training indoor, even for a Canadian kid that has played thousands of hours outdoors. It is often commented that proper skating training must begin before the age of ten if you want the player to have a chance at professional hockey. Some NHLers obviously never learned the best technique, but it is increasingly becoming essential. You certainly can't learn to skate like Trevor Zegras if you don't have amazing fundamentals by age ten. I would be shocked if Rodion Amirov taught himself outside without having some training by age ten. I don't see a way around the argument that Russia is letting the vast majority of it's potential hockey talent go to waste, as very few boys get to play and get to play with proper training at the important ages.

 

[Yakushev72]

I think you have stretched my argument somewhat. That hockey is very expensive and exclusive is an increasingly big problem for the sport. But most players are still in American terms "middle class". Perhaps that would make them modestly rich in Russian terms but still not the type that can afford to fly all over the world. Traveling the world to play and hiring multiple skills coaches is something that perhaps the Hughes' and Zegras' did as boys but I would expect that most Americans in the NHL do not come from that kind of money. All that is necessary at age nine, for the possibility of future stardom, is a team and a regular coach that can teach them how to skate properly.



Do you have any stories of current Russian players learning to play outside? It is a little bit hard to believe that it is the norm. And perhaps I have overestimated my understanding of Russian geography, but very few notable players come from south of Moscow or from the Lower Volga. Nikita Kucherov was born in the old oil town of Maykop, but I would be surprised if he learned to play outdoors there. Surely he learned to play in Moscow in an indoor rink.

The bit about "middle of the night" and "long drives" is true for some American hockey parents. Ice time is hard to get. But you would expect it to be a bigger problem in Russia, where you have far fewer rinks spread across a wider area. It is true that rinks are very spread out in the South and West of the United States, but in the North and Northeast they are far denser than in any part of Russia.



At least in the North American context, thirteen would be seen as very late to start formal training indoor, even for a Canadian kid that has played thousands of hours outdoors. It is often commented that proper skating training must begin before the age of ten if you want the player to have a chance at professional hockey. Some NHLers obviously never learned the best technique, but it is increasingly becoming essential. You certainly can't learn to skate like Trevor Zegras if you don't have amazing fundamentals by age ten. I would be shocked if Rodion Amirov taught himself outside without having some training by age ten. I don't see a way around the argument that Russia is letting the vast majority of it's potential hockey talent go to waste, as very few boys get to play and get to play with proper training at the important ages.

Kucherov is a unique case, and I don't know the story behind it. I can't think of any other notable Russian hockey player who comes from the Black Sea region. 99.999% grew up playing in the yard rinks, although some may have been brought into a hockey school at a younger age. If you show skill that catches someone's eye, that can happen. The question is, as in Wayne Gretzky, how do you get to skate 40-50 hours per week on indoor rinks? My understanding is those rinks have limited availability either because of demand, expense or both.

 

[VVP]

Kaprizov even didn't get the place in main team right now. Saying that he will be a superstart is not right. Romanov? he is not superstar either. Same as Gurianov. For now they just mediocre. Sergachev is one who is good. That's all? You named a number of players that is less that the golden team provided in 2011. What is a conclusion?
Sergachev by the way went to America 6 years ago. I would name Svechnikov instead of him.

Kaprizov just proved how people like you have no knowledge of hockey whatsoever but actually scream the loudest that they know something.