WJC: 2025 Team Canada Roster Talk
- Thread starter LeProspector
- Start date
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 24,373
- 16,091
Could see the club would struggle to score when Yakumchuk was left off. Our forwards weren’t good enough individually to create offence and drive a line. Offence had to come from D who can push play. Yakumchuk does that. The other D selected don’t.
donghabs98
Moderator
These comments alone raise so many red flags. The roster selection is one major thing, the lack of leadership and coaching is another big one. Hockey Canada should really rethink how they select coaches. Why keep selecting a current CHL coach to coach the team? They have their own team to worry about. Why not select someone currently not employed and make them a permanent coach where they can go around scouting potential players and designing a gameplan and team culture that is shaped through summer camp and the main fall selection camp?
HabsCowboysOwn
Wak Prescott the 60M/yr scam artist, here we gooo!
Not even worth mentioning in this case, he was bad like the rest of the team. That's it, nothing more to add.
3 points in 5 games with a ton of ice time doesn't make his performance better than his teammate's, using something that unimpressive to pump his tires is just odd to me.
He played over 20 against Latvia, the most of any Canadian forward
He played the most minutes of any forward against the USA, despite spending 4mins in the box
He once again played the most minutes of any Canadian forward today.
Long story short, playing Cowan a ton = loss.
Namikaze Minato
Registered User
You’re really going to base the decisions of Dave Cameron as who deserves the most ice time
The same guy who had Bonk as the PP quarterback?
Woodrow
......
- Dec 8, 2005
- 5,621
- 1,807
For accuracy sake he actually had the second most ice time among forwards today. McKenna played 4 more seconds than him.
Pavel Buchnevich
"Pavel Buchnevich The Fake"
What I think you guys could do better in the future:
It’s great to have so many first round picks and second round picks, but sometimes it’s a disadvantage. It can be an advantage for countries that have less draft picks and less promising players of note to stick with their group.
It seems every year that Canada has a lot of intriguing 19 year olds that are picked in the top 65 of the NHL Draft, but I think you guys have to learn to be more picky and selective. Some guys simply do not have a high enough pedigree to play big minutes and situations for team Canada.
If need be, choose a younger team. If that means the team isn’t as good, I’d rather lose with the younger guys failing than the mediocre older guys. Players like Cowan and Yager should be fourth liners at best for a team Canada. Bonk should never see a team Canada PP. He’s a 5-7 D for Team Canada. I don’t care if he’s 19 or 190 years old. Players like Pinelli, Howe, Gibson, Akey, it goes without saying they simply didn’t have the level. Stop choosing players because they’re 19.
My team this year would’ve been something like this.
Misa-Ritchie-Martone
Iginla-Catton-McKenna
Cristall-Luchanko-Sennecke
Beaudoin-Yager-Cowan
Hage
Schaefer-Yakemchuk
Dickinson-Parekh
Molendyk-Bonk
DuPont
Ravensbergen
George
Ivankovic
If that’s the fifth best team, that’s what you’ve got. That’s also what you’ve got this year. Don’t lower your standards and pick too many who don’t deserve to suit up for Canada for no reason other than they’re a little older. You can’t simply overwhelm team with more and higher draft picks. We saw this year that it doesn’t get you anywhere if those players are merely good junior players and can’t elevate against better competition.
It’s great to have so many first round picks and second round picks, but sometimes it’s a disadvantage. It can be an advantage for countries that have less draft picks and less promising players of note to stick with their group.
It seems every year that Canada has a lot of intriguing 19 year olds that are picked in the top 65 of the NHL Draft, but I think you guys have to learn to be more picky and selective. Some guys simply do not have a high enough pedigree to play big minutes and situations for team Canada.
If need be, choose a younger team. If that means the team isn’t as good, I’d rather lose with the younger guys failing than the mediocre older guys. Players like Cowan and Yager should be fourth liners at best for a team Canada. Bonk should never see a team Canada PP. He’s a 5-7 D for Team Canada. I don’t care if he’s 19 or 190 years old. Players like Pinelli, Howe, Gibson, Akey, it goes without saying they simply didn’t have the level. Stop choosing players because they’re 19.
My team this year would’ve been something like this.
Misa-Ritchie-Martone
Iginla-Catton-McKenna
Cristall-Luchanko-Sennecke
Beaudoin-Yager-Cowan
Hage
Schaefer-Yakemchuk
Dickinson-Parekh
Molendyk-Bonk
DuPont
Ravensbergen
George
Ivankovic
If that’s the fifth best team, that’s what you’ve got. That’s also what you’ve got this year. Don’t lower your standards and pick too many who don’t deserve to suit up for Canada for no reason other than they’re a little older. You can’t simply overwhelm team with more and higher draft picks. We saw this year that it doesn’t get you anywhere if those players are merely good junior players and can’t elevate against better competition.
Oh god no. Please no more grit on Team Canada lol. Speed, skill and the best available players please.
1Gold Standard
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2012
- 7,957
- 271
What are the odds that Hockey Canada executives dig in their heels and bring back the same management group for 2026? 50/50?
Hamilton Bulldogs
Registered User
- Jan 11, 2022
- 4,481
- 6,335
I doubt that many people even know who picked the team so I doubt there will be much outrage if they came back but these past two teams have been so bad even a casual observer finds them asking themselves which jackass set this squad up lol.
So yeah I'd say 5050.
izzy
go
my god there are so many pathetic people in this country, mass roasting a random teenager on this team as they do every year
its a stupid tournament, i hate the leafs and the hype on their prospects as much as the next guy, but good lord some of these people badly need a purpose
its a stupid tournament, i hate the leafs and the hype on their prospects as much as the next guy, but good lord some of these people badly need a purpose
EbonyRaptor
Registered User
I wonder if Hradek got in their heads a bit - as in the only way to score against him is by a tip-in. It seemed like their were trying to pass the puck into the net - way too many missed opportunities to shoot.
Woodrow
......
- Dec 8, 2005
- 5,621
- 1,807
TheBeastCoast
Registered User
Cameron deserves all of the blame for this. He asked Cowan to do way more then he is capable of. Theme of him as coach. Put a bunch of talented players in a position to fail and then act shocked when...imagine that they failed lol
Iginla was not an option. Had surgery and gone for thé season.
Odd take on Cowan and Yager, especially Yager who was the best forward the last 2 games.
MTL Dirty Birdy
Registered User
- Aug 29, 2021
- 1,378
- 1,584
I have to be honest, Cowan really didn’t impress me. Attitude, puck hog trying to dangle through teams constantly. On top of it, one of the oldest and had a bit of pro experience no? And no letter on his jersey…. Says a lot
If Cowan wasn’t a Leaf prospect he wouldn’t have gotten the same hype
Mathieukferland
Registered User
Button mentioned that Dave Brown of Erie will be the GM next year. Hopefully better than this year
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
This was a "snatch defeat from the jaws of victory" iteration of Team Canada. Some minor quibbles with the overall team selection, but this was a roster with proper coaching that could have won. Cameron was terrible and his staff were terrible.
Last edited:
Peasy
Registered User
And if he wasnt a leafs prospect he wouldnt be getting anywhere near the same hate.
1Gold Standard
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2012
- 7,957
- 271
That doesn't instill me with a whole lot of confidence for next year's tournament/and team. More like it was the OHL's turn in the rotation. HC executive. You're up, Brown! By the way...any openings in your hockey ops dept. My 18 year old fresh out of HS is looking for a job! Do me a solid would ya! wink wink.
I 100% agree.
I it’s all the talent he had this disposal it should never have been Cowan that was asked to be the offensive threat for them.
TheBeastCoast
Registered User
If Cowan is played on the 3rd line told to get in on the forecheck and create havoc and kill penalties he is probably a fan favourite honestly. For some reason he was asked to be the top offensive threat and carry the puck all the time and didn’t even kill penalties lol just absolutely ridiculous player usage from day 1.
I'm going to save my precise criticism of this team as my thoughts are well known. The below is not a knee jerk based on the results of this tournament; this is simply my sincere thoughts after observing Hockey Canada's decision-making with respect to international play at all levels the last decade or so.
1. It starts at the U-17 level. I don't care if two Canadian teams can make it to the finals of the U-17 like this year - stop taking more than one team to this tournament. There are plenty of ways to evaluate talent and every other nation does this without sending multiple teams to tournaments (I get Canada often has more depth). European teams (and the USA) at the U-20 level have a lot more experience playing together as their core players often play U-17, U-18, U-20 and at various international competitions each year (that Canada does not take part in). Pick the best 23 U-17 Canadian players for this competition and start playing them together at this level.
2. Stop it with the "graduated" nonsense at the U-18/Hlinka level. No other nation would handcuff themselves by refusing to roster one of their best players simply because they have already played in a U-20 tournament. Again, relative to other nations, Canadian U-20 players play together far less. Insert these players into the U-18 so they can get even more familiarly with international competition and build chemistry with future linemates. Furthermore, no player should be given "exempt" status and separated from the age group based on the fact they've played in a higher level competition once before. It sends a message of entitlement.
3. Quit making firm U-20 roster decisions based on summer hockey. Some of these kids are banged up, tired after a long year, or simply aren't in game shape after several weeks away from the rink. How many times have we heard McKenzie, Wheeler, Pronman, etc. say that Hockey Canada was/wasn't enamored with a player at the summer camp and this cemented their view of the player.
4. As others have suggested, bring back a true selection camp process. Enough with the "locks" and "frontrunners" before camp has even started. How many times in the last several years have we seen some of these guys become some of the least impactful players for Canada once the tournament begins. There are very few opportunities to truly evaluate these players on the same sheet of ice - this process needs to mean more.
5. The outdated approach to roster construction cannot be overstated. I saw someone post on X that Hockey Canada builds rosters like they are confined to a salary cap, and I couldn't agree more. Gone are the days where you need two lines of dedicated role players and mammoth shutdown defenceman. IIHF standards and officiating has essentially taken physical play out of the equation, and you certainly can't clutch and grab like Marc Staal and Ryan Parent anymore. We aren't going to physically run teams out of the rink or intimidate them. You win these tournaments now with talent, speed, skill and transition, something Hockey Canada has seriously overlooked. Guys like Cole Hutson, who may not be an elite defender but is an elite play driver, are immensely more valuable in today's international game than someone like Andrew Gibson. Prioritize skill and let the niche roles sort themselves out.
6. Related to point 5, please, for the love of God, stop with the anti-NCAA bias. NCAA hockey is some of the most fast-paced, challenging hockey that a U-20 player can play. Year after year I see American players that make plays at lightning speed and with urgency because the NCAA game has conditioned them to play that way. There is far more time and space in the CHL, and you can see the difference when we play the USA. Michael Hage is one of the best forwards in the NCAA this year (even on par with some of the top Americans) and he was one of the best in the USHL last year, and in neither case did he receive consideration from Hockey Canada for no reason other than he chose the "wrong" league. I'm hoping the increased integration of the CHL-NCAA due to the recent rule changes will force Hockey Canada's hand here.
7. I love the idea of a dedicated U-20 coach suggested by a poster above for the same reasons.
There was a time when Hockey Canada could defend its decisions and approach because it truly was the gold standard, but other nations have adapted and innovated and this is no longer the case. The cliche "Canadian way" of constructing international teams simply has to stop because it is no longer viable at the U-20 level.
1. It starts at the U-17 level. I don't care if two Canadian teams can make it to the finals of the U-17 like this year - stop taking more than one team to this tournament. There are plenty of ways to evaluate talent and every other nation does this without sending multiple teams to tournaments (I get Canada often has more depth). European teams (and the USA) at the U-20 level have a lot more experience playing together as their core players often play U-17, U-18, U-20 and at various international competitions each year (that Canada does not take part in). Pick the best 23 U-17 Canadian players for this competition and start playing them together at this level.
2. Stop it with the "graduated" nonsense at the U-18/Hlinka level. No other nation would handcuff themselves by refusing to roster one of their best players simply because they have already played in a U-20 tournament. Again, relative to other nations, Canadian U-20 players play together far less. Insert these players into the U-18 so they can get even more familiarly with international competition and build chemistry with future linemates. Furthermore, no player should be given "exempt" status and separated from the age group based on the fact they've played in a higher level competition once before. It sends a message of entitlement.
3. Quit making firm U-20 roster decisions based on summer hockey. Some of these kids are banged up, tired after a long year, or simply aren't in game shape after several weeks away from the rink. How many times have we heard McKenzie, Wheeler, Pronman, etc. say that Hockey Canada was/wasn't enamored with a player at the summer camp and this cemented their view of the player.
4. As others have suggested, bring back a true selection camp process. Enough with the "locks" and "frontrunners" before camp has even started. How many times in the last several years have we seen some of these guys become some of the least impactful players for Canada once the tournament begins. There are very few opportunities to truly evaluate these players on the same sheet of ice - this process needs to mean more.
5. The outdated approach to roster construction cannot be overstated. I saw someone post on X that Hockey Canada builds rosters like they are confined to a salary cap, and I couldn't agree more. Gone are the days where you need two lines of dedicated role players and mammoth shutdown defenceman. IIHF standards and officiating has essentially taken physical play out of the equation, and you certainly can't clutch and grab like Marc Staal and Ryan Parent anymore. We aren't going to physically run teams out of the rink or intimidate them. You win these tournaments now with talent, speed, skill and transition, something Hockey Canada has seriously overlooked. Guys like Cole Hutson, who may not be an elite defender but is an elite play driver, are immensely more valuable in today's international game than someone like Andrew Gibson. Prioritize skill and let the niche roles sort themselves out.
6. Related to point 5, please, for the love of God, stop with the anti-NCAA bias. NCAA hockey is some of the most fast-paced, challenging hockey that a U-20 player can play. Year after year I see American players that make plays at lightning speed and with urgency because the NCAA game has conditioned them to play that way. There is far more time and space in the CHL, and you can see the difference when we play the USA. Michael Hage is one of the best forwards in the NCAA this year (even on par with some of the top Americans) and he was one of the best in the USHL last year, and in neither case did he receive consideration from Hockey Canada for no reason other than he chose the "wrong" league. I'm hoping the increased integration of the CHL-NCAA due to the recent rule changes will force Hockey Canada's hand here.
7. I love the idea of a dedicated U-20 coach suggested by a poster above for the same reasons.
There was a time when Hockey Canada could defend its decisions and approach because it truly was the gold standard, but other nations have adapted and innovated and this is no longer the case. The cliche "Canadian way" of constructing international teams simply has to stop because it is no longer viable at the U-20 level.
Last edited:
