About the OG final

[Pilky01]

I bet Sweden would have won 4 or 5 to nothing.

 

[Novak Djokovic]

This is why I always get a nice chuckle out of "best on best" comments. Teams are very rarely ever at their very "best" and certainly every team will not be.

...except when Canada loses. That's when the tournament is legit, right?

 

[Pilky01]

...except when Canada loses. That's when the tournament is legit, right?

Ya, the only true best on best tournaments were 1998 and 2006.

 

[Mr Spock]

Daniel Sedin, Erik Karlsson, Phil Kessel, Patrick Kane, Joe Pavelski, Thomas Vanek, Teemu Selanne.

Those are just some of the names of players that were completely shut down by Team Canada.

Losing their top 3 centers was definitely a big blow to Team Sweden, but considering how other players with equal or better offensive skill were unable to penetrate the Canadian defense, I find it highly unlikely that they'd change the score by 3+ goals.

You talk like Sedin, Zetterberg and Bäckström just are average players and wouldnt change the game a bit.

 

[daver]

You talk like Sedin, Zetterberg and Bäckström just are average players and wouldnt change the game a bit.

By listing them with other all-stars?

 

[novisor]

Yes Zetterberg, Backstrom and Sedin were huge losses, but Canada had already lost the best goal scorer in the world (Stamkos) and Tavares. The table were equal in term of injuries. If Sweden would have had those 3 players it wouldn't have made any difference. The stingy Canadian defence would have shut them down.

 

[Xokkeu]

Ya, the only true best on best tournaments were 1998 and 2006.

I can't speak for anybody else but for me 2006, considering the team we sent, was not best on best.

 

[Cilisi]

"If ifs and buts were candies and nuts, we'd all have a Merry Christmas."

 

[Fish on The Sand]

I can't speak for anybody else but for me 2006, considering the team we sent, was not best on best.

Canada and the US both had a case of the dumb that year. How Robert Esche was starting over Ryan Miller is simply beyond me. I know that Esche did well in the World Cup, but Miller was awesome that year.

 

[An Argument For]

Canada and the US both had a case of the dumb that year. How Robert Esche was starting over Ryan Miller is simply beyond me. I know that Esche did well in the World Cup, but Miller was awesome that year.

I think that was a good thing for Canada. I mean it was mind-blowing that young guys like Crosby, Spezza, Staal, Bergeron were tearing up the NHL and couldn't get on while guys like Smythe, Doan, and Draper did. That was some awful combination of the old boys club building a team for a 7 game playoff series. The bonus though is the scrutiny and evaluation that goes into Olympic teams now..

 

[WarriorofTime]

I think that was a good thing for Canada. I mean it was mind-blowing that young guys like Crosby, Spezza, Staal, Bergeron were tearing up the NHL and couldn't get on while guys like Smythe, Doan, and Draper did. That was some awful combination of the old boys club building a team for a 7 game playoff series. The bonus though is the scrutiny and evaluation that goes into Olympic teams now..

It was due to the Lockout. The young guys were young kids off to a hot start, without much of a track record. If there was an 04-05 NHL season a lot of those guys would have been there and a lot of players that were good from 01-04 who were the "proven players" at that point, wouldn't have been. It would be more evident they were no longer top players.

Gotta get in the December of 2005 mindset.

 

[getwiththeprogram*]

...except when Canada loses. That's when the tournament is legit, right?

'twas ever thus. More Canadian hockey fans should read these forums. It would be quite edifying.

 

[Forsberg21Sakic19]

While I can understand how some on here believe that Canada would still have won the Gold Medal game, and I tend to agree, those 3 players in Sweden's lineup would have made a huge difference. They are the creative blood of the Swedish offense and their absence created a Swedish team that still had some skill, decent positioning, but no direction. At the absolute least, it would have been a closer game score-wise.

I don't think enough credit has been given to the overall quality of this Canadian team. This may be among the top 2 or 3 best national team squads ever put together. And the one area of "weakness", in net, was never an issue with Carey Price playing an excellent tournament.

As a general hockey fan I'm impressed with Canada's display. As a Swedish fan I'm annoyed with the Tre Kronor's performance. However, the international game is as competitive as it has ever been. 4 years is a long time and I am looking forward to sweet revenge in Pyeongchang.

 

[Canuck21t]

While I can understand how some on here believe that Canada would still have won the Gold Medal game, and I tend to agree, those 3 players in Sweden's lineup would have made a huge difference. They are the creative blood of the Swedish offense and their absence created a Swedish team that still had some skill, decent positioning, but no direction. At the absolute least, it would have been a closer game score-wise.

I don't think enough credit has been given to the overall quality of this Canadian team. This may be among the top 2 or 3 best national team squads ever put together. And the one area of "weakness", in net, was never an issue with Carey Price playing an excellent tournament.

As a general hockey fan I'm impressed with Canada's display. As a Swedish fan I'm annoyed with the Tre Kronor's performance. However, the international game is as competitive as it has ever been. 4 years is a long time and I am looking forward to sweet revenge in Pyeongchang.

I do think Sweden would have given a better fight if it had Sedin, Zetterberg and Bäckström. Then again, if Canada had Tavares in the lineup, how better would it be? Canada was getting better each game.

I am extremely proud of this Team Canada. We often applaud Finland for playing as a team, but I believe it is harder to be a team when you have so many stars. It only takes one or two hot-headed players to mess up the whole system. Here everyone played their respected role with very short shifts and everyone was humble at their position . I don't think we'll see a better TEAM for a long time.

 

[getwiththeprogram*]

I do think Sweden would have given a better fight if it had Sedin, Zetterberg and Bäckström. Then again, if Canada had Tavares in the lineup, how better would it be? Canada was getting better each game.

I am extremely proud of this Team Canada. We often applaud Finland for playing as a team, but I believe it is harder to be a team when you have so many stars. It only takes one or two hot-headed players to mess up the whole system. Here everyone played their respected role with very short shifts and everyone was humble at their position . I don't think we'll see a better TEAM for a long time.

This team played exceptionally well without the puck - the best I've ever seen a Canadian team without the puck on the big ice, as a matter of fact. Great team, a pleasure to watch it systematically grind down two very good teams in the medal round.

Now, we'll have to go back to watching HC mangle things at the worlds with the wrong coach, players who don't want to be there, and no buy-in.

If the Olympic team was playing chess on ice, the team HC sends to the Worlds will probably be playing marbles.

 

[Canuck21t]

This team played exceptionally well without the puck - the best I've ever seen a Canadian team without the puck on the big ice, as a matter of fact. Great team, a pleasure to watch it systematically grind down two very good teams in the medal round.

Now, we'll have to go back to watching HC mangle things at the worlds with the wrong coach, players who don't want to be there, and no buy-in.

If the Olympic team was playing chess on ice, the team HC sends to the Worlds will probably be playing marbles.

I still enjoy a good game of marbles. I wish Hockey Canada would call Andy Murray back. He has had successful championships and would trust him again. As for the players, those who say yes do want to be there so I'll gladly root for them. It surely would be a frustrating affair, but I still enjoy it as a whole.

 

[An Argument For]

I still enjoy a good game of marbles. I wish Hockey Canada would call Andy Murray back. He has had successful championships and would trust him again. As for the players, those who say yes do want to be there so I'll gladly root for them. It surely would be a frustrating affair, but I still enjoy it as a whole.

I really wish we could bring in Ralph Krueger. I think his coaching style in an international tournament in addition to the scoring talent that Canada should naturally have would have really changed they we perform at World Championships.

 

[1Gold Standard]

I really wish we could bring in Ralph Krueger. I think his coaching style in an international tournament in addition to the scoring talent that Canada should naturally have would have really changed they we perform at World Championships.

I suggested this as well but he's already found another gig.

 

[Tomas W]

It would been a better game if nothing else.

 

[Big Phil]

I honestly think the explosiveness of Stamkos would have added quite a few more goals. It is simlar to not having Kariya in 1998. Stamkos is just that dynamic. A guy like Duchene was all over the ice when he played because of his speed, the problem is he isn't a natural finisher like Stamkos. So I think if both teams were healthy then the game favours Canada the same, if not more.

 

[Incognito]

Canada's roster, even without the injured Stamkos and Tavares, is still much better than Sweden's, even if they would have had Zetterberg, Franzen, Sedin and Backstrom in the lineup. So having those guys in the game wouldn't have changed the result at all, most likely. But if you want to play this fantasy game where Sweden gets their injured players back, then presumably Canada can have Tavares and Stamkos back as well. Again though, it wouldn't change anything. Canada still wins. I know Sweden doesn't have as much depth as Canada does and therefore is affected by injuries more, but that's a BAD thing. It shouldn't be used as an excuse. It's a legitimate flaw.

 

[Canuckistani]

If Sweden has their missing players, I'd say Canada wins 4-1 with an empty netter.

Canada's defense was simply too strong.

 

[Canuckistani]

This is why I always get a nice chuckle out of "best on best" comments. Teams are very rarely ever at their very "best" and certainly every team will not be.

Injuries usually take a toll on any best-vs-best tournament, but rarely does it cost a team more than 2-3 players. It's at that point when a nation's depth of talent really shows.

The only such event in which no star players were missing from any team was probably Vancouver 2010.

 

[Theokritos]

If Sweden has their missing players, I'd say Canada wins 4-1 with an empty netter.

You'd expect the Swedes to spend more time outside of their defensive zone with Zetterberg, Sedin, Bäckström on the ice, the pressure on their defense would be relieved. Not to mention Zetterberg contributing defensively. At the same time the Canadians would be bothered in their own end a lot more. I don't see them scoring three goals (leaving aside empty netters) in this scenario, two at most. Their superior depth would still make them favourites, but by a smaller margin, it could & would have been a close affair and a hell of a game.

 

[JackSlater]

Imagine a world where Canada has Stamkos and Tavares, both top three scorers in the NHL at the time of their injuries, and a healthy Price. I think Canada probably wins 10 to -2.