About the OG final

[Theokritos]

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.

That's a very realistic scenario on paper of course, but you forgot to consider the psychological factor: Price would have become so bored at 10 to -2 that he would have scored two own goals on purpose (which makes it 10-0). Just to skate through the whole Swedish team afterwards, take out both Sedins at once with a single body check, make the defenders look like fools with a spin-o-rama move and send Lundqvist in the wrong corner with a Datsyukian deke. And he would have repeated it and repeated it for the hattrick. 13-0 Canada.

 

[JackSlater]

That's a very realistic scenario on paper of course, but you forgot to consider the psychological factor: Price would have become so bored at 10 to -2 that he would have scored two own goals on purpose (which makes it 10-0). Just to skate through the whole Swedish team afterwards, take out both Sedins at once with a single body check, make the defenders look like fools with a spin-o-rama move and send Lundqvist in the wrong corner with a Datsyukian deke. And he would have repeated it and repeated it for the hattrick. 13-0 Canada.

Well we're close on the margin of victory, but really I think Price is mentally strong enough not to negate Sweden's -2 goals. It's all hypothetical of course. I do fear though that a healthy Stamkos, thus meaning that St. Louis is not on the team, would cause a distraction when St. Louis puts a hit out on Yzerman. If St. Louis has Yzerman attacked before the OG final, BUT Stamkos and Tavares play with a healthy Price, I think Canada only wins 7 to -1.

 

[Theokritos]

I do fear though that a healthy Stamkos, thus meaning that St. Louis is not on the team, would cause a distraction when St. Louis puts a hit out on Yzerman. If St. Louis has Yzerman attacked before the OG final, BUT Stamkos and Tavares play with a healthy Price, I think Canada only wins 7 to -1.

Given that St. Louis has now turned out to be badness in person in the eyes of you Canadians, it must be assumed he would have run amok, hijacked a Malaysian Airlines Boeing 777 and flown it into Bolshoy Ice Dome during the OG final so that Canada wouldn't have won a gold medal anyway. So be thankful Stamkos was injured and forget about your scenario!

 

[Pominville Knows]

We would have won if your Yankie drug manufacturers had not tricked our doctor through notorious two-faced vigilante Martin St. Louis.

 

[Mehar]

This thread is going in the wrong direction (LOL). Injuries or not- Canada was the best team overall in Sochi. The USA was fully healthy (probably as good or if not better than Sweden) and Canada shut them down in the Semis in an impressive showing. Looking forward to a Canada three-peat in 2018 if the NHL gives the GO!

 

[ToewsGretzky*]

I really dislike this question because you indeed are somewhat questioning Canada's win by asking what if? what if?

Wouldn't have made the slightest of difference, you have to understand that this was arguably the greatest Canadian team ever sent to the olympics in our history, Canada only allowed 3 goals against coming into the final, they were a defensive juggernaut and they had too much depth, I can assure you Backstrom, Sedin and Zetterberg weren't going to stop wave after wave of onslaught from Canada's 4 lines which are all NHL top lines. If the Americans couldn't stop it, the Swedes sure as hell weren't going to healthy or not. This team was just that good and were playing their system to a T.

If you think Sweden would have beaten Canada had they had those 3 guys, then I will turn around and use the same logic, Canada would have won this game 5-0 instead of 3-0 had we had Stamkos and Tavares in the lineup. Scary thing about this team was that Canada wasn't even at full strength either, people tend to forget that fact.

 

[Theokritos]

Wouldn't have made the slightest of difference, you have to understand that this is arguably the greatest Canadian team ever sent to the olympics in our history

So they were better than the four teams before (if it was indeed the best since '98), that's nice but not yet that overwhelming per se and doesn't automatically make them the best team ever.

I can assure you Backstrom, Sedin and Zetterberg weren't going to stop wave after wave of onslaught from Canada's 4 lines which are all NHL top lines.

No one in the world can realistically assure this kind of thing, not even NHL coaches and hockey experts who know more about the game than you and I do. Canada had superior depth, that much is not in question, but their overall edge in talent was not large enough to guarantee victory against a full strenght Sweden on every given day, like the OG final day for example.

 

[ToewsGretzky*]

So they were better than the four teams before (if it was indeed the best since '98), that's nice but not yet that overwhelming per se and doesn't automatically make them the best team ever.



No one in the world can realistically assure this kind of thing, not even NHL coaches and hockey experts who know more about the game than you and I do. Canada had superior depth, that much is not in question, but their overall edge in talent was not large enough to guarantee victory against a full strenght Sweden on every given day, like the OG final day for example.

Well I disagree, on paper yes Canada has a massive talent edge and it showed on the ice, Canada was playing with such devotion to their system that nobody was going to stop them, I can assure you an Olympic gold means the world to these Swedish players, but Canadian players have that extra motivation to win it more than anyone else. Hockey is ingrained in the culture of Canada, the same cannot be said for Sweden, not to the level that it is in Canada that's for sure. Canada wanted it more healthy or not. I'm sure after Sweden's loss that nobody in Sweden was depressed any nobody was questioning the talent in the country, if Canada lost this game there would have been calls of having another Summit Series and questions about the talent in this country.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

4 of the 5 last Best on Best. Yup, we're the best.

 

[Theokritos]

Well I disagree, on paper yes Canada has a massive talent edge and it showed on the ice

The Soviets had a massive talent edge over the USA in 1980, the Swedes had a massive talent edge over Belarus in 2002 and so on. They still lost even though the talent edge was actually larger than it was in 2014 (with Sweden or both teams in full health). So no, there is just no way to legitimately "assure" that victory. You have a good case to say the Canadians would still have been favourites (maybe 60:40) due to depth and dedication, but that's as far as it goes in a single elimination game against an opponent of Sweden's calibre.

Canadian players have that extra motivation to win it more than anyone else. Hockey is ingrained in the culture of Canada... Canada wanted it more healthy or not.

You seriously believe Canada won that Olympic Gold because they "wanted it more" than Sweden? I don't believe that for a second. The talent gap/superior depth is more than enough to explain the Canadian victory in Sochi.

if Canada lost this game there would have been calls of having another Summit Series and questions about the talent in this country.

You guys are in a dangerous condition then regarding your composure, "on the edge" so to say. You win: You are the greatest of all, untouchable! You lose: the country has failed, disaster! You have reason enough to be more self-confident than that.

 

[ToewsGretzky*]

The Soviets had a massive talent edge over the USA in 1980, the Swedes had a massive talent edge over Belarus in 2002 and so on. They still lost even though the talent edge was actually larger than it was in 2014 (with Sweden or both teams in full health). So no, there is just no way to legitimately "assure" that victory. You have a good case to say the Canadians would still have been favourites (maybe 60:40) due to depth and dedication, but that's as far as it goes in a single elimination game against an opponent of Sweden's calibre.



You seriously believe Canada won that Olympic Gold because they "wanted it more" than Sweden? I don't believe that for a second. The talent gap/superior depth is more than enough to explain the Canadian victory in Sochi.



You guys are in a dangerous condition then regarding your composure, "on the edge" so to say. You win: You are the greatest of all, untouchable! You lose: the country has failed, disaster! You have reason enough to be more self-confident than that.

You don't understand, winning gold is so common for Canada, that the one time that we don't alarms are raised, if anything that just shows how much of an iron grip and dominance we have in the sport. Canada hasn't lost enough on the world stage for that "on the edge" mentality to fade, we haven't lost enough for our expectations to fade. We've won so much that its come to the point that we expect gold or bust, if we win a silver its considered a monumental catastrophe, does Sweden consider its silver a monumental catastrophe? doubt it. That's what separates hockey in Canada vs hockey in Sweden.

 

[Theokritos]

You don't understand, winning gold is so common for Canada, that the one time that we don't alarms are raised, if anything that just shows how much of an iron grip and dominance we have in the sport.

Have a hard time believing that was exactly the prevailing mentality or train of though after the 1996 loss, after the 1998 loss and after the 2006 loss.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Have a hard time believing that was exactly the prevailing mentality or train of though after the 1996 loss, after the 1998 loss and after the 2006 loss.

Yeah. It is what it is, Canada are both Olympic champions and the provider of the best elite depth in the business. They are actually so good that they can handle elite players being injured, which no-one else can really. They probably would have won anyhow, but a pivot core of Bäckström, Sedin and Zetterberg compared to what we now had, almost nothing, obviously could have won us the game. But it just was not the case, and Team Canada most certainly deserved it.

 

[ToewsGretzky*]

Have a hard time believing that was exactly the prevailing mentality or train of though after the 1996 loss, after the 1998 loss and after the 2006 loss.

1996? inaugural World Cup of hockey tournament? meh we won the next one anyways. I'm talking about the Olympics and everything before the 1998 olympics is irrelevant, Canada only started sending its best in 1998 so when I talk of Canada's "iron grip" i'm talking about what we have done at the best vs best level starting in 1998. The 2006 disaster was kind of softened by the fact that Canada had won the World Cup of hockey 2 years prior in 2004, and 4 years prior winning the olympic gold in 2002. Canada then winning back to back in 2010 and 2014 is further proof that the 2006 7th place disaster in Torino was nothing more than a fluke which is what us Canadians have been saying for years.

 

[waitin425]

I love "what if" scenarios. What if.......my aunt had a penis?

She'd be my uncle!

 

[Pominville Knows]

1996? inaugural World Cup of hockey tournament? meh we won the next one anyways. I'm talking about the Olympics and everything before the 1998 olympics is irrelevant, Canada only started sending its best in 1998 so when I talk of Canada's "iron grip" i'm talking about what we have done at the best vs best level starting in 1998. The 2006 disaster was kind of softened by the fact that Canada had won the World Cup of hockey 2 years prior in 2004, and 4 years prior winning the olympic gold in 2002. Canada then winning back to back in 2010 and 2014 is further proof that the 2006 7th place disaster in Torino was nothing more than a fluke which is what us Canadians have been saying for years.

What the **** are you talking about?

I love "what if" scenarios. What if.......my aunt had a penis?

She'd be my uncle!

You got your medals. Take it for what it is.

 

[Canuckistani]

1996? inaugural World Cup of hockey tournament? meh we won the next one anyways. I'm talking about the Olympics and everything before the 1998 olympics is irrelevant, Canada only started sending its best in 1998 so when I talk of Canada's "iron grip" i'm talking about what we have done at the best vs best level starting in 1998. The 2006 disaster was kind of softened by the fact that Canada had won the World Cup of hockey 2 years prior in 2004, and 4 years prior winning the olympic gold in 2002.

Canadian fans were devastated by the 1996 World Cup loss (largely due to it being at the hands of the US) and the subsequent loss in Nagano two years later led to so many fears about the direction of the Canadian game that it spawned summits to discuss what was wrong.

Granted, Canada rebounded nicely starting in 2002 and has dominated the best-on-best event since, but there was palpable fear in 1996-98 that we really had lost our edge.

 

[ToewsGretzky*]

What the **** are you talking about?


You got your medals. Take it for what it is.

Is it that hard to understand? everything before 1998 is irrelevant for Canada, in case you haven't caught on by now but Canadians only care about best vs best tournaments, thats ALL we care about.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Is it that hard to understand? everything before 1998 is irrelevant for Canada, in case you haven't caught on by now but Canadians only care about best vs best tournaments, thats ALL we care about.

Yeah well if you care so much about them maybe you should notice that Best-on-Best tournaments was played before 1998 as well.

 

[ToewsGretzky*]

Yeah well if you care so much about them maybe you should notice that Best-on-Best tournaments was played before 1998 as well.

Sure there were, the only ones I can remember are the Canada Cups and Canada won 4 golds out of the 5 tournaments from 1976 to 1991 sporting a 28-5-6 record winning in 76, 84, 87, 91 and losing in 81. Then of course there was the World Cup of Hockey in 1996 which Canada lost. So as far as I'm concerned there have been 6 best on best tournaments prior to 1998 and Canada won 4 of them. Hmm 4/6 not bad. I was only talking about the olympics which is why I didn't mention these other wins for Canada.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Sure there were, the only ones I can remember are the Canada Cups and Canada won 4 golds out of the 5 tournaments from 1976 to 1991 sporting a 28-5-6 record winning in 76, 84, 87, 91 and losing in 81. Then of course there was the World Cup of Hockey in 1996 which Canada lost. So as far as I'm concerned there have been 6 best on best tournaments prior to 1998 and Canada won 4 of them. Hmm 4/6 not bad. I was only talking about the olympics which is why I didn't mention these other wins for Canada.

I have not said otherwise, but you for some reason earlier discounted the 1996 US World Cup win by saying that it was only from 1998 canadians cared becouse you only care about best on best. Amongst them apparantly the 2004 World Cup.

You are unfortunately probably the last person on this forum that has noticed that Canada is the best in hockey, which makes all these threads and posts you've created about it both embarrassing for you and aimed into a vacuum.

There is no-one here that claims otherwise buddy, you're just the last one arriving to the party.

 

[ToewsGretzky*]

I have not said otherwise, but you for some reason earlier discounted the 1996 US World Cup win by saying that it was only from 1998 canadians cared becouse you only care about best on best. Amongst them apparantly the 2004 World Cup.

You are unfortunately probably the last person on this forum that has noticed that Canada is the best in hockey, which makes all these threads and posts you've created about it both embarrassing for you and aimed into vacuum.

There is no-one here that claims otherwise buddy, you're just the last one arriving to the party.

I'm not trying to brag or anything. I wasn't lying when I said from 1998 and onwards, I only brought up the 2004 World Cup of hockey because I was mentioning that it softened the blow on finishing 7th place in Torino.

 

[Pominville Knows]

I'm not trying to brag or anything. I wasn't lying when I said from 1998 and onwards, I only brought up the 2004 World Cup of hockey because I was mentioning that it softened the blow on finishing 7th place in Torino.

Either way we find ourselves in a situation where only losers like me care to retort to your blatantly obvious and unnessessary bragging, so one can speculate about what that tells us.

 

[ToewsGretzky*]

Either way we find ourselves in a situation where only losers like me care to retort to your blatantly obvious and unnessessary bragging, so one can speculate about what that tells us.

Well that's your opinion, suddenly its forbidden for Canadians to be proud of our hockey sporting achievements, apparently we must never speak of them or else I might anger someone or worse yet be accused of bragging. I guess I'll be silent over them to make you feel better

 

[Shadowthrone]

Well that's your opinion, suddenly its forbidden for Canadians to be proud of our hockey sporting achievements, apparently we must never speak of them or else I might anger someone or worse yet be accused of bragging. I guess I'll be silent over them to make you feel better

You can't possibly be much older than 13....