ALL of Canada’s Forwards and top-6 Defensemen are 1st Round Picks

[nbwingsfan]

Thats a big gaffe on your part. Do you know what an age group is? This is the 2001 age group.

And what they did 2-3 years ago is pretty irrelevant

 

[TheBeastCoast]

You could've quoted me.

Thats not, at all, what I was getting at, but you are one of the main culprits, and we've been through this before.

Players, coaches, team staff, families absolutely read media. Maybe some of them even read a website like this. Many Canadians have prognosticated that they are the favorites. Mr. Loud Mouth has prognosticated that Canada will go undefeated in this tournament. Many have ignored all arguments otherwise to these prognostications. Many have decided that they will show no respect to any other countries.

I mean...Canada goes in to the tournament expected to win the tournament by people in Canada more years then they arent...as in Canada is expected to win whether it is a good year for talent or not. You are right we have gone back and forth on the favourite thing. I just dont exactly see how what people say tangibly changes anything more then it does..any other year?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

He doesn't mean dominating the U20 tournament. He is referencing this 2001 birth year as being pretty strong through the tournaments they've played. He's not wrong that they've been a solid group.... but he can't say they've earned the "best on paper" tag as we have clearly changed papers since those other tourneys, which were a while ago. Canada has assembled a better roster than they had up through the U18's and the USA has lost a number of guys, including some to Covid, unfortunately. You have to factor those in and once you do so it definitely appears that the US has taken a bit of a step back.

Thats a nice try, but also a misrepresentation. You are acting like we've retained the exact same roster. But then you also suggest we lost some players due to COVID. How does that work? Do we just play with less players from the prior roster of years ago or do we get to be like every team and make changes to our roster that we want? You've yet to show how we've gotten worse since then. There's absolutely zero indication thats true. In fact, we've added players like Kaliyev, Johnson, Wolf, Brink, Lacombe, Brisson who weren't previously part of the group. And we are allowed to use players from other age groups, like any other country, so we've added players such as Sanderson and Beniers. But I guess that means we are worse because you want to be the favorites. Sensible.

 

[LFCTML]

Nope. They know that are as good as anybody. Gold or bust.

I never said they weren't as good as anyone else. They're plenty talented. Just a different mentality - and it's neither good nor bad.

 

[ES]

Even while USA has been good with 2001s, they lost one critical game in U18 and therefore only got bronze. Sweden won gold at home.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

You could've quoted me.

Thats not, at all, what I was getting at, but you are one of the main culprits, and we've been through this before.

Players, coaches, team staff, families absolutely read media. Maybe some of them even read a website like this. Many Canadians have prognosticated that they are the favorites. Mr. Loud Mouth has prognosticated that Canada will go undefeated in this tournament. Many have ignored all arguments otherwise to these prognostications. Many have decided that they will show no respect to any other countries.

So true - far too many of my fellow Canadians are really bullying, tormenting, and forcing other countries to lick the proverbial piss-covered push-pop out of some misguided sense of supremacy. It's unconscionable, if you ask me.

 

[Czechboy]

I'm Canadian, so obviously I can't speak for these nations, but I'm not so sure. I think the US definitely have that same attitude (gold or bust). And it seems like the Russians do too. But from my perception it seems like the Swedes have a different attitude about things. It seems like they're still able to value/celebrate silver medals.. even if there's disappointment with falling short of gold.

I'd say the Swedes take this very seriously. FTR, the original poster missed Finland.

Czechs would be thrilled with a Quarter Final win!

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I mean...Canada goes in to the tournament expected to win the tournament by people in Canada more years then they arent...as in Canada is expected to win whether it is a good year for talent or not. You are right we have gone back and forth on the favourite thing. I just dont exactly see how what people say tangibly changes anything more then it does..any other year?

This is what I addressed. You misrepresented my opinion, and didn't even have the honesty to quote the post you misrepresented.

Imagine thinking who random people on HF boards think is the favourite going into a junior tournament is going to give other teams "less pressure".

Besides, go back and look at the discussion from this thread. It reveals a lot. Who were the ones that took offense to what? I responded to a fellow American poster that its my opinion that we are the favorite. In comes a lot of Canadian posters who berate me, misrepresent my opinion, and mock me further for disagreeing. If one side is going to say opposing views aren't allowed, what do you think that suggests? I wouldn't say this is a back and forth. I would say one side wants everyone to submit to what they've decided.

 

[Statsy]

Thats a nice try, but also a misrepresentation. You are acting like we've retained the exact same roster. But then you also suggest we lost some players due to COVID. How does that work? Do we just play with less players from the prior roster of years ago or do we get to be like every team and make changes to our roster that we want? You've yet to show how we've gotten worse since then. There's absolutely zero indication thats true. In fact, we've added players like Kaliyev, Johnson, Wolf, Brink, Lacombe, Brisson who weren't previously part of the group. And we are allowed to use players from other age groups, like any other country, so we've added players such as Sanderson and Beniers. But I guess that means we are worse because you want to be the favorites. Sensible.

You were including the other players from the 2001 birth year in your assessment when you referenced wins from things like the Hlinka/Gretzky Cup which is NOT the U18 roster. Or perhaps that was a different poster (I don't recall), but it's beside the point as I was definitely including them. The only difference is the inclusion of the Sanderson/Beniers group which is NOT a particularly strong birth year for the US.

For the record, this entire discussion about who is favourites is actually pointless. Nobody cares who were or weren't the favourites going into any previous tournament. When it's over, the medal standings are all that remains.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

So true - far too many of my fellow Canadians are really bullying, tormenting, and forcing other countries to lick the proverbial piss-covered push-pop out of some misguided sense of supremacy. It's unconscionable, if you ask me.

I have absolutely no clue what relevancy this has to the discussion. Can you maybe explain it?

 

[Czechboy]

The problem with U18 supremacy is that there is not a good tourney to prove that...

Canada sends top team to Hlinka and usually wins (US does not have best team here).
US sends top team to U18 and is dominant (Canada does not have best team here).

Using just the U18 or the Hlinka is missing half the details.

FTR... I'd love to see a real U18 where all the best participate but have no idea when they could even play that. Shame the US doesn't send their best team to Hlinka - might settle a few debates.

 

[The Devilish Buffoon]

I have absolutely no clue what relevancy this has to the discussion. Can you maybe explain it?

It's just telling, and sometimes quite funny, to see what individuals decide to be sensitive to and moralize over, versus what they decide to be insensitive to.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

This is what I addressed. You misrepresented my opinion, and didn't even have the honesty to quote the post you misrepresented.



Besides, go back and look at the discussion from this thread. It reveals a lot. Who were the ones that took offense to what? I responded to a fellow American poster that its my opinion that we are the favorite. In comes a lot of Canadian posters who berate me, misrepresent my opinion, and mock me further for disagreeing. If one side is going to say opposing views aren't allowed, what do you think that suggests? I wouldn't say this is a back and forth. I would say one side wants everyone to submit to what they've decided.

Kind of amusing coming from the person who immediately got defensive because other people have the gaul to not agree with you that the Americans are the favourites this year. You can quit with the victim complex anytime now it is honestly just kind of pathetic. You are free to think the Americans are the favourites just as I'm free to not agree with you. That is about as deep as this is.

 

[PAZ]

Thats a big gaffe on your part. Do you know what an age group is? This is the 2001 age group.

Then you should specify the 2001 age group. When you simply say 'dominated this age group' without having any indicator of what year you're referencing to, the default would be the U18 tournament age group.

I know it's weird, but not everyone can read your mind so you need to be clear.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

You were including the other players from the 2001 birth year in your assessment when you referenced wins from things like the Hlinka/Gretzky Cup which is NOT the U18 roster. Or perhaps that was a different poster (I don't recall), but it's beside the point as I was definitely including them. The only difference is the inclusion of the Sanderson/Beniers group which is NOT a particularly strong birth year for the US.

For the record, this entire discussion about who is favourites is actually pointless. Nobody cares who were or weren't the favourites going into any previous tournament. When it's over, the medal standings are all that remains.

Not exactly. The Hlinka Gretzky was a secondary discussion. I posted the record of the NTDP previously. That didn't include any of those players, except I think Brink got like 7 games. Thats what I've been referencing. If the USA is beating up on all these countries badly over the course of two years to the point they are overwhelming favorites against these teams, what exactly has changed to make the USA not the favorite? Now, I know self-importance comes in, and you or someone will say "What about Canada"? USA beat handly with the NTDP a Canadian team that had 14 members of their current WJC team, and the Hlinka Gretzky game you referenced had 11 members of the current Canadian team.

The secondary discussion about the Hlinka Gretzky adds to what I've been saying. If USA was overwhelmingly the favorite in this age group and was able to get the best of a large core of this Canadian team, even in less games than against other countries, what has changed? If we all agree that the USA has steam-rolled the opposition (I can post the stats again) in this 2001 age group previously, there must be a really big swing in events to make things change to the point where Canada is now an overwhelming favorite. Let's hear this argument with specifics.

As the the pointlessness or lack thereof from this discussion, I don't agree. I think it's important. If we can just completely ignore all prior history in this age group and just decide based on our own whims what constitutes the favorite for this tournament, and then proceed to try to ram that down the throats of others that they must agree, I think objectivity is out the door.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

Not exactly. The Hlinka Gretzky was a secondary discussion. I posted the record of the NTDP previously. That didn't include any of those players, except I think Brink got like 7 games. Thats what I've been referencing. If the USA is beating up on all these countries badly over the course of two years to the point they are overwhelming favorites against these teams, what exactly has changed to make the USA not the favorite? Now, I know self-importance comes in, and you or someone will say "What about Canada"? USA beat handly with the NTDP a Canadian team that had 14 members of their current WJC team, and the Hlinka Gretzky game you referenced had 11 members of the current Canadian team.

The secondary discussion about the Hlinka Gretzky adds to what I've been saying. If USA was overwhelmingly the favorite in this age group and was able to get the best of a large core of this Canadian team, even in less games than against other countries, what has changed? If we all agree that the USA has steam-rolled the opposition (I can post the stats again) in this 2001 age group previously, there must be a really big swing in events to make things change to the point where Canada is now an overwhelming favorite. Let's hear this argument with specifics.

As the the pointlessness or lack thereof from this discussion, I don't agree. I think it's important. If we can just completely ignore all prior history in this age group and just decide based on our own whims what constitutes the favorite for this tournament, and then proceed to try to ram that down the throats of others that they must agree, I think objectivity is out the door.

In terms of US vs Canada, it really comes down to how well Knight plays and what kind of performance Canada gets from their goaltending.

Because there is a clear advantage to Canada in terms of the talent of the overall roster. Canada has mid 1st round picks that might end up sitting on the bench all tournament. That’s the kind of depth they have this year. They’ll have one of Byfield, Newhook, or McMichael centring the 4th line too, which is kind of insane.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Kind of amusing coming from the person who immediately got defensive because other people have the gaul to not agree with you that the Americans are the favourites this year. You can quit with the victim complex anytime now it is honestly just kind of pathetic. You are free to think the Americans are the favourites just as I'm free to not agree with you. That is about as deep as this is.

You are trying to revise history. Your posters have been mocking me and others who didn't agree with your opinion. This has been going on for days. We've been called derogatory names by your bunch. Weeks ago there were (successful) calls for those who disagreed on this subject to be banned from posting in the Canadian thread because apparently you can only voice one viewpoint in that thread. This is going down a path where its being beat into all of us that we must accept this one viewpoint, otherwise we are crazy.

Meanwhile, the people trying to beat this into us don't actually want to address any of the substantive points made. Thats because this isn't about substance to them. I think I have the right to tell others what's going on here, and to tell them they don't have to submit to it. There's nothing requiring you or anyone to respond to that. I didn't respond to the open mocking of me. I didn't respond to the derogatory remarks about my country. I didn't respond to any of the suggestions about how overrated American players are or how overrated the USA always is.

If you practiced what you preached, you wouldn't have tried to misrepresent my opinion and do so in a way where you hope I don't recognize you were talking about me.

 

[covfefe]

Not exactly. The Hlinka Gretzky was a secondary discussion. I posted the record of the NTDP previously. That didn't include any of those players, except I think Brink got like 7 games. Thats what I've been referencing. If the USA is beating up on all these countries badly over the course of two years to the point they are overwhelming favorites against these teams, what exactly has changed to make the USA not the favorite? Now, I know self-importance comes in, and you or someone will say "What about Canada"? USA beat handly with the NTDP a Canadian team that had 14 members of their current WJC team, and the Hlinka Gretzky game you referenced had 11 members of the current Canadian team.

The secondary discussion about the Hlinka Gretzky adds to what I've been saying. If USA was overwhelmingly the favorite in this age group and was able to get the best of a large core of this Canadian team, even in less games than against other countries, what has changed? If we all agree that the USA has steam-rolled the opposition (I can post the stats again) in this 2001 age group previously, there must be a really big swing in events to make things change to the point where Canada is now an overwhelming favorite. Let's hear this argument with specifics.

As the the pointlessness or lack thereof from this discussion, I don't agree. I think it's important. If we can just completely ignore all prior history in this age group and just decide based on our own whims what constitutes the favorite for this tournament, and then proceed to try to ram that down the throats of others that they must agree, I think objectivity is out the door.

Well, a big part of that 2001 group's success was Hughes putting up an ungodly number of points. So you're down your top player, but you aren't factoring the impact of that in on a relative basis with respect to this particular tournament.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

You are trying to revise history. Your posters have been mocking me and others who didn't agree with your opinion. This has been going on for days. We've been called derogatory names by your bunch. Weeks ago there were (successful) calls for those who disagreed on this subject to be banned from posting in the Canadian thread because apparently you can only voice one viewpoint in that thread. This is going down a path where its being beat into all of us that we must accept this one viewpoint, otherwise we are crazy.

Meanwhile, the people trying to beat this into us don't actually want to address any of the substantive points made. Thats because this isn't about substance to them. I think I have the right to tell others what's going on here, and to tell them they don't have to submit to it. There's nothing requiring you or anyone to respond to that. I didn't respond to the open mocking of me. I didn't respond to the derogatory remarks about my country. I didn't respond to any of the suggestions about how overrated American players are or how overrated the USA always is.

If you practiced what you preached, you wouldn't have tried to misrepresent my opinion and do so in a way where you hope I don't recognize you were talking about me.

I would like for you to clearly state the point(s) you are trying to make. I see argument; some fandom but no real points and certainly nothing to do with the thread topic.

 

[PaulD]

I never said they weren't as good as anyone else. They're plenty talented. Just a different mentality - and it's neither good nor bad.

I hear ya. And Im saying that mentality has changed for Sweden......to Gold or bust. Like Canada , Russia and the USA

 

[PaulD]

You also have exactly no way of knowing it. Im sure plenty of people said no team would ever come close to 95 either.

People who talk in absolutes usually have absolutely no idea what they're talking about

Its called a prediction.

You are rating taking the current team and comparing it to past teams. Me too.

 

[LFCTML]

I hear ya. And Im saying that mentality has changed for Sweden......to Gold or bust. Like Canada , Russia and the USA

Agree to disagree I guess. But like I said, I'm hardly informed on the matter. Just what I've noticed when engaging with a few Swedish fans.
For the record, I hope Canada is able to adopt some of that grace in the years ahead. I don't think it conflicts with our will to win. But there's a hell of a lot of talent out there. You're simply not going to come home with gold every year.

All that said though... this year's lineup looks about as stacked as they come haha, and I'm 100% on board with the "gold or bust" mentality.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Well, a big part of that 2001 group's success was Hughes putting up an ungodly number of points. So you're down your top player, but you aren't factoring the impact of that in on a relative basis with respect to this particular tournament.

And Kakko is gone for Canada. Lafreniere is gone for Canada. Its a valid point, but the whole second half of the U17 year didn't include Hughes. The results were

5-4 over Russia
10-2 over Sweden
3-1 over Finland
8-3 over Czech Republic

And then in the first international tournament of the next season Turcotte didn't play. The results were.

8-2 over Sweden
5-2 over Czech Republic
8-1 over Switzerland
3-2 over Finland

It has never been about one player. This US age group dominated using the NTDP, and then had a very credible showing with the back ups at the Hlinka. With referees who don't grant goals after the whistle, maybe that tournament is another win, but we can't replay that tournament to see. That Hlinka roster included Wolf, Lacombe, Miller, Colangelo, Farinacci, Kaliyev, Mastrosimone, and Robertson.

It's always been about the full 2001 age group. The USA has the results to prove they've been the best (overwhelmingly) in this age group, and I would think an analysis of the 2001 players would prove the same.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Its called a prediction.

You are rating taking the current team and comparing it to past teams. Me too.

Nope, youre saying we already know they wont be as good as 2005 or 95. I'm saying you have absolutely no way of knowing that already.

 

[Dakota Sioux]

They aren’t even the favorite on paper, but if Canada insists, give it to them. Takes all the pressure off us if everyone believes that nonsense.

For those who live in Canada they always think it’s gold of bust