I've literally shown percent of points already.
You mean that it used to be 60% in TOP 50 or TOP 100 and now it is 40%? Ok we will return to that
The point is that Swedes scatter, Russians stay in KHL/VHL if they aren't in North America.
There are lots of russians playing in Kazakshtan or Poland do they count?
We can count how much more swedes are playing in NHL/AHL or NL. Rest is irrelevant. Number is as we counted around 80(40 more in NHL, 20 more in AHL and 20 in NL
This isn't about d*ck measuring the strength of any programs. The point is literal the quantity of Junior players in feeder programs for these leagues. It's just a bigger ecosystem.
Not so fast. When Canada or USA have bigger "ecosystems" and produce more quality players it is understandable despite subpar US performaces internationally. But you are insisting that Russia also produces more than Sweden. Is there any evidence outside the number of teams?
I mean MHL has been created like 12 years ago. What was before that? Russia had no J20 teams at all. Does it mean SHL was better than KHL in like 2010?
So again, any evidence outside of just number of MHL teams?
Showing quantity of players is not a "shat" on the system. It's just numbers, lol. You even said yourself, Russia is a bigger picture.
So, as I have said, that unless you go against Sweden=Russia in terms of the strength of their "base", which is roughly the number of good players, capable of playing in NHL/AHL/KHL/SHL/NL, you can't follow with your argument,
So, if your argument is that Russia produces more than Sweden then we need some explanation for this:
a)Why are there 40 more swedes in NHL? Your own money argument fails to explain this
b)So if there is lets say TOP 100 SWE players, and Russia produces more "quality" players due to it's size, Almost all of the 100 best swedes are in NHL or somwhere elese abroad, for Russia number is just 40, and 60 players are in Russia, then why is it the case, that before the invasion like half of starting goalies, 1st pairig defensemen and TOP 3 PPG forwards per team were foreigners? And that foreigners took around 50% of TOP 50 in scoring(for Russian teams only)?
Where is this russian NHL level talent that just decided to stay home?
No, I said they produce more professional players. That's just a fact, as seen by the number of overall professional players. I didn't say anything about who has higher quality.
Japan has more registered players than Slovakia. Numbers themselves are not a decisive evidence esp when Russia and Sweden had SAME number of players 10 years ago, and then russian numbers scyrocketed in last 10 years. Was the KHL worse than SHL 10 years ago? I mean, it had more teams, strict import limit, same arguments as now basically. Funny that 10 years agod russians had more than 50% in TOP 50 russian team scoring
They are in Russia. Again, you are missing the point. We are comparing KHL and SHL, not Russian Hockey Players vs. Swedish Hockey Players. More Russian guys just stay in the Russian system, MHL -> KHL/VHL and never deviate out of it, or will do a short stint in North America and come back home.
By what logic? Your anti-Russian bias is taking off again and you are on a total sidebar. The whole point was there are lot of Russian players to feed into the KHL. So having more teams doesn't automatically mean the quality is lower.
By logic that "Russia produces more professional players and then it means, they have more players of KHL quality", naturally it should then mean, they have more players of NHL quality. If not, then why? We are talking about big numbers here there are 80 to 100 swedish players in NHL, depending on how you count. If Russia is better(due to it's size as you argue) at producing players, why it has 40 to 60 guys only? Numbers don't follow your logic. Then if that chain is broken, then why should we take for granted that the overall number of KHL-level players for Russia is higher than for Sweden? And significantly so, because as I have said, they have to cover for 6! extra teams
Is it the case that Sweden just magically produces more NHL level players, but if we step to KHL level Russia vastly outproduces Sweden? I mean, if we were talking about 10-15 players it would be possible, but we are talking about 100 players, those are big numbers.
What, the numbers are a lie? Because you said so? I didn't audit the registered player numbers, did you? But why lie? But you are woefully ignorant as to the effects a stable KHL has had on overall sponsored youth hockey in Russia, which was quite a mess 20 years ago compared to now.
As I have said, numbers skyrocketed in last 10 years, not 20. So, no, if you insist on this point, then you have to explain was the KHL weaker than SHL 10 years ago. Because your argument goes
- Russia has more players(10 to 6, or 5 to 3 ratio), so it has better base, so it has a better league, despite 6 extra teams and strong import limit
However what is your argument for 2012? Russia and Sweden had same amount of players, KHL was way bigger league(19 to 12) had strict import limit.
I gave real numbers, you just used some fast and loose method of calling half the "good" (by your standard definition) players in the league total amongst the 20 % of European players.
I mean, I used starting goalie, 1st pairing D-man, TOP 3 PPG for forwards, it's pretty transparent. Overall numbers in a strict import league are not a great indicator though.
There is even less of an argument for why the SHL is better. I don't think you even tried.
Easy, 14 teams vs 20, same base(number of players good enough for KHL/SHL), no strict import limit.
Never said the development in Sweden was poor, I think your whole argument for the SHL was the Swedish development, so I guess it's your argument that the reverse is true?
Look above, I squized the argument to one sentence.
Money may not be able to buy quality, but quality will often follow the money. If you don't understand that simple economic concept, you have more to learn than just European hockey leagues, lol
And this is the quality of discussion ladies and gentelmen.
What you are saying would make sense in an open system, but KHL isn't one. Who can they get with this money? 3 players. That's it. And as the evidence shows, they don't get the best player avaliable for this 3 import spots, because they have Liska, Kosmachuk, Fiore etc and some teams don't even use those spots at all.
I see you've gone right back to the same talking point and completely ignored what I said on that. Notice how you completely dodged me bringing up top performing Canadian SHL players in the early going.
Talking point was that if you "talent follows money" model was working, we would have seen better imports im KHL than what they have. Your model just doesn't work And the fact that you insist it does begs a certain question
What did I dodge in canadian/SHL thing again? Veronneau is better in SHL than AHL? Good for him I guess. I think you missed the point here