Toggle sidebar

WJC: Bob Mackenzie used to preach that wjc is a tournament for 19 year olds

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
The younger players who occasionally step up are the exceptional talents. 19 is your baseline general population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: irunthepeg
It’s still a widely held mindset that this is a tournament that’s dominated by 19 year olds. It’s become a TSN cliche, but the reason it become one is because there was a heck of a lot of precedence to support that argument. That 2016 Finnish team was the first that I can remember really dominating with their youngsters during the era of TSN broadcasting. Obviously there have been dominant underagers before (that Gretzky kid wasn’t half bad! :naughty:), but there haven’t been enough of them to make people think otherwise. With that said, a big part of the equation is the fact that coaches tend to give fewer opportunities to younger kids. Less playing time and PP time means they are less likely to produce big numbers.
 
Age is just a number, the best players under the cap age will play. It does not matter if you have 2 or 12 people of 17 years old.

Except of course it matters in hfboards where you get fake internet points for being younger than expected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Past Considerations
As Duthie, McKenzie and Button pointed out, Luukkonen was not very good last year and this year he was a MVP imo. For goalies the longer they have developed, the better.
 
I have never ever liked that idea. Yes, a 19 year old is more mature mentally and physically and has a little bit more experience. He's been to a couple of NHL training camps, etc. However, there is no doubt in my mind Canada has cost themselves the gold a time or two with this stubborn mentality because time after time we always shelve the 17 year olds and lean more on the older players no matter how skilled the 17 year old is. Lindros in 1991 is an exception, because he was already more physically strong than a 19 year old.

But MacKinnon in 2013 for example. The guy basically gets hidden on Canada's 4th line by coach Steve Spott and we don't even medal that year. A few months later MacKinnon is a 1st overall pick and a Memorial Cup MVP in a league filled with 19 year olds.

This year, Lafreniere wasn't given a fair shake and Tim Hunter, who wouldn't know skill if it bit him in the butt, never let him shine. Other times like Eric Staal or Nathan Horton getting cut in 2003. Or Nugent-Hopkins not even making the team either in 2011. Usually either the skilled 17 year old is cut or his playing time is low and the coach doesn't trust him.

Two golds for Canada in this decade, compared to 5 in the 2000s, 7 in the 1990s and 3 in the 1980s, tells me we are doing something wrong and this is one of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Past Considerations, Son of a Dawson, 1specter and 2 others
Big Phil said:
I have never ever liked that idea. Yes, a 19 year old is more mature mentally and physically and has a little bit more experience. He's been to a couple of NHL training camps, etc. However, there is no doubt in my mind Canada has cost themselves the gold a time or two with this stubborn mentality because time after time we always shelve the 17 year olds and lean more on the older players no matter how skilled the 17 year old is. Lindros in 1991 is an exception, because he was already more physically strong than a 19 year old.

But MacKinnon in 2013 for example. The guy basically gets hidden on Canada's 4th line by coach Steve Spott and we don't even medal that year. A few months later MacKinnon is a 1st overall pick and a Memorial Cup MVP in a league filled with 19 year olds.

This year, Lafreniere wasn't given a fair shake and Tim Hunter, who wouldn't know skill if it bit him in the butt, never let him shine. Other times like Eric Staal or Nathan Horton getting cut in 2003. Or Nugent-Hopkins not even making the team either in 2011. Usually either the skilled 17 year old is cut or his playing time is low and the coach doesn't trust him.

Two golds for Canada in this decade, compared to 5 in the 2000s, 7 in the 1990s and 3 in the 1980s, tells me we are doing something wrong and this is one of them.
Click to expand...
Pretty much this. You hade to play your best players.
 
Big Phil said:
I have never ever liked that idea. Yes, a 19 year old is more mature mentally and physically and has a little bit more experience. He's been to a couple of NHL training camps, etc. However, there is no doubt in my mind Canada has cost themselves the gold a time or two with this stubborn mentality because time after time we always shelve the 17 year olds and lean more on the older players no matter how skilled the 17 year old is. Lindros in 1991 is an exception, because he was already more physically strong than a 19 year old.

But MacKinnon in 2013 for example. The guy basically gets hidden on Canada's 4th line by coach Steve Spott and we don't even medal that year. A few months later MacKinnon is a 1st overall pick and a Memorial Cup MVP in a league filled with 19 year olds.

This year, Lafreniere wasn't given a fair shake and Tim Hunter, who wouldn't know skill if it bit him in the butt, never let him shine. Other times like Eric Staal or Nathan Horton getting cut in 2003. Or Nugent-Hopkins not even making the team either in 2011. Usually either the skilled 17 year old is cut or his playing time is low and the coach doesn't trust him.

Two golds for Canada in this decade, compared to 5 in the 2000s, 7 in the 1990s and 3 in the 1980s, tells me we are doing something wrong and this is one of them.
Click to expand...

Can't believe a guy like Tim Hunter can fine work as a coach tbh. He wouldn't be on my list of potential candidates for a coaching gig. I agree with this, play the better player ffs, we see it all the time at the NHL level even. Superior younger players playing down the lineup in favour of less-talented, older scrubs.
 
It has certainly been a very wise move from the Finnish staff to pick players like Laine and Kakko to the WJC when they were 17. They were both great but as a 19-year-old Laine was completely useless at the WJC, and I'd be willing to bet the same will be true for Kakko.
 
It's still a tourney for 19yo. 2 years of development means a lot in terms of strength, emotional maturity, consistency, skating. Of course anecdotal evidence of some players doing well at 17 will be there for a few reasons:
  • exceptional talents (Crosby, McDavid, Laine, etc)
  • kids ready to play in a lesser role (Lafreniere, Podkolzin, etc)
  • countries simply not having enough 19 yo talent to draw upon
In Europe 17 yo often have an opportunity to play in the pros, I think it allows the fans to see first hand who is ready. In Canada these kids play in CHL, and can seemingly dominate while lacking strength, skating etc, and thus giving the fans false expectations. I am saying fans because Canadian coaches and GMs have an opportunity to evaluate everyone and it's not some sort of stupid arse rule that makes them choose 19 year olds. It's the performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Past Considerations and kabidjan18
Lepardi said:
It has certainly been a very wise move from the Finnish staff to pick players like Laine and Kakko to the WJC when they were 17. They were both great but as a 19-year-old Laine was completely useless at the WJC, and I'd be willing to bet the same will be true for Kakko.
Click to expand...
Crazy that that's the same country that chose not to take Kotkaniemi. Because Jere Innala was clearly a superior player. They get it right more often than not though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FinPanda
I think mentality is a big piece of it. You won't convince me that Zadina, Necas, Tolvanen, etc. are worse players than what they were last year. I think sometimes guys come in thinking they can dominate without trying because they've played pro against men, but it's a tough tournament. Compared to the regular season in a lot of pro leagues the intensity is probably higher at the WJC because the result means more. Maybe the youngers guy have more respect for the competition and play their butts off in comparison, or feel that they have something to prove.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Past Considerations and Lepardi
Is it about time for Hockey Canada to get rid of this subtle grudge against Dale Hunter - an actual winner when it comes to coaching - and let him coach the team? And then if he wins he can coach it until he loses. That is fine by me. I have had enough Tim Hunter, Dave Cameron, Steve Spott, Don Hay (the 2nd time around) type of failure.
 
Lepardi said:
It has certainly been a very wise move from the Finnish staff to pick players like Laine and Kakko to the WJC when they were 17. They were both great but as a 19-year-old Laine was completely useless at the WJC, and I'd be willing to bet the same will be true for Kakko.
Click to expand...
What?
 
FinPanda said:
Sarcasm as Laine didn't play in the WJC when he was 19. He was already in the NHL and Kakko will be in the NHL most likely too.
Click to expand...
I'm scared to look up if Laine was actually leading NHL in goals since his introduction at the exact time he was supposed to be at the WJC 2018.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FinPanda
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom