Canada all time team

[Gerulaitis]

I didn’t even remember the goal in 1991, but that’s not where his impact came anyhow. He was physically dominant.

No Canadian Olympic team should be judged for anything in the era that saw amateurs bs pros, and as far as 1998 goes, Canada built a very flawed team with tunnel vision focused solely on beating the Americans.

Well, I do remember that game. Canada won either 4-0 or 4-1.

Lindros always seemed to be a little bit overrated. A talented physical center with too much hype.

Look, I couldn't even find a spot for Joe Sakic in my team Canada. And Sakic is better than Lindros. Canada produced a lot of great forwards over the last 100 years. Lindros can't crack the top 13 of them

 

[Michael Farkas]

In a real team scenario,.he could be a 4th liner mauler maybe. But not an actual top 12 of all time probably. Wasn't smart enough.

 

[The Panther]

Look, I couldn't even find a spot for Joe Sakic in my team Canada. And Sakic is better than Lindros. Canada produced a lot of great forwards over the last 100 years. Lindros can't crack the top 13 of them

Sakic is better than Lindros is the career and achievements sense, but he wasn't better than Lindros at each's best. Lindros from 1993-94 through 1998-99 was the 2nd (Lemieux) or 3rd (Jagr) best forward on earth, and that's for a six-year period (and Lemieux didn't play for three of those six seasons). I can't say that Sakic was the 2nd-best forward on earth for any six-year stretch.

That said, if I had to pick only one of them for a Team Canada (each being fully healthy), it's a hard choice. Would depend on what the team needs. Sakic's skill-set was really good for international hockey and he was one of the great clutch players.

 

[The Panther]

M. Lemieux - Gretzky - Crosby
Hull Sr. - McDavid - Lafleur
MacKinnon - Lindros - Howe
Messier - Clarke - Trottier
Keon - Bergeron

Orr - Harvey
Bourque - Pronger
Potvin - Robinson
Shore

Roy
Dryden
Brodeur

I basically like this team, but for goaltenders I would have Plante and Roy, or Plante and Brodeur.

Other than that, I like your team. Not sure I would have Keon on here, even as a sub. Cutting Beliveau seems kind of impossible, though. Is Crosby or Lafleur really better than him? I don't know. I'd like Bossy to be there, too. But it's tough.

Laughing at the Messier, Clarke, Trottier line... We'd have to hope the games weren't officiated at today's standards...

 

[MadLuke]

I can't say that Sakic was the 2nd-best forward on earth for any six-year stretch.

I think he is getting a bit underrated by time.

From 95-2001

Sakic, third in points being Jagr-Selanne, first in goals&points in the playoff, 2 Conn Smythe worthy run, 2 cups.

Not a slam dunk, Selanne, Forsberg, Jagr, Lindros, Bure, Kariya, there is a group of top forward and maybe not a clear number 2, but Sakic could be right there with an argument for that title in that window.

Sakic at his best, that 01-02, 22 points over every non Jagr player in the nhl (who played with Mario) scoring 54 goals, 118pts in the dpe, +45, Selke finalist, won the cup on a kind of top line heavy team getting all the attention by the end, MVP of 2002 Olympics.

Sometime I think that because we underrated Jagr a bit in the 90s, post Gretzky-Lemieux numbing us to goddly numbers and accomplishment, we underrated both Lindros and Sakic for staying so close to him during some stretch.

 

[The Panther]

I think he is getting a bit underrated by time.

From 95-2001

Sakic, third in points being Jagr-Selanne, first in goals&points in the playoff, 2 Conn Smythe worthy run, 2 cups.

Not a slam dunk, Selanne, Forsberg, Jagr, Lindros, Bure, Kariya, there is a group of top forward and maybe not a clear number 2, but Sakic could be right there with an argument for that title in that window.

Sakic at his best, that 01-02, 22 points over every non Jagr player in the nhl (who played with Mario) scoring 54 goals, 118pts in the dpe, +45, Selke finalist, won the cup on a kind of top line heavy team getting all the attention by the end, MVP of 2002 Olympics.

Sometime I think that because we underrated Jagr a bit in the 90s, post Gretzky-Lemieux numbing us to goddly numbers and accomplishment, we underrated both Lindros and Sakic for staying so close to him during some stretch.

Yes, Sakic's best 6-season span will be (I guess) 1995-96 through 2000-01. I was doing the comparison, though, mainly in mind of regular season results. Sakic's playoff resume is enormous, for sure.

I agree that Lindros and Sakic, at their bests, are close. It's not a huge difference, but I think Lindros at his best (speaking of things that get underrated on this forum...) is a bit better than Sakic. If we go past the 6 or 7 season limit, then Sakic dwarfs Lindros in every way, thanks to Eric's abridged career and concussions.

 

[Boxscore]

I basically like this team, but for goaltenders I would have Plante and Roy, or Plante and Brodeur.

Yeah, Plante, Fuhr, and Parent were in the mix for me. But the way I attacked it...

1 alpha = Roy (over Plante)
1 hot hand = Dryden (over Fuhr and Bernie)
1 steady Eddie = Brodeur

I wanted a goalie in each tier, which Marty being the ultimate insurance policy... could be 3rd string without his ego getting bruised, then step in at a moment's notice and prevail.

Other than that, I like your team. Not sure I would have Keon on here, even as a sub. Cutting Beliveau seems kind of impossible, though. Is Crosby or Lafleur really better than him? I don't know. I'd like Bossy to be there, too. But it's tough.

Keon is there, and Bergeron as well, for two main reasons:

1. Elite PK and shutdown.

2. If installed as an injury replacement, each can play up and down the lineup and contribute offensively while playing elite defense. That's why I took them over Gainey and Carbonneau. Henri was also a consideration.

Beliveau, Bossy, Espo, and Coffey were tough nixes but their skill sets are redundant. Mario over Beliveau every day and McDavid as well due to his speed. Lindros was also chosen over him based on his ability to dominate in multi-facets. Bossy is an elite sniper but this team will score goals in bunches and there's only 1 puck to go around.

Laughing at the Messier, Clarke, Trottier line... We'd have to hope the games weren't officiated at today's standards...

Anytime I make these ultimate International teams, the litmus test opponent is the 1987 Soviet Canada Cup squad with the Green Unit+ ... hence why I want a surplus of everything: Skill, speed, muscle, brutality, leadership, and defense. The Messier, Clarke, Trottier line will be deployed to intimidate and sway the momentum of a series... to drag the opponent into the battle.

The Lindros & Gordie line will overpower their match-up and MacKinnon's violent attacking style, shot, and speed will provide all the space they need. As much as I was tempted to put a Lindsay, Shanahan, or Neely on that wing... MacKinnon was chosen because he's a speed and tempo demon with a level of intensity 99% of world-class finesse players cannot match.

 

[Gerulaitis]

Sakic is better than Lindros is the career and achievements sense, but he wasn't better than Lindros at each's best. Lindros from 1993-94 through 1998-99 was the 2nd (Lemieux) or 3rd (Jagr) best forward on earth, and that's for a six-year period (and Lemieux didn't play for three of those six seasons). I can't say that Sakic was the 2nd-best forward on earth for any six-year stretch.

That said, if I had to pick only one of them for a Team Canada (each being fully healthy), it's a hard choice. Would depend on what the team needs. Sakic's skill-set was really good for international hockey and he was one of the great clutch players.

Imho:
Sakic was more consistent, had better peak, a winner, more durable, a great leader in the postseason and best on best.

 

[Namba 17]

Canada is so deep, that every time you think about "all-time-best-team" you can invent smth new

Messier - Gretzky - Howe
Lemieux - Trottier - Cook
Dickie Moor - Beliveau - Maurice Richard
Bobby Hull - Nighbor - Lafleur
Lindsay, Sakic

Kelly - Orr
Harvey - Bourque
Potvin - Shore
Robinson

Plante
Roy
Sawchuk

 

[NordiquesForeva]

I think Lindros would fit nicely on any sort of "all-time" Team Canada somewhere down in the lineup in more of an energy-type role in which he wouldn't be primarily responsible for scoring. Internationally, Lindros typically performed much better when he was in a secondary role and didn't need to lead the team.

At the World Juniors, his best tournament was in 1991, when he was a draft-eligible player. That gold medal-winning team was of course led by Lindros from an offensive perspective, but importantly had a core group of veteran leaders from the previous year's team (also gold medal-winners) - Rice, Brisebois, Craig, Manderville, Draper- that was able to take some of the pressure off of Lindros from a leadership perspective.

The next year, as a 19-year old, the Canadian team (with Lindros as the captain) finished 6th.

At the senior level, I'd actually argue his best tournament - at least in terms of impact - was an 18-year old at the 1991 Canada Cup. I don't think he had very strong tournaments in either 1996 or 1998 (when he was miscast as team captain). By the time 2002 rolled around with the accumulated injuries, concussions and wear and tear, he was more of a passenger with 1 point in the tournament (vs. Belarus). Unlike some of his contemporaries, Lindros never had that career-defining international tournament at the senior level.

 

[Gerulaitis]

Canada is so deep, that every time you think about "all-time-best-team" you can invent smth new

Messier - Gretzky - Howe
Lemieux - Trottier - Cook
Dickie Moor - Beliveau - Maurice Richard
Bobby Hull - Nighbor - Lafleur
Lindsay, Sakic

Kelly - Orr
Harvey - Bourque
Potvin - Shore
Robinson

Plante
Roy
Sawchuk

I think you forgot Bossy.
Plus, Trottier represented the US as well

 

[The Panther]

I think Lindros would fit nicely on any sort of "all-time" Team Canada somewhere down in the lineup in more of an energy-type role in which he wouldn't be primarily responsible for scoring. Internationally, Lindros typically performed much better when he was in a secondary role and didn't need to lead the team.

At the World Juniors, his best tournament was in 1991, when he was a draft-eligible player. That gold medal-winning team was of course led by Lindros from an offensive perspective, but importantly had a core group of veteran leaders from the previous year's team (also gold medal-winners) - Rice, Brisebois, Craig, Manderville, Draper- that was able to take some of the pressure off of Lindros from a leadership perspective.

The next year, as a 19-year old, the Canadian team (with Lindros as the captain) finished 6th.

At the senior level, I'd actually argue his best tournament - at least in terms of impact - was an 18-year old at the 1991 Canada Cup. I don't think he had very strong tournaments in either 1996 or 1998 (when he was miscast as team captain). By the time 2002 rolled around with the accumulated injuries, concussions and wear and tear, he was more of a passenger with 1 point in the tournament (vs. Belarus). Unlike some of his contemporaries, Lindros never had that career-defining international tournament at the senior level.

I don't disagree with your point about the deployment of Lindros on the team, but I think we can go too far with the Lindros-didn't-win-as-captain-therefore-he-sucks kind of idea.Winning as captain s more circumstantial than consequential, in most cases.

I also think Lindros was the best player on the ice at the 1996 World Cup.

 

[Thenameless]

Messier & Lemieux played some LW IRL, which reduces the number of tough decisions....

Messier-Gretzky-G. Howe
Lemieux-Beliveau-M. Richard
Bo. Hull-Crosby-Bi. Cook
Lindsay-Morenz-Bossy

Harvey-Orr
Potvin-Bourque
Kelly-Shore

Roy
Plante

Feels wrong leaving off McDavid (want more time in the developing fluid), Nighbor, & Clarke. Also doesn't sit well to leave off L. Robinson.

This is much more fun if you do it by provinces...

I'm not familiar with Bill Cook's game. I think Guy Lafleur would fit nicely on that line with Bobby Hull and Crosby. Can you tell me why you picked Bill Cook for this line? Thanks.

I don't disagree with your point about the deployment of Lindros on the team, but I think we can go too far with the Lindros-didn't-win-as-captain-therefore-he-sucks kind of idea.Winning as captain s more circumstantial than consequential, in most cases.

I also think Lindros was the best player on the ice at the 1996 World Cup.

Yes, he was. And that's not easy in any era.

 

[Namba 17]

Trottier represented the US as well

Trottier is always listed as Canadian.

I think you forgot Bossy.

Bossy is too limited to make all-time Canada team to my taste.
He is just great sniper, who demanded good playmaker and that's it.
Canada had players who could score goals on the same level plus brought smth else to the game.
He would make Can-2 though, I believe

 

[Gerulaitis]

Trottier is always listed as Canadian.


Bossy is too limited to make all-time Canada team to my taste.
He is just great sniper, who demanded good playmaker and that's it.
Canada had players who could score goals on the same level plus brought smth else to the game.
He would make Can-2 though, I believe

Ohhhh no way. Bossy arguably is the best pure goal scorer that Canada ever produced. Basically, he's the Canadian Ovechkin minus longevity

 

[Namba 17]

Ohhhh no way. Bossy arguably is the best pure goal scorer that Canada ever produced.

If by "pure" you mean that Bossy didn't bring anything but goals, than yes. That's what I wrote.
But M. Richard, Bobby Hull, G. Howe, M. Lemieux and Gretzky were better goalscorers than him, plus had smth more in their game.

Basically, he's the Canadian Ovechkin minus longevity

You never saw Ovi then.

 

[JackSlater]

I think Lindros would fit nicely on any sort of "all-time" Team Canada somewhere down in the lineup in more of an energy-type role in which he wouldn't be primarily responsible for scoring. Internationally, Lindros typically performed much better when he was in a secondary role and didn't need to lead the team.

At the World Juniors, his best tournament was in 1991, when he was a draft-eligible player. That gold medal-winning team was of course led by Lindros from an offensive perspective, but importantly had a core group of veteran leaders from the previous year's team (also gold medal-winners) - Rice, Brisebois, Craig, Manderville, Draper- that was able to take some of the pressure off of Lindros from a leadership perspective.

The next year, as a 19-year old, the Canadian team (with Lindros as the captain) finished 6th.

At the senior level, I'd actually argue his best tournament - at least in terms of impact - was an 18-year old at the 1991 Canada Cup. I don't think he had very strong tournaments in either 1996 or 1998 (when he was miscast as team captain). By the time 2002 rolled around with the accumulated injuries, concussions and wear and tear, he was more of a passenger with 1 point in the tournament (vs. Belarus). Unlike some of his contemporaries, Lindros never had that career-defining international tournament at the senior level.

Small thing but Lindros was 18 in 1992 when Canada bombed out, and I think he was known to be sick with something (which is partly why he was brought in late, which Hockey Canada made rules to prevent going forward for a while). I would call Lindros very good in both 1996 and 1998 (1996 especially) but in terms of something like this his role is easy. Lindros, go out and hit people and snap some goals when whichever of Canada's all time great playmakers at centre sets you up. I think it works very easily. He doesn't need to lead the team or even his own line at this level.

Trottier is always listed as Canadian.


Bossy is too limited to make all-time Canada team to my taste.
He is just great sniper, who demanded good playmaker and that's it.
Canada had players who could score goals on the same level plus brought smth else to the game.
He would make Can-2 though, I believe

While I don't think that Bossy is a lock at this level, I don't think it's true (or relevant) that he demanded a good playmaker. Bossy proved himself away from Trottier in the NHL (dominant in 1985 with Sutter as his centre) and was excellent for Canada even when Trottier was not on the team. In terms of chemistry I think he might be the easiest plug and play winger Canada has at this level. Solid defensively, scores goals in a variety of ways, doesn't need to dominate the puck to be effective. To me someone like Lafleur is likely the better player in a vacuum but it's a lot easier to throw Bossy onto any line and be confident that it will work.

 

[MadLuke]

I think he might be the easiest plug and play winger Canada has at this level.

I was going to say, even if you see him as a pure scorer, not sure if that an issue in a team like that (he was a good playmaker).

There just one puck, you need someone to shoot it at some point, one of the best sniper of all-time, that great, a Lafleur feel like less obvious to bring value on a team like that with Orr-Lemieux-Gretzky-McDavid, when you build your power play

I would be tempted to have at least one of the Bossy-Richard-Neely-Espo type and Bossy playoff-intl track record is just flat out excellent.