Olympics: Enjoy it, Canadian fans, while we can...

[Xokkeu]

What about 1998?

As somebody said, something weird was going on. Sure some guys like Hatcher and Leclair were awful choices for a big ice sheet, but you're telling me that the big ice confused and confounded great skaters like Schneider, Leetch, Modano etc? nearly the same exact team came back and got silver in 2002.

USA hockey has completely flipped the style script though. The current generation of American players are all very mobile and quick. Whereas that golden generation of the 90s was a lot slower. Still, that doesn't explain why the most talented American team ever basically folded like a house of cards in japan.

I think if the team had struggled badly in Sochi and been outclassed I would have started to believe the hype, but as it is the 2006 squad just wasn't good and 1998 looks more like an aberration.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

...the most talented American team ever...

Yup.

What amazed me about that team: the confidence it had. It was the only U.S. team I have ever seen who believed they were better than Canada. Perhaps it was bravado, perhaps it was Brett Hull, but that team went into the 1996 World Cup expecting to beat Canada - and it did, 3 out of 4 times. I have not seen that confidence before or since. Not sure if that is because the U.S. is not as good (as Xokkeu said, that was the best U.S. team ever) or because Canada improved in a big way. Perhaps both.

 

[Yakushev72]

I think it has more to do with teams and especially coaches being familiar with the systems and style of play that work best on each size of ice surface. By the way over the same period Canada's record vs those euro teams on the big ice is 5W 6L 1T vs 11W 0L 0T on the small ice. It is undeniable that the NA teams are better on the smaller ice size.

If contesting teams are so closely matched in talent, skill and ability that tactics and style decide a match, then the dimensions of the rink are irrelevant in any event.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

Again, feel free to prove me wrong. Please put together a 2018 team, other than Canada, that will be better than they were in 2014. I look forward to seeing it.

Second, for every player like Selänne, there are 10 players that drop off like a stone after the age of 30.

Go ahead and tell me which US players, over 30 , that won't perform well in 2018. While your at it, could look in your crystal ball and tell me which ponies won't race well this Friday at Del Mar race track. I have to start getting my picks together.

You don't know how any player over 30 will perform at any upcoming WHC or Olympics.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

Go ahead and tell me which US players, over 30 , that won't perform well in 2018. While your at it, could look in your crystal ball and tell me which ponies won't race well this Friday at Del Mar race track. I have to start getting my picks together.

You don't know how any player over 30 will perform at any upcoming WHC or Olympics.

I never said they won't perform well. I said they won't be as good as they are now and there are no players, of equal quality, to make up the loss. I'll give you two off the top of my head...

Zach Parise has gone from a point+ per game player before the 2010 Olympics to a .8 points per game player in recent years. Given how hard he plays the game, I expect your Captain to continue dropping off.

Ryan Kesler went from a .9 points / game player in 2010 to .55 points / game player last year. Again, I believe it will continue.

I expect a drop from David Backes, Dustin Brown, Joe Pavelski and Paul Stastny as well. I also don't believe Phil Kessel will ever be as good as he was this year - he's near the peak of his physical abilities. I guess we will see.

As for you...

People keep telling me I am wrong (about countries other than Canada taking a step back in 2018) but no one ever provides a team. I'm still waiting for yours.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

I am NOT saying the U.S. will NOT be a good team in Korea. I believe, along with Sweden, they will be the 2nd and 3rd best teams in 2018. The U.S. will be equally good in goal and better on defense. Up front, however, they may be offensively challenged on the big ice. As I have said many times, the U.S. has not had a strong offensive draft since 2007. That's a long time and I believe it will take its toll.

Time will tell but if I had a choice between the 100% healthy (the only team that was), physically peaking U.S. team of 2014 or an aging, (most likely) less healthy 2018 U.S. team, well, it's not much of a choice at all.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

So you predicted Parise numbers would drop but it had nothing to do with Canada's victory over the US. Kessel's numbers will drop along with other players. Your predictor is because of age and they are on the downside of their careers.

All this and Canada still only won 1-0. Keep up the great work as your predictor of a hug 5-0 white wash that didn't happen. Too bad you won't know which young top US NHL producers in the time from next year to 2018. No one has the US lineup for 2018 so don't pretend too.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

So you predicted Parise numbers would drop but it had nothing to do with Canada's victory over the US. Kessel's numbers will drop along with other players. Your predictor is because of age and they are on the downside of their careers..

I never said it had anything to do with Canada. I said their battle will be with time and a lack of quality replacements. Time, of course, will affect all teams negatively. Fortunately for Canada, unlike the U.S., Russia and Sweden, we have ample replacements. Add those replacements to a healthy Stamkos/Tavares and Canada will be even better in 2018.

All this and Canada still only won 1-0. Keep up the great work as your predictor of a hug 5-0 white wash that didn't happen. Too bad you won't know which young top US NHL producers in the time from next year to 2018. No one has the US lineup for 2018 so don't pretend too.

I have no idea how to answer this but I will try...

I have taken the U.S. 2014 line up, added father time, subtracted possible injuries and added possible replacement.
The answer was a negative number.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

If contesting teams are so closely matched in talent, skill and ability that tactics and style decide a match, then the dimensions of the rink are irrelevant in any event.

At the men's level systems and tactics are a massive component of the game. Not sure how much league hockey you watch but every year there are numerous upsets in the playoffs where less talented teams succeed because they find a system that works.

 

[Xokkeu]

I am NOT saying the U.S. will NOT be a good team in Korea. I believe, along with Sweden, they will be the 2nd and 3rd best teams in 2018. The U.S. will be equally good in goal and better on defense. Up front, however, they may be offensively challenged on the big ice. As I have said many times, the U.S. has not had a strong offensive draft since 2007. That's a long time and I believe it will take its toll.

Time will tell but if I had a choice between the 100% healthy (the only team that was), physically peaking U.S. team of 2014 or an aging, (most likely) less healthy 2018 U.S. team, well, it's not much of a choice at all.

Hmmmm, so you have already figured out that no good US players will appear from recent drafts?

 

[Get North]

Hmmmm, so you have already figured out that no good US players will appear from recent drafts?

Well from 2010 draft to around the 2015 draft we can kind of see who's going to be a good NHL player. If '09 draftees haven't made the 2014 team I doubt they'll make the 2018 team. So some Americans who might have a chance at the 2018 team who were drafted by 2010 or later are:

Bennett, Bjugstad, Coyle from 2010, Saad from 2011, Galchenyuk from 2012, ?? from 2013, Larkin, Tuch, Milano, Schmaltz from 2014, Eichel, Conner, White from 2015?

Doesn't look like much help from what we can see so far unless Galchenyuk lifts his game, Eichel becomes a great player by 2018, the 2014s can help a bit, Saad keeps improving.

There's more subtraction than adding to the American's forward group I think. Will Backes, Kesler, Callahan, Brown be able to keep their physical game going until their mid 30s? Pavelski and Parise will be 34 in 2018, we should be expecting a decline pretty soon from them.

 

[Xokkeu]

Well from 2010 draft to around the 2015 draft we can kind of see who's going to be a good NHL player. If '09 draftees haven't made the 2014 team I doubt they'll make the 2018 team. So some Americans who might have a chance at the 2018 team who were drafted by 2010 or later are:

Bennett, Bjugstad, Coyle from 2010, Saad from 2011, Galchenyuk from 2012, ?? from 2013, Larkin, Tuch, Milano, Schmaltz from 2014, Eichel, Conner, White from 2015?

Doesn't look like much help from what we can see so far unless Galchenyuk lifts his game, Eichel becomes a great player by 2018, the 2014s can help a bit, Saad keeps improving.

There's more subtraction than adding to the American's forward group I think. Will Backes, Kesler, Callahan, Brown be able to keep their physical game going until their mid 30s? Pavelski and Parise will be 34 in 2018, we should be expecting a decline pretty soon from them.

You're judging players just drafted. It would be a fine assumption if we knew that players drafted outside of the top 10 never turn out to be any good. Of course we know that's not at all true which is why players like Derek Stepan, Joe Pavelski, David Backes, Ryan Malone, Dustin Brown, Ryan Callahan, Justin Faulk, Paul Stastny all came out of the second round or later to be Olympians and players like Oshie, Pacioretty, Kesler and Parise were all later half first rounders.

So you are all free to think you can accurately predict that none of Larkin, Tuch, Milano, McCarron, Hartman, Compher, Fasching, Erne, Bailey, Samuelsson, Kerdiles etc will all suck because of their scouting projections and draft position, but history shows that's not true.

 

[Get North]

You're judging players just drafted. It would be a fine assumption if we knew that players drafted outside of the top 10 never turn out to be any good. Of course we know that's not at all true which is why players like Derek Stepan, Joe Pavelski, David Backes, Ryan Malone, Dustin Brown, Ryan Callahan, Justin Faulk, Paul Stastny all came out of the second round or later to be Olympians and players like Oshie, Pacioretty, Kesler and Parise were all later half first rounders.

So you are all free to think you can accurately predict that none of Larkin, Tuch, Milano, McCarron, Hartman, Compher, Fasching, Erne, Bailey, Samuelsson, Kerdiles etc will all suck because of their scouting projections and draft position, but history shows that's not true.

That's why I said from what from what we can see so far.

 

[Xokkeu]

That's why I said from what from what we can see so far.

What I see is a team with two elite scorers, Kane and Kessel who will be 29 and 30 and probably still close to peak form. Solid depth players that fill out the roster like returners Stepan, Pacioretty, van Riemsdyk, Craig Smith, Okposo, Saad. Which is pretty much exactly how the 2010 and 2014 teams were constructed. If you add another elite scorer like Eichel, plus a couple of late bloomers that always pop up out of the second round, you essentially have the same forward skill as before. If we hit the development jackpot and guys like Galchenyuk, Milano, Connor and White all hit, then the 2018 could be even better than 2014. Most likely though it's looking like not much of a deviation. The hypothetical US forward squad in 2018 and even 2016 will, like 2010 and 2014, rely on speed, athleticism, grit and just enough skill.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

Hmmmm, so you have already figured out that no good US players will appear from recent drafts?

You're judging players just drafted. It would be a fine assumption if we knew that players drafted outside of the top 10 never turn out to be any good. Of course we know that's not at all true which is why players like Derek Stepan, Joe Pavelski, David Backes, Ryan Malone, Dustin Brown, Ryan Callahan, Justin Faulk, Paul Stastny all came out of the second round or later to be Olympians and players like Oshie, Pacioretty, Kesler and Parise were all later half first rounders.

So you are all free to think you can accurately predict that none of Larkin, Tuch, Milano, McCarron, Hartman, Compher, Fasching, Erne, Bailey, Samuelsson, Kerdiles etc will all suck because of their scouting projections and draft position, but history shows that's not true.

No one knows, of course. Especially not me. I just doubt many players from the U.S.'s recent drafts will play a big part on a 2018 team. If they do, it might be sign of desperation.

Well from 2010 draft to around the 2015 draft we can kind of see who's going to be a good NHL player. If '09 draftees haven't made the 2014 team I doubt they'll make the 2018 team. So some Americans who might have a chance at the 2018 team who were drafted by 2010 or later are:

Bennett, Bjugstad, Coyle from 2010, Saad from 2011, Galchenyuk from 2012, ?? from 2013, Larkin, Tuch, Milano, Schmaltz from 2014, Eichel, Conner, White from 2015?

Doesn't look like much help from what we can see so far unless Galchenyuk lifts his game, Eichel becomes a great player by 2018, the 2014s can help a bit, Saad keeps improving.

There's more subtraction than adding to the American's forward group I think. Will Backes, Kesler, Callahan, Brown be able to keep their physical game going until their mid 30s? Pavelski and Parise will be 34 in 2018, we should be expecting a decline pretty soon from them.

You did a very good job of arguing my point, my friend. I couldn't have done it better myself. Well done.

What I see is a team with two elite scorers, Kane and Kessel who will be 29 and 30 and probably still close to peak form. Solid depth players that fill out the roster like returners Stepan, Pacioretty, van Riemsdyk, Craig Smith, Okposo, Saad. Which is pretty much exactly how the 2010 and 2014 teams were constructed. If you add another elite scorer like Eichel, plus a couple of late bloomers that always pop up out of the second round, you essentially have the same forward skill as before. If we hit the development jackpot and guys like Galchenyuk, Milano, Connor and White all hit, then the 2018 could be even better than 2014. Most likely though it's looking like not much of a deviation. The hypothetical US forward squad in 2018 and even 2016 will, like 2010 and 2014, rely on speed, athleticism, grit and just enough skill.

I don't know, Xokkeu. You make a good argument but 2018 still looks weaker than both 2010 and 2014 to me. Maybe I will be wrong and Korea will be a step up or at least a side-step. I don't see it, tho.

Again, the U.S. will not be a weak team. They are too talented to be a bad team. I just think 2018 will be a step back just like 2004 and 2006. I doubt the 2018 team will finish below 4th and could very likely medal. Maybe even Gold.

**

I believe the 2016 team, if there is a World Cup, will be almost the exact same team as Sochi - adding Trouba, Jones and Saad. On the small ice they will excel and I give them a 50% chance of playing in the GMG - maybe more. In fact, on the small ice, I think a Canada/U.S. finals is all but guaranteed.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

I hope we see a NHL/Olympics forever and the World Cup never rears its ugly head again. Dropping the Olympics and adding a World Cup every 4 years will be like dating the ugly sister.

 

[Xokkeu]

No one knows, of course. Especially not me. I just doubt many players from the U.S.'s recent drafts will play a big part on a 2018 team. If they do, it might be sign of desperation.



You did a very good job of arguing my point, my friend. I couldn't have done it better myself. Well done.



I don't know, Xokkeu. You make a good argument but 2018 still looks weaker than both 2010 and 2014 to me. Maybe I will be wrong and Korea will be a step up or at least a side-step. I don't see it, tho.

Again, the U.S. will not be a weak team. They are too talented to be a bad team. I just think 2018 will be a step back just like 2004 and 2006. I doubt the 2018 team will finish below 4th and could very likely medal. Maybe even Gold.

**

I believe the 2016 team, if there is a World Cup, will be almost the exact same team as Sochi - adding Trouba, Jones and Saad. On the small ice they will excel and I give them a 50% chance of playing in the GMG - maybe more. In fact, on the small ice, I think a Canada/U.S. finals is all but guaranteed.

2018 isn't going to be remotely close to 2006. First of all the US is going to have about three elite goalies, Schneider, Quick and Gibson. As opposed to Robert Esche, Rick DiPietro and John Grahame. There won't be past their prime 44 year old Chris Chelios, 34 year old immobile Derian Hatcher, 37 year old Schneider. The only defenders under 30 were Jordan Leopold and John Liles.

That comparison isn't even close, forward group regardless.

 

[YMCMBYOLO]

^ It's crazy to think how far USA have come.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

2018 isn't going to be remotely close to 2006. First of all the US is going to have about three elite goalies, Schneider, Quick and Gibson. As opposed to Robert Esche, Rick DiPietro and John Grahame. There won't be past their prime 44 year old Chris Chelios, 34 year old immobile Derian Hatcher, 37 year old Schneider. The only defenders under 30 were Jordan Leopold and John Liles.

That comparison isn't even close, forward group regardless.

I agree and I didn't mean it that way. I just meant 2004/2006 was a step back after 1996 and 2002 (the greatest generation of U.S. players) and 2018 might be a step back after 2010 and 2014. My bad.

^ It's crazy to think how far USA have come.

The 2003 - 2007 drafts were very strong for the U.S. and those drafts all but rebuilt the team.

 

[Xokkeu]

^ It's crazy to think how far USA have come.

2004 and 2006 were just lulls in between a golden generation and a new generation of NTDP generated players. The real impressive growth is from the 1980s where there were hardly any American players in the NHL to 1996 when they won the World Cup.

 

[YMCMBYOLO]

2004 and 2006 were just lulls in between a golden generation and a new generation of NTDP generated players. The real impressive growth is from the 1980s where there were hardly any American players in the NHL to 1996 when they won the World Cup.

I wonder how good the USA would be if they hadn't won gold at the 1980 Olympics..

 

[Xokkeu]

I wonder how good the USA would be if they hadn't won gold at the 1980 Olympics..

There's obviously no easy answer obviously. It's a good story to say that the 1980 win inspired the entire generation of Modano, Tkachuk etc, but the stats sort of seem to show an already steadily growing American presence in the NHL. In the 1960s the percentage of Americans was solidly around 1-3%. It had actually dropped from the 1920s and 30s when occasionally on certain years you could see 5-9%. Throughout the 1970s the numbers steadily increased year to year, so by the late seventies you were seeing about 7% and by 1980, 10% of NHL players were American. From there the numbers kept growing, jumping year by year to 17% by 1990. This numbers stayed relatively steady until around 2006 when the numbers rose quickly to the current 25%.

I'd honestly venture that the 1967 expansion of the NHL was a bigger factor than the 1980 Olympic win.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

I wonder how good the USA would be if they hadn't won gold at the 1980 Olympics..

With the globalization of sports, I think the American progression in hockey was inevitable. Without 1980, I doubt you would have seen the crazy spike in the mid-90's. That 1996 team was better than Team Canada and they knew it.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

The 90's were a crazy time for hockey. So many countries were peaking in terms of talent.

In 1991, many were surprised the U.S. made the final against Canada - no one expected the Russians to have fallen so far or the Americans to be so good. Having said that, we crushed them in 2 games.

In 1996, the Americans took it to / shocked Canada. So much so that we ended up building the 1998 team to beat them.

In 1998, we beat the U.S. (handily) but ran into the Czechs Golden Generation.

The Swede and Fins were also icing their greatest players.

In hindsight tho, 1996 and 1998 were one of the best thing that ever happened to Canadian hockey and lead to multi-year domination. Again, if someone said in 1998 that Canada would dominate hockey for such a long period, people would have said you were nuts.

 

[Xokkeu]

The 90's were a crazy time for hockey...

In 1991, many were surprised the U.S. made the final against Canada - no one expected the Russians to have fallen so far or the Americans to be so good. Having said that, we crushed them in 2 games.

In 1996, the Americans took it to / shocked Canada. So much so that we ended up building the 1998 team to beat them.

In 1998, we beat the U.S. (handily) but couldn't beat the Czechs.

In hindsight tho, 1996 and 1998 were one of the best thing that ever happened to Canadian hockey and lead to multi-year domination. Again, if someone said in 1998 that Canada would dominate hockey for such a long period, people would have said you were nuts.

You and everybody but Belarus