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

[The Bad Guy*]

The junior tournaments are irrelevant to the Olympics. Pavelski, Backes, Wheeler, Kessel, Stastny are forwards at the 2014 Olympics who weren't involved in international play at the World Juniors.

USA is simply not good on the bigger ice, the results say so. You can cover it up with bad squads, barely lost, etc but the fact is since 1972, USA has never won a medal on big ice at the Olympics.

Canada did not just win Gold at Sochi because they just iced the best team, they got Ralph Krueger for help on international ice, I'm sure that helped a ton for the gold medal result. I wouldn't be surprised to see USA do the same thing at 2018.

Also, the USA vs Canada game at the 2014 Olympics wasn't tight other than the result. USA couldn't get anything done offensively and Canada looked alot better than the Americans. I don't think they were all that close to a gold medal game.

Xokkeu has got you.

He is right, this is indeed the same crap that the euro posters always used to try to pawn off as proof that Canada could not win on big ice.

I recognized it as the cherry picking crap it was then the same way I recognize it as cherry picking crap here today in regards to the U.S.

I am not even sure if you are being serious here anymore really or just having fun a little bit.

 

[YMCMBYOLO]

Wasn't the ice in 2002 hybrid and not international?

 

[Get North]

1980 was on Olympic size ice. You erroneous facts and cherry picking of which results do and don't matter, the data points don't provide a convincing argument on USA hockey's ability on ice size.

2014, 2006, 1998, 1994 all within 20 years of USA doing bad on bigger ice. Was it the roster every single team?

 

[Get North]

Xokkeu has got you.

He is right, this is indeed the same crap that the euro posters always used to try to pawn off as proof that Canada could not win on big ice.

I recognized it as the cherry picking crap it was then the same way I recognize it as cherry picking crap here today in regards to the U.S.

I am not even sure if you are being serious here anymore really or just having fun a little bit.

Canada has just proved that the bigger ice is not impossible to win on but big credit to Ralph Krueger for that gold medal.

USA has not won on the bigger ice for a very long time, what's the excuse? Bigger ice doesn't play a role in all the non medals?

 

[The Bad Guy*]

Canada has just proved that the bigger ice is not impossible to win on but big credit to Ralph Krueger for that gold medal.

USA has not won on the bigger ice for a very long time, what's the excuse? Bigger ice doesn't play a role in all the non medals?

I think the excuse is that they just have not been quite good enough YET to win a medal on big ice, just like Canada was not quite good enough YET to win a medal on big ice until 2014.

Really, that is truly all it is, nothing more. They will have success there at the senior level sooner or later.

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

The US has won u18 u20 and IIHF world medals on big ice. They also own silver in 2002 on a larger ice surface. There are three data points in the Olympics, one freak collapse in 1998, a bad team in 2006 regardless of the ice surface (small ice in 2004 didn't help the same squad not suck) and 2014 where the US had one of the best teams but lost a tight semifinal to the Canadians. So the notion that Americans can't succeed on big ice is a fallacy in the exact same way that it was when people claimed Canada couldn't win in Sochi because of the ice size. All Canada did was have the most dominant performance in professional Olympic hockey history. Why? Because they had the best team, whereas as in 2006 they had a pretty crap one.

Even in 2006 player for player Canada had the strongest roster by a fair margin. I know people like you love to point out Canada's failings, but single game losses happen, even to the best.

If you look at the usa's performance over the last seven best on best tournaments it is undeniable that they are much better on the small ice. That doesn't mean the couldn't win on the big ice, it just makes it less likely.

Junior results are skewed because of the team familiarity that the ntdp provides.

 

[Get North]

I think the excuse is that they just have not been quite good enough YET to win a medal on big ice, just like Canada was not quite good enough YET to win a medal on big ice until 2014.

Really, that is truly all it is, nothing more. They will have success there at the senior level sooner or later.

That's my point though, they aren't good enough on big ice to win a medal and that's also going to put them at a disadvantage in 2018. I was originally discussing how USA will not be as good as they were in 2014 or atleast not good enough to be in a gold medal game.

USA is simply not good on the bigger ice, the results say so. You can cover it up with bad squads, barely lost, etc but the fact is since 1972, USA has never won a medal on big ice at the Olympics.

 

[xxxx]

Wasn't the ice in 2002 hybrid and not international?

It was, but it was rather closer to the international ice than the NHL ice.

 

[Xokkeu]

Even in 2006 player for player Canada had the strongest roster by a fair margin. I know people like you love to point out Canada's failings, but single game losses happen, even to the best.

Naturally, which is of course why I said Canada was the best team in Sochi by a wide margin and I said that Canada's loss in 1998 was a fluke loss and was arguing that their big ice "struggles" were overblown. But whatever helps you sleep at night

 

[Xokkeu]

It was, but it was rather closer to the international ice than the NHL ice.

It was 2 meters shorter than a typical iihf rink but was still 15 feet wider than nhl rinks.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

Has anyone else forgotten what we were all arguing about?

 

[1Gold Standard]

Has anyone else forgotten what we were all arguing about?

Who knows....when do camps open, Sept 15? I'll be taking in a few exhibition games OHL/NHL before the regular sched opens up... have another few weeks of vacation to burn off so will be doing some Ontario travelling between Kitchener-London and hopefully get a chance to check in and say hi to our boy wonder in Erie.

 

[JackSlater]

The junior tournaments are irrelevant to the Olympics. Pavelski, Backes, Wheeler, Kessel, Stastny are forwards at the 2014 Olympics who weren't involved in international play at the World Juniors.

USA is simply not good on the bigger ice, the results say so. You can cover it up with bad squads, barely lost, etc but the fact is since 1972, USA has never won a medal on big ice at the Olympics.

Canada did not just win Gold at Sochi because they just iced the best team, they got Ralph Krueger for help on international ice, I'm sure that helped a ton for the gold medal result. I wouldn't be surprised to see USA do the same thing at 2018.

Also, the USA vs Canada game at the 2014 Olympics wasn't tight other than the result. USA couldn't get anything done offensively and Canada looked alot better than the Americans. I don't think they were all that close to a gold medal game.

I see no reason to claim yet that USA struggles on the bigger ice surface. The sample is only three tournaments at this level (Olympic results prior to 1998 are irrelevant) and paints an uneven picture. The 1998 team was basically a mental debacle by all accounts. The 2006 team was simply bad, and would have needed a lot of luck to contend on any ice surface. The 2014 looked basically as good as any other team and then lost to Canada before losing to the Finns for bronze, which I really do not think they were motivated to win.

Add in that every player who went through their NTDP is quite familiar with the large ice, and I don't think USA is at any significant disadvantage on that surface.

 

[xxxx]

I see no reason to claim yet that USA struggles on the bigger ice surface. The sample is only three tournaments at this level (Olympic results prior to 1998 are irrelevant) and paints an uneven picture. The 1998 team was basically a mental debacle by all accounts. The 2006 team was simply bad, and would have needed a lot of luck to contend on any ice surface. The 2014 looked basically as good as any other team and then lost to Canada before losing to the Finns for bronze, which I really do not think they were motivated to win.

Add in that every player who went through their NTDP is quite familiar with the large ice, and I don't think USA is at any significant disadvantage on that surface.

Very well said.

 

[Yakushev72]

The issue of big ice/small ice is a holdover from the old days when the Soviets and Canada were the feature of international hockey. The Soviet teams were noted for their ability to move the puck at a lightning pace, and the Canadian teams were noted for using a heavy checking formula to slow them down. The body attacks were fairly effective on the smaller rinks because of less space to maneuver, and less effective on the bigger ice where there was more space.

There are no teams today that move the puck in the same way the Soviets did, so the concept of ice size is no longer relevant, unless one team is demonstrably slower and less agile on their skates than others. Since those days, the US, Swedish and Finnish programs have advanced far beyond what they looked like in the '70's and '80's, and you can't say that any of the top 6 or 7 teams are notably slower and worse skaters than the others. Old stereotypes that no longer have any validity should pass away.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

I agree with that.

None of the top teams have any real inability to win on big ice or small ice today. If they lose it is because they were just not good enough,did not prepare well enough or simply came up short against other good teams.

The N.A. teams have the bigger adjustment on big ice for obvious reasons but as Canada proved once and for all this year N.A teams just have to prepare for it and have the players necessary for implementation and they can win on it. How it was EVER a question that they could win on it with their victory in the 72 series and subsequent WHC wins over the years is beyond me.

You used to hear it all the time from European posters here that Canada could not win the olympics on big ice and honestly I don't think many of them actually believed it, it was just a way for them to needle Canadian fans and get on their nerves and they knew it. Those days are now over, that and the ******** can't win away from N.A. drivel they used to spout also for the same reasons. Their everlasting silence on these matters is now assured.God be praised.

And absolutely nothing prevents a European team from winning on small ice in this day and age either. Their players are used to it and the type of game it engenders.

 

[xxxx]

I agree with that.

None of the top teams have any real inability to win on big ice or small ice today. If they lose it is because they were just not good enough,did not prepare well enough or simply came up short against other good teams.

The N.A. teams have the bigger adjustment on big ice for obvious reasons but as Canada proved once and for all this year N.A teams just have to prepare for it and have the players necessary for implementation and they can win on it. How it was EVER a question that they could win on it with their victory in the 72 series and subsequent WHC wins over the years is beyond me.

You used to hear it all the time from European posters here that Canada could not win the olympics on big ice and honestly I don't think many of them actually believed it, it was just a way for them to needle Canadian fans and get on their nerves and they knew it. Those days are now over, that and the ******** can't win away from N.A. drivel they used to spout also for the same reasons. Their everlasting silence on these matters is now assured.God be praised.

And absolutely nothing prevents a European team from winning on small ice in this day and age either. Their players are used to it and the type of game it engenders.

When I think about it, I need to point out the Finnish success on both rinks.

2004 World Cup - silver
2010 Olympics - brozne
-----------------------
2006 olympics - silver
2014 olympics - bronze

No european team is that successful on both rinks - Sweden lost both QF's in 2004 and 2010, as well as Russia. It's true that back in time, the Czechs were good too. They were in the medal-round both in 2004 and 2006, but then they lost both QF's in Vancouver and Sochi.

To a certain poster, I'm not trying to put Sweden down, just having a hockey discussion.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

The U.S. will be a little old in the tooth up front as well. On paper, 2018 should be easier for Canada than 2014.

There's always that "on paper" argument to fall back on.

 

[1Gold Standard]

There's always that "on paper" argument to fall back on.

Yo, Spicoli, drop that slice of double cheese and sausage, call up your buddy Bettman and tell him to get moving on this World Cup thing for 2016..or whenever the hell they plan on having it. I expected this to be put to bed already and the Olympic question settled, in or out for 2018.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

I agree that the World Cup decision will play into whether or not Bettman allows NHL players to go in 2018.

Jeff Spicoli: "What Jefferson was saying was, Hey! You know, we left this England place 'cause it was bogus; so if we don't get some cool rules ourselves - pronto - we'll just be bogus too! Get it?"

 

[Mr Kanadensisk]

I see no reason to claim yet that USA struggles on the bigger ice surface. The sample is only three tournaments at this level (Olympic results prior to 1998 are irrelevant) and paints an uneven picture. The 1998 team was basically a mental debacle by all accounts. The 2006 team was simply bad, and would have needed a lot of luck to contend on any ice surface. The 2014 looked basically as good as any other team and then lost to Canada before losing to the Finns for bronze, which I really do not think they were motivated to win.

Add in that every player who went through their NTDP is quite familiar with the large ice, and I don't think USA is at any significant disadvantage on that surface.

Looking at the 7 Best on Best tournaments since 1996 the USA's record against the top Euro teams (SWE, FIN, CZE, RUS, SVK, SUI) is 8W, 2L, 0T on the small ice and 5W, 7L, 1T on the big ice. Clearly this suggests that the USA is usually better on the small ice, which makes complete sense. Not to say the USA can't win on the big ice, just that their chances are better on the small ice.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

There's always that "on paper" argument to fall back on.

Okay... prove me wrong. Put together 2018 teams and show me the gap will not be greater in 2018 than it was in 2014. Most believe it will.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

Okay... prove me wrong. Put together 2018 teams and show me the gap will not be greater in 2018 than it was in 2014. Most believe it will.

As long as the US keeps turning out goalies like Quick, Howard and Bishop along with defenseman like Trouba and Jones the US will be a threat to medal. Forwards like Tuch and Eichel, i'm good with where the US will be at the WCH or Olympics.

I agree with Xokkeu, in that there was talk after the 2010 games of the US not being able to ice a good team. Of course the naysayers were wrong.

"long in the tooth" ? How long has Selänne played ? That argument is a moot point.

PS. Oh by the way, pretty funny of you to make fun of someone for trolling. You jump on every thread to talk about Canadian Hockey

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

As long as the US keeps turning out goalies like Quick, Howard and Bishop along with defenseman like Trouba and Jones the US will be a threat to medal. Forwards like Tuch and Eichel, i'm good with where the US will be at the WCH or Olympics.

I agree with Xokkeu, in that there was talk after the 2010 games of the US not being able to ice a good team. Of course the naysayers were wrong.

"long in the tooth" ? How long has Selänne played ? That argument is a moot point.

PS. Oh by the way, pretty funny of you to make fun of someone for trolling. You jump on every thread to talk about Canadian Hockey

First, I never said the U.S. wouldn't be a threat to medal. I said the distance between Canada and every other team would be greater in 2018 than it was in 2014.

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.

Third, who have I ever made fun of (for trolling or anything else)? I have a lot of faults in life but making fun of people is not one of them.

Last, I started this thread so my participating in it should be a given.

 

[Yakushev72]

Looking at the 7 Best on Best tournaments since 1996 the USA's record against the top Euro teams (SWE, FIN, CZE, RUS, SVK, SUI) is 8W, 2L, 0T on the small ice and 5W, 7L, 1T on the big ice. Clearly this suggests that the USA is usually better on the small ice, which makes complete sense. Not to say the USA can't win on the big ice, just that their chances are better on the small ice.

Sorry, but on the face of it, this is a meaningless and ridiculous statistical analysis. Its like saying that the NY Rangers are more likely to win when playing in a city that has a population of more than 8 million, because they win more home games than road games. There is no correlation - nothing that argues that there is a reason for drawing your conclusion. If you can show that Americans are genetically excluded from being fast skaters, then you could make a supportable argument to the effect that they are more likely to lose if they are playing on a bigger ice surface. Otherwise, it makes no sense as far as I can tell.