How Would Canadas Second Team Do vs Non Usa Canada Competition

[Summer Rose]

It’s not like the US has had that many bad finishes, but when they’re bad, they’re BAD. Looking at you 2014 Olympic Team and 2016 World Cup.

They just always come short against Canada in the big ones (2002, 2010, 2025)

I agree with you about the 2016 World Cup, but the selectors made some very questionable decisions. Remember when Phil Kessel made that hilarious tweet during one of the games about sitting at home with his dog? The existence of team North America definitely hurt us too. It hurt Canada too, but we’re not deep enough on talent to give up our U23 players and get away with it like Canada can.

I wouldn’t say 2014 was that bad. Not necessarily good, but not bad either. We got past Russia in a shootout by spamming TJ Oshie, then got edged out by Canada where the only goal of the game was a somewhat flukey deflection. However, our performance (or more accurately, lack thereof) in the bronze medal game against Finland was nothing short of embarrassing.

You could argue that 2006 was worse based on where we got eliminated. The quarterfinal was a one-goal game against Finland, though it was 4-2 after two periods so we kind of dug ourselves into a hole before clawing one back. Finland eventually went on to shut out Russia and give Sweden a tight game for the gold medal.

In 2002 I was new to hockey so I don’t remember much about it. Just hanging on by a thread to get past Russia and then coming up short against Canada for gold, but if my memory serves me well, Canada pretty much outclassed us more or less from start to finish in the gold medal game.

1998 I didn’t watch so I have no comment, then 2018 and 2022 lacked NHL players entirely and like I said about the 2016 World Cup, we don’t have enough depth of talent to get away with it. We had to bring in an aging Brian Gionta who wasn’t even playing anywhere that season. As for the 2004 World Cup, I missed a lot of the games. I remember the Canada-Finland game being a banger and that’s about it.

That is my attempt to defend the US. A couple excuses and not a very good defense, I’ll admit, which is a is a reasonable assessment of the senior men’s team: all in all, we don’t have a large amount of depth like Canada does, and we like to come up short in big games.

 

[NVious]

So the Czech eliminating Canada in back to back Quarter finals tells you what then?

Back to the big boys... USA hasn't won a senior event since 1996. They actually have to win something to be declared the best.

That Canada can lose if they f*** around with their selections like this year. What do the 4 golds for USA/4 for Canada/2 for Finland and 0 for everyone else tell you? Nothing?

I never said they were the best. You can look at the awards won and award trends:

1 Vezina 84-05
5 Vezinas 05-25 (gonna be 6 this year)

2 Norris 84-05
2 Norris 05-25 (good chance for 3 this year)

1 Rocket 84-05
3 Rockets 05-25

1 Smythe 84-05
3 Smythes 05-25

0 Harts 84-05
2 Harts 05-25

It's pretty clear America has taken a massive step forward and nobody's gonna catch them, Czech/Sweden/Finland are too small of countries and Russia has had their chance. America's population is going to continue to increase massively and Hockey will only get more popular.

America had a good foundation in Hockey markets, then Gretzky created the next boom, then expansion laid the groundworks in many different places and we're now starting to see the fruits. Nothing like that exists in other countries and my prognostication is truly the most basic when you factor in what I said, nothing at all extraordinary required, just population boom and popularity boom coupled with the increased success of the USA Hockey in general.

 

[Czechboy]

That Canada can lose if they f*** around with their selections like this year. What do the 4 golds for USA/4 for Canada/2 for Finland and 0 for everyone else tell you? Nothing?

So they can send 2 teams but if they send the wrong selection they will lose? Strange. Imagine losing in quarters and posting about how 2 of your teams could beat everyone but America.

My answer is nothing to both btw. I don't think the Czechs winning 2 quarters in a row means much at all. It's nice and encouraging for sure but you need NHL players to win best on bests. Of the 3 nations winning those golds, only one has won a best on best in the 2000's. Maybe the next several best on bests are dominated by Finland, Canada and USA but I'll say I'm skeptical.

The rest of your arguments about international hockey are talking about NHL stats and NHL awards. I'm talking international hockey and you are talking all star NHL teams.

I agree it's a great program with great players but when the best on bests happen it isn't always Canada vs USA. The medal table from the 5 best on bests (20 years of data) had a very wide medal table. Canada was on top but even they didn't medal twice in 5 tournaments. International hockey always has suprises. Always has and always will. Not a 2 nation sport by any means. Canada is absolutely on top. Even if they lose in 2026 they will be on top. USA wants to win 2026 and 2028 then we can talk. By 'win' I mean the Olympic Gold and World Cup Gold. Not the U18's, U20's and Vezinas.

To put simply if the finals of those next 2 are Canada/US while the rest of the world fights for Bronze, then I'll concede.

 

[Lumber]

In short tournaments anything can happen. Getting knocked out in the 1/4 final looks bad in the final placement but it's irrelevant in many ways. A hot goalie, a couple of injuries, the bounce of a puck, a bad call can make all the difference which is why you play a best of 7 in the NHL (well money too lol). On another matter I don't think that anyone can argue that the most recent Canadian junior team was poorly selected and poorly coached. What does it prove, exactly that. Other teams at the tournament played better hockey.

 

[NVious]

So they can send 2 teams but if they send the wrong selection they will lose? Strange. Imagine losing in quarters and posting about how 2 of your teams could beat everyone but America.

My answer is nothing to both btw. I don't think the Czechs winning 2 quarters in a row means much at all. It's nice and encouraging for sure but you need NHL players to win best on bests. Of the 3 nations winning those golds, only one has won a best on best in the 2000's. Maybe the next several best on bests are dominated by Finland, Canada and USA but I'll say I'm skeptical.

The rest of your arguments about international hockey are talking about NHL stats and NHL awards. I'm talking international hockey and you are talking all star NHL teams.

I agree it's a great program with great players but when the best on bests happen it isn't always Canada vs USA. The medal table from the 5 best on bests (20 years of data) had a very wide medal table. Canada was on top but even they didn't medal twice in 5 tournaments. International hockey always has suprises. Always has and always will. Not a 2 nation sport by any means. Canada is absolutely on top. Even if they lose in 2026 they will be on top. USA wants to win 2026 and 2028 then we can talk. By 'win' I mean the Olympic Gold and World Cup Gold. Not the U18's, U20's and Vezinas.

To put simply if the finals of those next 2 are Canada/US while the rest of the world fights for Bronze, then I'll concede.

Now the world juniors=men's level lol, Canada could've literally had Bedard and Celebrini on this team, do you think that would've influenced the result? Strange you bring up 2 bad results for Canada but ignore their good results and then think that taking 2 bad results from a non perfect junior team is analogous to the men's team.

Yeah that makes sense, nothing to say because if you did want to draw a conclusion, it's not looking good for the rest of the world. You can be skeptical all you like, but that's just a word. The facts are America has objectively reached new heights in the world juniors, Americans going from 2% of NHL in 1970 to 15% 1990 to 28% now and having American top players winning more awards or winning awards never won before. Meanwhile other countries are handicapped by way lower population and nothing new in the Hockey scene, stagnation or even regression in some cases (Russia % of NHL has declined, Czech Republic, Slovakia as well).

Yeah it has surprises because it's one game, I'm talking about the overall result and trajectory. Canada and the US have pulled away from everyone and this is likely to continue. The infrastructure, population and established culture dictate this and it's shown in the awards, world juniors and recent best on best results.

Going back to the subject at hand, as I said and the point still stands:

If other countries with worse top end talent and worse depth can give Canada/US games, why wouldn't a 2nd Canadian team with worse top end talent but better depth be able to give them games?

 

[Czechboy]

In short tournaments anything can happen. Getting knocked out in the 1/4 final looks bad in the final placement but it's irrelevant in many ways. A hot goalie, a couple of injuries, the bounce of a puck, a bad call can make all the difference which is why you play a best of 7 in the NHL (well money too lol). On another matter I don't think that anyone can argue that the most recent Canadian junior team was poorly selected and poorly coached. What does it prove, exactly that. Other teams at the tournament played better hockey.

Nothing. Which was exactly my point. But letting me know the USA has won 4 of 10 is just as irrelevant.

 

[NVious]

Nothing. Which was exactly my point. But letting me know the USA has won 4 of 10 is just as irrelevant.

No it's not irrelevant lmfao, the world juniors is where the best junior players go generally minus the best 1-2 Canadians and the occasional US/non US player.

It is a great litmus test for the health of a country's Hockey program, the fact that the last 10 years it's been USA and Canada and the occasional Fin win says a lot. The rest of the world has fallen behind and it's not like Non North Americans are setting the NHL on fire either.

By all metrics:
Population
Sport popularity and future popularity
Sport infrastructure and future infrastructure
% of NHL
Winners of major awards
World Juniors

It's showing a two horse race and again my point stands about Canadas second team.

 

[Czechboy]

No it's not irrelevant lmfao, the world juniors is where the best junior players go generally minus the best 1-2 Canadians and the occasional US/non US player.

It is a great litmus test for the health of a country's Hockey program, the fact that the last 10 years it's been USA and Canada and the occasional Fin win says a lot. The rest of the world has fallen behind and it's not like Non North Americans are setting the NHL on fire either.

By all metrics:
Population
Sport popularity and future popularity
Sport infrastructure and future infrastructure
% of NHL
Winners of major awards
World Juniors

It's showing a two horse race and again my point stands about Canadas second team.

Great.. us and Canada are top two. Can you list all the us gold medals for me?

 

[NVious]

Great.. us and Canada are top two. Can you list all the us gold medals for me?

Good gotcha, low effort tier stuff.

Canada and US aren't top tier, can you tell me why in the past 10 years 1 other country has won at the world juniors?

 

[Czechboy]

Good gotcha, low effort tier stuff.

Canada and US aren't top tier, can you tell me why in the past 10 years 1 other country has won at the world juniors?

You keep talking about World Jr.s on a Senior thread.

 

[NVious]

You keep talking about World Jr.s on a Senior thread.

Bro you're the worst cherry picker I seen on here, you literally have zero argument about anything.

"I feel like it's not like that"
"I doubt this"

Literally zero reasoning. Sorry, it's over for other countries. You can pretend it's 20-30-40 years ago if you want though.

 

[Czechboy]

Bro you're the worst cherry picker I seen on here, you literally have zero argument about anything.

"I feel like it's not like that"
"I doubt this"

Literally zero reasoning. Sorry, it's over for other countries. You can pretend it's 20-30-40 years ago if you want though.

You - US is the second best nation in the world
Me - can you name one medal their men have won?
You - their 17 year olds and 18 year olds win all the time
Me - can you name an adult competition they won?
You - you are cherry picking

 

[NVious]

You - US is the second best nation in the world
Me - can you name one medal their men have won?
You - their 17 year olds and 18 year olds win all the time
Me - can you name an adult competition they won?
You - you are cherry picking

Why do they need to win to be the 2nd best lmfao?

Ok here is proof they are second best:
They came 2nd in 2010
They came 2nd in Four Nations faceoff

Your arguments are so bad you don't even know what you're arguing again.

All of it started because you couldn't accept the fact that Canada's B team would be competitive if not beating non US/Canada teams.

Again, if Canada/US can get close games or even get beaten by teams with worse depth/worse top end players (everyone else), why can't Canada's team which has worse top end talent but better depth beat them?

 

[Czechboy]

Why do they need to win to be the 2nd

Great list all the silver medals.... then the bronze ones at the adult level.

I haven't changed my argument once.. in International Hockey, there is no undisputed top number 2 or a undisputed 2. Canada is on top no doubt. That is the undisputed 1.

ZERO argument for 2. No amount of NHL awards changes that. No amount of U20 awards changes that.

Also, if you want to quote what I said, then quote what I said! No need to make things up.

 

[NVious]

Great list all the silver medals.... then the bronze ones at the adult level.

I haven't changed my argument once.. in International Hockey, there is no undisputed top number 2 or a undisputed 2. Canada is on top no doubt. That is the undisputed 1.

ZERO argument for 2. No amount of NHL awards changes that. No amount of U20 awards changes that.

Also, if you want to quote what I said, then quote what I said! No need to make things up.

Right because 50 years ago has so much to do with right now and going forward.

But I get it, a 2nd 15 years ago, 2nd this year means nothing. More evidence for you to ignore. Here's another good one

"AMERICA GOING FROM 2% to 28% AND BEING A CLEAR #2 MEANS NOTHING JUST LIKE THEIR SILVERS RECENTLY WHICH ALSO MEANS NOTHING"

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

That's the reality, you can laugh all you want, but Canada is the GOAT by far. USA is the only team that has a chance of equaling/maybe overtaking them.

Countries 1/4 the size or a bigger country like Russia would've done it already if they could've, they didn't and they won't. America has 350+ million people and Hockey popularity is growing.

World Juniors tell the tale, last 10 years 4-4 USA Canada and 2 for Finland. If other countries stood a chance the juniors would show that, they don't and they haven't been showing that.

The reason you gave for Russia not being able to do it is the same reason the states won't.

The USA has a popu almost 10X the size of Canada.

If they could do it they would have by now.

They can't and never will.

 

[NVious]

The reason you gave for Russia not being able to do it is the same reason the states won't.

The USA has a popu almost 10X the size of Canada.

If they could do it they would have by now.

They can't and never will.

What you're saying is like saying "Car A is bad, therefore Car B is also bad," the USA and Russia are independent countries that have nothing to do with one another.

1.Russia stagnated at 140 million people for nearly 50 years now
America will likely hit 400+ million

2.There is no NHL infrastructure in Russia, America has more NHL infrastructure than Canada

3.Russia compared to US is a poor country, just like Canada is a more expensive place to live than USA

4.The USA have already progressed massively in the last 50 years and as a whole nearly caught Canada

Saying something like "if it didn't happen already it won't," is just the most ahistorical thing anybody could ever say about anything. First time events happen all the time everywhere, the past isn't a guarantee.

Look at society, stop and think, I bet you could go back 50-100 years and you'd have tens if not hundreds of predictions of things seen as "normal" or "inconsequential" today that would've been seen as an impossibility.

The only constant is change and considering USA's rise of being within 1 goal on 1 shot away from beating Canada, it's definitely not an impossibility they could pass Canada.

 

[Summer Rose]

What you're saying is like saying "Car A is bad, therefore Car B is also bad," the USA and Russia are independent countries that have nothing to do with one another.

1.Russia stagnated at 140 million people for nearly 50 years now
America will likely hit 400+ million

2.There is no NHL infrastructure in Russia, America has more NHL infrastructure than Canada

3.Russia compared to US is a poor country, just like Canada is a more expensive place to live than USA

4.The USA have already progressed massively in the last 50 years and as a whole nearly caught Canada

Saying something like "if it didn't happen already it won't," is just the most ahistorical thing anybody could ever say about anything. First time events happen all the time everywhere, the past isn't a guarantee.

Look at society, stop and think, I bet you could go back 50-100 years and you'd have tens if not hundreds of predictions of things seen as "normal" or "inconsequential" today that would've been seen as an impossibility.

The only constant is change and considering USA's rise of being within 1 goal on 1 shot away from beating Canada, it's definitely not an impossibility they could pass Canada.

We could pass Canada, or we couldn't. Like I've said many times in other threads, the best we should realistically hope for is to catch up to Canada, not pull ahead of them. While there's an argument to be made that we've already done that in the form of being competitive with them, we have yet to actually win a senior gold since 1996, so I'm not sure about that one when we're 0 for 3 in actually beating them in a final. If we actually beat them out in one senior tournament for gold, that would be concrete evidence that we've caught up to them - not passed them. I think what it would be take to fairly say that we've actually "passed them" is something like us getting gold in at least 3 out of the next 5 tournaments and them not getting the other 2. It would not be fair to say that we're "ahead" if we get gold in 2026, because Canada could very well just turn around and get gold in 2028 or 2030.

If we do win gold in 2026, however, you just know that a lot of American fans are going to say something like "hey, we're ahead of Canada now!" I would respond to them "hold your horses, it's just one tournament win, let's not get ahead of yourselves" which will fall on deaf ears as we collectively beat our chests.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

I think Czechs could beat them.

 

[Ozakar]

Hyman-Scheifele-Wilson
Johnson-Duchene-Strome
PLD-Suzuki-Celebrini
Kyrou-Thomas-Barzal

Bouchard-Tanev
Hamilton-Ekblad
Dobson-Weegar

Thompson
Blackwood
Kuemper

Probably missed some names as I just threw this together quick so you can play around with the roster, but I think most of those guys are on it, how would they do vs everybody not named Canada/USA?

Sweden would hammer this team tbh.

 

[NVious]

Sweden would hammer this team tbh.

I doubt it tbh, is Nylander even better than Scheifle? Forget about line 2-3-4

Dahlin is better than any D Canada has, but after that there is a big dropoff.

 

[NVious]

I think Czechs could beat them.

Pasta and Necas are fantastic, Hertl and Hronek are good, but after that SHEEESH....

 

[Ozakar]

I doubt it tbh, is Nylander even better than Scheifle? Forget about line 2-3-4

Dahlin is better than any D Canada has, but after that there is a big dropoff.

I understand you started following the NHL this year. Sweden have a stronger O, D and goaltending than this team.

 

[Hanji]

Canada A
United States A
Sweden
Russia
Finland

Canada B
United States B
Czechia

Switzerland
Slovakia/Germany

 

[NVious]

I understand you started following the NHL this year. Sweden have a stronger O, D and goaltending than this team.

My apologies mr.hardcore Hockey fan that joined this forum yesterday, but I do disagree. Sweden's depth falls off dramatically whereas Canada's does not, that's why I asked if Nylander is even better than Schief which you didn't answer (an expert like you should be able to do that) because it illustrated the point that even the top end advantage isn't as drastic or existing at all really.