Toggle sidebar

If a best on best tournament was played right now, what would be your predictions/power ranknings?

WarriorofTime said:
Bedard will be a good injection for Canada's theoretical best on best squad.
Click to expand...
Yup.

Give it 4 years and the Canadian roster will be lights out. Unfortunately, we are in a lull. Fortunately, we won't be seeing a best-on-best anytime soon.
 
Last edited:
Albatros said:
Snowball's chance in hell. Even if the IIHF would inexplicably do such decision, they still couldn't persuade other participants to play along or the Swedish authorities to grant visas.
Click to expand...
I doubt anybody would intentionally boycott the world juniors. It’s a dream for a lot of kids in junior hockey.
 
Albatros said:
Snowball's chance in hell. Even if the IIHF would inexplicably do such decision, they still couldn't persuade other participants to play along or the Swedish authorities to grant visas.
Click to expand...

I think there will be a significant block that would boycott tournaments next season if the IIHF were to that idiotic decision. They would just propose alternative tournaments on those exact dates and call it the 5 Nations Freedom tournament. And just announce that this will be our tournament schedule going forward for however long it takes. on all levels. men and woman.
 
WarriorofTime said:
There are only 5 Canadians in the top 20 in NHL scoring. It's not bad, but they aren't the auto-locks to win like they used to be. Right now, they are heavily reliant on how good McDavid is.
Click to expand...

What your saying is 1 team has 25% of the best offensive players in the game including the #1?

Also it's 7 of the top 20

Canada - 7
USA - 5
Sweden - 3
Russia - 2
Germany - 1
Czech - 1
Finland - 1

No team is a lock, but Canada is the heavy favorite and a silver would be a massive disappointment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Czechboy
WarriorofTime said:
Yeah that's kinda my point though, who starts in net for Canada if they played a best on best tomorrow? Darcy Kuemper? Tristan Jarry? Logan Thompson? Then you have to add the intense media pressure, as you can bet TSN would spend about 3 hours a day discussing the goaltender situation, and the second anything goes wrong, that guy would probably be a scapegoat. I still think Canada is the favorite due to McDavid who is basically a standard deviation ahead of the League in terms of offense at the moment, I just think it's not quite as much of a guarantee (where you'd say if they played 10 times, Canada wins 8 of them) as it used to be. In 2014 for instance, Canada had 5 of the top 7 defensemen in the world (per HF voting) as well as an elite goaltender in Price in his prime, and about the same level of star power up front.
Click to expand...

Canada doesn't need superstar goaltending to win, all Canada has ever needed was a reliable goalie who will makes the saves he needs to make, this is available.
 
Canada is still the favourite. I think that is obvious. Call me bias, but down the middle you have McDavid, MacKinnon and Crosby. What line do you defend?

However, I am seeing a similar thing that happened in the 1990s. The Americans were the 2nd best team in 1991 at the Canada Cup and the idea was they were arriving. By 1996 I can remember a bit of a gulp in my throat when looking at their roster for the World Cup. They got better fast. I would say only at forward Canada had the edge, and up front the Americans were more youthful and fast. There was some name recognition and such but Canada had the right players at much of their wrong ages in that tournament.

When looking at the U.S. roster I am seeing one that is pretty strong in all three positions. All of the sudden you match things up with Canada and it isn't a team that is lacking talent.
 
Is anyone here old enough to remember when Canada was not in the world championships? I think it was around 1976 or 1977 when Canada joined the competition. That time two countries were relegated instead of one to make way for Canada.

Did people back then when Canada wasn't there think the worlds was a worthless competition because Canada was missing?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jj cale
VLK said:
Is anyone here old enough to remember when Canada was not in the world championships? I think it was around 1976 or 1977 when Canada joined the competition. That time two countries were relegated instead of one to make way for Canada.

Did people back then when Canada wasn't there think the worlds was a worthless competition because Canada was missing?
Click to expand...
Great point and no, it didn't bother the the other nations at all, they held the worlds in the highest esteem, no reason that should change if Russia isn't there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Czechboy
VLK said:
Is anyone here old enough to remember when Canada was not in the world championships? I think it was around 1976 or 1977 when Canada joined the competition. That time two countries were relegated instead of one to make way for Canada.

Did people back then when Canada wasn't there think the worlds was a worthless competition because Canada was missing?
Click to expand...
People in Canada considered all IIHF competition worthless because of the Soviet Shamateurs, that's why they left and then did the Summit Series and eventually Canada Cup.

For the Soviets, well that's what hockey was for them, so they wouldn't have considered it useless. It was their highest prize available, so they competed with all their might. I think the Summit Series they had something to prove for sure, but I don't think they viewed the Canada Cup as the end all be all. Like I think the Soviets would have traded the 1981 Canada Cup Win for preventing the Miracle on Ice and the 1980 Olympic Gold Medal in a heartbeat. "Best on Best" is a very North American concept, but certainly now-a-days the world is so globalized that I think it's spread elsewhere.
 
WarriorofTime said:
People in Canada considered all IIHF competition worthless because of the Soviet Shamateurs, that's why they left and then did the Summit Series and eventually Canada Cup.

For the Soviets, well that's what hockey was for them, so they wouldn't have considered it useless. It was their highest prize available, so they competed with all their might. I think the Summit Series they had something to prove for sure, but I don't think they viewed the Canada Cup as the end all be all. Like I think the Soviets would have traded the 1981 Canada Cup Win for preventing the Miracle on Ice and the 1980 Olympic Gold Medal in a heartbeat. "Best on Best" is a very North American concept, but certainly now-a-days the world is so globalized that I think it's spread elsewhere.
Click to expand...

All European countries used professionals, not just the Soviets.
 
WarriorofTime said:
People in Canada considered all IIHF competition worthless because of the Soviet Shamateurs, that's why they left and then did the Summit Series and eventually Canada Cup.

For the Soviets, well that's what hockey was for them, so they wouldn't have considered it useless. It was their highest prize available, so they competed with all their might. I think the Summit Series they had something to prove for sure, but I don't think they viewed the Canada Cup as the end all be all. Like I think the Soviets would have traded the 1981 Canada Cup Win for preventing the Miracle on Ice and the 1980 Olympic Gold Medal in a heartbeat. "Best on Best" is a very North American concept, but certainly now-a-days the world is so globalized that I think it's spread elsewhere.
Click to expand...
What are the best on bests in North America?

First 2 that came to mind were Euro Cup and World Cup of soccer and neither of those are North American based.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom