Thats always been forced rivalry.Crosbys always been much better as a player.. Ovechkin wouldnt make canadas roster based on hockey level dont think would have made Canadas roster even in 2014 when Babcock was coaching;D let alone nowadays atleast based on ability. He is scoring WWE typic forced goals in NHL nowadays empty netters etc but if being realistic same level guy would come to try outs with randon name he would be sended to ECHL right away slow beer league levelish skater clumsy hands in bad fit beer belly etc.. Playing in competition like 4 nations he would have been worst player around when its serious play not NBA typic hang around regular season game.
Is 4 Nations a “Best on Best”?
- Thread starter Joe Zanussi
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
I don’t think you understand how good prime Ovi was. When he had his game on, he was the most dominant goal-scorer we've seen in a long time.
He could score form anywhere. Off the rush, he was just too fast and strong, also some of the best hands for a guy that big too. You see McDavid and MacKinnon blow past defenders nowindays, Prime Ovi would go THROUGH defenders. His wrist shot was lethal from every square inch of the O-Zone and he had the best One-T on the PP for more than a decade. When he was dialed in, he could create plays and defend too.
That's the main difference between him and Crosby. Crosby gave that effort 100% of the time, always improved his game in the smallest of ways and was the more all-around player. When you compare Ovi at his best though, he was easily the best offensive force in hockey for multiple seasons and nights (Yes, even over Crosby).
Peiskos
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2018
- 3,807
- 3,898
Crosby's Canada crushed Ovechkin's Russia 7-3 at the best vs best Olympics in 2010. Crosby didn't get to play against Ovechkin at the 2014 Olympics but it wouldn't have mattered.. Crosby's team would have won.
Crosby also faced off against Ovechkin at the 2015 IIHF WC, while not a best on best Crosby's Canada once again crushed Ovechkin and Russia 6-1.
The Russians have largely been a tune up game for Canada at all levels of hockey, junior through mens level. Their participation in international hockey doesn't alter Canada's international hockey hegemony.
Last edited:
Gerulaitis
Registered User
- Apr 19, 2024
- 281
- 176
Not sure what was your point.
I was talking about the rivalry of the two biggest names in modern hockey.
Well, and Ovechkin wasn't that all bad versus Canada. He eliminated Canada in the 2006 Olympics.
Conspiracy Theorist
Registered User
- Jan 30, 2016
- 5,862
- 2,098
Technically no because European countries couldn't pick their best Euro players. Also Russia wasn't present. It's the next best thing though.
jigglysquishy
Registered User
The Summit Series wasn't best on best.
The term's genesis in hockey was to differentiate the 76 Canada Cup (best on best) from the 72 Summit Series (not best on best).
The entire reason the word is in hockey lexicon was because of the anger around 72 not being best on best.
Last edited:
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 19,793
- 15,442
Yes, even the IIHF wrote about the 1976 Canada Cup being the origin of specifically "best on best" when it counted down the top hockey stories of the century. As with many terms people try to twist the meaning of a term to suit what they want, and we see this with TSN calling the world juniors a best on best tournament in recent years, and if it happens enough then other people get confused about what the term means. The summit series was a big event, as was the Challenge Cup and a few other things on the level where this four nations event belongs.
Czechboy
Náš f*cken barák!
- Apr 15, 2018
- 30,511
- 28,337
Which was great.. got my Czechs a medal. Ovi and friends took out Canada and cleared a path for everyone else. Lost to Finland and then lost to Czechs in bronze game. I believe they didn't score another goal and were 0-7 in those 2 games after the big win? Always appreciated Russia for doing the heavy lifting!
Czechboy
Náš f*cken barák!
- Apr 15, 2018
- 30,511
- 28,337
Brutal round robin opponent and tough out on the way to a medal is how I'd characterize them internationally.
Just not.much to show in the big games. 5 big wins. 2 against Belarus. 1 against the Czechs. 1 against Finland and 1 impressive one against Canada (which I describe in the post before this).
Gerulaitis
Registered User
- Apr 19, 2024
- 281
- 176
What's your point. Ovechkin eliminated Canada. You're talking about Czechs and Finns.
Gerulaitis
Registered User
- Apr 19, 2024
- 281
- 176
They beat the Czechs in 1998, 02, 2010.
I remember that Ovie's massive hit on Jagr before he went to set up Malkin. Beautiful
novisor
Registered User
It absolutely was. The best two countries on earth, fielding their best rosters. Let's not pretend the Americans, Swedes, or Fins, could field a team in 72' that wouldn't go 0-8 vs either nation.
jigglysquishy
Registered User
Canada didn't field it's best roster.
They weren't allowed to choose their best (or second best) forward in Bobby Hull. The exclusion of Bobby Hull dominated the news cycle and eventually got to the point where the Prime Minister asked the NHL to allow him to play.
They weren't allowed to pick their fifthish best defenseman in JC Tremblay.
They weren't allowed to pick two of their top four goalies (Parent and Cheevers).
Gerulaitis
Registered User
- Apr 19, 2024
- 281
- 176
novisor
Registered User
He's won a WJC, multiple World Championships, and had a pretty good 06' Olympic tourney.
and? Individual players missing doesn't preclude it being best on best.
novisor
Registered User
Russia doesn't need to replace Finland, who is winning often at the WJCs, and Worlds. They have some of the best players on earth - performing much better than Sweden as of late. Russia still needed to be there though.
jigglysquishy
Registered User
That's literally the definition. Guys were not allowed to compete.
76 Canada Cup was advertised as the first best on best tournament since 72 SS was recognized as not one.
Like this is all very basic history.
Divine
Registered User
- Dec 18, 2010
- 20,218
- 14,753
WJC and Worlds aren’t best on best. Finland has a lot more players that aren’t in the NHL who are trying to make a name for themselves who attend the Worlds to get recognition. In NA, most of those players are already in the NHL or being watched.
WJC Canada had both Bedard and Celebrini eligible this year, but clearly they’re too talented to be there - so it’s basically the best non-NHL players because the actual best players are often in the NHL.
Finland finished last in this tournament with 2 points. Every other team has a least 5. If you’re picking just 4 nations you clearly take Russia over Finland.
Czechboy
Náš f*cken barák!
- Apr 15, 2018
- 30,511
- 28,337
They beat us in 1998? Please do tell because I've been talking about that GOLD medal for over 25 years now.
This is the Russian thing.. brag about round robin wins but lose the big ones. If you prefer a round robin win and a silver over a gold medal at a best on best that is fine but I know which one matters to me.
2002 was a big win for Russia over Czechs - booted us right out of Olympics. Then we beat Russia again in 2006 for our Bronze medal. Russia has given us 2 medals at these. But, by all means, celebrate the hit (and it was an awesome hit) and the round robin win in 1998. Kind of like the US thinking they got a draw with the Canadians at this 4 nations tournament. One nation has a trophy and the other has a round robin win. That is not a tie.
2010 saw Czechs and Russians both eliminated in quarters.. not sure what the brag is? We lost 2-0 to Finns and Russians got annihilated 7-3. Again, congrats on the round robin win. Got smoked when it counted.
However, we did meet again at the worlds a few months later and Russia sent about 80% of their Olympic team and Czechs sent about 10% of theirs.. another gold for the Czechs.lol I'll take that Gold over the round robin win at Olympics all day long.
Czechboy
Náš f*cken barák!
- Apr 15, 2018
- 30,511
- 28,337
Russia elimianted Canada and then didn't score another goal and left without a medal after 2 straight losses. These tournaments require more than 1 big win to be successful. Russia can't seem to string wins together in quarters, semis and medal games. That's my point.
Peiskos
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2018
- 3,807
- 3,898
My point is that it doesn't matter if we didn't get to see Crosby vs Oveckhin, the result would have been the same.
2006 is widely regarded as one of the worst bone headed roster constructions in Canadian history, Crosby for whatever reason wasn't even selected for the team, that's why Russia was able to eliminate Canada at the 2006 Olympics.
Gerulaitis
Registered User
- Apr 19, 2024
- 281
- 176
You're missing the larger picture. Although Russia is unlikely to win first place, Russia's inclusion can greatly influence the outcome of a tournament, who plays Canada for gold, silver and bronze medals.
You alluded to it earlier, Russia's heavy lifting in 2006 eventually enabled the Czech Republic to win bronze.
Any tournament without the top 6 is an incomplete tournament.
Last edited:
Canada tied Sweden in those exhibitions before Canada played in Moscow in 1972. Won 4-1, tied 4-4.
Canada was better, but they weren't on a different level than Sweden. Those games were very very competetive.
