Toggle sidebar

WJC: Most Important for the World Juniors? Coaching, Team Chemistry, or Goaltending?

  • We're expecting server maintenance on March 3rd starting at midnight, there may be downtime during the work.
  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
Status
Not open for further replies.
S E P H

S E P H

Cloud IX
Mar 5, 2010
33,250
18,871
Toruń, PL
Since the WJC is over, we can talk about every team and the ones that have overachieved, finished where they expected, and teams that underachieved.

And it seems that every year there are surprises', some disappointments, and others that are in a mix between. BUT what do you think is the most important success to win Gold at the juniors where risks, wildcards, and mistakes are that more noticeable?


Here are a couple examples...
- Canada have not won Gold in five years (until '15) due to a whole range of problems, but the one that fans, pundits, and insiders kept coming back to is goaltending.

- Czech Republic haven't even made a medal round with the talent they have had the last 2-3 years from extremely poor coaching.

- USA has had problems with coaching, but the last couple of years have shown a huge problem with chemistry. A reason why Eichel in particular played with so many line-mates, but has (chemistry) dealt some blows in the previous two to three years.


So....what are your guys' opinion on the single most important strength a particular team needs to win gold at a consistent rate?
Click to read more...
 
Last edited:
I put chemistry first, but coaching is a very close 2nd, and goaltending is a very close 3rd.

I base all this on Slovakia's result.
 
1) Goaltending
2) Coaching
3) Chemistry

A team can overcome a bad coach provided they are talented enough but you cannot overcome poor goaltending. Chemistry to me is not that important. How long do these players even have to time to gel with their linemates? Not much time I would say and they still manage to do fine.
 
It depends but i'd say this is the order:

1. Goaltending
2. Coaching
3. Chemistry

I don't watch u20 tournaments much but last year Finland won mainly because of Saros and this year... What if Russias goalie wouldn't have let in those 2 early goals? Or what if they wouldn't have switched their goalies after those 2 goals?

It would have been totally different game. They could have won or they could have lost much worse.
 
Intense Rage said:
1) Goaltending
2) Coaching
3) Chemistry

A team can overcome a bad coach provided they are talented enough but you cannot overcome poor goaltending. Chemistry to me is not that important. How long do these players even have to time to gel with their linemates? Not much time I would say and they still manage to do fine.
Click to expand...

Ya I agree with this. A stacked team can overcome bad coaching but might not be able to overcome bad goaltending. Furthermore good coaching probably isn't going to help a terrible team out all that much but a terrible team with a great goalie could find some upsets.
 
Skill at hockey.

Not trying to be flippant, as there are certainly other factors, including coaching and chemistry. And in single-elimination games, luck is a considerable factor, too. But the single most consistent way to win is to have the best players - and I don't think the other factors are all that close.
 
Coaching is most important. You don't need great goaltending to win gold. Chemistry is not so important.
 
Coaching/chemistry... luck... having enough skill/talent with the right mindset buying into the program... I don't think goaltending figures in very much... or at least relying on goaltending to "steal" a medal for you is kind of a risky proposition, though it sometimes happens. But for the most part, all the goalies for the top teams at this level have sufficient talent, and could get on a hot streak, or not, or more likely just be "steady".
 
What about just plain talent and I know Canada always has the edge here, but look at your top two centers!

Your top line center was the top forward in his draft class and most of the time that guy is in the NHL by now.

And your "second line" center is generational talent who broke a U18 record set by Mario Lemieux
 
The most important thing is Canada just took all the best players they could, instead of "outsmarting" everyone by bringing plugs.
 
Hasa92 said:
It depends but i'd say this is the order:

1. Goaltending
2. Coaching
3. Chemistry

I don't watch u20 tournaments much but last year Finland won mainly because of Saros and this year... What if Russias goalie wouldn't have let in those 2 early goals? Or what if they wouldn't have switched their goalies after those 2 goals?

It would have been totally different game. They could have won or they could have lost much worse.
Click to expand...

Finland won because of coaching last year. Saros may have been mvp in the team but there's no way Finland would've even been in the finals without whole team executing great strategy in front of Saros.

I rank assembling the team with the best players for their roles not just the best players second which might be what "Chemistry" in this poll also involves.

Coaching
Chemistry
Special teams
Goaltending

A team like Canada can of course win the tournament without being great at all of these but any other country needs to have all of the above at very good level.
 
Goaltending
Coaching
Chemistry

Russia wins with Vasilevsky. Only Canada and USA (in a good year) can overcome sub-par goaltending to win gold. People keep talking about Canada bringing plugs 2014, but Fucale's poor play was like a plague of bad confidence spreading in the team.
 
I'm going to go off the board and go:

Chemistry
Coaching
Goaltending

Being awful in any of these areas can sink your team fast, but solid team chemistry and a good defensive system that allows for few scoring chances can make an average goalie look great, and this tournament was a great example with Fucale, who was really only tested in one game, and looked pretty bad for that game.

All are essential to having a good team, and any can cause a loss, but I think you can cover for average goaltending. You can't fake chemistry or systems play though.
 
1.Goaltending
2.Coaching
3.Chemistry

Goaltending is the biggest single factor on winning games without an acceptable goaltender you're team doesn't win. Coaching is another big factor but players can overcome a terrible coach, but I believe is easier to overthrow an awful coach then to score like hot-cakes because you're goalie cant stop a beach ball.
 
Chemistry. It includes communication between goaltenders and players. I believe that you can make it through with just decent goaltending IF the goalie has good chemistry with his players.
 
I absolutely disagree with the results of this poll at this time. I think by far chemistry is number one.

I have seen teams fail with terrific coaches, unreal talent, and top tier goaltending.

I have also seen them succeed because the group of guys they put together looked like they genuinely wanted to win for the guy beside them, like this year's team.

A great goalie can win a tournament, and a great coach is important to building team chemistry, so I don't discount those qualities. But for me, teams are all about chemistry and how the guys come together. When I saw Domi blocking a bunch of shots that one game, you just knew they were in it to win.
 
S E P H said:
Since the WJC is over, we can talk about every team and the ones that have overachieved, finished where they expected, and teams that underachieved.

And it seems that every year there are surprises', some disappointments, and others that are in a mix between. BUT what do you think is the most important success to win Gold at the juniors where risks, wildcards, and mistakes are that more noticeable?


Here are a couple examples...
- Canada have not won Gold in five years (until '15) due to a whole range of problems, but the one that fans, pundits, and insiders kept coming back to is goaltending.

- Czech Republic haven't even made a medal round with the talent they have had the last 2-3 years from extremely poor coaching.

- USA has had problems with coaching, but the last couple of years have shown a huge problem with chemistry. A reason why Eichel in particular played with so many line-mates, but has (chemistry) dealt some blows in the previous two to three years.


So....what are your guys' opinion on the single most important strength a particular team needs to win gold at a consistent rate?
Click to expand...



The only problem Canada ever has is we are literally too good for the tournament...our best players are always tied up with NHL teams...is that going to guarantee us victory every year? no....but if u take the 2010 team and add the likes of stamkos, Tavares, kane, Duchene, oreilly,myers theres not a chance in hell usa wins it....you can do that for pretty much every tournament every year theres key players missing....it doesnt always lead to our demise, and it doesnt always mean we're a shoe in...but theres no ****ing way anyone can look at some of the rosters we could have had over the years and not admit its logical even very likely that Canada should probabley have quite a few more golds....considering back in the early days all we did was send the memorial cup champions and not a select team on top of that I think its pretty safe to say Canadas got a stranglehold on this game....you know....just incase you didn't know...:laugh:
 
bigtimehockeyfan999 said:
The only problem Canada ever has is we are literally too good for the tournament...our best players are always tied up with NHL teams...is that going to guarantee us victory every year? no....but if u take the 2010 team and add the likes of stamkos, Tavares, kane, Duchene, oreilly,myers theres not a chance in hell usa wins it....you can do that for pretty much every tournament every year theres key players missing....it doesnt always lead to our demise, and it doesnt always mean we're a shoe in...but theres no ****ing way anyone can look at some of the rosters we could have had over the years and not admit its logical even very likely that Canada should probabley have quite a few more golds....considering back in the early days all we did was send the memorial cup champions and not a select team on top of that I think its pretty safe to say Canadas got a stranglehold on this game....you know....just incase you didn't know...:laugh:
Click to expand...

Funny how Finland won 2014 without three of their best players (Kapanen, Barkov and Määttä). Määttä even made the Olympic team and shined. Imagine how he would have dominated in the WJC.
 
TheTwelfth said:
Funny how Finland won 2014 without three of their best players (Kapanen, Barkov and Määttä). Määttä even made the Olympic team and shined. Imagine how he would have dominated in the WJC.
Click to expand...
One reason: Karri Kivi. Maybe Teräväinen and Saros too, mut mostly Kivi.

Maybe it was good that Kapanen wasn't there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom