Percentage of Canadian NHL players drops to 45%

[Peiskos]

look at thread title...I am in disagreement that things are bleak as some make it out to be...BUT IF ANYTHING, they would be stagnant as still producing same level of players and drafts are still featuring similar numbers of players...not declining just staying even which is not a bad thing at all.

Curious by "stagnant" do you mean stagnant at producing generational superstars consistently??History has clearly shown only Canada has been capable of producing a generational superstar or even two for every era of the NHL.

In the 40's Canada gave the hockey world the Maruice "The Rocket" Richard.
In the 50's Canada gave the hockey world Howe.
In the 60's Canada gave the hockey world Hull.
In the 70's Canada gave the hockey world Orr/Espo
In the 80's Canada gave the hockey world Gretzky/Messier.
In the 90's Canada gave the hockey world Lemieux.
In the 00's Canada gave the hockey world Brodeur.
In the 10's Canada gave the hockey world Crosby.
In the 20's Canada gave the hockey world McDavid
(At just 21 going in to 2019, the 20's will be remnebred as McDavid's era IMO)


Business as usual for Canada. No other country has been able to produce & maintain this kind of consistent generational production, and you already know for fact that Canada will have another generational star ready for the 2030's.

If you view this is stagnant, than so be it. To me its just a confusing and bizarre opinion.

 

[Newsworthy]

I'm still trying to figure out what is the point the original poster is trying to convey through this thread?
I guess everything's up for discussion but all I see is facts.

 

[AmericanDream]

Curious by "stagnant" do you mean stagnant at producing generational superstars consistently??History has clearly shown only Canada has been capable of producing a generational superstar or even two for every era of the NHL.

In the 40's Canada gave the hockey world the Maruice "The Rocket" Richard.
In the 50's Canada gave the hockey world Howe.
In the 60's Canada gave the hockey world Hull.
In the 70's Canada gave the hockey world Orr/Espo
In the 80's Canada gave the hockey world Gretzky/Messier.
In the 90's Canada gave the hockey world Lemieux.
In the 00's Canada gave the hockey world Brodeur.
In the 10's Canada gave the hockey world Crosby.
In the 20's Canada gave the hockey world McDavid
(At just 21 going in to 2019, the 20's will be remnebred as McDavid's era IMO)


Business as usual for Canada. No other country has been able to produce & maintain this kind of consistent generational production, and you already know for fact that Canada will have another generational star ready for the 2030's.

If you view this is stagnant, than so be it. To me its just a confusing and bizarre opinion.

Stagnant meaning not producing any more elite players than they have before. Stagnant means not growing...you can say that is the case with Canada, but as I said you are taking it the wrong way, it isn't a bad thing it is amazing to still be in this position after all these years and the growth of the game world wide.

There are likely more Canadian players in the league than ever before (overall total)...obviously there are more teams/jobs available, so the 45% is deceiving.

Canada still holds most of the top players at positions, and elite players at that, so whether we use the term stagnant or just the "norm" I am fine with that. OP said things are bleak and getting worse, I am saying no, no they are not...if anything, things are just the same as they were in the 80s and 90s, only the US has filled those available spots as the sport has grown because Canada has had the same amount of players (fluctuates at times) over the past 10 plus years, but you can't expect Canada to fill all these spots with roughly the same amount of population playing the game year in and year out.

the US is coming on, there is no denying that, we are starting to produce elite talent more consistently than we have before, but this seems to be at the expense of European countries whose numbers are shrinking (certain nations) at the NHL level. A country like Slovakia used to have 6-8 borderline all-stars in the league at a given time, that isn't happening...Finland is just starting to bounce back with young talent after a drought...we have already explained Russia and other countries near by for the KHL...the US has benefited and though are closing the gap between them and Canada, it is still pretty wide. In 10 years maybe bring this thread back up, but the US just isn't there yet.

 

[indigobuffalo]

How is it at all surprising Canadian representations n is down now that we’re no longer restricting membership to North America?

*Breaking News* 90+% of permanent residents in Canada are Canadian.

 

[Canadiens1958]

How is it at all surprising Canadian representations n is down now that we’re no longer restricting membership to North America?

*Breaking News* 90+% of permanent residents in Canada are Canadian.

Canada never restricted membership. Outside of NA the best players chose to play amateur hockey until the late 1980s.

 

[indigobuffalo]

Canada never restricted membership. Outside of NA the best players chose to play amateur hockey until the late 1980s.

It wasn’t an official rule that the NHL was only for NA’s but when you look at the history of what it took to bring Euro’s into the league it clearly was an unwritten one.

 

[Canadiens1958]

It wasn’t an official rule that the NHL was only for NA’s but when you look at the history of what it took to bring Euro’s into the league it clearly was an unwritten one.

It has been shown on numerous occassions that 1950s and 1960s Euros were offered contracts and refusewd because the money was insufficient.1957 Sven Tumba is a prime example. Likewise Ulf Sterner in the mid sixties who came, played in the minors inc short stint with the NHL Rangers then went back to Sweden because the salary was better.

It has also been shown that numerous Canadians refused to play in the USA because the salary did not justify the cost of a second rental or moving the family.

No unwritten rule just marketplace forces.

 

[indigobuffalo]

It has been shown on numerous occassions that 1950s and 1960s Euros were offered contracts and refusewd because the money was insufficient.1957 Sven Tumba is a prime example. Likewise Ulf Sterner in the mid sixties who came, played in the minors inc short stint with the NHL Rangers then went back to Sweden because the salary was better.

It has also been shown that numerous Canadians refused to play in the USA because the salary did not justify the cost of a second rental or moving the family.

No unwritten rule just marketplace forces.

I meant the well documented rampant xenophobia.

 

[BogsDiamond]

Bottom line, Canada is still dominating every other individual nation as far as stocking NHL talent. After over 100 years, Canada is STILL number one, despite having a fraction of the population of the USA and Russia.

Hey, if one country supplies all (or almost all) of the talent, you can never call that sport truly "international".

But let's break down how many kids are actually registered to play hockey in Canada compared to the US:
USA:
Membership Statistics
2017-2018: 562,145
Canada:
Registered ice hockey players in Canada 2010-2017 | Statistic
2016-17: 631,295
Hockey Canada claims approx 570K - Hockey Canada

So the numbers are pretty close to equal in that regard.

Secondly, what kind of player are both countries producing?
While Canada is responsible for producing 45% of NHL players, I think it's accurate to say that most of the plumbers, checkers, rats and knuckle-draggers are from Canada.

When you start breaking down the skilled players in the league, I wonder what the percentage is. I have a feeling it's pretty even across the board - at least between Canada, US and Sweden.
Russia would have a much larger footprint if the KHL didn't exist. Without that league, their 4% could quite easily be in the double-digits.

 

[BogsDiamond]

I must be in an alternate universe. You and I have had a few battles over the years. Though, I do respect your opinion and your knowledge.

Again, we disagree. I say Canada has a slight advantage over the US in top level talent. Certainly not a major gap. The USNTDP is second to none in producing elite teams. (yes, if Canada had a similar system it would be different) But the level of play, dedication to the team, overall training both on and off the ice is something I admire.

And it's not just the USNTDP, it's the majority of youth programs in the US.

I will say someone at Hockey Canada must have been wondering how you guys were producing exceptional talent and knocked a few heads because recently Canada has been improving as well.

It's just a matter of time before the US takes over as the Number 1 Hockey nation. As a Canadian, (well, technically, a dual) I won't necessarily be looking forward to that. As a hockey fan, it is what it is.

Totally agree - and this goes along with what I stated in my comment above.
It seems like Canada has gotten its collective head out of its arse because there seems to be more of an emphasis on skill development the past few years.
However, saying that, my son played travel hockey last year and early in the season his team played a team in the U.S. at the Compuware arena in Michigan.
While waiting, we watched several practices taking place on their many pads. It didn't seem to matter what age the kids were, all the practices were the same in that each kid almost always had a puck on their stick and each drill was run at nearly top speed.
In comparison, my son's practices weren't the same. They had a puck maybe 50% of the time - on a good day.
And the defensemen weren't included in the forward drills. So they'd have a lot of drills based on positioning. They had the puck half the time compared to the forwards - so 25% overall.
This is no way to develop skills.
Now, my kids situation is only a small sample size but after playing in nearly 60 games last year and being at the rink super early for each, I was witness to several practices all over our region.
Nearly all of them had the same type of practice.

Using a weaker comparison, it's similar to how Europe develops basketball talent. No matter your size or position, every kid is taught how to shoot, pass and dribble. That's not always the case in the U.S. where the taller, slower players are taught to be defensive players and aren't given as much opportunity to refine their offensive skills.

Canada needs to do a much better job of developing offensive skills. We can brag about supplying 45% of the NHL 'talent', but a lot of those players are bottom-half players.
As long as the NHL is run by 'good ol Canadian boys', that's how it's going to be. It's written in our DNA that the bottom 2 lines and 3rd d-pairing have to be guys who have limited offensive skills, but can decapitate someone with a questionable hit.

 

[Canadiens1958]

I meant the well documented rampant xenophobia.

Like in European leagues where Canadian players were not welcome at all or limited by their or a parental dual citizenship loophole.

 

[DannyGallivan]

But let's break down how many kids are actually registered to play hockey in Canada compared to the US:
USA:
Membership Statistics
2017-2018: 562,145
Canada:
Registered ice hockey players in Canada 2010-2017 | Statistic
2016-17: 631,295
Hockey Canada claims approx 570K - Hockey Canada

So the numbers are pretty close to equal in that regard.

Secondly, what kind of player are both countries producing?
While Canada is responsible for producing 45% of NHL players, I think it's accurate to say that most of the plumbers, checkers, rats and knuckle-draggers are from Canada.

When you start breaking down the skilled players in the league, I wonder what the percentage is. I have a feeling it's pretty even across the board - at least between Canada, US and Sweden.
Russia would have a much larger footprint if the KHL didn't exist. Without that league, their 4% could quite easily be in the double-digits.

Well, let's look at the present day window, based on last year's offensive stats:

Top 2 in points: both Canadian (100 per cent)
Top 5 in points: 3 Canadians (60 per cent)
Top 10 in points: 5 Canadians (50 per cent)

Meanwhile, half of the top 20 in goals were Canadians (even though Europeans were at the top of the list).

...and that's not Canada versus the United States, or even Canada versus Europe. That's Canada versus EVERYBODY. To be able to say that, in a 31 team league in 2018 that is truly open to the best in the entire world, that's saying a lot. It's clear that Canada supplies far more skilled players than any single country. As usual.

And as far as the KHL is concerned, I doubt that the Russian footprint in the NHL would increase that much if the KHL didn' exist. Russia was always top heavy in talent, and their best (with very few exceptions) are already in the NHL.

 

[AmericanDream]

Well, let's look at the present day window, based on last year's offensive stats:

Top 2 in points: both Canadian (100 per cent)
Top 5 in points: 3 Canadians (60 per cent)
Top 10 in points: 5 Canadians (50 per cent)

Meanwhile, half of the top 20 in goals were Canadians (even though Europeans were at the top of the list).

...and that's not Canada versus the United States, or even Canada versus Europe. That's Canada versus EVERYBODY. To be able to say that, in a 31 team league in 2018 that is truly open to the best in the entire world, that's saying a lot. It's clear that Canada far more skilled players than any single country. As usual.

And as far as the KHL is concerned, I doubt that the Russian footprint in the NHL would increase that much if the KHL didn' exist. Russia was always top heavy in talent, and their best (with very few exceptions) are already in the NHL.

this is what I see as well, I am not understanding what more some want here from Canada to be honest..

 

[AmericanDream]

obiously this is just HF opinion, which all of our stuff is - but just take a look -

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/the-top-30-players-in-the-nhl-2018-edition-25.2536749/

so far in the top 24 players in the game, 13 are from Canada...5 from the US...by the time Kane comes up, 5 Canucks are off the board...in no way shape or form is the US close to Canada right now..we simply aren't. we are closing gaps in certain areas, our goaltender strength has always been good, our defense has always been near the top, but high end talent overall, we simply are still behind.

 

[DannyGallivan]

obiously this is just HF opinion, which all of our stuff is - but just take a look -

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/the-top-30-players-in-the-nhl-2018-edition-25.2536749/

so far in the top 24 players in the game, 13 are from Canada...5 from the US...by the time Kane comes up, 5 Canucks are off the board...in no way shape or form is the US close to Canada right now..we simply aren't. we are closing gaps in certain areas, our goaltender strength has always been good, our defense has always been near the top, but high end talent overall, we simply are still behind.

According to Sportsnet's top 100, Canada dominates any single country by a wide, wide, wide margin.

Allow me to quote the author of the article:
"Just shy of half the list was made up of players from the Great White North. And in fact there are more Canadians on the list that the next three best-represented countries — the United States, Russia and Sweden — combined.

As a reflection of population, Canada is still tops, as the country averaged about 1.24 top-100 players per million people. Sweden is next with just over one per million, and Finland next after that with just shy of one."

 

[BogsDiamond]

Well, let's look at the present day window, based on last year's offensive stats:

Top 2 in points: both Canadian (100 per cent)
Top 5 in points: 3 Canadians (60 per cent)
Top 10 in points: 5 Canadians (50 per cent)

Meanwhile, half of the top 20 in goals were Canadians (even though Europeans were at the top of the list).

...and that's not Canada versus the United States, or even Canada versus Europe. That's Canada versus EVERYBODY. To be able to say that, in a 31 team league in 2018 that is truly open to the best in the entire world, that's saying a lot. It's clear that Canada supplies far more skilled players than any single country. As usual.

And as far as the KHL is concerned, I doubt that the Russian footprint in the NHL would increase that much if the KHL didn' exist. Russia was always top heavy in talent, and their best (with very few exceptions) are already in the NHL.

Fair enough.
Regarding the KHL, you're right that they're very top-heavy. But that has more to do with the style of play in the NHL - which is a discussion all on its own.
Let's pretend the league was being run by people who loved creativity and offensive skills.
I wonder if we'd see a lot more skilled players on the 3rd and 4th lines as opposed to guys who don't even know there's a puck on the ice - where Canada dominates in producing this type of player.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Fair enough.
Regarding the KHL, you're right that they're very top-heavy. But that has more to do with the style of play in the NHL - which is a discussion all on its own.
Let's pretend the league was being run by people who loved creativity and offensive skills.
I wonder if we'd see a lot more skilled players on the 3rd and 4th lines as opposed to guys who don't even know there's a puck on the ice - where Canada dominates in producing this type of player.

My point is... Canada dominates in producing every type of player.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Regarding the KHL, you're right that they're very top-heavy. But that has more to do with the style of play in the NHL - which is a discussion all on its own

The NHL plays a style conducive to winning, as proven by Canada's Olympic results vs Russia (head to head and overall) when NHLers supplied the Olympic rosters.

Russian will always have players near the top of the goal and points producing list. It's virtually in their culture. However, it's also in Canada's culture, and after all these years Canada's depth is still strong while Russia's perceived up-and-coming dominance took a bit of a dive after the break up of the old Evil Empire.

The US is clearly Canada's arch-rival going forward. Will they close the gap? Hard to say. The typical American player IS the typical Canadian player. They may be mirror images of each other going forward, but will the USA's massive population advantage (nine or ten times that of Canada) make up for the massive cultural advantage Canada has when it comes to making hockey a priority?

Then there are up-and-coming small countries like Denmark that I expect will chip away at the demographics of the league.

My prediction: in 20 years, Canada will still supply about 40 per cent of the league, and the same percentage of top end talent. The USA's footprint will increase by about another ten percent, while countries like Russian and the Czech Republic will take the biggest hit.

 

[BogsDiamond]

obiously this is just HF opinion, which all of our stuff is - but just take a look -

https://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/the-top-30-players-in-the-nhl-2018-edition-25.2536749/

so far in the top 24 players in the game, 13 are from Canada...5 from the US...by the time Kane comes up, 5 Canucks are off the board...in no way shape or form is the US close to Canada right now..we simply aren't. we are closing gaps in certain areas, our goaltender strength has always been good, our defense has always been near the top, but high end talent overall, we simply are still behind.

A lot of that has to do with sports over-saturation.
Most involved with rep hockey are on the ice 12 months a year. I even heard of one coach telling his players that if he found out they were playing baseball in the Summer, they'd be cut.
If they were to register for any non-hockey sport it had to be lacrosse as it's closer to hockey than anything else.

Point blank, there's a reason why some of the best soccer players in the world come from the UK, Europe or Hispanic countries.
Just like some of the best football players come from Texas.

Canadian kids play hockey all year round.
The U.S. may never catch up because most of their population can't afford to play the game, or there are other options at their disposal.
But anyone who thinks our players are better just because they are Canadian is ridiculous. If every kid in the U.S played hockey as much as Canadian kids, the numbers would look a lot different.
We would probably have already witnessed an American breaking Gretkzy's records.

 

[BogsDiamond]

The NHL plays a style conducive to winning, as proven by Canada's Olympic results vs Russia (head to head and overall) when NHLers supplied the Olympic rosters.

And yet, Team Canada is 1-2 when playing on an Olympic size rink.
Again, the NHL enforces rules and regulations that is more conducive to Canadian hockey - which allows our country to produce the lesser player types that GM's have convinced themselves the sport needs.

 

[DannyGallivan]

And yet, Team Canada is 1-2 when playing on an Olympic size rink.
Again, the NHL enforces rules and regulations that is more conducive to Canadian hockey - which allows our country to produce the lesser player types that GM's have convinced themselves the sport needs.

Skill is actually more of a requirement on the NHL-sized rink. Agility, quickness and puckhandling as well as resiliency to play in a physical environment are all much more necessary on the North American rink.

The large European rink plays very well into "the trap" and a slow paced game. While straight-ahead speed is sometimes called upon, the game's pace crawls in comparison to the game on the NHL rink.

In other words, the bigger rink caters more to players with less skill.

 

[BogsDiamond]

Skill is actually more of a requirement on the NHL-sized rink. Agility, quickness and puckhandling as well as resiliency to play in a physical environment are all much more necessary on the North American rink.

The large European rink plays very well into "the trap" and a slow paced game. While straight-ahead speed is sometimes called upon, the game's pace crawls in comparison to the game on the NHL rink.

In other words, the bigger rink caters more to players with less skill.

Agree to disagree.
The game is infinitely easier for knuckle-draggers on the small ice surface.
I'm old enough to remember every Olympic game from 1998+.
Chris Pronger was considered one of the best dmen in the world between 98-14.
And yet, each time he played for Team Canada on the Olympic ice surface he was the worst player on the ice. Why? Because he didn't have the skating or skill to stop top players without utilizing slashes, forearm shivers or bodyslams.

When the Blackhawks started their season overseas a few years back, Pat Kane (pretty talented guy) marveled at how much more time and space he had on the larger ice surface and said he would welcome the same in the NHL.

With a bigger ice surface it's easier to defend, but you have to know how to skate and make good passes. The smaller ice surface dumbs the game down with its chipping-and-chasing routine.
Same with the tried-and-true strategy of 'get the puck back to the point, crash the net, blast the puck on net, hope it hits 4 asses before deflecting into the net'.
That strategy is perfect for guys with low IQ and low skill. Dummies like Raffi Torres, Tom Wilson or Brooks Orpik wouldn't make a farm team in a league with olympic sized ice.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Agree to disagree.
The game is infinitely easier for knuckle-draggers on the small ice surface.
I'm old enough to remember every Olympic game from 1998+.
Chris Pronger was considered one of the best dmen in the world between 98-14.
And yet, each time he played for Team Canada on the Olympic ice surface he was the worst player on the ice. Why? Because he didn't have the skating or skill to stop top players without utilizing slashes, forearm shivers or bodyslams.

When the Blackhawks started their season overseas a few years back, Pat Kane (pretty talented guy) marveled at how much more time and space he had on the larger ice surface and said he would welcome the same in the NHL.

With a bigger ice surface it's easier to defend, but you have to know how to skate and make good passes. The smaller ice surface dumbs the game down with its chipping-and-chasing routine.
Same with the tried-and-true strategy of 'get the puck back to the point, crash the net, blast the puck on net, hope it hits 4 asses before deflecting into the net'.
That strategy is perfect for guys with low IQ and low skill. Dummies like Raffi Torres, Tom Wilson or Brooks Orpik wouldn't make a farm team in a league with olympic sized ice.

The small ice surface relies on quicker thinking, quicker feet, better vision and an overall faster paced game.

 

[Hanji]

The small ice surface relies on quicker thinking, quicker feet, better vision and an overall faster paced game.

Agree to disagree.
The game is infinitely easier for knuckle-draggers on the small ice surface.
I'm old enough to remember every Olympic game from 1998+.
Chris Pronger was considered one of the best dmen in the world between 98-14.
And yet, each time he played for Team Canada on the Olympic ice surface he was the worst player on the ice. Why? Because he didn't have the skating or skill to stop top players without utilizing slashes, forearm shivers or bodyslams.

When the Blackhawks started their season overseas a few years back, Pat Kane (pretty talented guy) marveled at how much more time and space he had on the larger ice surface and said he would welcome the same in the NHL.

With a bigger ice surface it's easier to defend, but you have to know how to skate and make good passes. The smaller ice surface dumbs the game down with its chipping-and-chasing routine.
Same with the tried-and-true strategy of 'get the puck back to the point, crash the net, blast the puck on net, hope it hits 4 asses before deflecting into the net'.
That strategy is perfect for guys with low IQ and low skill. Dummies like Raffi Torres, Tom Wilson or Brooks Orpik wouldn't make a farm team in a league with olympic sized ice.

The truth is somewhere in the middle as different skill sets are required for each.

On the big ice time and space is given to you; but if you can't take advantage, you're done. On the small ice one must create time and space for one's self. This can be achieved via puck skills or physicality. However, physical players on the small ice can succeed without the slightest ability to 'take advantage'. The small ice game is exceedingly role specific.

 

[Dr Pepper]

Neato.

Figured Canada would drop below the majority soon enough, that probably happened a few years ago.

I think it's great, to see players from (almost) all corners of the world uniting in the NHL.

With efforts being made to grow the game in Asia, it won't be long until we start seeing a percentage hail from China, or Japan, or South Korea. Well, maybe in 10-20 years or so, but still.

In this case, diversity is a good thing.