This is how i see it. Anyways, i hate to even mention Sweden, since even Peter Forsberg hinted that they threw a game in 2006 to avoid playing Canada in the 2006 QF's. However, i agree with this list.
Rank the Olympic gold medal winners (98-14)
- Thread starter HarryLime
- Start date
This is how i see it. Anyways, i hate to even mention Sweden, since even Peter Forsberg hinted that they threw a game in 2006 to avoid playing Canada in the 2006 QF's. However, i agree with this list.
While the depth may not be there, I find it hard to rag on a team that included Peter Forsberg, Niklas Lidstrom, Henrik Lundqvist, Mats Sundin, Henrik Zetterberg, the Sedins.
Take the five forwards there, toss in Alfredsson, and you have a top 6 that is just as good as anything Canada can put on the ice at any time. In fact, I’d say in their prime, Canada wouldn’t be able to put anything as good as that on the ice. Lidstrom is arguably the best Dman in the history of the NHL, and Lundqvist is the best goalie of the past decade maybe. Certainly the last 5 years.
Clearly the depth isn’t there, but I have a hard time saying that’s the worst of the five teams. That’s a pretty tough group to beat.
Is it just me, or is Sweden in a little bit of a lull, in terms of producing top talent? Their best talent right now doesn’t come close to comparing to what they could ice then. Do they have a single forward that would crack that top 6 (other than the Sedins and Alfredsson themselves – who probably wouldn’t as the players they are today anyway)? I don’t think so. Landeskog is a maybe on that.
Don't worry. You're not the only one.
As I have said many times... All teams, not named Canada, will be entering the 2018 Olympics in a lull.
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 19,805
- 15,466
That might be better than what Canada could produce as a top six if we pretend all of those players were at their peaks in 2006, but they weren't. Only Lidstrom (absolutely an all time great) and Alfredsson (great player) were at their best, while Sundin and Forsberg were a bit past their best and the Sedins hadn't really emerged, which can also be said of Lundqvist. Zetterberg was breaking out to have one of his better years, but still not his peak. Obviously it's a great group, but it doesn't stand out in Olympic history.
Forsberg – 75 points in 60 games. Sundin 78 points in 70 games. Sedins combined for 165 points that season.
These guys may not have been at their absolute peaks, in which case most would be Hart candidates, but they weren’t far off.
That was one hell of a team. I don't think they lack too much from some of the Cdn teams.
I would say they’re better on the top 6 than most. Their depth is where they get killed. In fact, I’d say that top 6 with Lidstrom and Lundqvist behind them is right up there with every one of those teams top lines.
Incognito
Registered User
As others have said, this only works if you have a time machine or a magic wand and make it so that all these players can be in their primes during the 2006 Olympics. That just wasn't so. And besides, Sakic, Yzerman, Lemieux, Iginla, Kariya, Pronger and Brodeur are clearly and easily better than Forsberg, Zetterberg, Sundin, the Sedins, Lidstrom and Lundqvist. So essentially, your comment about Canada not being able to ice anything as good as the Swedes you mentioned doesn't really hold up.
They were all plying nea r their best though.
But that's a pretty sick top 6. Nieds too.
Just saying, that set of players who n the top lines makes it difficult to claim they'd be at the bottom of that group.
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 19,805
- 15,466
2006 saw much higher scoring than what we see even today. Forsberg was 39th in points (9th in points per game) and had slipped defensively from his more mobile years. Sundin was 31st in points and still only 18th in ppg. Sedins were good for 41st and 45th in scoring and weren't noteworthy defensively (I think they were Sweden's fourth line in that tournament). Alfredsson was a monster that year though, while Zetterberg was emerging as a two way force and Lidstrom was Lidstrom. Lundqvist was very good but not yet a great goaltender. It's still a very strong group of players, but the names look better than the reality... just like Canada's 2002 team. I think it's much stronger if you eliminate the Sedinds and just focus on Alfredsson/Forsberg/Sundin/Zetterberg/Lidstrom/Lundqvist.
I think the low ranking of the Swedish team is based mostly on how they played. On talent, they are undoubtedly ahead of Czech Republic, though I would argue that the Czechs had a stronger tournament. They are the only gold medal winning team that lost two games however (both convincingly) which hurts them.
Last edited:
Incognito
Registered User
No, I agree with that. The 2006 Swedish Olympic Team had a lot of talent and to say otherwise isn't giving them their due credit.
Sweden was better in Salt Lake City and destroyed Canada in group game. That team was more deserving of gold than the Torino one. Loosing to Belarus was not Salos fault but attitude problem. That Sweden/Canada semifinal in 2002 could have been great matches of the current olympic era but was not to be.
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 19,805
- 15,466
Well, he saved 37 other shotsand I think the Czechs were the better team in that game. Luongo got his chance to save the day, it wasn't like the defence allowed 20 shots only, like in Sochi.
I stumbled across that game. Hadn't seen it in nearly 10 years. Canada plays poorly, but Luongo is very strong.
No. He let in 2 goals that an amateur could have stopped, especially the dribbler from the blue line, and he was the reason the game went into O.T. Make the big stops but let in the easy one... same old Bobby Lu.
Yes. This probably is correct. The Czech's Golden Generation needed to be given more credit and this does that.
True. They beat three super-powers in the playoffs. The US, Canada, and Russia. I think that the only tournament that is close to that is Vancouver for Canada (Russia, Slovakia, USA).
i have to admit the first game, Canada got beaten. it was the first time on the bigger ice and they tried to emulate Hardy Nilsson's torpedo system which backfired. Also having Cujo in net wasn't the best choice. Once Canada got their act together and played dominant hockey, i do believe the outcome of the semi final would have been reversed.
either way could've would've should've, Sweden shouldn't have looked past Belarus
I've personally never ever seen a team dominate like 14 Canada did. Sure they weren't scoring that many goals, but I think that a lot of times it was due to other teams collapsing defensively, knowing what they were up against. That team had control of every single game they played.
Nemesis Prime
Registered User
100% agree. One of the most sofisticated hockey performance I have ever seen.....
