The bronze team had no Blueger, no Girgensons, no Merzlikins, so it essentially was as far from the best team, as this years team is from them, since Latvia misses Abols, Balinskis and Silovs.
I agree that playing Silovs every game was an unusual desicion and 32 year old Gudlevskis probably wont be able to pool it off, but I dont think the gap is as big, and the two Slovak league goalies are two of the best this league has to offer and are absolutely capable of taking some of the load.
While no one argues that Balinskis is the best D Latvia has to offer, during the Bronze run he had just 2 assists and +2 in 10 games. Freibergs, for example, had 1+3 and a +5. Its not like Balinskis is carying every Latvia game, and without him, top pairs of Jaks - Rubins and Freibergs - Zile is good enough and I dont agree that they are not of decent quality.
While Latvia has no centers on the level of Kasper or Texier, Im not sure why playing "Slovak league level" bottom liners means Latvia is on the same level as Austria with 17 ICEHL players or France with 12 League Magnus players.
Merzlikins is just an addition by subtraction for the Latvian NT, sadly that's just how it is. Not having him indeed means almost nothing. And almost the same applies to Girgensons, although he would no doubt be a useful cog in a machine, he was never really a key player for Latvia unlike Abols, Balinskis and Silovs.
Also the math itself, "as far from the best team, as this years team is from them" is just not true since for countries with a limited player pool, replacing a few players is relatively easy because you just move the similar quality players up the depth chart. Like, missing Merzlikins is meaningless. Missing Girgensons means Kenins or Dzierkals get moved up the ladder. But if you miss another 3 guys, it means Batna is your new 1st line center. The weight of each loss isn't an arithmetic progression, it's a geometric one.
In Balinskis case, it wasn't his job to produce points. His job was to play the tough matchups and to prevent Latvia from getting completely buried in their own end. So the fact that he finished with a positive +/- at all is admirable. Freibergs, on the other hand, I think we all know what he can offer both offensively and defensively. Let's face it, he is the defensive version of Roberts Bukarts. He was great for Zlin, he moved to the good Extraliga teams where he flopped without contributing at any end of the ice, he then tried himself at the KHL and was basically a complete waste of space. Now he carved himself a decent if unspectacular role for the decent Extraliga team but is that good enough at the WC level? As I've said, sure it is enough if the goal is to avoid relegation. But does it move the needle towards the quarterfinals?
Just because some players do play in the ICEHL doesn't mean they are "ICEHL-level" players. Guys like Haudum, Lebler, Schneider can and have played abroad. So when you add Kasper, Baumgartner, Rohrer, Zwerger to that mix it turns out those "ICEHL-level" guys are there to play bottom line roles as well. Meaning Austrian top-6, the guys who play almost 2/3 of the game, is nominally better than the Latvian top-6. And the bottom lines are a toss-up and they play a limited time anyway.
Now I'm not saying Austria has a stronger team than Latvia. Latvians clearly have an edge in goal and on defense but still, it's very close. Both teams have their advantages and disadvantages rather than one clearly outclassing the other. And the same kind of logic applies to France as well. Sure France is still weaker on paper but is a win in the game against them beyond doubt?
