The "next generation"

[Canuck21t]

As much as Russia has superiority in forwards, the U.S. has superiority in defense and goaltending. You can disagree, that's fine, we can't all agree on everything, we have our own opinions, influenced by bias or not. Either way, however, Rabid Ranger does have an argument, so don't be so quick to attack his opinion just because you disagree.

That is not my point. You have good arguments in favor of the USA and so does Rabid Ranger, but the latter can't seem to accept others' opinion. Over and over Rabid Ranger is saying how can people think Russia will be better and it's not just in this thread. Whenever someone ranks the USA lower than Russia, he will hunt those people down to his last breath. I don't really mind since this is a place to voice our opinion after all. I just wanted to point out how persistant he is. It's good and annoying at the same time.

 

[Postman]

That is not my point. You have good arguments in favor of the USA and so does Rabid Ranger, but the latter can't seem to accept others' opinion. Over and over Rabid Ranger is saying how can people think Russia will be better and it's not just in this thread. Whenever someone ranks the USA lower than Russia, he will hunt those people down to his last breath. I don't really mind since this is a place to voice our opinion after all. I just wanted to point out how persistant he is. It's good and annoying at the same time.

I see your point.

I don't think Rabid is the only one to do it, but you can't blame someone for supporting players from his home country. I think he just firmly believes the U.S. to have better prospects than Russia, so he'll debate it to the death with anyone who disagrees. At least he does so with informed opinions and doesn't flame people who are on the opposing end of the argument.

 

[arrbez]

Miles better? How so?

If we're counting current NHL players, and not just prospects, then for the moment i think Russia is miles ahead of the USA in terms of forwards. maybe not in depth, but in quality at the top end. I would have to consider any player who's proven they can play at high level in the NHL over a player who hasn't played, or produced in the NHL. Also, Russia has a "surefire franchise player" in Ovechkin, who is aparently good enough to play at the world cup. So with Kovalchuk (a grade A superstar) and Zherdev (the makings of a superstar), i would have to rate them far ahead of the states. The USA has a great group coming into the NHL. There's been a bumper crop of good defensemen from the states lately, but lets face it, they don't have much going for them as far as young star forwards yet. Some guys just can't produce in the NHL for some reason, so I would rate a few proven players above a bunch of prospects. Robbie Schremp could turn into the second coming of Pat Falloon, you never know...

 

[Rabid Ranger]

That is not my point. You have good arguments in favor of the USA and so does Rabid Ranger, but the latter can't seem to accept others' opinion. Over and over Rabid Ranger is saying how can people think Russia will be better and it's not just in this thread. Whenever someone ranks the USA lower than Russia, he will hunt those people down to his last breath. I don't really mind since this is a place to voice our opinion after all. I just wanted to point out how persistant he is. It's good and annoying at the same time.

First of all, I can, and do accept other people's opinions. For the record, I'm very appreciative of Russian hockey, and the talent of the players from that country. I also think that Russia has a superior stable of forward prospects than the United States, and the defense isn't far behind. That doesn't change my assertion that the U.S. has an overall better future in the sport. I will argue that point until I'm blue in the face, and it's mainly because I see so many posters, mainly Canadian, discounting American hockey in general, and it's prospects in particular. I'll try to tone it down a bit, but I won't go away!!!!

 

[Rabid Ranger]

If we're counting current NHL players, and not just prospects, then for the moment i think Russia is miles ahead of the USA in terms of forwards. maybe not in depth, but in quality at the top end. I would have to consider any player who's proven they can play at high level in the NHL over a player who hasn't played, or produced in the NHL. Also, Russia has a "surefire franchise player" in Ovechkin, who is aparently good enough to play at the world cup. So with Kovalchuk (a grade A superstar) and Zherdev (the makings of a superstar), i would have to rate them far ahead of the states. The USA has a great group coming into the NHL. There's been a bumper crop of good defensemen from the states lately, but lets face it, they don't have much going for them as far as young star forwards yet. Some guys just can't produce in the NHL for some reason, so I would rate a few proven players above a bunch of prospects. Robbie Schremp could turn into the second coming of Pat Falloon, you never know...

Fair points. I have no problem admitting the U.S. lacks an elite offensive game breaker at this point. Maybe a guy like Parise or Schremp can be that guy, who knows? The trend over the past few years is the Mike York type of player to come from the U.S. Hard working two-way types that top out at about 60 points a season. Valuable to be sure, but not exactly elite. Hopefully that changes.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

I see your point.

I don't think Rabid is the only one to do it, but you can't blame someone for supporting players from his home country. I think he just firmly believes the U.S. to have better prospects than Russia, so he'll debate it to the death with anyone who disagrees. At least he does so with informed opinions and doesn't flame people who are on the opposing end of the argument.

Thanks for the support in this thread. As a fellow fan of USA Hockey, I salute you sir!

 

[Postman]

Thanks for the support in this thread. As a fellow fan of USA Hockey, I salute you sir!

No problem man, I know how it is feeling that the U.S. prospects don't get enough credit, seeing as how these boards are made up of mostly Canadian posters. The U.S. is like the Carolina Hurricanes of international hockey.

 

[BlueAndWhite]

I think he has a legit argument. Russia indeed has a better crop of forwards, but their superiority ends there.

As for defensive and goalie depth, if we were only to take players 24 and under, this is how the two countries stack up:

U.S.:
*Leopold
*Orpik
Suter
Komisarek
Gleason
Whitney
*Jillson
*Tanabe
Stuart
Hainsey
Ballard
*Hale
*Martin
*Liles
Welch
Thelen

Russia:
*Kalinin
Tjutin
Kolstov
Grebeshkov
Knyazev
*Volchenkov
Babchuk
Kadeykin
Kondratiev
Lyamin

*Already in the NHL full-time

There's a notable difference in quantity at first glance, but also in quality, IMO. Not to mention you see many of the U.S. defensemen have already found full-time jobs in the NHL, while only two notable Russian defensemen have. Guys like Komisarek, Tjutin, Kondratiev, Hainsey, Gleason, Babchuk, and Grebeshkov have also played some games, but none have yet stuck for a full season. And although Russia has the blue chip forwards that the U.S. doesn't have, the U.S. has the blue chip defensemen that Russia doesn't in Suter, Komisarek, and Whitney who are all top 10 picks (this is if you wanna leave Leopold out of the discussion). Not to mention they seem to churn out at least one top defenseman in each draft.

1.) Well the reason that many U.S. defenseman have already found full-time jobs is because they are older, and thus should be further along in their development.

Leopold - draft in 1999 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player
Orpik - drafted in 2000 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (79 games)
Jillson - drafted in 1999 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (138 games)
Tanabe - drafted in 1999 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (296 games)
Hale - drafted in 2000 (23 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (69 games)
Martin - drafted in 2000 (23 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (70 games)
Liles - drafted in 2000 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (79 games)

Now take a look at the Russian list - of all the guys you have listed as non-full time players, ALL are at least two years younger than the full-time American defenseman and only two were drafted before the 2002 draft (Kodratiev and Knyazev went in 2001).

2.) If you're including a guy like Tanabe and Leopold, then I think guys like Vishnevski and Andrei Markov should be on the list as well. Vishnevski is as old as these guys and Markov is a year older (I believe, I'm not sure...)

 

[Canuck21t]

First of all, I can, and do accept other people's opinions. For the record, I'm very appreciative of Russian hockey, and the talent of the players from that country. I also think that Russia has a superior stable of forward prospects than the United States, and the defense isn't far behind. That doesn't change my assertion that the U.S. has an overall better future in the sport. I will argue that point until I'm blue in the face, and it's mainly because I see so many posters, mainly Canadian, discounting American hockey in general, and it's prospects in particular. I'll try to tone it down a bit, but I won't go away!!!!

You can be annoying but if you think you have valid points, than go ahead. Don't even tone down, you have all the right to express yourself. I was just saying how persistant you are and can get on my nerve but who am I to critizice eh? Cheers buddy.

 

[arrbez]

The U.S. is like the Carolina Hurricanes of international hockey.

ouch, i don't think that's quite fair to USA hockey

 

[Zine]

If you're including a guy like Tanabe and Leopold, then I think guys like Vishnevski and Andrei Markov should be on the list as well. Vishnevski is as old as these guys and Markov is a year older (I believe, I'm not sure...)

Don't forget Kalinin and Semenov.

 

[BlueAndWhite]

Don't forget Kalinin and Semenov.

Kalinin was already included in the list, but Semenov is another Russian full-time d-man.

 

[stockwizard*]

No problem man, I know how it is feeling that the U.S. prospects don't get enough credit, seeing as how these boards are made up of mostly Canadian posters. The U.S. is like the Carolina Hurricanes of international hockey.

I hope America would start producing some star players. With a market of over 300 million people this is good for the growth of the game.
In some specific regions in the U.S. hockey is wildly popular, in other areas it is totally non existent.
Is it true that the States has the second most amount of hockey rinks in the world only second to Canada? Or is Russia number 1 in the number of rinks?
Just Curious.

 

[Zine]

Is it true that the States has the second most amount of hockey rinks in the world only second to Canada? Or is Russia number 1 in the number of rinks?
Just Curious.

Yeah, the US has the 2nd most.
As of 2001 there were 2,500 indoor rinks in the US.
Other top countries:
Canada (3,350)
Sweden (285)
Finland (202)
Czech Republic (103)
Russia (84)
Slovakia (40)

These and some other interesting stats are at

http://www.ohf.cz/hp/iihftable.html

 

[stockwizard*]

Thanks man,
I didn't realise how many more rinks there are in North America.

 

[Postman]

1.) Well the reason that many U.S. defenseman have already found full-time jobs is because they are older, and thus should be further along in their development.

Leopold - draft in 1999 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player
Orpik - drafted in 2000 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (79 games)
Jillson - drafted in 1999 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (138 games)
Tanabe - drafted in 1999 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (296 games)
Hale - drafted in 2000 (23 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (69 games)
Martin - drafted in 2000 (23 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (70 games)
Liles - drafted in 2000 (24 y.o.) - FULL time NHL player (79 games)

Now take a look at the Russian list - of all the guys you have listed as non-full time players, ALL are at least two years younger than the full-time American defenseman and only two were drafted before the 2002 draft (Kodratiev and Knyazev went in 2001).

2.) If you're including a guy like Tanabe and Leopold, then I think guys like Vishnevski and Andrei Markov should be on the list as well. Vishnevski is as old as these guys and Markov is a year older (I believe, I'm not sure...)

Yes, those U.S. defensemen are older, but the point of the list was defensemen 24 and under. Semenov and Vishnevski were oversights, but Markov would be too old. Add in Paul Mara for the U.S. as well, who I forgot and is 24 years old. There's still more quality and depth on the U.S. list even with that.

The point was, the U.S. has been producing a lot of top notch defensemen since the late 90's drafts, whereas Russia hasn't been producing as much. If you just wanna go younger because Russia DOES have younger D...

Here's defensemen 22 and under:

U.S.:
Suter
Komisarek
Whitney
Gleason
Stuart
Ballard
Welch
Richmond
Thelen

Russia:
Tjutin
Kolstov
Grebeshkov
Knyazev
Babchuk
Kadeykin
Kondratiev
Lyamin

Well quantity is certainly a lot closer, but there's still that issue of the U.S. having three bluechip blueliners while Russia doesn't even have one. Just like the U.S. with Kessel (2006) on forward prospects, Russia looks to have one D bluechipper with Anikeenko in 2005. But again, there will be three notable American D in that draft, in Johnson, Lashoff, and Macias.

 

[SpezNc2]

Thanks man,
I didn't realise how many more rinks there are in North America.

it's because both Canada and USA are big contries...

We have to get rink from vancouver to halifax and from boston to seattle....

The europe is smaller so...

 

[Zine]

Yes, those U.S. defensemen are older, but the point of the list was defensemen 24 and under. Semenov and Vishnevski were oversights, but Markov would be too old. Add in Paul Mara for the U.S. as well, who I forgot and is 24 years old. There's still more quality and depth on the U.S. list even with that.

The point was, the U.S. has been producing a lot of top notch defensemen since the late 90's drafts, whereas Russia hasn't been producing as much. If you just wanna go younger because Russia DOES have younger D...

Here's defensemen 22 and under:

U.S.:
Suter
Komisarek
Whitney
Gleason
Stuart
Ballard
Welch
Richmond
Thelen

Russia:
Tjutin
Kolstov
Grebeshkov
Knyazev
Babchuk
Kadeykin
Kondratiev
Lyamin

Well quantity is certainly a lot closer, but there's still that issue of the U.S. having three bluechip blueliners while Russia doesn't even have one. Just like the U.S. with Kessel (2006) on forward prospects, Russia looks to have one D bluechipper with Anikeenko in 2005. But again, there will be three notable American D in that draft, in Johnson, Lashoff, and Macias.

I'd say Grebeshkov is a blue-chip prospect. Of the players you listed,
I'd say only Suter will likely be better. The only reason Grebeshkov wasn't in the NHL this year was due to his injuries, injuries that significantly hampered his offensive numbers. He's certainly better than Gleason - just ask any Kings fan.

The way I see it - the U.S. is certainly better in goal, and to a lesser extent on D, but what they're are missing is that big game breaker. They don't have a franchise player that can take over a game when called upon. Even their highly touted defense doesn't have a Bouwmeester or Pitkanen type player.
Russia does have these future NHL mega-stars (Kovalchuk, Zherdev, Ovechkin, Malkin).
The U.S. could make an arguement for adding Kessel (although still a few years away), but by that same token Russia could add Vasyunov.
For this reason, I just don't see the U.S. being better than Russia in the future.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

I'd say Grebeshkov is a blue-chip prospect. Of the players you listed,
I'd say only Suter will likely be better. The only reason Grebeshkov wasn't in the NHL this year was due to his injuries, injuries that significantly hampered his offensive numbers. He's certainly better than Gleason - just ask any Kings fan.

First of all, what are you saying, Suter is the only American defensemen (propsect wise) with a potential ceiling higher than Grebeshkov? I don't know how much support you'll find for that opinion. I think there's also *some* Kings fans that won't find as much distinction between he and Gleason.

The way I see it - the U.S. is certainly better in goal, and to a lesser extent on D, but what they're are missing is that big game breaker. They don't have a franchise player that can take over a game when called upon. Even their highly touted defense doesn't have a Bouwmeester or Pitkanen type player.
Russia does have these future NHL mega-stars (Kovalchuk, Zherdev, Ovechkin, Malkin).

So the U.S. is better in goal and on defense, but because Russia possesses a few luminaries on offense it gets the nod? Can you help me understand that a bit better? As for the franchise player argument, I think you overrate Zherdev, Pitkanen, and to a certain extent Bouwmeester. All good players, but "mega-stars?" I don't think so. What Russia has one the U.S. is Kovalchuk and Ovechkin. There's isn't a comparable American player, and there doesn't project to be one, unless Kessel fits the bill. We'll see.

The U.S. could make an arguement for adding Kessel (although still a few years away), but by that same token Russia could add Vasyunov.
For this reason, I just don't see the U.S. being better than Russia in the future.

I still don't see how a couple forwards renders the overall U.S. superiority null and void.

 

[Legionnaire]

Gleason is better, and will be better than Grebeskov. Gleason is already a solid defensive dman, hard shot, and can join the rush. If he fufills his full potential we're looking at a Rob Blake type of dman.

 

[Rails]

The U.S. is like the Carolina Hurricanes of international hockey.

I'd say more like Philadelphia...always good, but not quite good enough.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

I'd say more like Philadelphia...always good, but not quite good enough.

Yeah, just good enough to win the World Cup and this year's WJC's, the silver medal at the SLC Olympics, and the bronze at this year's World Championships among other accomplishments.

 

[Postman]

I'd say more like Philadelphia...always good, but not quite good enough.

It was a tongue-in-cheek comment relating to how U.S. prospects are being underrated (by some in this thread), just like Hurricanes' prospects.

 

[Zine]

First of all, what are you saying, Suter is the only American defensemen (propsect wise) with a potential ceiling higher than Grebeshkov? I don't know how much support you'll find for that opinion. I think there's also *some* Kings fans that won't find as much distinction between he and Gleason.
So the U.S. is better in goal and on defense, but because Russia possesses a few luminaries on offense it gets the nod? Can you help me understand that a bit better? As for the franchise player argument, I think you overrate Zherdev, Pitkanen, and to a certain extent Bouwmeester. All good players, but "mega-stars?" I don't think so. What Russia has one the U.S. is Kovalchuk and Ovechkin. There's isn't a comparable American player, and there doesn't project to be one, unless Kessel fits the bill. We'll see.

I still don't see how a couple forwards renders the overall U.S. superiority null and void.

First, I'm just stating my opinion on the matter. There's no need to get bent out of shape about things.
I'll reiterate my point that the U.S. does not have any foreseeable future superstars. Obviously, this may change because were talking about prospects, but at this point in time they don't have any game breaking prospects that can compare to what Russia and Canada have. The fact is, more often than not, teams with these calibre players end up winning. It's an undeniable fact.

Second, I'll have to disagree with you saying that Pitkanen and Bouwmeester will not be future mega-stars. If these guys aren't, then what future D-men will be?
And, even if you think Zherdev is not in that superstar class, I find it hard to think of any GM that would take any American prospect over him (forwards and defensemen) - the same thing goes for Malkin. In fact, the top US prospect at forward right now (Parise) probably won't even be an NHL first liner, although he should be one of the best 2nd liners in the league.

Yes, the US is better in goal and on D. But the edge the U.S. holds in the defensive department pails in comparison to its shortcomings at forward.
And for this reason alone, I don't see the U.S. future as bright as Russia's.
JMHO

 

[Postman]

In fact, the top US prospect at forward right now (Parise) probably won't even be an NHL first liner, although he should be one of the best 2nd liners in the league.

IMO, Parise, O'Sullivan, and Schremp all have top line star potential. They are not on the same level as Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, or Zherdev, but they do have first line potential.