The Real National Team Ranking

[SanDogBrewin]

Also disagree strongly about American hockey not growing. SInce the expansion of the NHL into the southern markets it has caused an exponential explosion of youth hockey players in new regions and even NHL drafted players regularly coming out of Texas, California and Florida among others.

And throw in the growing ratings with NBCsports taking a bigger role in expanding their coverage. NHL Center Ice subscriptions has been up as well.

I lived in Texas last year and was presently surprised at how many sheets of ice there were. Southerners are grasping how cool hockey can be and is.

 

[Xokkeu]

Well if your whole team is locked in 365 days a year only to play ice hockey... it would be a shame if they dident play like a team don't you think? after the Soviet Union fall they was free to go to the NHL or what ever they wanted... but the big red machin was by far the best national hockey team ever played

Reminds me of Spain in soccer. I think in the final they started something like 7 players from Barcelona and all but one of the others was from Real. SO basically the core of the team played together all year round.

It'd be like some NHL team having Crosby, Stamkos, Weber, Keith, Doughty, Toews, Perry and Getzlaf all on the same team.

 

[Yakushev72]

So despite multiple players being drafted out those states, and the numbers of youth players growing every year, those are just anecdotal. But with no evidence of Russia's youth program producing results, they are trending up?

Not following it.

Since the focus of the discussion is power ranking, who has been drafted from what Southern hockey programs, and how do they contribute toward shifting the balance of power in hockey? The Stars have been in Dallas for 21 years now, and yet except for Seth Jones, who seems like a bit of an anomaly, there are no Dallas products currently playing in the NHL, much less on Team USA in the Olympics. According to an article on dallasnews.com, hockey exploded in the Dallas area after the Stars won the Stanley Cup, but long after that is over, youth hockey has lost a little bit of its appeal, and is mostly limited to a few suburbs north of Dallas where the Stars operate programs. I'm not aware of any other productive sources of talent in the Southern US. As far as I know, US players still predominantly flow from the Northeast and Minnesota, Michigan and Illinois.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

Well if your whole team is locked in 365 days a year only to play ice hockey... it would be a shame if they dident play like a team don't you think? after the Soviet Union fall they was free to go to the NHL or what ever they wanted... but the big red machin was by far the best national hockey team ever played

Amazing to think what a National Canadian team working under those conditions as the old soviet teams would have accomplished when you look at how good the Soviet teams were.

A team with even more talent then those guys playing together 365?

Wow, big red machine times 2!!

Too bad we never got to see it, what a juggernaut it would have been.

 

[Lollipop]

I agree (with both posts) but, of course, it's a matter of perspective. I wouldn't put the U.S. at 2 or 3 (currently) but I could see someone making the case.



D-Men are such a crapshoot. It will be interesting to see how Seth Jones' career plays out - a potential superstar.



Well said. It will be tough for Russia to replace the aging stars of OV, Malkin, Datsyuk and Kovalchuk. As others have said, it is amazing that the team that played like a bunch of interchangeable robots 40 years ago, now is played but a bunch of individuals who couldn't spell TEAM.



Sums it up nicely.

What's the case? There's no reason to put USA ahead of Sweden and Finland.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

According to an article on dallasnews.com, hockey exploded in the Dallas area after the Stars won the Stanley Cup, but long after that is over, youth hockey has lost a little bit of its appeal, and is mostly limited to a few suburbs north of Dallas where the Stars operate programs. I'm not aware of any other productive sources of talent in the Southern US. As far as I know, US players still predominantly flow from the Northeast and Minnesota, Michigan and Illinois.

Not true at all, youth programs are all over Texas. Houston, Corpus Christi and Austin all have growing youth programs. Can't find enough good coaches.

Attendance at the minor league games remain high in Texas as well.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

Since the focus of the discussion is power ranking, who has been drafted from what Southern hockey programs, and how do they contribute toward shifting the balance of power in hockey? The Stars have been in Dallas for 21 years now, and yet except for Seth Jones, who seems like a bit of an anomaly, there are no Dallas products currently playing in the NHL, much less on Team USA in the Olympics. According to an article on dallasnews.com, hockey exploded in the Dallas area after the Stars won the Stanley Cup, but long after that is over, youth hockey has lost a little bit of its appeal, and is mostly limited to a few suburbs north of Dallas where the Stars operate programs. I'm not aware of any other productive sources of talent in the Southern US. As far as I know, US players still predominantly flow from the Northeast and Minnesota, Michigan and Illinois.

I wonder if the Great Recession will hurt hockey in the U.S. (and Canada) - given how expensive it is. As someone once said, "Why spend thousands of dollars to sign your kids up for football or hockey when you can give them a ball and tell them to play soccer or basketball?". Add all the worries about concussions and...

My guess, in 10 years, we will see that the turndown in the economy took a huge toll on the game we love.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

What's the case? There's no reason to put USA ahead of Sweden and Finland.

I am no fan of US hockey so I am a bad person to ask. Having said that, I am sure Xokkeu could make a strong case.

 

[Xokkeu]

Since the focus of the discussion is power ranking, who has been drafted from what Southern hockey programs, and how do they contribute toward shifting the balance of power in hockey? The Stars have been in Dallas for 21 years now, and yet except for Seth Jones, who seems like a bit of an anomaly, there are no Dallas products currently playing in the NHL, much less on Team USA in the Olympics. According to an article on dallasnews.com, hockey exploded in the Dallas area after the Stars won the Stanley Cup, but long after that is over, youth hockey has lost a little bit of its appeal, and is mostly limited to a few suburbs north of Dallas where the Stars operate programs. I'm not aware of any other productive sources of talent in the Southern US. As far as I know, US players still predominantly flow from the Northeast and Minnesota, Michigan and Illinois.

I'm not going to do the research for you, since it's obvious you don't even follow the US u20 rosters which generally have 4 or 5 southern players every birth year.

Just off the top of my head:

Top 2015 Goalie prospect Thatcher Demko is CA
Rocco Grimaldi round 2 CA
Shane Gotisbehere round 4 just signed with Flyers is FL
Nic Kerdiles round 2 CA
The Shore brothers round 2, 3 and 6 are from CO
Stefan Noesen Round 1 is a Texas product
Chris Brown round 2 TX
Emerson Etem round 1 CA

 

[Xokkeu]

I am no fan of US hockey so I am a bad person to ask. Having said that, I am sure Xokkeu could make a strong case.

Finland always play as the bigger sum of their parts but their forwards 7-12 and D 4-6 simply aren't as good as Sweden or the US.

They had a dry patch of birth years around 1985-90 but their current crop of 1990s players are going to fill those gaps and if they play above their paper level like usual they'll easily be a threat to grab an Olympic or World Cup gold.

 

[aphyro]

Amazing to think what a National Canadian team working under those conditions as the old soviet teams would have accomplished when you look at how good the Soviet teams were.

A team with even more talent then those guys playing together 365?

Wow, big red machine times 2!!

Too bad we never got to see it, what a juggernaut it would have been.

I have no opinion about that!

Maybe it would work for the canadians maybe not? but i bet it would be hard for Canada to get throug with that in a democrasy... i mean they sure wanna met there familys etc...

 

[The Bad Guy*]

I have no opinion about that!

Maybe it would work for the canadians maybe not? but i bet it would be hard for Canada to get throug with that in a democrasy... i mean they sure wanna met there familys etc...

Well, if the players were under that political system I guess they would not have much choice.

Would have been something to have seen. it was the difference between those old soviet teams being great as opposed to just good.

 

[Mehar]

Grouped into tiers

Canada

--------

USA
Sweden

-------

Russia
Finland

---------

Czechs
Swiss
Slovaks


I see the Finns really trending up with their current U23 group, while I see Russia stagnating a bit, if not trending down. Both Sweden and the US are likely to remain pretty steady through the next four years, but maybe be joined by Finland if all their pieces fall into place.

The Czechs and Slovaks are trending down and aren't even tournament threats anyway. The Swiss are just typically solid.

Very well said. I agree with this, except i have Finland in the same tier as Sweden and USA, with Russia clearly below all three countries. I do see Russia stagnating and trending downward despite what others say. The next wave of Russian players are nowhere near as good as Ovechkin, Datsyuk, and Malkin. Datsyuk is turning 36 next month, and i doubt it if he is even around in the next Olympics. Russia's defense is weak compared to other countries, and i do not think it will get better in 4 years time compared to what countries like Sweden and Canada have. Czechs and Slovaks are not threats now and i doubt it if they will be any threats in the years ahead. Best solution for them is to merge again into Czechoslovakia, but that is unlikely to happen.

 

[ViD]

Very well said. I agree with this, except i have Finland in the same tier as Sweden and USA, with Russia clearly below all three countries. I do see Russia stagnating and trending downward despite what others say. The next wave of Russian players are nowhere near as good as Ovechkin, Datsyuk, and Malkin. Datsyuk is turning 36 next month, and i doubt it if he is even around in the next Olympics. Russia's defense is weak compared to other countries, and i do not think it will get better in 4 years time compared to what countries like Sweden and Canada have. Czechs and Slovaks are not threats now and i doubt it if they will be any threats in the years ahead. Best solution for them is to merge again into Czechoslovakia, but that is unlikely to happen.

very interesting perspective on a team that has been the most successful in the WHC last 7 years, medals pretty much every WJHC and starts to be on par with CHL every year in Super Series.

 

[Lollipop]

I still not see how USA is #2. Strange that no one can explain how USA is that.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

I still not see how USA is #2. Strange that no one can explain how USA is that.

I think most of us agree that Sweden is 2nd and Finland is (currently) 3rd.

 

[Xokkeu]

I still not see how USA is #2. Strange that no one can explain how USA is that.

Because they have a better group of players and would likely win a seven game series against anybody except Canada.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

I still not see how USA is #2. Strange that no one can explain how USA is that.

You haven't explained why the US shouldn't be. Through this whole thread you've complained about Canada/World Cup being only in North America which is irrelevant because the 2004 World Cup had it's preliminary games in Europe, you brought up NHL refs for some reason, couldn't explain why and don't think NA hockey fans like IIHF tournaments with no real explanation.

You have made no case to the contrary. Saying "they haven't done zilch" or "they choked in big games" is no explanation.

 

[Mehar]

very interesting perspective on a team that has been the most successful in the WHC last 7 years, medals pretty much every WJHC and starts to be on par with CHL every year in Super Series.

I put no stock in the WHC. Look at team's like Finland, USA, Sweden and Canada. Compare their rosters to Russia, when you have a solid goalie like Bobrovsky to rely on, and stars like Malkin and Ovechkin. WHC is always about Russia having a chance to send a good team to beat up on everyone's C or D team. Canada had Ben Scrivens (a career NHL backup to count on as goalie). It had to rely on guys like Kadri to score goals (LOL).

Best on Best- Russia cannot get it done. In your backyard in Sochi- you lost to USA, got embarrassed by Finland and lost in the QF again, just like in 2010, and just like in the 2004 World Cup. Russia finished 4th in 2006 Olympics, and has not won in the Olympics since 1992 as the CIS. Best on Best- Russia has failed in 6 tournaments, with no medals the last 4. I guess you Russians quickly have forgotten about the Sochi disaster. It was only over three months ago. Never such a host country been embarrassed by their hockey team. Canada got it done under pressure in 2010, but the Russians cracked. The WHC victory last week does not change that reality.

 

[Lollipop]

You haven't explained why the US shouldn't be. Through this whole thread you've complained about Canada/World Cup being only in North America which is irrelevant because the 2004 World Cup had it's preliminary games in Europe, you brought up NHL refs for some reason, couldn't explain why and don't think NA hockey fans like IIHF tournaments with no real explanation.

You have made no case to the contrary. Saying "they haven't done zilch" or "they choked in big games" is no explanation.

The latest 10 years:

USA

WJC: 2 gold, 2 bronze
WHC: 1 bronze
Olympics: 1 silver

Sweden

WJC: 1 gold, 4 silver, 1 bronze
WHC: 2 gold, 1 silver, 3 bronze
Olympics: 1 gold, 1 silver

Sweden has 14 medals. USA has 6 medals the latest 10 years.
Also Russia has 16 medals and Finland had 10 medals. Sorry but 6 medals in 10 years aren't very impressive for a so called #2 country.

If USA has much better players and can win 7 games series against other countries except Canada then why don't we see better results.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

I put no stock in the WHC. Look at team's like Finland, USA, Sweden and Canada. Compare their rosters to Russia, when you have a solid goalie like Bobrovsky to rely on, and stars like Malkin and Ovechkin. WHC is always about Russia having a chance to send a good team to beat up on everyone's C or D team. Canada had Ben Scrivens (a career NHL backup to count on as goalie). It had to rely on guys like Kadri to score goals (LOL).

Best on Best- Russia cannot get it done. In your backyard in Sochi- you lost to USA, got embarrassed by Finland and lost in the QF again, just like in 2010, and just like in the 2004 World Cup. Russia finished 4th in 2006 Olympics, and has not won in the Olympics since 1992 as the CIS. Best on Best- Russia has failed in 6 tournaments, with no medals the last 4. I guess you Russians quickly have forgotten about the Sochi disaster. It was only over three months ago. Never such a host country been embarrassed by their hockey team. Canada got it done under pressure in 2010, but the Russians cracked. The WHC victory last week does not change that reality.

I agree.

Until Russia can get it done at the highest level of competition there is no other choice but to rank them outside the top 4 of Canada,Sweden, Finland and the U.S.

They can win all the WHC'S and do well at the WJC'S all they want but until they can get the job done at the big ones at the senior level they are out of the top 4 for now. And failing to medal at one olympics would be forgiveable, it can happen to anyone. But 3 in a row while even having home ice advantage at one of them? That cannot be discounted.

They have failed to show you can rank them any higher, they just don't have the results to push them in there at the moment. Sochi was their big chance to stake their claim and they fell on their face.

To me it is Canada at 1 with no dispute, Sweden looking pretty good at 2 and Finland and the U.S as a flip the coin for 3.

 

[YMCMBYOLO]

Personally, I have Sweden and even Finland above the USA, as they have been more successful/won more in recent history.

 

[ViD]

I put no stock in the WHC. Look at team's like Finland, USA, Sweden and Canada. Compare their rosters to Russia, when you have a solid goalie like Bobrovsky to rely on, and stars like Malkin and Ovechkin. WHC is always about Russia having a chance to send a good team to beat up on everyone's C or D team. Canada had Ben Scrivens (a career NHL backup to count on as goalie). It had to rely on guys like Kadri to score goals (LOL).

Best on Best- Russia cannot get it done. In your backyard in Sochi- you lost to USA, got embarrassed by Finland and lost in the QF again, just like in 2010, and just like in the 2004 World Cup. Russia finished 4th in 2006 Olympics, and has not won in the Olympics since 1992 as the CIS. Best on Best- Russia has failed in 6 tournaments, with no medals the last 4. I guess you Russians quickly have forgotten about the Sochi disaster. It was only over three months ago. Never such a host country been embarrassed by their hockey team. Canada got it done under pressure in 2010, but the Russians cracked. The WHC victory last week does not change that reality.

seems like a bunch of excuses. While we failed to win best on best, we have definitely found a way to defeat Canada on all levels. 2006 Torino, 5 last WHC, several last WJHC and even a Super Series. The only win Canada has claimed was in 2010 Vancouver.

Russia > Canada against each other. Prove me wrong. You have the titles, but in face to face battles we have been a better side recently.

Take that, we are a top nation and we are going to continue to be the best. We have the winning spirit now and Olympic gold will come soon.

 

[OttawaRoughRiderFan*]

seems like a bunch of excuses. While we failed to win best on best, we have definitely found a way to defeat Canada on all levels. 2006 Torino, 5 last WHC, several last WJHC and even a Super Series. The only win Canada has claimed was in 2010 Vancouver.

Russia > Canada against each other. Prove me wrong. You have the titles, but in face to face battles we have been a better side recently.

Take that, we are a top nation and we are going to continue to be the best. We have the winning spirit now and Olympic gold will come soon.

You keep telling yourself that. Let me know when it happens - but, I won't hold my breath and neither should you. Almost everyone, who is not Russian, sees Russia as number 5 - and falling. Perhaps the hot housing of Russian players will help.

 

[Mehar]

seems like a bunch of excuses. While we failed to win best on best, we have definitely found a way to defeat Canada on all levels. 2006 Torino, 5 last WHC, several last WJHC and even a Super Series. The only win Canada has claimed was in 2010 Vancouver.

Russia > Canada against each other. Prove me wrong. You have the titles, but in face to face battles we have been a better side recently.

Take that, we are a top nation and we are going to continue to be the best. We have the winning spirit now and Olympic gold will come soon.

You are very funny. Everyone knows the WHC is a joke and a second tier tournament, just like the Spengler Cup. When Canada won the Spengler Cup several years ago, i did not celebrate that, because i knew it was a meaningless trophy. What excuses? North Americans do not care about the WHC. Ovechkin and Malkin jumped at the chance to go because they got humilated in Sochi. Look at your roster and everyone elses. You had stars, while Canada had Ben Scrivens and guys like Nazem Kadri to rely on. Look at the good players that turned down the invites for Canada. It is a joke to say the WHC determines who is the best.

By the way- titles is what matters. I could care less about head to head matchups. Switzerland has beaten Canada in 2006 Torino, Spengler Cup and WHC. What does that mean? Means nothing. Russia has failed to win in 6 Best on Best tournaments since 1998. You have Zero Medals the last 3 Olympics, and have not won since 1992 as the CIS. You lost in the QF of the 2004 World Cup.

Win something Best on Best before you proclaim Russia as the best. Everyone knows Russia is Number 5 in the World right now looking up at Canada, Sweden, Finland, and USA. You could not even win against Finland and USA at home in Sochi. You got embarrassed again this year, cracked under pressure, which was the exact opposite of Canada in 2010. Funny how posters were saying before the Olympics- that the winner of the Olympics is the Number One country in the world. If i remember correctly- all last year you said Canada will struggle in Sochi, because of the "Big Ice, Soft Goaltending" and that Russia will win Gold. What happened in the end (LOL)? Pathetic how quickly the Russian posters are forgetting about Sochi. It was only over three months ago, and winning the WHC does not change anything.