The Real National Team Ranking

[ViD]

So Russia dident send their A team to Sochi?

Even tho Putin himself said that the only gold who mattered in Sochi was the Ice hockey gold

My bad it wasent Putin... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/spor...atters-the-hockey-gold-medal/article16794868/ it was Larionov

You need to pay more attention. We are talking about WHC rosters

 

[ViD]

Judging by your wording of the above bolded statement, it sounds like you actually believe that Russia is the #1 hockey country in the world right now ...

It's among the best. Top 3

 

[xxxx]

Russia A team ? Is this a joke ? There was 14 new players on this team and they still dominated.

I was not talking about this year's Team Russia. Just a theory.

The only time Russia had a close to A team was in 2008 and Canada had their best available team at the moment. We still defeated you

Wrong.

In 2008, you had 1 goalie, 6 d-men, and 9 forwards, that's 16 players from the 2010 olympic team. But that 2008 Russian team was definitely not the only one that was close to an olympic team. In 2010 WHC roster, Russia had one goalie, 5 d-men, and 8 forwards that played earlier in Vancouver. That's 14 players (including players like Malkin, Datsyuk, Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, Semin, Gonchar, Fedorov, Kalinin, Afinogenov) from the olympic team, plus another 5 from the 9-player olympic reserve list (Kulemin, Frolov, Tereschenko, Koschechkin, Eremenko).


In 2011, Russia played with Afinogenov, Ovechkin, Belov, Emelin, Grebeshkov, Kalinin, Kovalchuk, Kulemin, Kulikov, Morozov, Radulov, Tarasenko, Tereschenko, Tyutin, Zaripov, Zinovjev. That's 13 players from 2010 olympics. One goalie (Nabokov), 7 forwards, and 5 d-men. Plus another 3 players from olympic reserve list.

In 2012, Russia had 2 d-men from 2010 olympic team (Kalinin, Nikulin) and 3 d-men from 2014 olympic team (Medvedev, Emelin, Nikitin). Then one goaltender from 2010 (Varlamov), and 8 forwards from 2014 olympic team (Ovechkin, Malkin, Datsyuk, Svitov, Popov, Tereschenko, Semin, Kulemin). That's 14 players from both 2010 and 2014 olympics (3+11)

In 2013, Russia had one goaltender from the Sochi team (Varlamov) (+ Bryzgalov from 2010, but he wasn't selected in 2014) - four d-men (Medvedev, Nikulin, Tyutin, Nikulin, Belov), and 7 forwards (Svitov, Popov, Tereschenko, Anisimov, Kuznetsov, Kovalchuk, Radulov) and Ovechkin, but he played only the QF game against the US, where Russia was eliminated. That's overall 12-13 players from the 2014 team.

I think it's not that hard to figure out that if you think that Russia had a near-olympic roster in 2008, than it was very similar in 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013.

 

[Macman]

There was 14 new players on this team and they still dominated.

That's one way to spin it but Russia had considerably fewer new players on its roster in Minsk than any of the other hockey powers. Canada and the U.S. had entirely different rosters from Sochi to Minsk. Sweden had just one player from the Olympics. The Czechs and Slovaks had four and the Finns five.

Russia had by far the most Olympians among the contenders in Minsk and its win reflects that.

 

[JackSlater]

The only time Russia had a close to A team was in 2008 and Canada had their best available team at the moment. We still defeated you

I must have missed the part where Brodeur, Luongo, Pronger, Niedermayer, Boyle, Campbell, Iginla,Thornton, Lecavalier, Savard all played as part of Canada's best available team. You do realize that pretending the 2008 team was nearly Canada's Olympic team doesn't make it true, right?

Fact is that Russia is regularly sending a higher proportion of their Olympic team to this tournament than any other top nation, and thus any objective person is skeptical about what the results mean in comparing teams for best on best competitions. Why should any Canadian be impressed with Russia for winning with 7 Olympians (including its best goaltender and two best players overall) when Canada didn't even have one of its top 50 players at the tournament? Same situation for USA and similar situations for other nations. It's really a no win scenario for Russia. Win and it's expected, lose and it's embarrassing.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

Why?

This is the thing which doesn't make USA #2 country.

A #2 country should do well in all major tournaments. One bronze in WHC is simple not good enough regardless if USA cares or not. If USA is #2, and especially a whole level ahead of next country, then they should do better in WHC. The players who are going cares about winning, be sure about that.

Sweden and Finland do well in all tournaments unlike USA.

Sweden and Finland do not do well in all tournaments at all.


Finland had not won a gold at WJC for almost 20 years and does not medal at the WHC every year and Sweden won gold at the WJC for the first time just a few years ago and does not medal every year the WHC or olympics.

Why do you think they do well every year at all tournaments?

 

[SanDogBrewin]

I disagree. Sweden has outperformed USA in U20. Sweden has 6 medals in WJC, USA only 4 medals.
Sweden has been in every medal round in WJC since 2006. The same can't be said about USA.

About World cup: there's hasn't been any world cup in 10 years. How can I count it then?

I like how you always conveniently cut out a year that would add a significant Medal, 2004 Gold Medal, to the US medal count in the WJC. That makes 3 Gold Medals for the US to 1 for Sweden since 2004.

But I already said that I think Sweden should be ranked higher than the US. You can't remove tournaments, that you don't approve of, to fit your argument. The World Cup is significant and it will be back.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

A #2 country should do well in all major tournaments. One bronze in WHC is simple not good enough regardless if USA cares or not. If USA is #2, and especially a whole level ahead of next country, then they should do better in WHC. The players who are going cares about winning, be sure about that.

How can the US or Canada do better when they have no control over the roster ?

With the NHL playoffs happening there is no control what roster you can send. If the WHC got pushed back 2 weeks then I could see you have a legit argument. The US had a good roster in 2013 because there was some luck in which players NHL teams didn't make the playoffs.

 

[Xokkeu]

Why?

This is the thing which doesn't make USA #2 country.

A #2 country should do well in all major tournaments. One bronze in WHC is simple not good enough regardless if USA cares or not. If USA is #2, and especially a whole level ahead of next country, then they should do better in WHC. The players who are going cares about winning, be sure about that.

Sweden and Finland do well in all tournaments unlike USA.

Because they send a U23 team every year.

If you want to talk about program history, then it's an easy mathematical equation. If you want to talk about who has the best group of players, it's a different discussion.

 

[Urbanskog]

The World Cup isn't even organized by the IIHF... I personally don't give any value to it.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

The World Cup isn't even organized by the IIHF... I personally don't give any value to it.

Fine.

But just make sure to keep that same stance if and when the team you cheer for ever wins it.

 

[Urbanskog]

Fine.

But just make sure to keep that same stance if and when the team you cheer for ever wins it.

Well, Finland wasn't far from winning it last time.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

Well, Finland wasn't far from winning it last time.

Exactly.

What happens if next time out they do when it?

Will you and other Finnish posters attach no value to it?

My guess is that you and all others will, just like Russian fans attach great value to their Canada Cup victory in 1981and U.S fans here do with the 1995 win.

I am willing to be proven wrong when it happens, and it will happen sooner or later.

I am very confident I will be proven correct though, very confident.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

I sure do have to not post so damn fast sometimes, "when" instead of "win" looks pretty bad.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

The World Cup isn't even organized by the IIHF... I personally don't give any value to it.

Just for that reason ?

 

[Urbanskog]

Exactly.

What happens if next time out they do when it?

Will you and other Finnish posters attach no value to it?

My guess is that you and all others will, just like Russian fans attach great value to their Canada Cup victory in 1981and U.S fans here do with the 1995 win.

I am willing to be proven wrong when it happens, and it will happen sooner or later.

I am very confident I will be proven correct though, very confident.

Nope. The NHL should cooperate with IIHF and not just create their own World Cup which is why I'm against this tournament.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

Nope. The NHL should cooperate with IIHF and not just create their own World Cup which is why I'm against this tournament.

O.K, I am holding you to that.

Just wondering, I wonder what the t.v ratings in Finland were for that World cup final?

Would be interesting to see. I wonder if i can find that anywhere for curiosity sake.

 

[JackSlater]

If you want to talk about program history, then it's an easy mathematical equation. If you want to talk about who has the best group of players, it's a different discussion.

I think that judgements based on players do not even enter the thought process for many European fans. I honestly wonder whether many of them thought that Argentina was the world's best basketball nation after the 2004 Olympics.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

Just for that reason ?

yep, that seems to be the determining factor for most of them.

 

[The Bad Guy*]

I think that judgements based on players do not even enter the thought process for many European fans. I honestly wonder whether many of them thought that Argentina was the world's best basketball nation after the 2004 Olympics.

Most likely.

 

[Urbanskog]

Just wondering, I wonder what the t.v ratings in Finland were for that World cup final?

Would be interesting to see. I wonder if i can find that anywhere for curiosity sake.

No idea, perhaps someone else can answer that.

 

[SanDogBrewin]

Well, Finland wasn't far from winning it last time.

So the players definitely enjoyed it

 

[Urbanskog]

So the players definitely enjoyed it

Much possible, I only said that I don't value it.

 

[Macman]

The World Cup isn't even organized by the IIHF... I personally don't give any value to it.

So you place greater value on a lower-calibre tournament just because of who has their initials on it?

 

[Urbanskog]

So you place greater value on a lower-calibre tournament just because of who has their initials on it?

Why does the NHL have to create its own, unofficial tournament? Why can't it cooperate with the IIHF instead and work on developing the WCH?