Who Would Make Canada's Roster If There Was Olympics This Year?

[JackSlater]

Spot on. It’s not like Canada doesn’t have any depth either. Robert Thomas, Barzal, Marner and Point supplement the generational core of McDavid, MacKinnon, Crosby and Bedard. I also think a high-stakes shooter like Verhaege will be huge for Canada. You also have a plethora of two-way forwards, which are important in best-on-bests in Stone, Marchand, Horvat, Konecny, Danault and Reinhart

It’s just that the Americans have better scoring depth this time around due to poor Canadian drafting in the late 2010s. Byfield, McTavish, Fantillli and Celebrini are paving the way for the future.

There is depth, but it's relative. I'd rather compare Canada to what Canada has shown it's capable of rather than USA or any other country at the moment, at least when assessing whether depth is in a good place. I don't think anyone doubts that a potential team Canada is good enough to win. The reason Canada has dominated at the best on best level is due to generally having the most talented team by a wide margin, and that should be the goal.

I'd love to see the players you mentioned in a tournament sooner than later. The 2025 all star thing should help too. Marner for example brings positives and negatives, so I'd like to see him play internationally again or in some big games before 2026 to get another relevant look at him. I'd be quite happy to see him, Point, and Konecny recreate their 2017 line at one of the next two world championships in fact.

 

[Nucks2001]

There is depth, but it's relative. I'd rather compare Canada to what Canada has shown it's capable of rather than USA or any other country at the moment, at least when assessing whether depth is in a good place. I don't think anyone doubts that a potential team Canada is good enough to win. The reason Canada has dominated at the best on best level is due to generally having the most talented team by a wide margin, and that should be the goal.

I'd love to see the players you mentioned in a tournament sooner than later. The 2025 all star thing should help too. Marner for example brings positives and negatives, so I'd like to see him play internationally again or in some big games before 2026 to get another relevant look at him. I'd be quite happy to see him, Point, and Konecny recreate their 2017 line at one of the next two world championships in fact.

You bring up very valid points and while Canada has regressed in some areas (particularly goaltending). I think the rest of the world has just gotten better and is skewing our perception of things. The USA doesn’t need Dubinsky, JVR, Whitney, or Stepan on their teams anymore.

The biggest thing that Canada has going for them is we have proven winners and big-time performers. The USA is lacking in those areas for sure. We have the best playoff performer in the NHL (MacKinnon), Point, Makar, the greatest winner of his generation (Crosby), and Marchand and Stone.

I will agree with you that our depth is not as amazing as prior Team Canada rosters, but that’s just goes to show that Canada can still put up a good roster despite half-a-decade of weak drafting. Shows how strong of a nation we are

 

[Mehar]

Goaltending is such a crap shoot. Skinner, Jarry, Hill?

Those are the three guys right now. The Starting Job would be up for grabs between them.

 

[SimpleJack]

He’s already much better than I thought; on a playoff team he puts up a hundred points and should be playing in Canada’s top 6. Think he’s already a top 30 player in the league and hopefully next year he can take a step towards the top 10

As a Hawks fan that’s had the opportunity to watch the vast majority of his games and really get to watch him a lot I will say, without being overly biased or too much of a homer, and without looking too much into just stats and #s….that Bedard has been 100% as advertised. He’s sensational and will only get better. The Hawks and fans like myself still don’t understand just how lucky we were to land a gem like this.

 

[JackSlater]

You bring up very valid points and while Canada has regressed in some areas (particularly goaltending). I think the rest of the world has just gotten better and is skewing our perception of things. The USA doesn’t need Dubinsky, JVR, Whitney, or Stepan on their teams anymore.

The biggest thing that Canada has going for them is we have proven winners and big-time performers. The USA is lacking in those areas for sure. We have the best playoff performer in the NHL (MacKinnon), Point, Makar, the greatest winner of his generation (Crosby), and Marchand and Stone.

I will agree with you that our depth is not as amazing as prior Team Canada rosters, but that’s just goes to show that Canada can still put up a good roster despite half-a-decade of weak drafting. Shows how strong of a nation we are

I think it's pretty easy to separate where Canada is at from where the other countries are. Certainly USA and Finland are stronger than they have been before. I agree that at the moment there are some question marks surrounding USA's key players, but it's a one game elimination scenario and they have enough elite players now that plenty of options can swing a single game. Canadian fans seem overly fixated on USA, partly due to talent ad partly due to some of the best Americans playing on Canadian teams, but the field in general is Canada's concern.

I'm curious to hear thoughts on the ideal partner for Makar. I don't love Toews for this level of play. Maybe Morrissey would be a good fit, though I would like someone a bit more defensively inclined in a perfect situation.

 

[Nucks2001]

I think it's pretty easy to separate where Canada is at from where the other countries are. Certainly USA and Finland are stronger than they have been before. I agree that at the moment there are some question marks surrounding USA's key players, but it's a one game elimination scenario and they have enough elite players now that plenty of options can swing a single game. Canadian fans seem overly fixated on USA, partly due to talent ad partly due to some of the best Americans playing on Canadian teams, but the field in general is Canada's concern.

I'm curious to hear thoughts on the ideal partner for Makar. I don't love Toews for this level of play. Maybe Morrissey would be a good fit, though I would like someone a bit more defensively inclined in a perfect situation.

Ur 100% right. Canada doesn’t have a prime Drew Doughty or Shea Weber right now. Those were two defencmen that excelled at both ends of the ice, but brought more of a shutdown role with offensive juice.

I still think a Toews-Makar pairing makes the most sense as these guys have built-in chemistry which is so important to have in a D-partner for a short tournament. If it was up to me tho, I’d had someone else and I’d want Morrisey running the offence on another pairing. Makar shines the most when he has the puck on his stick.

Toews fills more of a Vlasic role for this team and he should be on Team Canada. I don’t think he should be on the 1st line, but the lack of options on LD combined with his chemistry with Makar make him a lock for that 1st pairing IMO.

 

[jfc64]

Come on, you know it. Give Dubois a month to prepare and he'll be fine.

MacKinnon - Point - McDavid
Dubois - Suzuki - Barzal
Marchand - Crosby - Bedard
Byfield - Horvat - Thomas
MacTavish

Weegar - Makar
- Sanderson
Chychrun - Bouchard
- Dobson

 

[SOLR]

Not sure how Sam Reinhart is still being ignored. Hoping Kirby Dach follows a similar long curve.
Celebrini might just have enough time to get there, assuming he doesn't hurt himself.

(lots of hockey to be played before Feb 2026, clearly we are seeing some young ones emerge this year)

Bedard - McDavid - MacTavish (as long as MacTavish gets to 60+ pts, + grinding mode by that time)
Mackinnon - Point - Marner
Byfield - Suzuki - Reinhart (as long as Byfield gets to 70-75 pts by that time)
Celebrini - Crosby - Barzal ( as long Celebrini gets 60 pts in his rookie season)

Horvat - Boeser - Stone
Perfetti - Dach - Thomas
Lafreniere

I don't see how Marchand, Scheifele, Tavares etc. are still relevant by 2026.

 

[NordiquesForeva]

This might be a "hot take" but I'm unsure as to how much forward depth truly matters at the best-on-best level. Going back to the beginning of the Yzerman/Babcock regime, these have been our 4th lines at best-on-bests:

2010: Marleau - Thornton - Heatley (Bergeron)
2014: Sharp - Duchene - St. Louis (Tavares: Injured)
2016: Thornton - O'Reilly - Duchene (Giroux)

Aside from Marleau's time on the PK in 2010, these lines didn't see much ice time at ES or special teams as the games increased in importance. Babcock would roll three lines and three defense pairings, with those players getting the bulk of special teams ice time as well.

Now, a different head coach could certainly adopt a different approach and spread out the ice time more evenly, but from my perspective the only areas where quality of depth truly matters is:

1) in providing optionality to the coach early in the tournament when he's shaking out his line formations - for example, Toews started the 2010 Olympics as our 13th forward but fairly rapidly started receiving more and more ice time and if I'm not mistaken got the most ice time of any forward through the playoff/medal round. Conversely, Sharp started the 2014 Olympics on Toews' wing but quickly fell down the depth chart and didn't play much at all in the playoff/medal round.

2) providing quality replacements in the event of injury - Duchene was certainly adequate in replacing Tavares in 2014, but both players were #4 centers and neither moved the needle a whole lot when they were playing.

The importance of the depth pieces is that they're able to provide versatility and optionality for the coaching staff in the event of #1 and #2 above. International experience is a plus, as is a strong track record in the NHL playoffs. So they need to be good players that won't be out of place at an international tournament, but the management team doesn't need to overthink it either.

I guess you could say that selecting some younger players for depth roles provides them with experience for future tournaments, but Canada doesn't really do that as far as I can tell. Maybe with goaltending.

All to say, in the lead up to the next tournament we (the collective we, here, on Twitter/X, TSN, etc.) will spend the majority of the time filling in the blanks on the 4th line and 3rd defense pairings, but the meat of the team in terms of quality, importance to winning gold, and how much they'll play will have been locked in place months earlier. Canada will live and die with McDavid, Makar, MacKinnon, Crosby and a few others - not with Konecny, Suzuki, Horvat, Reilly, or whoever else ends up in depth roles on the team.

 

[NordiquesForeva]

Ur 100% right. Canada doesn’t have a prime Drew Doughty or Shea Weber right now. Those were two defencmen that excelled at both ends of the ice, but brought more of a shutdown role with offensive juice.

I still think a Toews-Makar pairing makes the most sense as these guys have built-in chemistry which is so important to have in a D-partner for a short tournament. If it was up to me tho, I’d had someone else and I’d want Morrisey running the offence on another pairing. Makar shines the most when he has the puck on his stick.

Toews fills more of a Vlasic role for this team and he should be on Team Canada. I don’t think he should be on the 1st line, but the lack of options on LD combined with his chemistry with Makar make him a lock for that 1st pairing IMO.

I think Toews is closer to prime Doughty than he is to Vlasic in terms of his 2-way ability, and I also think Makar is better than anyone on those 2010 + 2014 teams. The LHS/RHS balance and chemistry that that pairing brings is incredibly valuable as well. Canada's problem will be the #3 - #6 spots in the defense group, not the top pairing. Morrissey is there, probably Dobson as well, but honestly we're pretty thin from #3-6 relative to 2010 and 2014.

2010
1. Keith
2. Weber
3. Doughty
4. Pronger
5. Niedermayer
6. Boyle
7. Seabrook

Seabrook obviously didn't play much, and Pronger and Niedermayer were past their primes (additionally, Pronger was never truly at his best for us internationally for what I assume would be officiating differences or injuries), but those two + Boyle provided excellent 2-way quality and outstanding veteran leadership.

2014
1. Doughty
2. Weber
3. Keith
4. Vlasic
5. Pietrangelo
6. Bouwmeester
7. Hamhuis
8. Subban

The top 3 is outrageously strong, and #4-6 is very strong. Bouwmeester was exceptionally experienced on international ice which was an often over-looked fact at the time.

Simply put, I just don't think we measure up at the #3-6 spots relative to previous tournaments. Maybe (hopefully) Dobson can insert himself into that equation, Morrissey is quite good, maybe Power takes a big step and becomes our Pietrangelo. Lots of what-ifs. If I was to guess right now, our forwards will be best in class, goaltending will solve itself and defense will be the weak link going forward.

 

[Roo]

Hyman - McDavid - Marner
Verhaege - MacKinnon - Reinhart
Marchand - Crosby - Stone
Thomas - Point - Koneckny
Schiefele, Horvat

Toews - Makar
Morrisey - Ekbald
Rielly - Pietrangelo

 

[Boonk]

Thomas Harley is starting to break out in Dallas and is really good on both sides of the ice at such a young age, by 2026 I think he's easily in the conversation for a spot on this team.

 

[JackSlater]

This might be a "hot take" but I'm unsure as to how much forward depth truly matters at the best-on-best level. Going back to the beginning of the Yzerman/Babcock regime, these have been our 4th lines at best-on-bests:

2010: Marleau - Thornton - Heatley (Bergeron)
2014: Sharp - Duchene - St. Louis (Tavares: Injured)
2016: Thornton - O'Reilly - Duchene (Giroux)

Aside from Marleau's time on the PK in 2010, these lines didn't see much ice time at ES or special teams as the games increased in importance. Babcock would roll three lines and three defense pairings, with those players getting the bulk of special teams ice time as well.

Now, a different head coach could certainly adopt a different approach and spread out the ice time more evenly, but from my perspective the only areas where quality of depth truly matters is:

1) in providing optionality to the coach early in the tournament when he's shaking out his line formations - for example, Toews started the 2010 Olympics as our 13th forward but fairly rapidly started receiving more and more ice time and if I'm not mistaken got the most ice time of any forward through the playoff/medal round. Conversely, Sharp started the 2014 Olympics on Toews' wing but quickly fell down the depth chart and didn't play much at all in the playoff/medal round.

2) providing quality replacements in the event of injury - Duchene was certainly adequate in replacing Tavares in 2014, but both players were #4 centers and neither moved the needle a whole lot when they were playing.

The importance of the depth pieces is that they're able to provide versatility and optionality for the coaching staff in the event of #1 and #2 above. International experience is a plus, as is a strong track record in the NHL playoffs. So they need to be good players that won't be out of place at an international tournament, but the management team doesn't need to overthink it either.

I guess you could say that selecting some younger players for depth roles provides them with experience for future tournaments, but Canada doesn't really do that as far as I can tell. Maybe with goaltending.

All to say, in the lead up to the next tournament we (the collective we, here, on Twitter/X, TSN, etc.) will spend the majority of the time filling in the blanks on the 4th line and 3rd defense pairings, but the meat of the team in terms of quality, importance to winning gold, and how much they'll play will have been locked in place months earlier. Canada will live and die with McDavid, Makar, MacKinnon, Crosby and a few others - not with Konecny, Suzuki, Horvat, Reilly, or whoever else ends up in depth roles on the team.

Depth at forward isn't necessarily about how well the line that ends up as the fourth line plays. 2010 is a good example of this - Thornton's line started out as basically the second line, he and Heatley weren't very good, and they dropped down the lineup. Canada's fourth line became its best line and the fourth line centre was selected as top forward in the tournament - that's only a realistic possibility on a truly deep team. Off the top of my head some of the top depth guys rose up the roster in 1987 as well, but lines were much more fluid with Keenan.

The next coach may not roll the lines as much as Babcock did, but it is nice to have the possibility that your fourth line might be able to step up if another line falters and go head to head against top lines on other teams. Babcock rolling the lines was also a big part of the 2014 team mauling the other teams with fresh players all game, and it isn't really possible if Canada has any lines that are relative liabilities.

We're looking at a situation where Canada's depth forward are likely to be more of the good enough variety rather than difference makers. Canada has won major tournaments with several forwards that you'd classify as just good enough, but sometimes it's a choice to take those players and sometimes they are all that is available.

 

[Nucks2001]

Depth at forward isn't necessarily about how well the line that ends up as the fourth line plays. 2010 is a good example of this - Thornton's line started out as basically the second line, he and Heatley weren't very good, and they dropped down the lineup. Canada's fourth line became its best line and the fourth line centre was selected as top forward in the tournament - that's only a realistic possibility on a truly deep team. Off the top of my head some of the top depth guys rose up the roster in 1987 as well, but lines were much more fluid with Keenan.

The next coach may not roll the lines as much as Babcock did, but it is nice to have the possibility that your fourth line might be able to step up if another line falters and go head to head against top lines on other teams. Babcock rolling the lines was also a big part of the 2014 team mauling the other teams with fresh players all game, and it isn't really possible if Canada has any lines that are relative liabilities.

We're looking at a situation where Canada's depth forward are likely to be more of the good enough variety rather than difference makers. Canada has won major tournaments with several forwards that you'd classify as just good enough, but sometimes it's a choice to take those players and sometimes they are all that is available.

Considering a lot of people have Brayden Point as their 3rd line centre, I would say he’s a big difference maker.

Robert Thomas is a lot of people’s 4th line centre, who is similar to Jumbo Joe in his playmaking and face-off ability.

Our wingers are worse. We don’t have Rick Nash or prime Mike Richards on the wings. But then again you have to consider the fact that those 2010 and 2014 Canadian teams did not have anyone close to McDavid and MacKinnon when it came to offensive power. We still have good scoring options on the wing imo. Guys like Verhaege have shown in the playoffs that they’re big-time players. Good skill and playmaking in Marner and Barzal.

You also consider the Bedard effect and I don’t think Canada’s depth is as bad as you’re making it out to be.

 

[JackSlater]

Considering a lot of people have Brayden Point as their 3rd line centre, I would say he’s a big difference maker.

Robert Thomas is a lot of people’s 4th line centre, who is similar to Jumbo Joe in his playmaking and face-off ability.

Our wingers are worse. We don’t have Rick Nash or prime Mike Richards on the wings. But then again you have to consider the fact that those 2010 and 2014 Canadian teams did not have anyone close to McDavid and MacKinnon when it came to offensive power. We still have good scoring options on the wing imo. Guys like Verhaege have shown in the playoffs that they’re big-time players. Good skill and playmaking in Marner and Barzal.

You also consider the Bedard effect and I don’t think Canada’s depth is as bad as you’re making it out to be.

I don't think Point is particularly crucial at the best on best level, though I do like his game, and Thomas is no Thornton. That does remind me though of the 2004 World Cup, where Thornton was third line centre and was the best player in the championship game.

I'd say that prime Crosby was at least better than MacKinnon. Also if you're relegated to naming Verhaeghe then that somewhat shows depth issues. Canada used to be able to cut stars, sometimes superstars, and still show up with a loaded forward group. The group available is fine but Canada is less than it was. As for Bedard, we'll see where he is in two years but he isn't a Crosby or McDavid.

 

[TheDoldrums]

Definitely agree that the forward depth feels like a step down. I mean they cut Claude Giroux in his prime a decade ago, there aren't going to be snubs anywhere near that this time.

 

[Nucks2001]

I don't think Point is particularly crucial at the best on best level, though I do like his game, and Thomas is no Thornton. That does remind me though of the 2004 World Cup, where Thornton was third line centre and was the best player in the championship game.

I'd say that prime Crosby was at least better than MacKinnon. Also if you're relegated to naming Verhaeghe then that somewhat shows depth issues. Canada used to be able to cut stars, sometimes superstars, and still show up with a loaded forward group. The group available is fine but Canada is less than it was. As for Bedard, we'll see where he is in two years but he isn't a Crosby or McDavid.

Brayden Point has the led the playoffs in goals twice and is the best match-up guy on this roster. His speed is made for the large ice. He’s absolutely crucial imo. I agree that our depth isn’t as good as previous years, but I don’t think it’s as grave as some people are making it out to be.

 

[JackSlater]

Brayden Point has the led the playoffs in goals twice and is the best match-up guy on this roster. His speed is made for the large ice. He’s absolutely crucial imo. I agree that our depth isn’t as good as previous years, but I don’t think it’s as grave as some people are making it out to be.

I like Point, for me he's one of the clear locks at this time.

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

I think Toews is closer to prime Doughty than he is to Vlasic in terms of his 2-way ability, and I also think Makar is better than anyone on those 2010 + 2014 teams. The LHS/RHS balance and chemistry that that pairing brings is incredibly valuable as well. Canada's problem will be the #3 - #6 spots in the defense group, not the top pairing. Morrissey is there, probably Dobson as well, but honestly we're pretty thin from #3-6 relative to 2010 and 2014.

2010
1. Keith
2. Weber
3. Doughty
4. Pronger
5. Niedermayer
6. Boyle
7. Seabrook

Seabrook obviously didn't play much, and Pronger and Niedermayer were past their primes (additionally, Pronger was never truly at his best for us internationally for what I assume would be officiating differences or injuries), but those two + Boyle provided excellent 2-way quality and outstanding veteran leadership.

2014
1. Doughty
2. Weber
3. Keith
4. Vlasic
5. Pietrangelo
6. Bouwmeester
7. Hamhuis
8. Subban

The top 3 is outrageously strong, and #4-6 is very strong. Bouwmeester was exceptionally experienced on international ice which was an often over-looked fact at the time.

Simply put, I just don't think we measure up at the #3-6 spots relative to previous tournaments. Maybe (hopefully) Dobson can insert himself into that equation, Morrissey is quite good, maybe Power takes a big step and becomes our Pietrangelo. Lots of what-ifs. If I was to guess right now, our forwards will be best in class, goaltending will solve itself and defense will be the weak link going forward.

Doughty was amazing in 2010

 

[SOLR]

Definitely agree that the forward depth feels like a step down. I mean they cut Claude Giroux in his prime a decade ago, there aren't going to be snubs anywhere near that this time.

Yeah there will be, we are just not in 2026.

 

[Liga]

1 center: Crosby
2 center: Mcdavid
3 center: Bedard
4 center: Barzal

 

[Nucks2001]

1 center: Crosby
2 center: Mcdavid
3 center: Bedard
4 center: Barzal

Both Bedard and Barzal will likely play the wing this tournament. Crosby may play on the wing depending on how Team Canada sets up their top 6. He would be the perfect 3rd line centre and may play 2nd line centre although they would probably have Mack at centre with Crosby on his LW.

 

[NordiquesForeva]

Both Bedard and Barzal will likely play the wing this tournament. Crosby may play on the wing depending on how Team Canada sets up their top 6. He would be the perfect 3rd line centre and may play 2nd line centre although they would probably have Mack at centre with Crosby on his LW.

What is NYI's rationale for playing Barzal at RW, not C, besides Horvat being a C and Roy (and Lambert before him) preferring to keep them together? I've always thought Barzal's biggest strength was his skating and puck carrying/distribution through the middle of the ice (centre responsibilities), and that the typical winger responsibilities (board play, shooting, playing off the centre) are more or less his weaknesses.

Its a moot point at the best on best level as I agree that due to the logjam at centre Barzal would have to move over, but I've always wondered about NYI's thought process with moving Barzal to the wing. Seems sub-optimal imho.

 

[Nucks2001]

What is NYI's rationale for playing Barzal at RW, not C, besides Horvat being a C and Roy (and Lambert before him) preferring to keep them together? I've always thought Barzal's biggest strength was his skating and puck carrying/distribution through the middle of the ice (centre responsibilities), and that the typical winger responsibilities (board play, shooting, playing off the centre) are more or less his weaknesses.

Its a moot point at the best on best level as I agree that due to the logjam at centre Barzal would have to move over, but I've always wondered about NYI's thought process with moving Barzal to the wing. Seems sub-optimal imho.

His poor face-offs and defensive play as a centre might be why they switched him to wing. His speed bursts would be better used on the wing. I agree with your other points tho. I don’t watch much Islanders games but I would imagine Barzal does most of the puck carrying and distribution while Horvat is just there to fill any voids and provide a front-of-net presence.

 

[HockeyWooot]

Thomas Harley is starting to break out in Dallas and is really good on both sides of the ice at such a young age, by 2026 I think he's easily in the conversation for a spot on this team.

Believe Harley is American?