World Cup 2016: Best On Best?

[Karma_]

Didn't vote, because the term "best on best" is personally meaningless for me, and it feels like marketing term first and foremost.

But technically neither this or last World Cup can be considered as such, because in both tournaments chosen players were cut by the organizer, in 2004 Jere Karalahti and this time Slava Voynov.

I am following the tournament despite mixed feelings towards it, but if the price of this tournament is no NHL participation in Olympics, it will be the last time out of principle.

 

[JackSlater]

Well, it has been defined a certain way since 1976, when the first Canada Cup was held. No one argues that the pre-1998 Olympics, annual World Championships, '79 Challenge Cup or Rendez-Vous '87 are "best-on-best", and there is a reason for that. The fact that several of these tournaments produced excellent hockey and involved most of the best players in the world (such is the case with this current World Cup) is beside the point.

It's certainly OK for this World Cup to be considered/defined as something a bit different, and for people to enjoy the hockey, but when certain teams are prohibited from selecting who they deem to be their "best" players, well, the tournament can't really be called best-on-best.

Indeed. I can't see how this tournament is much different from the 1979 Challenge Cup or Rendezvous 87.

There's always a chance. Canada humiliated Switzerland 3-2 in a shootout at the 2010 OG.(BEST ON BEST) Canada destroyed Latvia 2-1 at 2014 OG. (BEST ON BEST)

Canada really humiliated Switzerland in 2006 (best on best) by losing to Switzerland and its three NHLers.

 

[Paul4587]

Interested in seeing anyone who claims that it is a best on best answer the question of whether USA and Canada can select all of their best players. The answer an obvious, and also explains why it is not a best on best.

Yeah I don't see what's so hard to understand about this. A best on best World Cup would imply the top nations in the world who qualify would all be icing teams that were picked from anyone that should be eligible to play for that country.

I've followed a lot of world cups in a lot of different sports and this is by far the most gimmicky of them all.

 

[TheTotalPackage]

Best on best in terms of cramming the most talent available in the tournament? Yes.

Best on best in terms of countries icing their best team possible? No. McDavid should be on Team Canada and Gaudreau, Eichel and Saad should be on Team U.S.A.

 

[Xokkeu]

I could handle Team Europe. Would say fine, Slovakia or Switzerland would be better but okay I can stomach it.


But team North America turns this into an all start exhibition instantly.


The USA team is realistically 3rd or 4th best on paper, and when you take away some of our best offensive talent it drops down to clear 5th.

 

[Dr Awesome]

No. I'm more interested in watching team North America. I love watching international competition even if I have to wake up at 4am. This tourney doesn't have that flavour.

 

[snipes]

Doesn't meet the technical definition for best-on-best. I think we've already established the historical record will have an asterisk.

Having said that, this has been amazing hockey and the best players in the world are playing. This is the deepest #1-8 tournament assembled. I'm along for the ride and enjoying it for what it is.

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

Tough to say. I think Johnny would have made the USA but they just love their size, grit and defence right now. That's how they plan to shut down Canada.

McDavid. Also, if you look back at Canada's history, they really don't ever invite young players to their first eligible olympics ie Crosby 2006.

Tough to say, the US and Canadian national teams tend to favour older players.

 

[hitmen19]

if any country but Canada wins, its going to be considered best on best. if Canada wins, it wont.

 

[zeke]

the most talented hockey tourney in history.

so yes.

this is actually the FIRST time we've ever had an actual best on best tourney. ever.

 

[General Zodd]

I wonder which hurts the most...

Is it Canada needing the shootout to beat Switzerland in the 2010 Olympics?

Is it Canada losing to Switzerland 1-4 at the 2010 WC?

Is it Canada needing OT to beat Switzerland at the 2011 WC?

Is it Canada losing to Slovakia at the 2012 WC?

Is it USA losing to Slovakia at the 2012 WC?

Is it Canada losing to Switzerland at the 2013 WC?

Is it USA losing to Slovakia at the 2013 WC?

Is it USA losing to Slovakia at the 2015 WC?

Take your pick. I already know what defenders are gonna say next. "Yeah well we didn't have all our best in the WC's". Well neither did they. And who do you think suffered more from it? Who has more depth to choose from?

And I didn't even bring up all the other times Slovakia and Switzerland put up close fights with Canada and the U.S. Or the times when they challenged, and some times beat, Sweden, Finland, Russia and the Czechs.

Slovakia and Switzerland are a step behind the big 6, but they are defenitely ahead of the rest. Yet they are being thrown into the same category as Slovenia, France, Italy and Austria on these forums. With comments like this:

If you think Switzerland or Slovakia are as good or better than Canada in a 7-game series - we might as well crown you King of the World!

 

[oilerbear]

Some pros and cons:

Pro - the best players in the world will be there.

Con - team NA possibly diluting the talent on the 2 NA teams.
- team Europe...

Possibly?

Do some work and check the players rank in EVG/EVP per 60 and PPG/PPP per 60 the last 3 years.

Check the Dmens HSCA shot rates and EVGA to see if the best in the game are all there.

I did this pre tournament to see if there were some dumb choices by mgmt.

 

[xxxx]

the most talented hockey tourney in history.

so yes.

this is actually the FIRST time we've ever had an actual best on best tourney. ever.

this.

 

[Past Considerations]

If you think Switzerland or Slovakia are as good or better than Canada in a 7-game series - we might as well crown you King of the World!

Don't move the goal posts.

 

[Canuckistani]

the most talented hockey tourney in history.

so yes.

this is actually the FIRST time we've ever had an actual best on best tourney. ever.

So by your logic we could split the players up randomly into eight teams (A through H) and it would still be the greatest beat-on-best of all time.

This is what separates international hockey fans from casual fans with little to no regard for national team events.

 

[Xokkeu]

the most talented hockey tourney in history.

so yes.

this is actually the FIRST time we've ever had an actual best on best tourney. ever.

The all star game has more condensed talent so obviously better

 

[Xokkeu]

Tough to say. I think Johnny would have made the USA but they just love their size, grit and defence right now. That's how they plan to shut down Canada.

McDavid. Also, if you look back at Canada's history, they really don't ever invite young players to their first eligible olympics ie Crosby 2006.

Tough to say, the US and Canadian national teams tend to favour older players.

USA already tried to get Eichel and Saad was just left off Sochi. So we know for a fact they are inhibited.

 

[Pavels Dog]

So by your logic we could split the players up randomly into eight teams (A through H) and it would still be the greatest beat-on-best of all time.

This is what separates international hockey fans from casual fans with little to no regard for national team events.

This..

Imagine a Team Europe vs Team NA final. It would be a total joke on the level of the ASG. Just the possibility of that happening means this tournament is not legit like the Olympics.

 

[Xokkeu]

So by your logic we could split the players up randomly into eight teams (A through H) and it would still be the greatest beat-on-best of all time.

This is what separates international hockey fans from casual fans with little to no regard for national team events.

Considering the Czech team and some of the bottom Finland and Europe players, simply taking the top 150 odd players and dividing them up in eight random teams would probably have a better player pool.

 

[llwyd]

Well, it's just isn't - there can't be a question of that. But it's rather close to one, so still an interesting and entertaining tournament.

 

[Elvs]

If you think Switzerland or Slovakia are as good or better than Canada in a 7-game series - we might as well crown you King of the World!

And somehow this should be the determining factor for who can participate? No one is likely to beat Canada in a 7 game series, so let's just give them the World Cup.

While we're at it, we can take away gold medals from nations who won them in the Olympics and WC's, and give them to Canada instead. After all, they earned it as they are the best team on paper and if things were played best of 7 they'd defenitely win.

Next summer Olympics, let's exclude Canada from womens soccer. They're not gonna beat USA or Germany in a best of 7 anyway. And maybe let Usain Bolt sprint alone next time?

 

[JackSlater]

Tough to say. I think Johnny would have made the USA but they just love their size, grit and defence right now. That's how they plan to shut down Canada.

McDavid. Also, if you look back at Canada's history, they really don't ever invite young players to their first eligible olympics ie Crosby 2006.

Tough to say, the US and Canadian national teams tend to favour older players.

We know for fact that Eichel would make the American team, since the GM asked for permission to pick him. We can also be confident that McDavid would make Canada, especially since Babcock aleady said that he thinks some of the young guys would be there if the Young Gunz didn't exist.

the most talented hockey tourney in history.

so yes.

this is actually the FIRST time we've ever had an actual best on best tourney. ever.

Nonsense. Define a best on best tournament. I bet it ends up sounding an awful lot like the all star game. If you claim that a best on best just has all of the best payers, this event still doesn't meet that criteria at all.

this.

We've already seen you call the 2013 WJC a best on best and a tournament composed only of Canadians, broken down by ages, a best on best. You have no idea what the term means. Also funny that you are now contradicting yourself by agreeing with someone who says that this is the first ever best on best. Keep grasping at straws I guess.

So by your logic we could split the players up randomly into eight teams (A through H) and it would still be the greatest beat-on-best of all time.

This is what separates international hockey fans from casual fans with little to no regard for national team events.

Yes, clearly there are some fans who prefer the Alphabet Cup to best on best hockey.

Well, it's just isn't - there can't be a question of that. But it's rather close to one, so still an interesting and entertaining tournament.

I agree, it isn't even a debate. Objectively it is not a best on best. Basically four of the eight teams cannot select all of the best players from the regions they supposedly represent.

 

[Gary Nylund]

And somehow this should be the determining factor for who can participate? No one is likely to beat Canada in a 7 game series, so let's just give them the World Cup.

While we're at it, we can take away gold medals from nations who won them in the Olympics and WC's, and give them to Canada instead. After all, they earned it as they are the best team on paper and if things were played best of 7 they'd defenitely win.

Next summer Olympics, let's exclude Canada from womens soccer. They're not gonna beat USA or Germany in a best of 7 anyway. And maybe let Usain Bolt sprint alone next time?

You can keep the Olympics golds but they're a bit of a gimmick and have asterix next to them for sure IMO, at a hockey tournament that's decided by a shootout.

 

[TeamRenzo]

Team NA23 will lose on purpose against either Canada or USA in the semifinal, so it's not really best on best. Team Europe doesn't seem to care, I would have rather seen Switzerland and Slovakia.

********! Those guys would love nothing more than to beat a team full of the older peers. These guys are all competitors and guess what competitors do...they compete.

Tell me which of the NHL's best players arent playing in this tournament?

 

[Orange Dragon]

You can keep the Olympics golds but they're a bit of a gimmick and have asterix next to them for sure IMO, at a hockey tournament that's decided by a shootout.

Yes, and then put an asterisk to all tournaments without international refs.