WC: General Talk '14 — Canada
- Thread starter NHL Dude 120
- Start date
- Status
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 18,100
- 12,754
Canada has some issues in hockey. Goaltending is weak (one elite goaltender for the whole country) and the teams consistently fail to gel quickly. This year we saw younger players refuse this team in droves. Any of Skinner, Hall, Eberle, Seguin, Benn (all refusals) could have walked onto this team and instantly been the best player on the team. Those kinds of refusals are not really acceptable. It is worse because it was an Olympic year, so the performance will mostly be forgotten by 2018, but this was particularly bad.
I quoted you here to demonstrate the level of talent required to win. Canada sends teams to this tournament good enough to win every single year. The last two Canadian teams were more talented than the opposition by a large amount, and even this year's team was more talented than pretty much every other team (amazing given how lacking they were). Sometimes... all that is required is a bit of fortune. The last two Canadian WC teams blow the 2007 team out of the water in terms of talent, but were unlucky in loses where they outplayed the opposition. Even today (I didn't get to see the game) Canada apparently outplayed Finland. Canada's issue with goaltending is real, and the number of young players turning down the tournament this year is ridiculous, but the talent has been more than sufficient to win. Sometimes things just don't bounce the right way.
This might see more players turn down the offer as they don't want to devote even more time to this tournament. I think the issue is how this tournament should be viewed. I do not think HC views this tournament as a must win. Best on best tournaments are must wins. This tournament is a nice way to gain experience for later, bigger tournaments. I do think it is good to have international experts in the HC system (like Ralph Krueger at the Olympics) but it is also important for Canadian coaches to get some head coaching experience internationally. I do think they should have someone (like Andy Murray) with the team every year in a coaching capacity, but it's also important to give prospective coaches (Babcock in 2004) the opportunity to get more experience.
Is the WC always in Europe? If so, didn't know that.
It was held in USA once and Canada once.
Last edited:
Franck
eltiT resU motsuC
Is the WC always in Europe? If so, didn't know that.
Because Canada and the US never apply to host.
I doubt the US would ever be able to host the tournament successfully, but Canada certainly could if they wanted to, as 2008 showed.
The only reason Canada hosted in 2008 was because the IIHF wanted Canada to host it to celebrate the 100th year. It will not be hosted again because it is in direct competition with the Stanley Cup Playoffs.
Atomos2
Registered User
KuralySnipes
Registered User
KuralySnipes
Registered User
Jussi
Registered User
Nope, not in my lifetime. Canada hosted in 2008, excellent attendance.
KuralySnipes
Registered User
Brewsky
King Of The Ice Mugs
Well said! One poster made a great point earlier in saying that a lot of the guys that play for Canada in this tournament might be exercising their only opportunity to wear the maple leaf sweater. They might not be picked for the Olympics, but they do get a chance to represent Canada here. If no one else wants to take their place, then let them have their day! All Canadian players play hard!
1Gold Standard
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2012
- 7,907
- 199
I was surprised we even made a 1/4 final game...everybody here knows my position and my views as to how Hockey Canada prepares for this event. i.e. they don't really. Until there are fundamental changes at Hockey Canada, Canadians should be prepared for more of these 1/4 flame-outs.
and to JackSlater 5 consecutive years means there's more going on then just not getting the bounces. The teams are improperly selected, poorly coached and lack sufficient preparation time. Seriously, players can't converge on Toronto a week before departing for Europe to practice? They have their first team practice a day before their 1st exhibition game, 5 days before the tournament is set to kick off? What is Hockey Canada too cheap to book ice time or has it become to inconvenient for Hockey Canada to compete for is ice-time with the 500,000 or so beer league players in the country? Why waste our time at all?
and to JackSlater 5 consecutive years means there's more going on then just not getting the bounces. The teams are improperly selected, poorly coached and lack sufficient preparation time. Seriously, players can't converge on Toronto a week before departing for Europe to practice? They have their first team practice a day before their 1st exhibition game, 5 days before the tournament is set to kick off? What is Hockey Canada too cheap to book ice time or has it become to inconvenient for Hockey Canada to compete for is ice-time with the 500,000 or so beer league players in the country? Why waste our time at all?
SillyRabbit
Trix Are For Kids
- Jan 3, 2006
- 8,081
- 7,190
Didn't watch the tournament at all, what exactly was Canada's downfall?
Seems like we literally sent out the C or D squad to this tourny, which even then, should've performed better than they did.
How did the Canuck players play? Nice to see Juice got the "C."
Seems like we literally sent out the C or D squad to this tourny, which even then, should've performed better than they did.
How did the Canuck players play? Nice to see Juice got the "C."
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 18,100
- 12,754
I agree that preparation is lacking. You can compare the Olympic preparation to any WC (European scouting, camp, etc.) and see the big disparity. Getting together for a week in Calgary (big ice) would be nice. I would guess that HC is afraid that the players don't want to commit another week from their off season. I don't know if that is true though, or if such a fear would be valid.
The elimination this year is not surprising - the team was bad. The team in 2010 was bad, and the team in 2011 wasn't great either. 2012 and 2013 were definitely more about bad luck than anything else though. Canada beats those Slovakian and Swedish teams 8/10 times, and even the play in those games would indicate that. Canada under performs at this tournament, but in some instances bad luck is a big factor.
The main issue is still the players who are not at the tournament. Part of that is the players (Hall, Seguin, Skinner, etc.) but also management. Why did they not invite a full 25 man roster? Where was Ryan Johansen's invitation (Read and Schenn invited instead) among others? With the right players invited, Canada can still gain from this tournament even if they lose. Canada 2010 had very young versions of Stamkos, Tavares and Duchene, who have (or will) all gone on to contribute to team Canada at the highest level. Hall and Seguin will probably play for Canada at a best on best at some point, and this would have been a great opportunity for them to be the best players on this team as well as among the best in the entire tournament. One bright spot was MacKinnon, but overall this has to be considered a missed opportunity.
Last edited:
It's always in Europe and always at an inconvenient time for the NHL, which is why no one in NA really cares about it.
In the past, Canada sent bigger stars, but there have been some high profile injuries in the past, which has reduced the tournament's popularity among NA players (Joe Nieuwendyk missed a good chunk of a season after tearing up his knee at the IIHF for example).
At this point Canada mostly uses the tournament to give its young, future stars international experience. Look at how many guys under 22 were on this year's roster. You'd never see that on a serious Team Canada squad.
People shouldn't really get upset over the loss. Team Canada has made a conscious decision to use this tournament as essentially a developmental camp. They pair up a few gritty experienced 3rd line-type players with young, up-and-coming stars.
In the past, Canada sent bigger stars, but there have been some high profile injuries in the past, which has reduced the tournament's popularity among NA players (Joe Nieuwendyk missed a good chunk of a season after tearing up his knee at the IIHF for example).
At this point Canada mostly uses the tournament to give its young, future stars international experience. Look at how many guys under 22 were on this year's roster. You'd never see that on a serious Team Canada squad.
People shouldn't really get upset over the loss. Team Canada has made a conscious decision to use this tournament as essentially a developmental camp. They pair up a few gritty experienced 3rd line-type players with young, up-and-coming stars.
1Gold Standard
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2012
- 7,907
- 199
Mackinnon was exceptional, the best on the entire team...had he played on a line with somebody worthy and who could finish, he would have racked up a hell of a lot more pts. Didn't particularly like the PP set up though and how he was used on the PP. but oh well...
expecting an even better year from him next year...and I hope the Avs go far in the playoffs. Wondering if McDavid plays next year a month before draft day. Where is next year's tournament BTW?
In the Czech republic. It's funny that this tournament just beat the record in attendance set by the Czechs in 2004, when the Czechs will have the chance to take the record back next year
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
Honestly, I don't see the appeal to most Canadian and American players-especially stars. The event is at the end of a long season overseas. What's the incentive? Patriotism? Desire to travel? At the end of the day I don't think those things mean as much as rest and spending time with one's family. I mean, what is Hockey Canada and USA Hockey going to do? Hold a hypothetical roster spot in a hypothetical tournament 2-4 years from now over these guys heads?
Very well said. You cannot force anyone to play in this tournament. Canada and USA have to do their best with what they work with. Look at Ovechkin and Malkin flying to this tournament the minute their NHL seasons are over, while other North American stars say no thanks when they are invited.
Yep,I think you are correct.
There really isn't much of an incentive.
Guys like you and me might think it would be the opportunity of a lifetime to represent our country and jump at every chance but we are just armchair sportsmen who never had a chance of being a top level player, our perspective is so different from these guys who have been high level players all their life whether it be in minor hockey or now at this stage.
The reality is different for most of them.
Sometimes it makes you think they should take the team that is going to represent us at the Spengler if that is all the preparation they are going to put into this thing.
I mean, I get it on a certain level, we won the tournament we had to win and we prepared very professionally for it, next to the olympics this is simply a 2nd rate event no matter what importance European hockey countries place on it and thus we do not prepare for it much.It's a tradition over there but that is all it is, a tradition, like the spengler cup.It used to mean something but today it means d*&k all.A win here is nice but let's face facts,a european fan will feel great about winning this but behind it they are thinking"this is great,but oh man I wish we could have won the olympics, that is what really mattered" A Canadian fan is thinking "well,would have been nice to win this and sucks to lose but man oh man I am sure glad we won the one that counted at the olympics"
Bottom line, it is 2nd rate and everyone knows it. Still, we do have a team there and I would like them to put more effort into wanting to win it just because the jersey with a Maple Leaf is on it. Some more pride from Hockey Canada would be appreciated as long as they continue to send a team.
It just does not mean very much to Hockey Canada, and it shows.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
What I find humorous is the U.S. and Canada were both a better period away from playing in the semis. The line between success/failure is fairly thin in these tournaments and doesn't really reveal much except that Europeans are more passionate about the event then their NA counterparts.
Yep, that is the difference.
Sweep everything aside, what NHL players are there or not there and ice size or being in europe in unfamiliar surroundings the main difference is simply that they want it and value it more they the NA teams do.
We just do not look at it as they do. If we did, you would see us winning it a lot more.
1Gold Standard
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2012
- 7,907
- 199
oh well...we'll line up in the queue stretching from one end of the country to the other paying bloated and inflated prices for the upcoming junior tournament...I mean there's no question the pressure to win at home now has to be on some Hockey Canada staffers/flunkies... it has to be...
- Status
