How good is Russia?

[WM]

i have been trying to decide for my hockey pool whether to pick Russia and i am having a hard time deciding how good they will actually be. what does everybody else think?

Click to read more...

 

[arrbez]

how does your pool work?

for me the russians are always so hard to judge. they have the talent to do well, but who knows whats going on within that organization. i have a feeling they could really bomb this tournament because of all the dissent, and the lack of an nhl-calibre goalie doesn't help either

 

[McThome]

Ya, actually - they're probably a good team to bet on.... you should get damn good odds, odds that don't reflect how much of a chance they actually probably have.

 

[Ola]

Ya, actually - they're probably a good team to bet on.... you should get damn good odds, odds that don't reflect how much of a chance they actually probably have.

I doubt they have any chance at all at even making it to the semi´s. Thats about the only thing that speaks in their favor...

I´ve seen them soo much in international tournaments and there attitude is unbelivable. If Kovalchuck played for ATL the way he plays for the Russian national team Hartley would sit him for 81 straigth games. In last years World Champ. his line mates refused to pass him the puck bacause they knew they would never get it back...

 

[Rabid Ranger]

On paper they are just "bad" enough to be overlooked, and that's what I think will happen. I think Russia will surprise in this tournament.

 

[TORRUS]

I think Russia will surprise in this tournament.

That is what I allways say befere every tournament and then I realize that I was wrong again. So this time, I wont say anything.

 

[wilka91*]

IMO, the Russians won't leave the Olympics empty handed.

But the World Cup is not the Olympics, so I have absolutely no idea how they're going to play.

 

[Buya89]

On paper they are just "bad" enough to be overlooked, and that's what I think will happen. I think Russia will surprise in this tournament.

bad enough?

 

[Captain8]

i have been trying to decide for my hockey pool whether to pick Russia and i am having a hard time deciding how good they will actually be. what does everybody else think?

I think there is always the possibility that Russia may pull an upset in the 1/4 finals, but I don't see them winning two elimination games in a row unless three things happen:

1. Nabokov recovers and returns to form quickly.
2. Ditto Datsyuk.
3. Kozlov is at the top of his game on every shift.

Those are my criteria for success, assuming that everything else falls into place. Realistically, the probability of all three happening is very small.

 

[wilka91*]

It's all about luck.

 

[TORRUS]

IMO, the Russians won't leave the Olympics empty handed.

Yeeee!!!

 

[Epsilon]

Russia is good enough to win the whole thing, or bad enough to lose all their games. You can never really tell.

 

[McThome]

Russia is good enough to win the whole thing, or bad enough to lose all their games. You can never really tell.

Ya, that's the point I was trying to make.

 

[Big Phil]

Its a bad time for Russian Hockey right now I think. In the 1998, 2002 Olympics they were good enough to have won gold. It would have been a helluva game if Russia had played Canada in the Gold Medal game, even though it was a great game anyways, but they have quite the drought if you think about it. They havent won a best-on-best tourny since 1981.

So now with their depleted line up it looks like they may even finish in the bottom of the pool. They seem to be a better threat in the 2006 Olympics (if they go) since their young players are second to only Canada's.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

bad enough?

Okay instead of "just bad enough" how about "just not good enough"? My point is, Russia has a weakened roster that doesn't appear to be a frontrunner. I happen to think they have a better "team" now then when the roster was originally named, and could surprise.

 

[wilka91*]

They havent won a best-on-best tourny since 1981.

Yes but you have to consider other facts :

- Canada decides when there will be a best-on-best tourney (i.e. Why was there only 2 years between Canada Cup 1981 and 1983, whereas usually it was 4 or 5 years?)

- all of those tourneys are refereed by Canadians or Americans (objectively speaking, the 1987 Canada Cup should have been somehow ruled out for unsportsman like officiating ; and can somebody explain to me why at the 2002 Olympics the referees didn't review Samsonov's goal against the US, because video shows that he did, in fact, score?)

 

[Buya89]

Okay instead of "just bad enough" how about "just not good enough"? My point is, Russia has a weakened roster that doesn't appear to be a frontrunner. I happen to think they have a better "team" now then when the roster was originally named, and could surprise.

Canada's roster is stacked with superstars, does that count them GOOD ENOUGH?

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Canada's roster is stacked with superstars, does that count them GOOD ENOUGH?

You're missing my point. I don't think Russia will ice one of the best ON PAPER rosters for the World Cup. Despite that, I think they as TEAM might surprise.

 

[Gainey23]

i wouldn't rule out Team Russia... Ovechkin could have a coming out party and live up to his billing... no Fedorov, no Zhamnov, but this will still be the best puck-possession team in the tourney (Datsyuk, Kovalchuk, and Kovalev is still the strongest player in the world with the puck down low next to maybe Forsberg) and they would have to be considered a threat just based upon that.

i would be more inclined to favor Team Russia if this tourney were being played on an Int'l sized ice surface and no 2-line pass rule.
if they're available in your pool, take them.. a little weak down the middle, perhaps, but they do still have a core of studly wingers.

 

[Captain8]

Yes but you have to consider other facts :

- Canada decides when there will be a best-on-best tourney (i.e. Why was there only 2 years between Canada Cup 1981 and 1983, whereas usually it was 4 or 5 years?)

- all of those tourneys are refereed by Canadians or Americans (objectively speaking, the 1987 Canada Cup should have been somehow ruled out for unsportsman like officiating ; and can somebody explain to me why at the 2002 Olympics the referees didn't review Samsonov's goal against the US, because video shows that he did, in fact, score?)

The second CC was played in 1984.

And while I agree that the Samsonov goal should have been reviewed, replays showed that the puck hit the post.

But as far as the USSR's performance in best-on-best tourneys is concerned, a strong arguement can be made that their team was an even match for Canada despite the overtime contests that favored Canada in 1984 and 1987. The USSR could have easily won both of those Cups if things had turned out slightly differently and the officiating in 1987 was a prime example. Apart from the 1996 World Cup, it was only during the 80s that Russia/USSR brought their best team to the tourney.

In the 1998 Olympics, I think Russia had a better team than the Czechs. Then again, so did Canada. But in 2002, Russia's placing was justified. A very close win over the Czechs in the 1/4s combined with a weak 3rd place opponent may have even seemed like a bit of good fortune. In the two contests against the US, both teams dominated play for stretches, but I don't think either demonstrated clear superiority.

 

[wilka91*]

But in 2002, Russia's placing was justified. A very close win over the Czechs in the 1/4s combined with a weak 3rd place opponent may have even seemed like a bit of good fortune.

I would like to know your opinion regarding Team Canada in the 2002 Olympics, because after ending 3rd in its group, a very close win over the Finns in the quarters combined with a weak semifinal opponent that guaranteed a spot in the final sounds like great fortune to me.

As to Samsonov's shot, it had absolutely nothing to do with the post. Either Richter stopped the puck at the goal line, and in this case the black "dot" behind the goal line is a part of Richter's glove, or the black dot, is a black puck. I can post shot-by-shot slides of that so said magical "save".

But I agree with all the other things you said.

 

[Captain8]

I would like to know your opinion regarding Team Canada in the 2002 Olympics, because after ending 3rd in its group, a very close win over the Finns in the quarters combined with a weak semifinal opponent that guaranteed a spot in the final sounds like great fortune to me.

As to Samsonov's shot, it had absolutely nothing to do with the post. Either Richter stopped the puck at the goal line, and in this case the black "dot" behind the goal line is a part of Richter's glove, or the black dot, is a black puck. I can post shot-by-shot slides of that so said magical "save".

But I agree with all the other things you said.

The overhead replays I saw showed glove then post.

Canada also got a break, no doubt about it. But that's the nature of the beast in these tourneys.

 

[Proffessor G DIDDY]

I think Russia if they can play good team defense then they can win. But that would have favour players like Vishnevki, Kalilnin, Kasparaitus and Volchenkov, while leaving Tverdovsky and Gonchar to do the offense. I believe is Russia play 4 defenseive defensemen they'll be all right. Up front I think oce again Russia need to spread their there's no point placing Ovechkin, Yashin, Samsonov, Kovalev, Datysuk, and Kovalchuk, they should be spread over 3 maybe even 4 lines. If they mesh with players like Zubrus, Kozlov and Chubarov that 3 productives lines with good D and great talent. Fourth line should seriously just be Frolov, Kvasha, Afinogenov. Francois Allaire said that Bryzgalov is ready for the task he better be, i'm still unceratin about Nabokov, but he should start if healthy. If Russia chose players with more experience they would have been a lot better. Nicholshin, Malakhov, Valerie Bure, Brylin, should have all been chosen.

 

[Proffessor G DIDDY]

In saying that here's my team

Samsonov - Yashin - Afinogenov
Frolov - Datsyuk - Kovalev
Ovechkin - Kvasha -Kovalchuk
Chubarov - Kozlov - Zubrus

Gonchar - Kalilnin
Tverdovsky - Volchenkov
Kaspairatus - Vishnevski
Nabokov - Bryzgalov

BUT HERE'S WOULD BE REAL RUSSIAN TEAM IF NOT FOR SOFT **** PLAYERS

Samsonov - Federov - Kovalev
P.Bure - Zhamnov - Kovalchuk
Brylin - Yashin - Zubrus
Nikholshin - Kozlov - Korolev

Gonchar - Malakhov
Tverdovsky - Kasparaitus
D. Markov - Vishnevksi
Khabibulin - Nabakov

That team would smash any other team but it wasn't to be. The USA will win it again due to experience and they have struck the right balance in the squad good attack, defense, special teams and .

 

[Proffessor G DIDDY]

In saying that here's my team

Samsonov - Yashin - Afinogenov
Frolov - Datsyuk - Kovalev
Ovechkin - Kvasha -Kovalchuk
Chubarov - Kozlov - Zubrus

Gonchar - Kalilnin
Tverdovsky - Volchenkov
Kaspairatus - Vishnevski
Nabokov - Bryzgalov

BUT HERE'S WOULD BE REAL RUSSIAN TEAM IF NOT FOR SOFT
PLAYERS

Samsonov - Federov - Kovalev
P.Bure - Zhamnov - Kovalchuk
Brylin - Yashin - Zubrus
Nikholshin - Kozlov - Korolev

Gonchar - Malakhov
Tverdovsky - Kasparaitus
D. Markov - Vishnevksi
Khabibulin - Nabakov

That team would smash any other team but it wasn't to be. The USA will win it again due to experience and they have struck the right balance in the squad good attack, defense, special teams and goal tending.