U18: Team USA U18 2022 Roster

SK94

Registered User
Apr 11, 2016
1,063
582
I was actually really impressed by Augustine. He took some good saves when they need it. It has been a dominant performance so far and let's hope that it is not going to be similar disappointment than with 01s. Depth in this group is unreal.

I really like guys like Spicer, Lucius, Leddy and Duke too even they are not going to be high round picks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pavel Buchnevich

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,209
7,374
Colorado
As much as Havelid won that for Sweden, Augustine lost it for the US. You can't give up 5 goals on like 13 shots, especially when a few of them should have been stopped. Augustine wasn't ready for this level. The loss of Silverstein proved too large.

Nightingale was out coached. Sat on a poor performing PP all tournament. Underplayed his 4th line who was buzzing today. Never mixed up the lines.

Post automatically merged:

Also, I'm kind of glad USAH has started choking consistently here. USAH has been too comfortable using this tournament to validate its success. It's time to rethink the purpose of the NTDP. Winning this tournament isn't enough.
 
Last edited:

Pavel Buchnevich

Drury and Laviolette Must Go
Dec 8, 2013
57,901
23,870
New York
I warned you guys I was worried about this team. I didn’t actually think they’d lose in this tournament because Russia was banned, but I guess I overestimated them.

1. The problems start with the initial roster construction. The defensemen do not mesh well together. There were points last season where I liked how they worked, but this season it got a lot worse. I won’t say the problems were created by USAH. 4 of the 5 best defensemen on this team are right shots. That in itself creates initial problems. I don’t even know what a guy like Hunter Brzustewicz did his whole time at the NTDP. He was injured half the time, so that’s bad luck, but he contributed nothing and my whole point about him is proven how his best stretch of hockey the last few years was at the Hlinka without all the other NTDP guys. He showed his worth there, but didn’t fit with this team. Should’ve been left off.

2. If he wasn’t left off, they should’ve left Casey off. Casey is another who didn’t fit. They tried to force him into the top four because he’s been one of the biggest names in this age group for a long time, has some interesting parts to his game, and will be a higher pick, but his presence in that top four makes the pairings way too difficult. Pairings should’ve been Hutson with Leddy and Chesley with Duke. Instead, they tried to force Casey into the top four, and it makes the mix way too difficult. I would’ve even been okay with a third pairing of Casey (or Brzustewicz) with Powell, but it was a defensive group with too many hyped players that didn’t fit together, especially how they were utilized.

3. I thought the forward group had a different problem, but one I’ve been harping on for a long time. Simply put, they tried to develop the wrong guys at center. In this tournament, it really showed up with a lot of the main players this pertains to having weak tournaments (Stramel, Nazar, Gauthier, Snuggerud). Aside from Cooley, I don’t think their decisions are looking likely to pay off. Frank Nazar is not a center. No way you’re convincing me that guys is an NHL center. I don’t want to say one bad game defines him, but this is what we’ve seen for two years. Very talented scorer. On his day he can win a game on his own, but inconsistent and a lot of areas of his game that are question marks. I at least see the thinking with Stramel, but that kid is still too raw to be relied upon to be a center. He doesn’t process the game on either end quick enough yet.

4. Then you had a few of the opposite situations. Gauthier and Snuggerud had very bad tournaments, in my opinion. I don’t think either guy looks comfortable on the wing. Gauthier’s best hockey at the NTDP came in the middle. He needs to play in the middle of the ice. That’s harder to do when you are lined up on the outside. He needs to play a simple game. On the outside he tries to over-complicate the game and play a game he doesn’t have the talent to play. Snuggerud will be drafted higher due to how he’s been used this season, but I don’t think he actually improved as a hockey player. He was a lockdown center last year. This year they try to make him a sniper. I thought his defensive play even started suffering in this one-dimensional sniper role they turned him into. I doubt it works in the NHL, so I hope Minnesota takes him back to last year. This year was a step back for his hockey development, in my opinion. And then there’s McGroarty, who I don’t think actually had his play suffer because he’s clearly a great player that can elevate despite less than ideal circumstances, but I cannot understand why that kid never got a chance in the middle. He’s a natural center and your best forward. What’s so difficult? Clearly there were also some of these same center/wing issues at the heart of Fleming leaving.

5. With the forwards, I think they need to put some more thought into these choices of who to pick at the beginning of the selection process and for this tournament. Fleming wasn’t a fit and leaves before two years. You can’t put that all on him. You have to take some responsibility. I don’t know if he was snubbed or it was a conscious decision, but could you imagine how it would’ve went for Brindley with two years at the NTDP? He was the most used non-NTDP player through the two years, and I thought he was a really bad fit nearly every time he played with this group. Good prospect. Never fit with the NTDP. There were too many small forwards on this team. Cooley, Nazar, Howard, Brindley, Spicer all 5’10 or smaller, and four of the 5 cannot play fourth line. Even players like Fleming and Lucius are only 6’0, and very perimeter. Needed some better planning with this group, if you want to build a team to win.

6. This team had so many key long-term injury issues throughout the two years. Brzustewicz missed half the two years. Lucius probably missed similar. Silverstein didn’t miss that much less. Stramel missed more than 25% of the two years. It hasn’t only been this age group. You could go down the list over the years with players like Wise, Turcotte, Smilianic, Boucher, Chaz Lucius, and now these kids. It’s every year. At least one major player misses half a season or more. Are all these injuries normal? It seems a little abnormal to me. I’d consider sacking the medical staff. That’s what pro sports teams do when they suffer a rash of injuries over the course of multiple years that keep repeating themselves. And make no mistake, I think we win this tournament with Silverstein in net. Augustine is a good prospect, but you can’t expect a non-generational D-2 goalie prospect to play a full tournament with D-1’s and not have a game where he can’t stop a shot. Goalies at that age are just way too inconsistent.
 

Deep Blue Metallic

Bo knows hockey.
Mar 5, 2021
4,779
5,807
I warned you guys I was worried about this team. I didn’t actually think they’d lose in this tournament because Russia was banned, but I guess I overestimated them.

1. The problems start with the initial roster construction. The defensemen do not mesh well together. There were points last season where I liked how they worked, but this season it got a lot worse. I won’t say the problems were created by USAH. 4 of the 5 best defensemen on this team are right shots. That in itself creates initial problems. I don’t even know what a guy like Hunter Brzustewicz did his whole time at the NTDP. He was injured half the time, so that’s bad luck, but he contributed nothing and my whole point about him is proven how his best stretch of hockey the last few years was at the Hlinka without all the other NTDP guys. He showed his worth there, but didn’t fit with this team. Should’ve been left off.

2. If he wasn’t left off, they should’ve left Casey off. Casey is another who didn’t fit. They tried to force him into the top four because he’s been one of the biggest names in this age group for a long time, has some interesting parts to his game, and will be a higher pick, but his presence in that top four makes the pairings way too difficult. Pairings should’ve been Hutson with Leddy and Chesley with Duke. Instead, they tried to force Casey into the top four, and it makes the mix way too difficult. I would’ve even been okay with a third pairing of Casey (or Brzustewicz) with Powell, but it was a defensive group with too many hyped players that didn’t fit together, especially how they were utilized.

3. I thought the forward group had a different problem, but one I’ve been harping on for a long time. Simply put, they tried to develop the wrong guys at center. In this tournament, it really showed up with a lot of the main players this pertains to having weak tournaments (Stramel, Nazar, Gauthier, Snuggerud). Aside from Cooley, I don’t think their decisions are looking likely to pay off. Frank Nazar is not a center. No way you’re convincing me that guys is an NHL center. I don’t want to say one bad game defines him, but this is what we’ve seen for two years. Very talented scorer. On his day he can win a game on his own, but inconsistent and a lot of areas of his game that are question marks. I at least see the thinking with Stramel, but that kid is still too raw to be relied upon to be a center. He doesn’t process the game on either end quick enough yet.

4. Then you had a few of the opposite situations. Gauthier and Snuggerud had very bad tournaments, in my opinion. I don’t think either guy looks comfortable on the wing. Gauthier’s best hockey at the NTDP came in the middle. He needs to play in the middle of the ice. That’s harder to do when you are lined up on the outside. He needs to play a simple game. On the outside he tries to over-complicate the game and play a game he doesn’t have the talent to play. Snuggerud will be drafted higher due to how he’s been used this season, but I don’t think he actually improved as a hockey player. He was a lockdown center last year. This year they try to make him a sniper. I thought his defensive play even started suffering in this one-dimensional sniper role they turned him into. I doubt it works in the NHL, so I hope Minnesota takes him back to last year. This year was a step back for his hockey development, in my opinion. And then there’s McGroarty, who I don’t think actually had his play suffer because he’s clearly a great player that can elevate despite less than ideal circumstances, but I cannot understand why that kid never got a chance in the middle. He’s a natural center and your best forward. What’s so difficult? Clearly there were also some of these same center/wing issues at the heart of Fleming leaving.

5. With the forwards, I think they need to put some more thought into these choices of who to pick at the beginning of the selection process and for this tournament. Fleming wasn’t a fit and leaves before two years. You can’t put that all on him. You have to take some responsibility. I don’t know if he was snubbed or it was a conscious decision, but could you imagine how it would’ve went for Brindley with two years at the NTDP? He was the most used non-NTDP player through the two years, and I thought he was a really bad fit nearly every time he played with this group. Good prospect. Never fit with the NTDP. There were too many small forwards on this team. Cooley, Nazar, Howard, Brindley, Spicer all 5’10 or smaller, and four of the 5 cannot play fourth line. Even players like Fleming and Lucius are only 6’0, and very perimeter. Needed some better planning with this group, if you want to build a team to win.

6. This team had so many key long-term injury issues throughout the two years. Brzustewicz missed half the two years. Lucius probably missed similar. Silverstein didn’t miss that much less. Stramel missed more than 25% of the two years. It hasn’t only been this age group. You could go down the list over the years with players like Wise, Turcotte, Smilianic, Boucher, Chaz Lucius, and now these kids. It’s every year. At least one major player misses half a season or more. Are all these injuries normal? It seems a little abnormal to me. I’d consider sacking the medical staff. That’s what pro sports teams do when they suffer a rash of injuries over the course of multiple years that keep repeating themselves. And make no mistake, I think we win this tournament with Silverstein in net. Augustine is a good prospect, but you can’t expect a non-generational D-2 goalie prospect to play a full tournament with D-1’s and not have a game where he can’t stop a shot. Goalies at that age are just way too inconsistent.
TL;DR

Score 4 goals. Allow 14 shots. Still lose.
 

uton

Registered User
May 1, 2022
1
0
Pavel Buchnevich... Please stop it ...

From all the years I have been watching USA hockey this is by far the best team I have ever seen. I could not believe the skill lever on both side of defense and offense.. it was like watching the harlam globetrotters..Hockey in America has come a long way... They lost, it was an upset...we play them 10 times and we win 9. Their goalie played great and yours didn't. It's just that simple. .
 

Pavel Buchnevich

Drury and Laviolette Must Go
Dec 8, 2013
57,901
23,870
New York
Pavel Buchnevich... Please stop it ...

From all the years I have been watching USA hockey this is by far the best team I have ever seen. I could not believe the skill lever on both side of defense and offense.. it was like watching the harlam globetrotters..Hockey in America has come a long way... They lost, it was an upset...we play them 10 times and we win 9. Their goalie played great and yours didn't. It's just that simple. .
This is the same team that also lost to Sweden in the exhibition games. Didn’t have to face the Russians that beat them badly the few times they’ve played over the years. Who did they really beat? A Canadian team that had 20% of their players to choose from. They didn’t even have to play Finland. Czech Republic is rarely ever good enough to beat the USA at any level. In other words, they didn’t have to face two of the big four opponents, lost twice to another, and beat the other that sent 20% of their best players. Maybe they weren’t that good, and you shouldn’t just have an all too simplistic answer for why they lost. Even if we adopt your thinking and you want to blame Augustine, it poses a lot of the questions I asked. Why is your starting goalie injured two years in a row that you need to use the U17 goalie? Why can’t you solve a mediocre prospect with all your star draft picks?

The 2001 age group was also better than this one. I don’t know how that can be seriously argued.
 

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
37,274
26,727
Chicago Manitoba
This is the same team that also lost to Sweden in the exhibition games. Didn’t have to face the Russians that beat them badly the few times they’ve played over the years. Who did they really beat? A Canadian team that had 20% of their players to choose from. They didn’t even have to play Finland. Czech Republic is rarely ever good enough to beat the USA at any level. In other words, they didn’t have to face two of the big four opponents, lost twice to another, and beat the other that sent 20% of their best players. Maybe they weren’t that good, and you shouldn’t just have an all too simplistic answer for why they lost. Even if we adopt your thinking and you want to blame Augustine, it poses a lot of the questions I asked. Why is your starting goalie injured two years in a row that you need to use the U17 goalie? Why can’t you solve a mediocre prospect with all your star draft picks?

The 2001 age group was also better than this one. I don’t know how that can be seriously argued.
I don't know, I have these 04's right on par with the 01's. The depth of this team might rival the 01's amount of first rounders. 01 might be slightly higher end, but overall I think this 04' group is pound for pound every bit as good as the 01's.

Let's also not forget what happened in the 2020 WJC where the best 01's from that USNDP team (outside of J.Hughes) we had shit the bed and we finished the worst we have in a long long time. Thank God for Zegras in 2021!

I personally don't care about u-18 success, I care about WJC and above. This team has a shit ton of skill, I want them all to succeed moving forward as individuals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GermanSpitfire

Deep Blue Metallic

Bo knows hockey.
Mar 5, 2021
4,779
5,807
Also, I'm kind of glad USAH has started choking consistently here. USAH has been too comfortable using this tournament to validate its success. It's time to rethink the purpose of the NTDP. Winning this tournament isn't enough.
What should be the benchmark of success?
 

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,209
7,374
Colorado
What should be the benchmark of success?

I think player development should be the primary goal. It's not as easy to measure as "did you win the U18s" but it's far more impactful.

For example, I would *never* take 13 forwards and 8 defensemen each NTDP class like they do. I wouldn't select some of the insanely small players, including the goalies when they've done it, unless they're truly elite. I wouldn't wait until the IIHF U18's preceding months to demote players clearly not at the level of playing for the development program. I would play the top players a lot more than they do instead of just running 4 lines and 4 d-pairs. I wouldn't prevent NTDP players from participating in the Hlinka. And so on.

This is more out there but I'd honestly like to see them just go to one NTDP team each year - split fairly evenly between U17 and U18 players. So each year, you select roughly 6 forwards, 3-4 defensemen, and 1 goalie. The truly elite talent. And they join the truly elite U18s you selected the year prior to form a team. And those players are all eligible for all international tournaments. The U17s would benefit from playing more exclusively with top talent, and they'd graduate into top line roles as they age, or immediately if they're clear standouts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deep Blue Metallic

95snipes

Registered User
Dec 11, 2019
1,032
1,306
I think player development should be the primary goal. It's not as easy to measure as "did you win the U18s" but it's far more impactful.

For example, I would *never* take 13 forwards and 8 defensemen each NTDP class like they do. I wouldn't select some of the insanely small players, including the goalies when they've done it, unless they're truly elite. I wouldn't wait until the IIHF U18's preceding months to demote players clearly not at the level of playing for the development program. I would play the top players a lot more than they do instead of just running 4 lines and 4 d-pairs. I wouldn't prevent NTDP players from participating in the Hlinka. And so on.

This is more out there but I'd honestly like to see them just go to one NTDP team each year - split fairly evenly between U17 and U18 players. So each year, you select roughly 6 forwards, 3-4 defensemen, and 1 goalie. The truly elite talent. And they join the truly elite U18s you selected the year prior to form a team. And those players are all eligible for all international tournaments. The U17s would benefit from playing more exclusively with top talent, and they'd graduate into top line roles as they age, or immediately if they're clear standouts.
And have 16 year stars playing 3rd/4th line roles and likely minimal power play time? I don't agree with that at all. Seems like a great way to stunt development in crucial years.

I think the way they do it makes sense. 2 years with the program. First year play predominantly USHL games and 2nd year play NCAA teams.
This is the same team that also lost to Sweden in the exhibition games. Didn’t have to face the Russians that beat them badly the few times they’ve played over the years. Who did they really beat? A Canadian team that had 20% of their players to choose from. They didn’t even have to play Finland. Czech Republic is rarely ever good enough to beat the USA at any level. In other words, they didn’t have to face two of the big four opponents, lost twice to another, and beat the other that sent 20% of their best players. Maybe they weren’t that good, and you shouldn’t just have an all too simplistic answer for why they lost. Even if we adopt your thinking and you want to blame Augustine, it poses a lot of the questions I asked. Why is your starting goalie injured two years in a row that you need to use the U17 goalie? Why can’t you solve a mediocre prospect with all your star draft picks?

The 2001 age group was also better than this one. I don’t know how that can be seriously argued.
It would be a good game. The 2019 team definitely had better star power, but this year's team was much deeper.
 

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,209
7,374
Colorado
And have 16 year stars playing 3rd/4th line roles and likely minimal power play time? I don't agree with that at all. Seems like a great way to stunt development in crucial years.

I think the way they do it makes sense. 2 years with the program. First year play predominantly USHL games and 2nd year play NCAA teams.

It doesn't stunt the growth of 16 year old star players in the CHL when they do that, so I don't think that blanket assessment is accurate. Nor would or should every 16 year old be automatically relegated to the 3rd/4th line.

I'm not saying my suggestion would happen. It absolutely won't. But if it doesn't, they need to make other changes to prioritize development so we don't end up in a situation where guys like Kaden Muir play as much 5-on-5 time as Ryan Chesley because they're on the team and not because they deserve it.

The reality is outside of the outlier years (i.e. 1997, 2001, 2004), the NTDP is bringing in too many guys that aren't up to par to the level or the resources they're being allocated. They need to find a way to prioritize more of those resources to the truly elite players, and the rest put to the USHL and the like versus the marginal NTDP players.
 
Last edited:

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,174
11,229
Murica
To me I think a failure of the USNTDP is it isn't truly bringing the *all* of the very best American players. There shouldn't be any *marginal* players at all throughout either the u17 and u18s. It should truly be the best of the best and it isn't. It makes me wonder if the current format is on borrowed time. Yes, we have done better internationally but with the amount of resources allocated I expect more.
 

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,209
7,374
Colorado
To me I think a failure of the USNTDP is it isn't truly bringing the *all* of the very best American players. There shouldn't be any *marginal* players at all throughout either the u17 and u18s. It should truly be the best of the best and it isn't. It makes me wonder if the current format is on borrowed time. Yes, we have done better internationally but with the amount of resources allocated I expect more.

Yep, this is a great articulation of the point I was trying to make. The NTDP intentionally chooses role players with little to no NHL upside because they're trying to win when the goal should be to develop. And it's seemingly more common now for a decent amount of NTDPers to spend another season in the USHL before being ready for the NCAA. That's a huge red flag for player selection and development given how many resources they spend on the NTDP and the fact that they can (for the most part) pick their players.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AmericanDream

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,174
11,229
Murica
Yep, this is a great articulation of the point I was trying to make. The NTDP intentionally chooses role players with little to no NHL upside because they're trying to win when the goal should be to develop. And it's seemingly more common now for a decent amount of NTDPers to spend another season in the USHL before being ready for the NCAA. That's a huge red flag for player selection and development given how many resources they spend on the NTDP and the fact that they can (for the most part) pick their players.

This is a mindset that has plagued USA Hockey since the beginning of time. Just pick the best players and go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: William H Bonney

Deep Blue Metallic

Bo knows hockey.
Mar 5, 2021
4,779
5,807
What is the likelihood of honest introspection within USAH? They can convincingly point to a multitude of tournament medals and increasing numbers of American NHLers as proof of their success, and state "no need to fix what's not broken".

I have to agree that for the amount of money and effort invested, the NTDP often leaves me wanting for more, and that's rarely because of a lack of talent on the ice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: William H Bonney

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,209
7,374
Colorado
What is the likelihood of honest introspection within USAH? They can convincingly point to a multitude of tournament medals and increasing numbers of American NHLers as proof of their success, and state "no need to fix what's not broken".

I have to agree that for the amount of money and effort invested, the NTDP often leaves me wanting for more.

I'd put it at least than 1%
 

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,209
7,374
Colorado
Bonney bringing the wild-eyed optimism!

In fairness to USAH, they did develop the "small ice" approach and the NTDP itself, so they're not totally incapable of creativity.

USAH largely adopted the cross-ice games model from Sweden and Finland, who were already using it. The ADM is largely modeled on the Swedish development system, too.

The NTDP was revolutionary but it's been unchanged for so long, so it's time for some type of shake up. And I think it often gets too much credit for USAH's resurgence. It was launched at a time when our player development was piss poor, and the initial NTDP teams weren't exactly developing a ton of talent. They made do with what the youth leagues developed. The NTDP started doing better because the youth player pool was improving greatly. A lot of the top talent the NTDP has developed would have probably still been top talent had they gone to a USHL or CHL team. That's not to say the NTDP doesn't deserve credit because they definitely do, but the notion the NTDP likes to peddle, like pretending like Matthews wouldn't have been Matthews if not for the program, is misguided.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deep Blue Metallic

AmericanDream

Thank you Elon!
Oct 24, 2005
37,274
26,727
Chicago Manitoba
Yep, this is a great articulation of the point I was trying to make. The NTDP intentionally chooses role players with little to no NHL upside because they're trying to win when the goal should be to develop. And it's seemingly more common now for a decent amount of NTDPers to spend another season in the USHL before being ready for the NCAA. That's a huge red flag for player selection and development given how many resources they spend on the NTDP and the fact that they can (for the most part) pick their players.
I actually have been thinking about how the USNDP could change up a few weeks ago. Ironically, a bit similar in theory to what you said above but I was thinking about going in the opposite direction lol.

I was thinking of having 2 full USNDP teams that combined the 16 & 17 year olds. Split up the top kids between the two teams so that you can start to focus further on the elite players getting elite ice time on two teams and not having to evenly roll 4 lines and 4 pairs like you stated.

So in theory one team would have say Howard, Cooley, Snuggerud and Smith...all top players that can get the ice time they need.

Team two has Nazar, McGroarty, Stramel, Gauthier etc...

In my mind we can develop more skilled high end players this way...

Good for the 16 year olds too as they have to work hard for ice time and play with and against top competition.

I blame the booze if idiotic....
 

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
25,209
7,374
Colorado
I actually have been thinking about how the USNDP could change up a few weeks ago. Ironically, a bit similar in theory to what you said above but I was thinking about going in the opposite direction lol.

I was thinking of having 2 full USNDP teams that combined the 16 & 17 year olds. Split up the top kids between the two teams so that you can start to focus further on the elite players getting elite ice time on two teams and not having to evenly roll 4 lines and 4 pairs like you stated.

So in theory one team would have say Howard, Cooley, Snuggerud and Smith...all top players that can get the ice time they need.

Team two has Nazar, McGroarty, Stramel, Gauthier etc...

In my mind we can develop more skilled high end players this way...

Good for the 16 year olds too as they have to work hard for ice time and play with and against top competition.

I blame the booze if idiotic....

I don't think the player pool is deep enough for this. And this would really hurt the USHL.
 

Elias40

Registered User
Jan 3, 2020
603
323
What percentage of players do not pass the NTDP at all and still play in the NHL? Conversely, how many players are under the radar, when they know their quality and potential but do not get into the NTDP team?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad