Toggle sidebar

Who's bigger....Team USA or Team Canada??

Status
Not open for further replies.

HabLover

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
2,482
0
Sandspit
Visit site
This is what I have from the Ralph's site

Average height for Canada - 6'1.5"
Average weight for Canada - 202 lbs

Average height for USA - 6'0.5"
Average weight for USA - 189 lbs

Also, I think Phil Kessel is listed at 5'10 or so and about 161lbs. Is this true? I don't think those numbers could be right and if they are, what happens if he runs into Anthony Stewart, Dion Phaneuf, Alex Ovechkin, etc. He could be destroyed!
Click to read more...
 
Habsfan 32

Habsfan 32

Registered User
Aug 18, 2004
6,316
2
Way up north...
Team Canada is huge this year and their defence is going to rough and hit alot so the other teams better be big or it's gonna hurt them along the boards.
 

leafaholix*

Guest
It looks like Canada's going to rough up the competition real bad.
 
nomorekids

nomorekids

The original, baby
Feb 28, 2003
33,375
107
Nashville, TN
www.twitter.com
yeah, and nigel dawes is 5'7 and had a great tourny last year. if kessel gets the icetime(which he may or may not, as the kid of the team) he could impress. he's got top notch skills, and should be a top 3 pick in 2006.
 

HabLover

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
2,482
0
Sandspit
Visit site
nomorekids said:
yeah, and nigel dawes is 5'7 and had a great tourny last year. if kessel gets the icetime(which he may or may not, as the kid of the team) he could impress. he's got top notch skills, and should be a top 3 pick in 2006.
Click to expand...


Kessel could very well have a good tourney, but it's highly unlikely at the age of 17. Only a select few are able to dominate and play a significant amount at 16 or 17. Now Mr. Dawes may be short, listed at 5'8 on the ralph site, but he seems to be pretty stocky for a little guy. I was just questioning whether Kessel is actually 161 lbs or not, cuz that is pretty darn light and he could get crunched! These are the best in world U20.
 

chicpea*

Guest
Why does the Ralph site/Team USA Tournament site only give profiles for american players? :dunno:
 
Rabid Ranger

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,067
11,079
Murica
Canada and the U.S. are actually the same size (on average) at forward, about 191 lbs. It's on defense where Canada has the distinct weight advantage over everyone (by a fair margin).
 
Rabid Ranger

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,067
11,079
Murica
HabLover said:
Kessel could very well have a good tourney, but it's highly unlikely at the age of 17. Only a select few are able to dominate and play a significant amount at 16 or 17. Now Mr. Dawes may be short, listed at 5'8 on the ralph site, but he seems to be pretty stocky for a little guy. I was just questioning whether Kessel is actually 161 lbs or not, cuz that is pretty darn light and he could get crunched! These are the best in world U20.
Click to expand...


What if the considerably larger Rostislav Olesz runs into Phaneuf? Oh, that's right, he did! Phaneuf would waste anyone, regardless of their size. As for Kessel, yeah he's pretty slight, but he's also a dynamic skater, so Phaneuf would have to catch him first.
 

Hart_House_Ca

Registered User
Feb 21, 2004
496
0
Why would you ask who is bigger then provide the stats for both teams? Wouldn't that be the answer to your question?
 

romain_jaime

Registered User
Feb 10, 2004
576
0
Montreal
The thing with Canada is that we have always put forth a large team but this year all the large players are also acceptionally skilled players more so then ever.

Large, mobile, hard hitting, skilled players = Lots of on ice action ! :handclap: :bow:
 
Rabid Ranger

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,067
11,079
Murica
Hart_House_Ca said:
Why would you ask who is bigger then provide the stats for both teams? Wouldn't that be the answer to your question?
Click to expand...

You're starting to get the picture on HabLover's posting style. "Innocent" questions that he knows the answer to that revolve around topics that he knows will eventually get a rise out of people. Oh, and: :dunno:
 

espo*

Guest
Bigger-smaller,6'2 and 230 pounds or 5'10 and 185.For me it's not a question who is bigger but who is going to play better and size does'nt tell me too much about that.
 
Rabid Ranger

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,067
11,079
Murica
cyclops said:
Bigger-smaller,6'2 and 230 pounds or 5'10 and 185.For me it's not a question who is bigger but who is going to play better and size does'nt tell me too much about that.
Click to expand...


Don't get me wrong, size is important, but it's not the only factor that will determine the success of a player or team.
 

espo*

Guest
For sure it's a factor...but like you said it's not the be-all and end all.Who's the better player and how does the team play is what's most important in the end.There's some great big players and some great small ones.i like big players but given a choice between Todd Bertuzzi and Wayne gretzky it's an easy pick for anyone.If my teams big and talented i'm happy,if they are small and talented i'm happy too.I suppose all things considered i would prefer to have my team big and talented but the talent level of small versus big would have to be equal for me to prefer it,if the small guys are better players i'll want them more i guess. Big is good but not always better of course.I'm glad Canada is big this year but in the end if we win i think it'll have less to do with them being big and more to do with the combined team just playing good hockey,size will come into it but smart team play maximizing their talent will be more important i think.
 

TORRUS

Registered User
May 31, 2004
1,270
0
Beli
cyclops said:
For sure it's a factor...but like you said it's not the be-all and end all.Who's the better player and how does the team play is what's most important in the end.There's some great big players and some great small ones.i like big players but given a choice between Todd Bertuzzi and Wayne gretzky it's an easy pick for anyone.If my teams big and talented i'm happy,if they are small and talented i'm happy too.I suppose all things considered i would prefer to have my team big and talented but the talent level of small versus big would have to be equal for me to prefer it,if the small guys are better players i'll want them more i guess. Big is good but not always better of course.I'm glad Canada is big this year but in the end if we win i think it'll have less to do with them being big and more to do with the combined team just playing good hockey,size will come into it but smart team play maximizing their talent will be more important i think.
Click to expand...

Very wise...
 
William H Bonney

William H Bonney

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
24,837
6,731
Colorado
Who's right?
Everything I've seen this year says Kessel is 6'0 185, but the Ralph site says 5'10 161 or whatever......I'm pretty sure that they have his old height/weight from last year.
 
Rabid Ranger

Rabid Ranger

2 is better than one
Feb 27, 2002
31,067
11,079
Murica
Mobey said:
Who's right?
Everything I've seen this year says Kessel is 6'0 185, but the Ralph site says 5'10 161 or whatever......I'm pretty sure that they have his old height/weight from last year.
Click to expand...


I saw the U.S. vs UND game and he looked bigger than 5'10" 161.
 

AgentNaslund*

Guest
Canadian muscle will push the US around like a bunch of babies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom