U18 team

[Keke]

Both Owen Sound and Kingston lost in the 1st round and this means both Palmu and Parikka are available for the U18. Both are very good additions considering Palmu's skill and our very young defense. My guess for the final roster:

Aho - Saarela - Puljujärvi
Tammela - Nättinen - Tavernier
Palmu - Niemelä - Laine
Björkqvist - Ruotsalainen - Piipponen
Embrich

Parikka - Vainio
Niemeläinen - Saarijärvi
Välimäki - Leskinen
Reunanen

Heljanko/Vehviläinen

(assuming Parikka and Palmu are healthy)

 

[Quethas]

http://www.thewhig.com/2015/03/30/parikka-tears-achilles-tendon

"Finnish native Parikka, 17, had his first Ontario Hockey League playoff experience ended in a practice last week. He tore the Achilles tendon in his foot."

So looks like that Parikka will miss the tournament too.

 

[Eyelanders]

Both Owen Sound and Kingston lost in the 1st round and this means both Palmu and Parikka are available for the U18. Both are very good additions considering Palmu's skill and our very young defense. My guess for the final roster:

Aho - Saarela - Puljujärvi
Tammela - Nättinen - Tavernier
Palmu - Niemelä - Laine
Björkqvist - Ruotsalainen - Piipponen
Embrich

Parikka - Vainio
Niemeläinen - Saarijärvi
Välimäki - Leskinen
Reunanen

Heljanko/Vehviläinen

(assuming Parikka and Palmu are healthy)

Parikka will miss the tournament like the poster above said, but here are a few random thoughts on this roster:

- Tavernier was very, very disappointing in the U20 league this year, but he's got good hands and he's quick, so should be able to score some points on that 2nd line.
- Embrich doesn't deserve to be in there IMO, he isn't anything special, though could be a decent penalty killer and face-offs specialist.
- I like the fact that you have Piipponen and Björkqvist on the 4th line, strong kids who are physical and quite good with the puck, too.
- Vehviläinen should be in goal, he has more experience from big games and I think he's also the better prospect than Heljanko.

 

[Tormentor]

Tavernier's development seems to have stalled a bit and his season hasn't been that good. He's played a lot with Nättinen and Tammela in recent tournaments though, so if there's a role for him on the team, that might be it. Aho, Ruotsalainen and Puljujärvi have played a lot together in Kärpät, so that might be a line as well, if the coaching decides to spread the talent to 3 lines. In this case Palmu, Saarela and Laine would be pretty good pieces to form a 3rd scoring line. Niemelä, Ju.Mattila and Björkqvist are pretty good two-way players, so that might work as a 4th line. This would leave Tuulola, Piipponen, Moilanen and Väyrynen to fight for the spot of 13th forward.

So maybe something like this:

Tammela - Nättinen - Tavernier
Aho - Ruotsalainen - Puljujärvi
Palmu - Saarela - Laine
Björkqvist - Ju.Mattila - Niemelä
Tuulola/Piipponen/Moilanen/Väyrynen

Leskinen - Saarijärvi
Niemeläinen - Vainio
Je.Mattila - Välimäki
Reunanen/Rautanen/Rahikainen

Our first two preliminary round games are against Czech Republic and Switzerland. I'd give both Vehviläinen and Heljanko a game each and go from there. That said, Vehviläinen seems like the early favorite for the starting job.

 

[Fawkes]

So maybe something like this:

Tammela - Nättinen - Tavernier
Aho - Ruotsalainen - Puljujärvi
Palmu - Saarela - Laine
Björkqvist - Ju.Mattila - Niemelä
Tuulola/Piipponen/Moilanen/Väyrynen

Leskinen - Saarijärvi
Niemeläinen - Vainio
Je.Mattila - Välimäki
Reunanen/Rautanen/Rahikainen

This is pretty much how I think the lines will look like. The first line has played together the whole season so it would be stunning if that line would be broken now. Kärpät Line played together in the last U18 tournament and while the results weren't great, I think Marttila will try it again. Saarela is also an option to center that line, but I think Ruotsalainen fits that line better because he is more of a two-way player than Saarela is. Puljujärvi and Aho both like to possess the puck so the C in that line should play a more defensive role.

I'm not sure Laine will make the team, but if he does that line with Palmu and Saarela should fit him well. All three have a lot of skill and should be able to cycle the puck in the offensive zone. I haven't seen Eetu Tuulola play a lot, but what I've read about him, I'm hoping he is selected to the team. He has some scoring ability and plays physical. I even think he might be worth a shot in the third line if Laine does something stupid again and is kicked out.

The defensive pairings don't look very promising, but that's all we got. With Juolevi and Parikka injured, a lot will depend on how Vainio and Saarijärvi will perform. They are the top two defenseman on this team.

 

[JJTT]

Looks like they are playing 2 games at Vierumäki between U20/U18 national teams.

U18's won yesterday 3-2 on shootout. Patrik Laine and Teemu Väyrynen with the goals. Patrik Laine and Jonne Tammela scored on the shootout.

http://www.leijonat.fi/uutiset/tuor...nen-oli-tasainen-toinen-ottelu-tiistaina.html

U20's won the second game 4-2.

3.15 Jonne Tammela (Julius Nättinen) 1-0
26.34 Jonne Tammela (Julius Nättinen, Otto Leskinen) 2-0
28.23 Roope Hintz (Antti Kalapudas) YV 2-1
40.37 Teemu Lämsä 2-2
45.28 Joel Kiviranta (Roope Hintz, Patrik Virta) 2-3
59.31 Kaapo Kähkönen TM 2-4

Kaapo Kähkönen with another goal

 

[fr9dd9]

Whats your thoughts on team finland then? Gold or not? Medal or not?

 

[Keke]

I just don't think Ruotsalainen is good enough to play in a scoring line. In the 5-nation tournament he seemed to kill all the plays himself and as good as Aho and Puljujärvi are you are only as strong as the weakest link. And Saarela definetely brings more offense to that line unless he somehow manages to injure himself again.

And before the season I was very optimistic of our chances to even get a gold but now it doesn't seem likely. The development of our top players haven't been as good this season (Saarela, Tavernier, Aho, Laine, Vainio etc.) and the late injuries have also hurt our team.

Marttila is a good coach and if everything goes perfectly (top players play like top players should, Vehviläinen/Heljanko has a big tournament ) we may have a chance to get a medal. Despite the disadvantages I like our odds more now than I did last season (-96 team).

 

[Fawkes]

Marttila is a good coach and if everything goes perfectly (top players play like top players should, Vehviläinen/Heljanko has a big tournament ) we may have a chance to get a medal. Despite the disadvantages I like our odds more now than I did last season (-96 team).

This team looks a lot better on paper than the -96 team did. The forwards are maybe the best group that we've had in a long time. If Puljujärvi and Laine play up to their potential, this team can score a lot of goals. I'm not sure what can be expected from Saarela. He hasn't played many games with the -97 team, so in a way he comes to the team from the outside. His season with Ässät didn't go well. He scored only six goals this whole season, so it's not realistic to expect him to "turn on" the scoring just like that.

As good as the offense can be, the defense and goaltending are questionable and might kill our chances for a medal. I expect USA to win the gold once again, but everything from second place to 8th place is possible.

 

[Tormentor]

Didn't see this coming, Henri Jokiharju is one of the 8 defensemen continuing to the 2nd phase of the camp. Kudos to Keke for being right in the Top Prospects thread.

Goalies:
1 Veini Vehviläinen, JYP
30 Christian Heljanko, HIFK
31 Nico Viksten, Ilves

Defensemen:
2 Juho Rautanen, HIFK
3 Markus Niemeläinen, HPK
4 Jesper Mattila, Ilves
5 Otto Leskinen, KalPa
6 Juuso Välimäki, Ilves
8 Henri Jokiharju, Jokerit
9 Vili Saarijärvi, Green Bay
24 Veeti Vainio, Blues

Forwards:
10 Sebastian Aho, Kärpät
11 Kasper Björkqvist, Blues
14 Joonas Niemelä, Blues
15 Petrus Palmu, Owen Sound
16 Arttu Ruotsalainen, Kärpät
18 Aleksi Saarela, Ässät
19 Jonne Tammela, KalPa
20 Sami Tavernier, HIFK
21 Jesse Puljujärvi, Kärpät
22 Teemu Väyrynen, Blues
25 Julius Nättinen, JYP
27 Patrik Laine, Tappara
28 Julius Mattila, Ilves
29 Topi Piipponen, KalPa

 

[JJTT]

Didn't see this coming, Henri Jokiharju is one of the 8 defensemen continuing to the 2nd phase of the camp. Kudos to Keke for being right in the Top Prospects thread.

Goalies:
1 Veini Vehviläinen, JYP
30 Christian Heljanko, HIFK
31 Nico Viksten, Ilves

Defensemen:
2 Juho Rautanen, HIFK
3 Markus Niemeläinen, HPK
4 Jesper Mattila, Ilves
5 Otto Leskinen, KalPa
6 Juuso Välimäki, Ilves
8 Henri Jokiharju, Jokerit
9 Vili Saarijärvi, Green Bay
24 Veeti Vainio, Blues

Forwards:
10 Sebastian Aho, Kärpät
11 Kasper Björkqvist, Blues
14 Joonas Niemelä, Blues
15 Petrus Palmu, Owen Sound
16 Arttu Ruotsalainen, Kärpät
18 Aleksi Saarela, Ässät
19 Jonne Tammela, KalPa
20 Sami Tavernier, HIFK
21 Jesse Puljujärvi, Kärpät
22 Teemu Väyrynen, Blues
25 Julius Nättinen, JYP
27 Patrik Laine, Tappara
28 Julius Mattila, Ilves
29 Topi Piipponen, KalPa

Who was cut? Moilanen, Tuulola, Reunanen and Rahikainen?

 

[Eyelanders]

As good as the offense can be, the defense and goaltending are questionable and might kill our chances for a medal. I expect USA to win the gold once again, but everything from second place to 8th place is possible.

Could you explain why do you think goaltending is questionable? Because of the previous national tournaments? From what I've seen of Vehviläinen and Heljanko, I don't think they're terrible goalies. Vehviläinen has good potential with pretty good size and quickness, plus he can make some high-end saves. Heljanko may not be an NHL prospect with that size and only good-but-not great quickness and technique. However, he's not a bad back-up goalie on this team IMO.

 

[Fawkes]

Could you explain why do you think goaltending is questionable? Because of the previous national tournaments? From what I've seen of Vehviläinen and Heljanko, I don't think they're terrible goalies. Vehviläinen has good potential with pretty good size and quickness, plus he can make some high-end saves. Heljanko may not be an NHL prospect with that size and only good-but-not great quickness and technique. However, he's not a bad back-up goalie on this team IMO.

Because of the previous national tournaments. Finland has allowed way too many goals this season. I don't know if that's because of goaltenders or poor defensive play. I'm not saying Vehviläinen, Heljanko or Viksten are bad goalies. But if the defense leaks, I'm not sure our goalies are good enough to allow us to win close games.

Who was cut? Moilanen, Tuulola, Reunanen and Rahikainen?

Yep. Reunanen is the surprise cut, but I'm guessing he is injured since he won't be playing with the U17 team either. Tuulola and Moilanen will play with the U17 team in a tournament played in Russia. I was hoping that Tuulola would have made the U18 team, but with Laine seemingly playing well, Tuulola was left without a place on the roster. Happy to see Palmu joining the team.

 

[Joe MacMillan]

Lol, there are no excuses for this Selänne call up to team, it is utter BS as he takes someone's place there who has shown way more to deserve chance to show their skill in that tournament. Not that it is really his fault though so would hope people not hate the guy. Personally I believe he is OK player but just so hard to see him being anything special at this point after all eliteprospects stats scouting I did ...

This is my issue with the selection as well. Giving him special treatment means leaving someone who had earned a roster spot off the team.

Pre-tournament or not, you pick the players who have a legitimate chance to make the final roster, and make them earn it. That's what exhibition tournaments are for.

This stupidity once again illustrates the lack of commitment the FHA has to junior tournaments on an international level.

 

[FiLe]

This stupidity once again illustrates the lack of commitment the FHA has to junior tournaments on an international level.

Consider. Selänne does develop into a player worth something. Unlikely, but not impossible.

However, he's deemed ineligible to represent Finland. Now... I wonder how many of us then would be calling for FIHA's head if he wasn't locked down when they had a chance to do so. Especially since the price of determining that was as meager as giving him a look in some relatively meaningless U18 practice tournament. Because hindsight's 20/20, every media outlet and bar-corner hockey blogger in this country would have a field day with that.

Heck, we've had equally worthless cases breaking EHT rosters with the adult Lions, yet I don't think we've ever seen anyone still complain about it two months after the fact.

Seriously, guys. Stop being foolish and making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[Joe MacMillan]

Consider. Selänne does develop into a player worth something. Unlikely, but not impossible.

However, he's deemed ineligible to represent Finland. Now... I wonder how many of us then would be calling for FIHA's head if he wasn't locked down when they had a chance to do so. Especially since the price of determining that was as meager as giving him a look in some relatively meaningless U18 practice tournament. Because hindsight's 20/20, every media outlet and bar-corner hockey blogger in this country would have a field day with that.

What a master plan. How come US Hockey hasn't figured it out and locked him up into their program.

Your selective reasoning works both ways: what if the player who was snubbed develops into an impact player but refuses to join any national squad in the future because of the actions of FHA? Unlikely, but not impossible.

I, for one, am not making a mountain out of a molehill, just gave my 2 cents on the issue that was discussed in this thread.

 

[FiLe]

Your selective reasoning works both ways: what if the player who was snubbed develops into an impact player but refuses to join any national squad in the future because of the actions of FHA? Unlikely, but not impossible.

If we're talking about a Finnish player who is not eligible to represent a country other than Finland, your reasoning is poppycock. Matter of fact, if we had a guy with no choice other than Finland and he refuses the call at a later age because he was snubbed on U18 level... all we should say to him is good riddance. He's obviously a head case with serious entitlement issues no sane man should want near the team.

However, if we're talking about a player with dual citizenship, locking them down, even if just in case, is perfectly reasonable. Doubly so if we're talking about a name who naturally draws extra interest. Because no matter how long the shot is, the press and at least half the guys who now feel enraged over this solution would start crapping on FIHA for not taking the necessary measures if the worst (or best?) comes to pass.

Besides, a single junior worth anything will not have his development stunted by not making it to the NT age groups. Case in point: There are plenty of players in U20 who were never in U16 or U18, and plenty of players who have only worn the blue-and-white at senior level. And the top prospects will make those junior squads regardless. I could see the reason to be upset if we had a squad's worth of Puljujärvis waiting in the reins and we bring this Selänne shmuck in only because his name is Selänne. I might snort at that too. But the case we have here is a fringe player Selänne "stealing" the spot from another fringe player... in a single practice tournament, on top of this all.

Bottom line: Anyone who figures this is some kind of good evidence of FIHA not taking the junior teams seriously is a frickin' drama queen. I'm not saying there aren't some pieces that might hint at that, but this is not one of them.

 

[Joe MacMillan]

If we're talking about a Finnish player who is not eligible to represent a country other than Finland, your reasoning is poppycock. Matter of fact, if we had a guy with no choice other than Finland and he refuses the call at a later age because he was snubbed on U18 level... all we should say to him is good riddance. He's obviously a head case with serious entitlement issues no sane man should want near the team.

Mario Lemieux was a head case in his youth, wouldn't you want a player of that caliber on your team? Obviously I am not suggesting that we have anyone that talented in our program, but simply underlining the position I am coming from.

However, if we're talking about a player with dual citizenship, locking them down, even if just in case, is perfectly reasonable. Doubly so if we're talking about a name who naturally draws extra interest. Because no matter how long the shot is, the press and at least half the guys who now feel enraged over this solution would start crapping on FIHA for not taking the necessary measures if the worst (or best?) comes to pass.

Fair enough. Still strongly disagree with the selection as I don't see Eetu Selänne becoming much of anything as a player and his place in the roster should have been given to someone of more deserving to be there, but I can see it as an effort to secure the position long term, and as such a reasonable action.

Bottom line: Anyone who figures this is some kind of good evidence of FIHA not taking the junior teams seriously is a frickin' drama queen. I'm not saying there aren't some pieces that might hint at that, but this is not one of them.

No one is being a drama queen, except maybe for you for jumping on anyone who doesn't share your view. No one is calling the heads of the suits running the show in the FHA, but simply expressing disappointment with the fact that a player was chosen based on factors other than on-ice performance.

 

[FiLe]

Mario Lemieux was a head case in his youth, wouldn't you want a player of that caliber on your team? Obviously I am not suggesting that we have anyone that talented in our program, but simply underlining the position I am coming from.

Unless you're referring to some other incident, nobody snubbed Mario or suggested taking a lesser player in his stead. As the story goes, Mario was selected to the U20 team in 1983, and would have been selected to the next year's team as well but was not happy with the way he was treated the year before and declined because of that.

So yeah, that's hardly comparable. A fringe kid who feels he should have been the 13th forward in that one U18 practice tournament instead of Selänne and will bear grudge to FIHA from here to eternity IS a head case.

No one is being a drama queen, except maybe for you for jumping on anyone who doesn't share your view. No one is calling the heads of the suits running the show in the FHA, but simply expressing disappointment with the fact that a player was chosen based on factors other than on-ice performance.

I could understand people's irritation if he was picked to a major tournament without basis or given some kind of major role if it was a lesser tournament. But no, he was selected to a lesser tournament and mostly spent it warming the bench. It's not like they slapped an '8' on him, put him in the first line and waited him to do wonders. Actually, it is quite likely that thanks to him being there, one or two of the more deserving kids in the lineup got to play more than usual. On top of that, said U18 event got far more media coverage than its kind normally do. Matter of fact, usually those get none - only one bothering to report about them is FIHA's own website. I just don't see the reason for displeasure. Actually, I don't see why anyone after rubbing a pair of cells together would call that anything but a win.

Yes, I think we can all agree that he wouldn't have even warmed the bench in a practice tournament if he wasn't a Selänne. But sometimes, selling the high ideals and doing some unorthodox stuff may actually lead to intangibles that make it worth it. Especially in a case like this, where only an idiot would argue that the price was too high.

 

[Joe MacMillan]

Unless you're referring to some other incident, nobody snubbed Mario or suggested taking a lesser player in his stead. As the story goes, Mario was selected to the U20 team in 1983, and would have been selected to the next year's team as well but was not happy with the way he was treated the year before and declined because of that.

So yeah, that's hardly comparable. A fringe kid who feels he should have been the 13th forward in that one U18 practice tournament instead of Selänne and will bear grudge to FIHA from here to eternity IS a head case.

I was referring to the infamous incident where Mario demonstrated his displeasure for being selected by a team subject to relocation threats at the 84 draft.

Not comparable events but I made the analogy to reinforce my point against yours that a head case would never be worthy to hold onto.

And for what it's worth, I consider the chances of Eetu becoming an impact player a pipedream and as far-fetched as the player being snubbed becoming one.

I could understand people's irritation if he was picked to a major tournament without basis or given some kind of major role if it was a lesser tournament. But no, he was selected to a lesser tournament and mostly spent it warming the bench. It's not like they slapped an '8' on him, put him in the first line and waited him to do wonders. Actually, it is quite likely that thanks to him being there, one or two of the more deserving kids in the lineup got to play more than usual. On top of that, said U18 event got far more media coverage than its kind normally do. Matter of fact, usually those get none - only one bothering to report about them is FIHA's own website. I just don't see the reason for displeasure. Actually, I don't see why anyone after rubbing a pair of cells together would call that anything but a win.

Yes, I think we can all agree that he wouldn't have even warmed the bench in a practice tournament if he wasn't a Selänne. But sometimes, selling the high ideals and doing some unorthodox stuff may actually lead to intangibles that make it worth it. Especially in a case like this, where only an idiot would argue that the price was too high.

There in bold lies the basis of our disagreement. I just don't see anything to be gained unless

1. Eetu develops into a player worthy of national team selections in the future. He's playing midget hockey at the age of 17 for crying out loud. At that age he should be playing major junior, or at very least absolutely dominate the league he plays in for us to hold onto any hope he could have a future on the NT; or

• The selection subject to the disagreement has a long term impact on our junior hockey and the popularity thereof. This I deem as more likely happening since it has already gained some media coverage, but still I don't see it lasting very long and will quickly be completely forgotten among the general public.

In the big picture this is a non-issue, but in the context of our argument it's a matter of principle to me: the players should earn their team selections based on on-ice performance, not because you share a name and bloodline with an ex-superstar.

 

[FiLe]

In the big picture this is a non-issue, but in the context of our argument it's a matter of principle to me: the players should earn their team selections based on on-ice performance, not because you share a name and bloodline with an ex-superstar.

In theory, I agree. In practice, well... let it be said that I can certainly see why Finland is considered the promised land of obstructive bureaucrats, since so many of us seem to put principle before reason.

 

[Joe MacMillan]

In theory, I agree. In practice, well... let it be said that I can certainly see why Finland is considered the promised land of obstructive bureaucrats, since so many of us seem to put principle before reason.

In this context though, are you of the belief that choosing the best players available would be unreasonable?

Neither action has practical ramifications within the realm of possibility but both can be reasonable by the objective observer, so all we have left is to rely on principle.

 

[FiLe]

In this context though, are you of the belief that choosing the best players available would be unreasonable?

No. What is somewhat unreasonable however is making a single principle exclusive.

For things to be reasonable each and every player must be a justified addition to the team. However, you don't have to use the same justification for all of them. As long as there is one, and it makes sense in the context, things remain reasonable and there is no point in complaining about them.

In Selänne's case, the justification was not Selänne being among the best players available - the justification was FIHA covering its backside, even if it was against a long shot.

Now one might say that's actually counterproductive towards achieving the best possible result - until one realizes that the operation happened in a context where achieving a good result was secondary. Nobody cared whether Finland won or lost games in said event. Therefore, using a justification other than the principle stating "best players should be picked" was perfectly kosher.

To put it simply, you're applying principle in a context where said principle certainly fits - but, incidentally, doesn't matter.

 

[Joe MacMillan]

I actually agree with each and every point in your post but have the following remarks:

No. What is somewhat unreasonable however is making a single principle exclusive.

That is exactly what you've been guilty of, making it seem as if the actual selection was the only justifiable one, and calling those thinking otherwise foolish.

To put it simply, you're applying principle in a context where said principle certainly fits - but, incidentally, doesn't matter.

True, it doesn't matter any more or less than your choice of preference, provided that you don't believe that the selection (re: Selänne), albeit justified, has any actual effects on reality.

 

[JJTT]

http://www.mtv.fi/tvopas/index.shtml/sport/20150416

Looks like MTV Sport isn't showing these games