Revisiting: Can the US Men's Hockey Team beat Team Canada in the near future?

[Dom]

23 hours ago, -AJ- said:

I was talking about this with my brother yesterday and it does feel very close these days. The US dominates Canadians in net and honestly, for maybe the first time ever, they might have a better blueline. Can you imagine Adam Fox and Quinn Hughes? Insane. I'd have to take a closer look at the rosters, but Demko or Oettinger alone vs whatever goalie we have might be enough to swing the odds in the Americans' favour.

Logan Thompson is pretty damn good. 

[Dom]

21 hours ago, HKSR said:

I'd say on paper, the Americans would win it.

 

On the ice, you can't rule out the "Canadian pride" factor.  Something about Canadians and hockey brings out the beast in the players.  I could see a lineup like this overpowering the Americans out of sheer will.  Especially those 3rd and 4th lines.

 

Bedard-McDavid-Marner

Stamkos-Mackinnon-Reinhart

O'Reilly-Point-Stone (helluva shutdown 3rd line)

Marchand-Crosby-McTavish (grind line)

 

Toews-Makar (honestly I'd still take this pair over any other defence pairing in the world -- something to be said about chemistry and familiarity)

Theodore-Dobson

Morrissey-Hamilton

 

Goaltending is atrocious though... which means we'd struggle unless our goalie also turns it up a notch wearing the maple leaf.

 

Logan Thompson is no slouch. 

[Jess]

1 minute ago, Dom said:

Logan Thompson is pretty damn good. 

 

Very true--he's solid, but not sure he's on the level of Oettinger or Demko right now. I did forget about him though, and he's probably our starter.

[Miss Korea]

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

 

I've been talking about how Canada can win even when they look like they can't.  What does that have to do with teams that look like they can win and don't?  Completely the opposite of what I'm trying to say.  Again, reading comprehension. 

 

Yes, USA is producing some top tier talent, but I'd bet good money that a Canadian team with inferior talent could probably still win a championship over them.  Again, Canadian heart or pride, whatever you want to call it. 

 

Anyways, I'm gonna stop there cuz clearly your hockey knowledge is limited.  Jamie Langenbrunner led the 2010 USA squad???  Patrick Kane, Kesler, Parise, and Pavelski say hi.

 

Langenbrunner was their team captain.  That's all I'm saying.  Compare him to HHoF Scott Niedermayer and anyone other than you would understand how much of an underdog the American men were in 2010.  Even with younger guys like Kesler/Kane/Parise, their skillset didn't even come close to the firepower that Canada brought.  Anyone who can't recognize the high level of dogged determination the Americans brought... is an idiot.

 

Canadian pride.  That's what you've been calling it.  I'm calling it delusions.  You are attributing something called Canadian exceptionalism.  It's the idea that Team Canada is somehow unique or distinct in a way that has nothing to do with strength or ability.  And I'm telling you that is a load of horseshit.  An inferior Canadian team is not somehow better than others because of where the players were born.  That kind of Don Cherry belief system is exactly why Canadian hockey has been declining.

 

Tell me with a straight face that Hockey Canada is a better organization than USA Hockey because they have more pride.  Try it.

[HKSR]

20 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

Langenbrunner was their team captain.  That's all I'm saying.  Compare him to HHoF Scott Niedermayer and anyone other than you would understand how much of an underdog the American men were in 2010.  Even with younger guys like Kesler/Kane/Parise, their skillset didn't even come close to the firepower that Canada brought.  Anyone who can't recognize the high level of dogged determination the Americans brought... is an idiot.

 

Canadian pride.  That's what you've been calling it.  I'm calling it delusions.  You are attributing something called Canadian exceptionalism.  It's the idea that Team Canada is somehow unique or distinct in a way that has nothing to do with strength or ability.  And I'm telling you that is a load of horseshit.  An inferior Canadian team is not somehow better than others because of where the players were born.  That kind of Don Cherry belief system is exactly why Canadian hockey has been declining.

 

Tell me with a straight face that Hockey Canada is a better organization than USA Hockey because they have more pride.  Try it.

Anybody that doesn't recognize Team USA and Team Canada were (on paper) very well matched in 2010 is a blatant idiot. 

 

It's SO obvious you have no clue what you're talking about.  At THAT TIME, Patrick Kane was one of the most dangerous offensive players on the planet.  Kesler was one of the best (if not the best) defensive forwards in the world.  And your argument is Scott Niedermayer?  Are you friggin serious?  Hey dumb dumb, do you realize 2009-10 was his last season in the NHL?   In other words he was DONE with professional hockey.  And you think Niedermayer is the difference maker?  Good grief, I didn't think you knew much about hockey, but did you even follow hockey back then???  What a waste of my time.  I'm arguing with an amateur.

 

PS - What does Hockey Canada and USA Hockey producing talent have anything to do with what I'm arguing?  Do you even know what the actual argument is?  Oh wait, your reading comprehension is terrible. 

 

I'm done here.  I'll let others laugh at your replies that are full of piss poor hockey knowledge lmao.

[Miss Korea]

17 minutes ago, HKSR said:

Anybody that doesn't recognize Team USA and Team Canada were (on paper) very well matched in 2010 is a blatant idiot. 

 

It's SO obvious you have no clue what you're talking about.  At THAT TIME, Patrick Kane was one of the most dangerous offensive players on the planet.  Kesler was one of the best (if not the best) defensive forwards in the world.  And your argument is Scott Niedermayer?  Are you friggin serious?  Hey dumb dumb, do you realize 2009-10 was his last season in the NHL?   In other words he was DONE with professional hockey.  And you think Niedermayer is the difference maker?  Good grief, I didn't think you knew much about hockey, but did you even follow hockey back then???  What a waste of my time.  I'm arguing with an amateur.

 

PS - What does Hockey Canada and USA Hockey producing talent have anything to do with what I'm arguing?  Do you even know what the actual argument is?  Oh wait, your reading comprehension is terrible. 

 

I'm done here.  I'll let others laugh at your replies that are full of piss poor hockey knowledge lmao.

 

You can't be calling anyone an amateur when the best crap you can come up with is "Canadian pride"

[Barn Burner]

23 hours ago, HKSR said:

 

Thank you.

 

Not sure why Canadian Pride is not an X-factor in all this.  There have been many times in the past where we've seen a 'weaker' Canadian squad absolutely dominate a tournament because they simply WANT it more than other countries.  It's just human nature where people perform at their peak when they really want something.

I remember the 1993 WJC Gold Medal game - Canada vs. Sweden. 

 

Forsberg and Naslund were dominant, yet Canada won despite being underdogs. 

 

It happens. 

[Diamonds]

1 hour ago, HKSR said:

Anybody that doesn't recognize Team USA and Team Canada were (on paper) very well matched in 2010 is a blatant idiot. 

 

It's SO obvious you have no clue what you're talking about.  At THAT TIME, Patrick Kane was one of the most dangerous offensive players on the planet.  Kesler was one of the best (if not the best) defensive forwards in the world.  And your argument is Scott Niedermayer?  Are you friggin serious?  Hey dumb dumb, do you realize 2009-10 was his last season in the NHL?   In other words he was DONE with professional hockey.  And you think Niedermayer is the difference maker?  Good grief, I didn't think you knew much about hockey, but did you even follow hockey back then???  What a waste of my time.  I'm arguing with an amateur.

 

PS - What does Hockey Canada and USA Hockey producing talent have anything to do with what I'm arguing?  Do you even know what the actual argument is?  Oh wait, your reading comprehension is terrible. 

 

I'm done here.  I'll let others laugh at your replies that are full of piss poor hockey knowledge lmao.

I don't really want to wade into the whole argument, but Canada and the US were not on equal footing in 2010. You mentioned 4 good to very good players on team USA, but who did Canada have? The number 1 player in the world at the time in his prime in Sidney Crosby, the Conn Smythe winner that season in Jonathan Toews, all 3 Norris finalists (in fact they had 6 of the top 7 in Norris voting). You mentioned Pavelski on Team USA but who was better than him on the Sharks at that time? Joe Thornton, Patrick Marleau, and Dany Heatly and they formed Canada's third line. Team Canada was so stacked that year that they left of the Rocket Richard trophy winner in Stamkos and left off Martin St. Louis. Yes, the US squad had some talent but on paper they were definitely the underdogs.

[HKSR]

16 minutes ago, Diamonds said:

I don't really want to wade into the whole argument, but Canada and the US were not on equal footing in 2010. You mentioned 4 good to very good players on team USA, but who did Canada have? The number 1 player in the world at the time in his prime in Sidney Crosby, the Conn Smythe winner that season in Jonathan Toews, all 3 Norris finalists (in fact they had 6 of the top 7 in Norris voting). You mentioned Pavelski on Team USA but who was better than him on the Sharks at that time? Joe Thornton, Patrick Marleau, and Dany Heatly and they formed Canada's third line. Team Canada was so stacked that year that they left of the Rocket Richard trophy winner in Stamkos and left off Martin St. Louis. Yes, the US squad had some talent but on paper they were definitely the underdogs.

 

Don't forget Miller was the Vezina winner and was lights out that year.  In fact he was 4th in Hart trophy votes.  

Kesler was arguably the top defensive center in the game.

Kane is Kane.  Etc etc.

 

But bottomline to the argument, who won?  Doesn't matter how close it got.  Fact is, the better team won.  The example I'm looking for is when USA or another country was clearly inferior and won the championship.  Still haven't seen an example yet.  Canada has done it several times.

[Elias Pettersson]

3 hours ago, HKSR said:

 

Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit (I wasn't gonna be mean about it, but if you're gonna call me arrogant and lazy, you better be able to take what you dish). 

 

Let me repeat it again so maybe you can understand it more clearly. 

 

I asked for you to show me an American roster than is inferior (on paper) than the Canadians and yet still overcame and won. 

 

The women's teams are almost always toe to toe on paper, and it shows in the results on the ice. 

The 1996 World Cup rosters are pretty evenly matched as well.  I don't think anyone would have said Canada was the outright favourite when Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, etc were already 35 years old. 

The recent world juniors had many predicting USA would win (or could win).  As you said, they've been producing a ton of talent the past several years.  They've been favourites or co-favourites to win the WJHC for several years, so hardly an inferior team that dug deep and won anyways.

And uhh... did you include a picture of the 2010 Olympics?  Lmao.

 

FIND ME AN EXAMPLE (OR EXAMPLES) OF WHERE A CLEARLY INFERIOR USA ROSTER FOUGHT THE ODDS AND WON THE CHAMPIONSHIP.  Whew, hopefully you can read that clearly.

 

I can provide a very clear example of Canada winning despite the odds seriously against them.  The 2006 WJHC.  Canada were not favourites at all, but they fought tooth and nail and won gold in Vancouver.  There's even an article talking about it:

https://www.tsn.ca/wjhc-history-2006-vancouver-1.155002

 

 

 

 

1996 World Cup.  I watched every game of that series.  Canada was supposed to win easily.  Gretzky, Messier, Sakic, Lindros, Brodeur, Yzerman, Niedermayer, Shanahan, Coffey, Blake, Foote.  They were a powerhouse.  

[HKSR]

12 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

1996 World Cup.  I watched every game of that series.  Canada was supposed to win easily.  Gretzky, Messier, Sakic, Lindros, Brodeur, Yzerman, Niedermayer, Shanahan, Coffey, Blake, Foote.  They were a powerhouse.  

I already touched on 1996:

 

" 1996 World Cup rosters are pretty evenly matched as well.  I don't think anyone would have said Canada was the outright favourite when Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, etc were already 35 years old. "

 

USA was stacked too.  Brett Hull, LaFontaine, Richter, Leetch, Modano, Housley, Chelios... literally a who's who of the greatest American players to ever play the game.

 

If anything, it was just name bias alone that made it seem like Canada was a powerhouse.  In fact more of the US guys were in their prime than Canadians.

 

Edited November 8, 2023 by HKSR

[Elias Pettersson]

15 minutes ago, HKSR said:

I already touched on 1996:

 

" 1996 World Cup rosters are pretty evenly matched as well.  I don't think anyone would have said Canada was the outright favourite when Gretzky, Messier, Coffey, etc were already 35 years old. "

 

USA was stacked too.  Brett Hull, LaFontaine, Richter, Leetch, Modano, Housley, Chelios... literally a who's who of the greatest American players to ever play the game.

 

If anything, it was just name bias alone that made it seem like Canada was a powerhouse.  In fact more of the US guys were in their prime than Canadians.

 

 

Other than Leetch and Hull those American players don't stack up to the Canadian players at all.  Lindros was coming off his best season ever and one year from winning the Hart trophy, Messier was only 2 years removed from winning the cup, Gretzky 3 years removed from winning the NHL scoring title.  Sakic, Brodeur, Yzerman, Shanahan, Niedermayer and Blake were all in their prime years.

 

Canada was expected to win that tournament with ease.  It was a big shock when they lost.  Mike Richter was the reason the USA won.  I remember he stood on his head...

[HKSR]

1 hour ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Other than Leetch and Hull those American players don't stack up to the Canadian players at all.  Lindros was coming off his best season ever and one year from winning the Hart trophy, Messier was only 2 years removed from winning the cup, Gretzky 3 years removed from winning the NHL scoring title.  Sakic, Brodeur, Yzerman, Shanahan, Niedermayer and Blake were all in their prime years.

 

Canada was expected to win that tournament with ease.  It was a big shock when they lost.  Mike Richter was the reason the USA won.  I remember he stood on his head...

I disagree.  USA were a powerhouse too.  Like I said, most of that USA team was in their prime.  Many of the greatest Americans to ever play the game.  Gretzky, Messier, and Coffey were all 35 years old.  Don't really care what they did 3 or 4 years prior to that.  Niedermayer wasn't in his prime yet.  He was 2 or 3 years from that.  

I think you underestimate how good Chelios and Housley were... not to mention Modano and LaFontaine.  I didn't even mention LeClair who was a beast of a player then too.

[shiznak]

Sigh.
 

It’s easy to say, put all the top scoring talent from a country on one team, and they’ll dominate a tournament, but we seen first hand from previous tournaments that just isn’t the case. Chemistry plays a huge factor in success. The current group of USA players, remind me of the Russian’s teams from yesteryears. All the talent/skill in the world, but a whole a lot of individual on the team. 

 

I’m also not sure how the USA has the edge on defense against Canada. The USA might have the household names, but like, I would much rather choose a less sexier pairing of Middleton and Spurgeon over a random pairing of McAvoy and Slavin or Werenski. Makar and Toews; pretty much have been the best defensive duo the past three years now. I think I trust them to shutdown any offensive threat the USA can throw at them. 

[wai_lai416]

34 minutes ago, shiznak said:

Sigh.
 

It’s easy to say, put all the top scoring talent from a country on one team, and they’ll dominate a tournament, but we seen first hand from previous tournaments that just isn’t the case. Chemistry plays a huge factor in success. The current group of USA players, remind me of the Russian’s teams from yesteryears. All the talent/skill in the world, but a whole a lot of individual on the team. 

 

I’m also not sure how the USA has the edge on defense against Canada. The USA might have the household names, but like, I would much rather choose a less sexier pairing of Middleton and Spurgeon over a random pairing of McAvoy and Slavin or Werenski. Makar and Toews; pretty much have been the best defensive duo the past three years now. I think I trust them to shutdown any offensive threat the USA can throw at them. 

so eer why is it USA just a bunch of individual players on the team while Canada somehow have all the instant chemistry?? literally all the players that would make team canada at the next olympic probably have never played with anyone in their line maybe except the toews makar. besides Makar availability is always a big question mark.. he's made of glass and is always injured.. he only had 1 season where he played 90% of the games.. he's like guaranteed to miss 20% of the season every year.. and if he gets hurt then what? maybe we'll see a hughes/hughes pairing.. they grew up playing hockey together.. if we want to talk about chemistry they probably have more chemistry than any one else. 

 

of coz hockey isn't played on paper but on the ice.. but i would still take USA over Canada just because they have 3 goalies that can steal a game on their own on any given night. logan thompson is maybe good.. or maybe he's only good because of the vegas defence.. because despite his good gaa and sv% his underlaying number is in the bottom half of the league and even adin hill have better numbers.. heck spencer martins underlaying number is almost the same as thompson and we were saying he's not even an nhl goalie last season

[Miss Korea]

1 hour ago, shiznak said:

Sigh.
 

It’s easy to say, put all the top scoring talent from a country on one team, and they’ll dominate a tournament, but we seen first hand from previous tournaments that just isn’t the case. Chemistry plays a huge factor in success. The current group of USA players, remind me of the Russian’s teams from yesteryears. All the talent/skill in the world, but a whole a lot of individual on the team. 

 

I’m also not sure how the USA has the edge on defense against Canada. The USA might have the household names, but like, I would much rather choose a less sexier pairing of Middleton and Spurgeon over a random pairing of McAvoy and Slavin or Werenski. Makar and Toews; pretty much have been the best defensive duo the past three years now. I think I trust them to shutdown any offensive threat the USA can throw at them. 

 

It is awfully cocky for a Canucks fan to think that a team of Americans lack the ability to work as a team.  Apart from Pettersson, all our star players are American.  Even most of our supporting cast is American - DeSmith, Cole, Lafferty, Garland.  Our best performing Canadians? Phil Di Giuseppe and Carson Soucy.  That's how far down the list we have to go.

 

Are you going to tell me that Quinn Hughes can't generate offense because he's too... individual?  That team is going to have Miller, Boeser, and Demko.  It's going to have Jack.  It'll probably have Luke.  I know @Elias Pettersson will get a kick out of this, but you could slot in Jack with Miller and Boeser and Quinn will be feeding them pucks all game long.  Instead of Hronek you'll get someone better like McAvoy or even Adam Fox.  If you don't think that lineup can beat Toews/Makar, you're basically suggesting the Canucks are guaranteed to lose every game against Colorado this season.  I'm sure you don't really believe that.

 

Our best Canadian forwards would have to play with random linemates on Team Canada.  We are going to have the exact same growing pains as USA.  McDavid would probably end up with Marner.  MacKinnon would have to play with Stone and Bedard.  You cannot tell me that these star players are somehow less "individual" (whatever the hell that means) in comparison to guys like Tkachuk(s) and Matthews.  In any case, you'd be nuts to throw Middleton/Spurgeon out there and cut whoever else can make the team: Morrissey, Power, Hamilton, Pietrangelo, Rielly, Montour...

 

1 hour ago, wai_lai416 said:

so eer why is it USA just a bunch of individual players on the team while Canada somehow have all the instant chemistry?? literally all the players that would make team canada at the next olympic probably have never played with anyone in their line maybe except the toews makar. besides Makar availability is always a big question mark.. he's made of glass and is always injured.. he only had 1 season where he played 90% of the games.. he's like guaranteed to miss 20% of the season every year.. and if he gets hurt then what? maybe we'll see a hughes/hughes pairing.. they grew up playing hockey together.. if we want to talk about chemistry they probably have more chemistry than any one else. 

 

of coz hockey isn't played on paper but on the ice.. but i would still take USA over Canada just because they have 3 goalies that can steal a game on their own on any given night. logan thompson is maybe good.. or maybe he's only good because of the vegas defence.. because despite his good gaa and sv% his underlaying number is in the bottom half of the league and even adin hill have better numbers.. heck spencer martins underlaying number is almost the same as thompson and we were saying he's not even an nhl goalie last season

 

There are some fools here who think Team Canada will have instant chemistry because Canadians have more pride.

 

Come to think of it, Team Canada in 2010 had tons of chemistry from the start... or so we thought.  The three Sharks formed the third line and Keith-Seabrook was essentially Toews-Makar.  Getzlaf-Perry too.  Do you know what happened?  They lost to the United States.  All that talent and they still lost that group game.  The gold medal game shifted a bunch of lines and Duncan Keith ended up pairing with Drew Doughty.  Crosby had a million linemates before settling with Staal and Iginla in the gold medal game.  

[Miss Korea]

@Diamonds @Elias Pettersson Don't waste your time.  That guy will come up with any excuse regardless of which American team you bring up.  Excuses and excuses.  His question has such a silly premise.  How many times in the past did Team Canada ice an inferior team compared to the USA?  Maybe a couple of junior teams here and there?  Here would be better question: how many times was Team Canada the clear-cut favourite only to choke when it mattered?  Why didn't "Canadian pride" get them through those times?

[Elias Pettersson]

2 hours ago, shiznak said:

Sigh.
 

It’s easy to say, put all the top scoring talent from a country on one team, and they’ll dominate a tournament, but we seen first hand from previous tournaments that just isn’t the case. Chemistry plays a huge factor in success. The current group of USA players, remind me of the Russian’s teams from yesteryears. All the talent/skill in the world, but a whole a lot of individual on the team. 

 

I’m also not sure how the USA has the edge on defense against Canada. The USA might have the household names, but like, I would much rather choose a less sexier pairing of Middleton and Spurgeon over a random pairing of McAvoy and Slavin or Werenski. Makar and Toews; pretty much have been the best defensive duo the past three years now. I think I trust them to shutdown any offensive threat the USA can throw at them. 

 

Imagine calling Jacob Slavin and Charlie McAvoy a "random" pairing.  That's funny...

[shiznak]

2 hours ago, wai_lai416 said:

so eer why is it USA just a bunch of individual players on the team while Canada somehow have all the instant chemistry?? literally all the players that would make team canada at the next olympic probably have never played with anyone in their line maybe except the toews makar. besides Makar availability is always a big question mark.. he's made of glass and is always injured.. he only had 1 season where he played 90% of the games.. he's like guaranteed to miss 20% of the season every year.. and if he gets hurt then what? maybe we'll see a hughes/hughes pairing.. they grew up playing hockey together.. if we want to talk about chemistry they probably have more chemistry than any one else. 

 

of coz hockey isn't played on paper but on the ice.. but i would still take USA over Canada just because they have 3 goalies that can steal a game on their own on any given night. logan thompson is maybe good.. or maybe he's only good because of the vegas defence.. because despite his good gaa and sv% his underlaying number is in the bottom half of the league and even adin hill have better numbers.. heck spencer martins underlaying number is almost the same as thompson and we were saying he's not even an nhl goalie last season

 

Not entirely sure who will make the team in 2 years (not saying these players will make it on the team), but these players have at some point played significant minutes together for their own clubs or have played together before.
 

- McDavid and Hyman
- Stamkos, Hagel, Point, and Cirelli

- Thomas, Kyrou, and Schenn.

- Marner, Hyman, and Tavares.

- Stone, Stephenson, and Marchessault.

- Konecny and Couturier

- Theodore and Pietrangelo

- Weegar and Ekblad

- Pulock and Pelech

- Middleton and Spurgeon

57 minutes ago, Miss Korea said:

 

It is awfully cocky for a Canucks fan to think that a team of Americans lack the ability to work as a team.  Apart from Pettersson, all our star players are American.  Even most of our supporting cast is American - DeSmith, Cole, Lafferty, Garland.  Our best performing Canadians? Phil Di Giuseppe and Carson Soucy.  That's how far down the list we have to go.

 

Are you going to tell me that Quinn Hughes can't generate offense because he's too... individual?  That team is going to have Miller, Boeser, and Demko.  It's going to have Jack.  It'll probably have Luke.  I know @Elias Pettersson will get a kick out of this, but you could slot in Jack with Miller and Boeser and Quinn will be feeding them pucks all game long.  Instead of Hronek you'll get someone better like McAvoy or even Adam Fox.  If you don't think that lineup can beat Toews/Makar, you're basically suggesting the Canucks are guaranteed to lose every game against Colorado this season.  I'm sure you don't really believe that.

 

Our best Canadian forwards would have to play with random linemates on Team Canada.  We are going to have the exact same growing pains as USA.  McDavid would probably end up with Marner.  MacKinnon would have to play with Stone and Bedard.  You cannot tell me that these star players are somehow less "individual" (whatever the hell that means) in comparison to guys like Tkachuk(s) and Matthews.  In any case, you'd be nuts to throw Middleton/Spurgeon out there and cut whoever else can make the team: Morrissey, Power, Hamilton, Pietrangelo, Rielly, Montour...

 

 

There are some fools here who think Team Canada will have instant chemistry because Canadians have more pride.

 

Come to think of it, Team Canada in 2010 had tons of chemistry from the start... or so we thought.  The three Sharks formed the third line and Keith-Seabrook was essentially Toews-Makar.  Getzlaf-Perry too.  Do you know what happened?  They lost to the United States.  All that talent and they still lost that group game.  The gold medal game shifted a bunch of lines and Duncan Keith ended up pairing with Drew Doughty.  Crosby had a million linemates before settling with Staal and Iginla in the gold medal game.  

 

Did I suggest Middleton and Spurgeon make it on the team over Powers, Hamilton, etc? No. I said I feel more comfortable with them, because they are each other partners for their own club. They know each other tenacities on the ice. You’re trending in unknown territory with some sort of random pairing in a 2 week tournament. 

 

You bring up Keith and Seabrook, in the 2010 Olympics and how they barely played together during the event. Do you realize that Seabrook was always going to be the 7th defensemen? He was fighting with Dan Boyle for the last 6th spot. Boyle eventually got it because of the Sharks connection. 
 

The US gave Canada a run for their money in 2010. Next Olympics they didn’t even medal, with arguably a better roster than in 2010 AND with two of the top 4 tournament points leader. So what do that tell you?

 

I also like how you mentioned our Canadian players sucks. Well, of course they sucks. Most of them are barely role players, on other teams. We also have more US born players on our roster than Canadians. It’s like one arguing a US based team winning the Stanley Cup, but having more Canadians on the team. So, it’s basically “Canada’s” team. 

Edited November 8, 2023 by shiznak

[wai_lai416]

2 hours ago, shiznak said:

 

Not entirely sure who will make the team in 2 years (not saying these players will make it on the team), but these players have at some point played significant minutes together for their own clubs or have played together before.
 

- McDavid and Hyman
- Stamkos, Hagel, Point, and Cirelli

- Thomas, Kyrou, and Schenn.

- Marner, Hyman, and Tavares.

- Stone, Stephenson, and Marchessault.

- Konecny and Couturier

- Theodore and Pietrangelo

- Weegar and Ekblad

- Pulock and Pelech

- Middleton and Spurgeon

 

Did I suggest Middleton and Spurgeon make it on the team over Powers, Hamilton, etc? No. I said I feel more comfortable with them, because they are each other partners for their own club. They know each other tenacities on the ice. You’re trending in unknown territory with some sort of random pairing in a 2 week tournament. 

 

You bring up Keith and Seabrook, in the 2010 Olympics and how they barely played together during the event. Do you realize that Seabrook was always going to be the 7th defensemen? He was fighting with Dan Boyle for the last 6th spot. Boyle eventually got it because of the Sharks connection. 
 

The US gave Canada a run for their money in 2010. Next Olympics they didn’t even medal, with arguably a better roster than in 2010 AND with two of the top 4 tournament points leader. So what do that tell you?

 

I also like how you mentioned our Canadian players sucks. Well, of course they sucks. Most of them are barely role players, on other teams. We also have more US born players on our roster than Canadians. It’s like one arguing a US based team winning the Stanley Cup, but having more Canadians on the team. So, it’s basically “Canada’s” team. 

of the list you have.. the only few that are guaranteed are mcdavid marner stone couturier maybe marchessault.. everyone else is borderline or prolly too old and if it was up to me th eonly 34+ player i would take is crosby.. the rest of them there's better options.. more than 3/4 of the people you listed won't even be close to the conversation of being selected to the team.. it's almost as if you are just listing players because they are same nationality and play for the same team.. olympic is a best on best tournament.. you take your best player and let them work things out themselves.. not take the player you think may or may not have chemistry.. it's like imagine leaving QH off the olympic roster and replacing him with someone that's above average but have better chemistry with certain guys.

 

maybe team canada should consider just sending the golden knights team to the olympic instead coz majority of the team is canadian and they will all have instant chemistry since they played together for a while and just won the cup together and is dominating the league right now

[Robert Paulson]

Canadians watch hockey above any other sport.

 

Americans are equally as likely to watch hockey, golf or boxing. 
 

On a very simplistic level hockey is different in Canada. 

Edited November 8, 2023 by Robert Paulson

[Sativika]

On 11/6/2023 at 1:56 PM, Miss Korea said:

  ........A month into the season, and I'm a bit surprised to see no Canadians leading the scoresheet anywhere.  It was a safe bet to assume guys like McDavid and Makar would be the stat leaders in their respective positions.  But instead it's... Jack and Quinn Hughes.  Matthews (who can only score hat-tricks) is leading in goals - no surprise.  But some names I didn't expect to also be at the very top: Alex DeBrincat?  Frank Vatrano?  BROCK BOESER?  Half of the top 10 scoring leaders this season are American.  None are Canadian.  Other than Demko playing even better than anyone anticipated, the US goalie situation is the same as before: they're amazing.  Meanwhile our best performing Canadian is...  James Reimer .

 

Fast forward three years.  I don't know if Team Canada has what it takes to win anymore.  We obviously have greater depth in the league, where the largest slice of the pie is still Canadian.  But if you had to make an all-star roster, I think the Americans are looking better and better each year.  In three years' time, Team Canada will lose HHoF guys like Crosby, Marchand and Stamkos.  They might still be in the NHL, but it would be a very old, slow squad to bring all three on one roster.  Team USA loses Kane, Carlson and Pavelski.  Losing Kane obviously hurts, but they have tons more young talent coming up.

 

The future team USA is going to look absolutely stacked from head to toe.  Tkachuk.  Hughes.  The goalies.  Bring on the debates.

 

And don't get me started on comparing the women's rosters.  

 

There's definitely more parody in the NHL. Other hockey countries have raised the bar with regards to talent/skill levels to match the usual hockey powerhouse nations. To me the '72 Summit Series was the catalyst that planted the seed; NHL caliber hockey players were not just from North America anymore since. In keeping with the Americans.....

.......There's a couple of reasons why they're on the rise. The trade of the greatest hockey player ever, (Gretzky) to a U.S.A market team, and 10+ times the population of Canada! 

 

Think of it....every world stage event, Olympics, Worlds, whatever, the Americans field a team with huge numbers. not only that, they contend in the upper echelon of most disciplines. Why not. National pride, no matter what country one is from, is a huge f*ckin' deal in world sport event. Why not get as many peeps as you can to make that national pride happen. And the States have pride in spades. In short, they got the numbers to achieve such. And hockey, though not as popular in the States as the NFL or NasCar, is and has been on the rise since Wayne joined the LA Kings in '88.

 

Sorry. Kind of went off on a different tangent........

 

McDavid and Makar will triumph. No worries there. The worry that most of the Canadian NHL contingent are not at the top means nothing to me. If the NHL decides to have a World Cup Tourney or go the 2026 Olympics in Italy, the Canadian roster compared to one today will look different. Don't worry. We'll field a stacked roster.