5 Responses to “World Cup Notebook”

1. Colby Cosh says:

   August 30, 2004 at 3:30 pm

   I don’t know if Slovakia can still be considered a “sleeper” after their 2002 World Championship gold medal… with the kind of talent they produce up front, and two of the five best defencemen on the planet in Chara and Visnovsky, they’ve got to be considered the #3 hockey nation if their goaltending is remotely credible.
2. Ben says:

   August 30, 2004 at 5:54 pm

   I’m tempted to put Slavakia third behind Canada and Sweden. Goaltending is the real wild card given that Canada is the only country with a top quality guy between the pipes aside from Finland who lack in other areas (although they looked great against a lethargic Czech team in their 4-0 win today). The Czechs and Russians could end up being the bottom-feeders with Germany if they aren’t careful.
3. dcthrowback says:

   August 30, 2004 at 10:01 pm

   Lub-o-mir!
4. Ninja says:

   August 31, 2004 at 1:36 pm

   Joe T, I’m not sure if you and Larry Brooks agree on a regular basis, but his column today might open your eyes on the CBA issue.

   http://www.nypost.com/sports/27797.htm
5. PJ says:

   August 31, 2004 at 2:02 pm

   So according to Larry Brooks, each of the 6 proposals was a salary cap because he says so?

   His CBA columns are almost as factually accurate as his trade rumors.

One Response to “World Cup Notebook”

1. Ben says:

   August 27, 2004 at 12:55 pm

   Back when you asked who should have been taken instead of Gill I recal that there were a bunch of responses. If I remember correctly (I haven’t bothered to go back and check the comments) Liles, Martin and Weinrich were all suggested by various readers. Maybe Team USA management reads Offwing. Either that or you’ve got some smart readers.

2 Responses to “World Cup Notebook”

1. Nick says:

   August 24, 2004 at 10:08 am

   Aye caramba, Eric! You sure we WANT the details?
2. Rick says:

   August 26, 2004 at 10:20 am

   I hardly call attendance of 14,871 a “sparse crowd,” for an exhibition game that we were charged full price for. The arena was rockin’, and there was a large Canadian contingent in attendance.

16 Responses to “World Cup Notebook”

1. Jes Gőlbez says:

   August 13, 2004 at 9:41 am

   I’d rather have Matt Schneider, who Joe Thornton and Prince vince can’t possibly just skate around and look like a pylon.

   Hal Gill? Well, it’s better for Canada
2. Ben says:

   August 13, 2004 at 11:08 am

   Hal Gill is quite possibly the greatest waste of size in the NHL and I say that as a Bruins fan. How good of a defenseman is he? He finished seventh on the Bruins in average time on ice behind Nick Boynton, Dan McGillis, Jiri Slegr, Sergei Gonchar, Sean O’Donnell and Ian Moran. Ouch.
3. Ben says:

   August 13, 2004 at 11:10 am

   Seventh for defensemen that is. He was beaten by a few forwards as well.
4. Joe T. says:

   August 13, 2004 at 11:34 am

   Ben’s right on here. As a New Englander, I have the privelage of watching Hal Gill’s lack of mobility work to the advantage of smaller, quicker opponents quite often. Saku Koivu really made him look silly at times during their playoff series.
5. Ben says:

   August 13, 2004 at 12:26 pm

   So who should Wilson take instead? Tough question considering how weak the US is at the position but my first two picks would Sean Hill (who I’ve always liked) and John-Michael Liles who was outstanding as a stay at home defender with Colorado last year. Paul Martin was another solid rookie defenseman who happened to get more ice-time than Gill while playng with the defensively minded Devils. Liles and Martin might not be ready for the World Cup spotlight yet but I’d still take them over Gill.
6. PJ says:

   August 13, 2004 at 2:20 pm

   Can’t we dangle citizenship in front of a few Canadian d-men?
7. Charlie says:

   August 13, 2004 at 3:02 pm

   Mark Eaton!! The guy is solid and has a touch of speed. While he is not the most physical his positional play is superb.
8. Charles Tupper says:

   August 13, 2004 at 10:30 pm

   IMO, these kids are ready to go and instead of reproducing the feeble display by the US defence in ‘02 at Salt Lake City again, where the Canucks, (who were lucky to get to the Gold medal match) nullified their transitional game by dumping and running oldsters like Chelios, let the kids play. Why care about Leetch and Chelios? The great thing about the American game, IMO, unlike its Canadian counterpart, is that it still is able to produce remarkable talent outside the NHL hegemony.

   As Tarasov said about the Canadian game, “Where are your philosophers?”

   To a great extent it’s still true, however the US program allows room to develop a different approach, a high speed, fast transitioning counter-attack game that people allegedly want to see. It may not boost
   attendance at NHL arenas however from a pure love of the game perspective it’s truly great to watch. Can
   you imagine the excitement generated in US hockey
   markets seeing, once again, the US college David
   facing, this time, the NHL Goliath.

   Oooh, it’s goose-bump time.

   Last point Eric, why in the world will you be travelling to Montreal to view these matches. Especially after the digraceful, despicable, reprehensible behaviour shown those kids on the Brocton Boxers from Boston, in April 2003, who travelled all the way to Frogtown for a friendly game of puck just to be given the finger and see their flag burnt. Disagreement about the war is one thing but to treat your guests in this manner is inexcusable.
9. Ben says:

   August 13, 2004 at 11:42 pm

   The irony of you writing a comment filled with digs against Canada while having the same name as a Canadian father of confederation is just hilarious.

   Canada beat everyone they needed to beat to get to the final and win the gold in 2002. I hardly call that luck.

   Personally I’d take the hegemonic NHL talent that Canada has produced over the last five years over that of any other country in a heartbeat. Lecavalier, Richards, Heatley, Nash, Horton, Bowmeester, Bergeron, Raycroft, Ryder, Staal, Luongo. Nope, nothing remarkable about that lot. And we’ve got this kid named Sidney coming up through the ranks who’s going to be one hell of a philosopher.

   As for that incident in 2003, you’re right, it was inexcusable. It was also an isolated incident over a year ago and I don’t know any Canadian that condoned it. All it showed is that Canadians are free to be jackasses just like Americans are. Incidentally that same team was invited back to Canada this year and was hosted by a team in St Stephen, NB who felt horrible about how the team had been treated in Montreal.
10. Charles Tupper says:

    August 14, 2004 at 2:24 am

    Canada barely gets by the Finns 2-1 and do not face the Swedes who kicked their ass the first time around; Vladimir Kopat scores on a 70-foot shot that bounced wildly off goalie Tommy Salo’s head with only 2:24 remaining and Belarus scores one of the greatest upsets in Olympic history, beating Sweden 4-3 in the hockey quarterfinal and you don’t call that lucky?

    Five of the last seven years a European wins the Art Ross. In the last ten years five Europeans win the Hart. Six of the top ten point getters in 03-04 are European. In 00-01 seven of top ten are Euros. Five of top ten in 01-02 are Euros and an American. Five of ten again in 02-03 are Euros. For the first time ever two Rooskies, Alexander Ovechkin and Evgeni Malkin go 1-2 in the June draft. Canada has not won a World Junior Championship since 1997. Canada has over 400,000 boys playing minor hockey, 2.5 times the number of Europeans including the Russians. The Euros produce almost 3 times per capita as many elite players as Canada does. If Canadian hockey produced elite players at the same rate as Europe there would be no Euros or Americans in the NHL.

    What exactly is remarkable about the bunch you mention? Is there an Art Ross or a Hart or a Norris trophy winner amongst them?

    Are you suggesting that Sidney Crosby will bring the same kind of innovation to this game as Tarasov or Tommy Watt, Freddie Shero or Roger Neilson? Don’t make us laugh.

    Being free to act like jackasses is one thing but treating twelve-year-olds like that, especially when they are there at your invitation makes you just scum.
11. Ben says:

    August 14, 2004 at 12:20 pm

    Was Canada fortunate that they didn’t have to play Sweden again? Of course. Could they have beaten them if they had to? We’ll never know. Like I said, they beat everyone they had to to win the gold and that’s all that’s required.

    Five of the last seven years a European wins the Art Ross. Yes. two of the last three years a Canadian won it. Fourteen of the last twenty years a Canadian won it. It all depends what kind of time frame you want to look at.

    Five of the top eleven (three players tied for ninth) point getters in 2003-04 were Canadian. No other single nation can make that claim. the same can be said for the other years you list. I don’t see anything wrong with Canada contributing half of the top ten scorers in any given year. Pointing out that once in the history of the NHL draft two Russians went first and second hardly seems like an indictment of the Canadian game to me.

    It’s true that Canada hasn’t won a gold medal at the World Juniors since 1997 but they’ve won eleven medals over the last twelve years, more than any other country, and five of those eleven were gold. We’ve also won back-to-back World Championships, going undefeated this year. I see you forgot to mention that.

    Saying the Europeans produce 3 times per capita the number of elite players as Canada is meaningless unless you define elite. I would define elite as anyone able to make a living playing hockey in which case you have to look at the NHL AHL, IHL, ECHL and the European leagues that are partially stocked with Canadian players and coaches.

    Some would argue that the hardest and most prestigious individual award an NHL player can win is the Conn Smythe. Over its thirty-nine year history it has been won by a Canadian thirty-seven times including nine of the last ten times.

    What’s remarkable about the group I mentioned?

    Andrew Raycoft- Calder Trophy winner
    Dany Heatley- First overall draft pick, Calder Trophy winner, World Championship MVP
    Vincent Lecavalier- First overall draft pick and good enough to replace Steve Yzerman on Team Canada
    Brad Richards- Conn Smythe and Lady Byng Trophy recipient and record holder for game-winning goals in the playoffs.
    Rick Nash- Maurice Richard Trophy winner at the age of 19.
    Michael Ryder- could have won the Calder Trophy, finished first in rookie scoring.
    Patrice Bergeron- went from playing Junior B hockey in Quebec to being a key player on the Bruins as a rookie in less than two years.
    Roberto Luongo- Vezina finalist, Team Canada backup goalie, record holder for saves in a single season, Vezina finalist
    Horton, Staal and Bowmeester- all top three draft choices with less than a full year of NHL experience. All Three will be impact players in the future.

    You wanted to know what remarkable talent Canada has produced lately. There it is. No, there isn’t an Art Ross, Hart or Norris Trophy winner among them. Not yet, because rarely are any of those awards won by players under the age of 25. My group does include winners of two Calders, a Lady Byng, a Conn Smythe, a Maurice Richard trophy and finalists for various other awards. If that’s not remarkable i your eyes you had best give me a definition of what is.

    If by philosophers you mean innovative coaches, Canada has produced plenty. Will any of the young coaches produce the same kind of innovation as Tarasov, Watt, Shero or Neilson? If it was the same it wouldn’t be innovation would it? I’m not sure that there have been any truly innovative coaches that have changed the NHL game in the last few years (unless you want to count the implementation of the trap, popularized by a Canadian). That’s hardly a knock against Canada alone.

    As for the Montreal incident, yes, it was reprehensible. I’ve given you that. But I don’t hold the actions of a few against a city of millions.
12. Charles Tupper says:

    August 15, 2004 at 2:03 am

    Europeans did not start entering the NHL in any number until after ‘92 so going back 20 years when the NHL was 95% Canadian is indicative of the decline of Canadian influenceover the last ten years. Europeans represent ~30% of the NHL players yet they consistently place 50-70% of scorers in the top ten. They are way over-represented. Canada places 30-50% in the top ten which is an abysmal stat considering 60% of the NHL are Canadians.

    If the Yankees had not won a WS since 1997, do you think people would say there is something wrong? You want to talk World Championships, just look at the list. In the last twenty years Canada has won four. Wow a real hockey power!

    NHL is the elite league. The best or most skilled members of a group. Everything else is the penultimate.

    Let’s look at the Calder. Since 1990 five Canucks have won the rookie of the year. Seven Euros and three Americans. Canucks are 60% of the NHL (higher in the early 90s) but have only won 30% of the rookie awards since the Euros started to arrive in force. And you really believe there is nothing wrong with the Canadian game?

    Howe wins the Hart in ‘52 at 24. Jean Beliveau wins the Hart in ‘56 at 25. Orr wins it in 1970 at 22. Case closed.

    Swede Matts Waltin has been experimenting with the torpedo for a number of years now however it’s really nothing new…it owes much, if not all, to the Russians
13. Ben says:

    August 15, 2004 at 7:43 pm

    Wow, where to start.

    If this discussions were being judged by the rules of forensic or parliamentary debate you would have just lost.

    One of your points is that Canada is losing its influence and not producing elite talent anymore. You just stated that “NHL is the elite league. The best or most skilled members of a group. Everything else is the penultimate” right after saying that 60% of the NHL is comprised of Canadians. By your own definition of elite 60% of the elite hockey players in the world are Canadian. That’s hardly a lack of production or influence.

    I said the Hart, Art Ross and Norris trophies are rarely won by players under 25. You came back by saying Beliveau won the Hart at 25 in ‘56. It’s interesting that you went back that far to find someone that young that won it when you could have just gone back to 2002 when a 25 year old Jose Theodre (a remarkable Canadian player) won the Hart and Vezina. Another point you would have lost on, not to mentin that you’ve done nothing to convince me that the group of players whos credentials I’ve listed are anything less than remarkable. Simply saying none of them have won the Hart or Art Ross doesn’t cut it. From 1980 to 1987 Wayne Gretzky was the only player to win the Hart Trophy. Does that mean he was the only remarkable player in the NHL. I think not. Again, by all debating standards I’m familiar with you would have lost this point for not clearly rebutting my point that there is a solid group of young Canadian players in the NHL today.

    Finally, on the issue of Canada’s lagging percentage of players in the Top 10 in scoring and their lack of major tournament wins, I have several comments. First of all, you’re pitting Canada against Europe and Russia as a group. You cannot find one country who has finished as highly in Canada in each major world hockey tournament as Canada over the last 10 years. As a group, yes, Europe and Russia have more wins and medals than Canada. It shouldn’t be surprising to anyone that the combined national programs of 5 countries have had more combined success than one Canadian national program which has limited funding and doesn’t have a standing national team. That Canada can consistently put together a team, practice as a group for two weeks and thenn compete for a medal in almost every tournament they enter is much more impressive than you give credit for. Yes, it’s a problem when the Yankees go 7 years without a Championship. And to fix it they throw more money at the probelm. Hockey Canada doesn’t have that option. It is a sore spot in Canada that we’ve come back from the World Juniors without the gold for seven years but we have the sense to know as long as we keep producing players like Nash, Heatley, Richards, Luongo, etc we’re still doing somthing right.

    Finally, I think you have to consider why the percentage of Canadians in the NHL is as high as it is and why that percentage has dropped. The pre-90’s NHL was stocked with mostly Canadians because a) we had been developing hockey players for decades and had a headstart and b) eastern Europeans didn’t have the option of going to the NHL without the dangerous task of defecting. Now that Europe has opened up more Europeans have come over limiting the number of Canadians. When there are 5 top notch hockey powers in Europe developing players it’s unreasonable to expect Canada to match their production. Furthermore, I think the percentage of Canadian players has only stayed as high as it is because Canada is a cheap and easy source of third and fourth line players. Most NHL coaches and managers have Canadian roots and easy access to information on Canadian junior players. Why go to Europe to scout a third or fourth line player when you can easilyfind one through your contacts in Canada? In short, I think you’ve overestimated the influence of Canadian hockey players in the past and underestimated their value and talent now. That being said no single other nation consistently competes at the same level as Canada year after year. Despite the similarities in total numbers of players at the minor hockey level I think it’s unreasonable to compare Canada to a continent’s worth of European programs.

    I’ll concede the coaching points, partly because I think you’re probably right and partly because you’re clearly far more knowledgable than I when it comes to coaches and coaching techniques of the past and present. It’s not an area of hockey I pay much attention to to be honest.

    We’ll probably have to agree to disagree on most of this stuff but the discussion has been fun. It would be nice to see what other people think but I suspect this
    debate has moved too far down the page for most people to notice it anymore.
14. Charles Tupper says:

    August 15, 2004 at 9:41 pm

    Canada has 2.5 times as many boys playing hockey as all of Europe yet only produces 60% of the talent at the elite level. Why? When the CBA is finally resolved look for a team reduction to about 28, maybe more. Will Canadians still be 60% of NHL players? Bet you dollars to donuts that as the league retracts under the weight of its self-imposed fiscal imbalance look for a big loss in Canadian content. The only salvation for Canadian players is that an independent NHL study shows fans come to see the fights not the scoring.

    Actually Beliveau was 24 going on 25. Howe, (interesting how you fail to mention the great Anglos in the game) was 23 turning 24 at the end of March ‘52. And of course the wondrous Robert Gordon Orr was only 22. Do you suggest Bouwmeester, Heatly and Lecavalier are in the same class as Orr or Howe? Such a notion can only be described as ‘invincible ignorance.’ The Hart trophy is awarded to the most valuable player and when Canadian hockey was at its pinnacle the greatest and most valuable players were under 25. Your group pales in comparison to the young talent of the fifties and sixties.

    Gretzky is way overrated and so are the eighties. However, that’s a subject for another time. It is interesting to note that Gretzky’s last Hart was in ‘89 with LA. After the Euros arrived his production fell remarkably whereas Howe won another Hart in 1960 and again in 1963. The eighties were the weakest period of NHL hockey since WW2. It was an unremarkable time with unremarkable players posting highly inflated stats because of expansion.

    The issues of a national programme, made relevant by Father David Bauer in the 60s, are well known. The NHL had no interest then or now to rectify the inadequacies. Ask yourself why the Euros simply walked into NHL jobs outing Canadians whose skills had been developed in this vaunted programme producing elite players for decades? Simply put they were clearly better players. It is not unreasonable to expect Canada to match European production. The simple fact is that they choose not to try. Again, it’s not a continent of players there are~400,000 Canadian boys playing hockey as compared to ~160,000 Europeans. How many indoor rinks are in Russia or the Czech Republic or Slovakia? The percentage of Canucks has only stayed at this level because of constant expansion.

    Finally, the US recognized a weakness in their hockey program and in less than ten years produced a World Junior champion. When will Canada wake-up?. Probably. like Britsh soccer, when most of the NHL players are foreign nationals.
15. Ben says:

    August 15, 2004 at 11:43 pm

    Sure, Canada has 400,000 boys in minor hockey. Of those 400,000 how many play in recreational leagues? Most. Beleive it or not the role of hockey in Canada isn’t purely to produce the next Howe or Orr, neither of whom was the player they were because of the Canadian system. No matter how many kids we have playing rec hockey in Canada there are still only 20 odd spots on the national team roster at any given level.

    At no point did I try to compare any of the NHL’s young, Canadian rising stars to the all-time greats of the 50’s and 60’s. That would be foolish, especially since the NHL has changed so much between now and then and it’s pretty much impossible to adequately compare players from completely different eras. I simply said I consider them to be remarkable, exceptional players by NHL standards, which they are. I wasn’t around to watch the glory days of Beliveau, Orr, Howe, Esposito, Lafleur or any other pre-80’s icons.

    Clearly your standard for what constitutes a remarkable player is significantly different than mine.

    That the US was able to win a World Junior title in 10 years is to be appluaded but consistantly finishing in the top 3 in 9 of those 10 years is hardly cause for a complete overhaul of the Canadian system. Gold would be ideal in each of those years but perfection is an unattainable goal (especially on a tight budget) and the difference between gold, silver and bronze is simply one win. The US had to do something because finishing at the bottom of the pack was embarassing. Finishing in the top 3 year after year as Canada has done is not.

    You think Canada has fallen behind. I think the rest of the world has caught up. There is a fundamental difference between the two views and very different consequences for each. For the first to happen would be an embarrassment. For the second to happen would be a testament to how hard the other countries have worked to get where they are as well as a credit to how good of a job Canadian players have done in helping to popularize the game and give other countries a target to strive for.You can continue to hold the first view while I will gladly continue to hold the latter.
16. Nicanor says:

    August 19, 2004 at 5:52 am

    How about bringing along Brooks Orpik if he is eligible?

4 Responses to “World Cup Notebook”

1. puckcat says:

   August 10, 2004 at 3:10 pm

   I saw the final of the first Canada Cup in 1976,the most exciting and memorable hockey game I have ever witnessed.Darryl Sittler scored in o/t to give Canada a 5-4 win over the underrated Czechs. The first 2 goals Canada scored in o/t didn’t count as the net came off before Bobby Hull’s shot went in and the 10 minute mark buzzer went off just before Guy Lapointe’s shot hit the back of the net. In the post game ceremonies the Montreal Forum crowd chanted the names of the goalies Rogie and Zarilla over and over. Pieere Trudeau presented the Cup and the players exchanged jersies on the ice and exited wearing the other teams colors. Terrific event!
2. puckcat says:

   August 10, 2004 at 3:25 pm

   I also saw the final of the 1981 Canada Cup, the most distressing disappointing game I have ever seen. Team Canada led by young golden boy Wayne Gretzky and veteran Guy Lafleur were being called “Team Woosh”,the finest team Canada had ever put on the ice. Montreal Forum management handed out small plastic Canadian flags before the game and the crowd was revved up. Tretiak was brilliant in net in a scoreless 1st period and then did the tide ever turn as the Russians poured in goals against the hapless Mike Liut. In the silence of the 3rd period many of the little flags floated down from the balconies. Russia won 8-1 as stunned fans exited!
3. Josh Crockett says:

   August 10, 2004 at 8:54 pm

   Looking at the roster: Yeesh. I could make a pretty decent case that, given the youth in goal, this might be the year to start rebuilding the overall roster (since I don’t think we stand a chance of beating this Canadian team). But perhaps they’re holding off on that until the (less-watched) ‘06 Olympics in Italy, aiming to keep that roster core together for the ‘08 World Cup and the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver.

   Good to see: Halpern, Drury, Gomez (an initial mistake corrected), Leopold, maybe Conroy and Rafalski. Not so happy about: Chelios and Leetch (like you), Konowalchuk, Smolinski and Guerin. Would have liked to see: Bates Battaglia, Mike Grier and Hal Gill.
4. Charles Tupper says:

   August 11, 2004 at 1:37 pm

   Eric, where do you get this notion that the US National Program is in poor shape? Restructured in ‘96, won the under 18 world’s in ‘02 and the world’s in ‘04. This is a helluva program considering hockey in the US ranks way down the list. When did the last Canadian team win the World Juniors tourney? Five, seven years ago? Instead of making the World’s a showcase for old fogies from the NHL retirement home why not allow the the US Juniors, World Champs 2004, to play. Why not let Parise and Montoya show their stuff. It worked in 1980, and this 2004 USA Junior team has far more talent than the Miracle squad.