Team Canada #2

[30ranfordfan]

So, after seeing the list of players named to Team Canada for the Olympics, I'm going to do a quick post here and remind everyone why a below-expectations finish at this Olympics.... or 5 years in a row of no WJC gold..... does not mean Canada has fallen apart internationaly.

I'll give you the hypothetical situation. After each team names their Olympic rosters, declare every single player that has been picked by their country to be ineligible. Then put together a new team..... the 'B' squad if you will. I would think Canada's would look something like this:


Forwards
Joe Thornton / Logan Couture / Claude Giroux
Eric Staal / Jeff Skinner / Martin St. Louis
Mike Richards / Andrew Ladd / James Neal
Jason Spezza / Taylor Hall / Jordan Eberle

Defense
Dan Boyle / Brent Seabrook
Kris Letang / Marc Staal
Dion Phaneuf / Mike Green


Goalies
Marc-Andre Fleury
Martin Brodeur

Extras
Bryan Little, Tyler Seguin, Jason Garrison, Mark Giordano, Corey Crawford




We can debate who would actually be on this 'B' team all we want. Lots of good players I left out.... who (specifically) makes it isn't my point.


My point is: Take a look at that roster, and pit that against other nation's 'B' squad. Who wins? Canada in a landslide. The depth this country has is still incredible :)

[centrehice]

That team could beat TC #1, no problem. I'd have Seguin in there over some others.

[Craig2]

I think a series of games between the "B" team you've put together and the squad announced today would result in some awesome hockey. It not only reinforces our depth, but also goes to show how tough the decision-making process must have been for Yzerman and company. The depth, especially at forward, is amazing.

I believe Seguin and Hall would have both fit well on the "A" team given the large ice surface and speed of the game, but they'll get their chance in four years along with Couture and a few others.

[jmatchett]

Canada's B squad as you call it is great. But sadly, it's not Canada's B Squad vs. Finland's B Squad in the Olympics, it's their "A" squad versus everyone's "A" squad. They may have the most high-end depth, but the high-end talent is becoming more and more even throughout the world. Heck, last year at the WJC, Canada's team, on paper, was unstoppable. Well, the US got a few CHL players and a bunch of college kids and beat them thoroughly in the semifinals, and a ragtag Russian team with good goaltending beat them in the Bronze Medal game.

If the Olympics were a 7-game series, Canada probably wins 9 times out of 10. But in a single elimination tournament, no team is safe (see: Sweden vs. Belarus). One bad game, a key injury or two, or a hot goalie can be the end no matter the talent a team has.

[mooneyes]

We should be allowed to have 2 teams! There are what?, 40 cross country skier's, 2 bobsled teams, 4 ski peoples....2 figure skaters,, a 100 speed skaters... etc...;P

[30ranfordfan]

Agree with this post 100%

Fans (and media) in this country tend to go WAY over the top when Canada loses at hockey. Sometimes it's justified, sometimes it isn't. You use Sweden / Belarus as an example - but Canada losing 2-1 to Switerland is even better.

You're bang on with the "A" squad vs "A" squad thing. That's the point I'm trying to make. Truth is..... Jonas Hiller COULD play out of his mind for two weeks, and the Swiss end up with a medal. It's unlikely, but it's not as impossible as, ummm, the Oilers wining the Stanley Cup this year.

Top end talent around the world has grown over the last 20 years, and that's a good thing. Canadians just need to stop worrying about it everytime we don't win - we're still pumping out top end talent at a much better rate than anyone else.

And I do think the 'A' squard should be considered the favorite to win. Little biased? Maybe, but I don't see Yzerman's team losing.

Canada's B squad as you call it is great. But sadly, it's not Canada's B Squad vs. Finland's B Squad in the Olympics, it's their "A" squad versus everyone's "A" squad. They may have the most high-end depth, but the high-end talent is becoming more and more even throughout the world. Heck, last year at the WJC, Canada's team, on paper, was unstoppable. Well, the US got a few CHL players and a bunch of college kids and beat them thoroughly in the semifinals, and a ragtag Russian team with good goaltending beat them in the Bronze Medal game.

If the Olympics were a 7-game series, Canada probably wins 9 times out of 10. But in a single elimination tournament, no team is safe (see: Sweden vs. Belarus). One bad game, a key injury or two, or a hot goalie can be the end no matter the talent a team has.

[jmatchett]

I do think the 'A' squard should be considered the favorite to win. Little biased? Maybe, but I don't see Yzerman's team losing.

On paper, Canada is the odds-on favorite to win. But like I said, all it takes in one bad game, an in-game injury or two, a hot goalie, etc. to knock any team out. That's the risk of a single-game elimination tourney. Same as 98 in Nagano, where Canada would beat Czech Republic 75%-85% of the time (if not more), but it wasn't their day. But yes, as far as on-paper talent goes, Canada should win, but I don't expect it to be a cakewalk.

[RGM81]

An embarrassment of riches in this country for being able to ice a great team.

We should be proud of that fact.

While many right-thinking people will differ over this or that selection, and this or that omission, once the Games start everybody will be fully behind the red & white.

Should be a great tournament.