1998 was the first year that NHL players played in the Olympics and could have been a magical year if not for circumstances and the shootout loss. This was the last chance for 80s vets like Gretzky.
2002 was sort of the last hurrah of the generational 1990's era talents who were still on top of the game and probably the most impressive in terms of star power and ability.
2006 was a bad year where the lockout, age, and reliance on substandard veterans made for a very bad team. Many of the players were not generational talents but simply older players who had some good years prior to the lockout in the clutch/grab era.
2010 was the year when Hockey Canada finally included new generation talents along with veterans whose qualities suited Olympic play and chemistry,
2014 was the next step in that development as the primary roles fell to the new generational talents in forward and defense with veterans providing depth and everybody buying into amazing team defense. The commitment to defense and the pure talent allowed the team to capitalize on offensive chances generated in a split second from their defensive chokehold over other teams.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda
I think if you put the 2014 up against any other Team Canada in history they likely win due to defense and coaching alone. This was the most well oiled machine I've ever seen put on the Canada jersey, no passengers and everyone executing their roles perfectly. Other teams may have had more talent, but none have played as complete a game as this group
The greatest player to ever wear a Team Canada jersey is hands down, Phil Esposito. A leader on and off the ice.
For everyone citing the 2002 team, I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but that team had a lot of stars in the back 9 of their careers, and are now almost all retired, so we judge them by what they did as a whole.
This year's team is a team full of 20 somethings. I bet 10-15 years from now we'll look back and judge this team as much deeper than 2002.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Mike F For This Useful Post:
Demographics tell me this is the peak team of this generation. Most players for the 2003 draft will turn 29 this year. So a good number of these guys were 28 year olds. Than factor in that you have players from the next 5 drafts after that to compliment that group like Crosby, Price, Vlassic,Toews, Benn, Doughty, and Pietrangelo. All in the 23-27 age range. Plus guys like Keith, Hamhuis, Nash and Bouwmeester who are 29 to 31. This team would have been absolutely lethal with a healthy Stamkos on it.
Even if the NHL sends players to the 2018 games it would be much like Turin again where a lot of these 25-28 year old guys go again, except 4 years older will no longer be as dominating. This group could still win, but I don't think they would be as good as this rendition.
__________________ "Some guys like old balls"
Patriots QB Tom Brady
It's so hard to judge , this team is certainly up near the top. It reminds me of the '91 Canada Cup team who was more about sticking to their system and defense first , while still aggressive on the forecheck. It's the way the game should be played.
While I think this team was very impressive and dominant , I also think it should be factored in that the high end competition are weaker than they have been in the past , either due to injuries (Swedes, Fins ) or aging (Czechs) . I still think this Canadian team is one of the best ever but impossible to compare generations.
While I think this team was very impressive and dominant , I also think it should be factored in that the high end competition are weaker than they have been in the past , either due to injuries (Swedes, Fins ) or aging (Czechs) . I still think this Canadian team is one of the best ever but impossible to compare generations.
Which is also a bit like the 91 Canada Cup. A tourney that was held as the Soviet Union was breaking up. The 87 Canada Cup was epic because you had the top Russian guys like Makarov, Larionov, Festisov in their prime against Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier and a bunch of Canadians who were similarly aged.
I doubt I will see anything like the 87 Canada Cup again because getting two teams of that level matched up was something.
__________________ "Some guys like old balls"
Patriots QB Tom Brady
Which is also a bit like the 91 Canada Cup. A tourney that was held as the Soviet Union was breaking up. The 87 Canada Cup was epic because you had the top Russian guys like Makarov, Larionov, Festisov in their prime against Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier and a bunch of Canadians who were similarly aged.
I doubt I will see anything like the 87 Canada Cup again because getting two teams of that level matched up was something.
Yep I completely agree '91 they cruised through but like you said the Soviets were now the unified team and in turmoil , the Americans became the biggest rival but weren't quite up to the same level yet.
In some ways it is so hard to judge teams for different eras.....that 87 series was epic at the time. If you watch it today, the pace is so slow, the obstruction was atrocious.......this 2014 team was so committed to taking care of the details....both teams are great in their own right/era.....
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
I would say best Olympic team ever. People get hood winked by the lack of offense this year but here's a couple of things to remember:
Bad luck: a five game sample is pretty small, they had glorious chances and they were making allot of very creative plays, just didn't convert, over a longer stretch you'd see them right up there with any other team Canada for offense.
Best on best: when you're playing against the other best players and best goalies in the world it's actually harder to score.
Big ice: can we disabuse ourselves of the notion that big ice means more offense once and for all? Big ice rewards team defence more than anything else which was why lesser teams committed to a game plan could hang with Canada. The big ice sucks goals out of the game.
Heard an interesting viewpoint on NHL network the other day about the big ice. The host said that basically, the only extra ice that's open is 15' further from the net. The only offence it helps generate is off the rush, so well defending teams don't give up odd man rushes. All the rest of the scoring chances are from cycling and shots from the outside, all of which are now further from the net
