I like international hockey. I mean how can you like hockey in its purest form and not love the clash of international and continental styles you see in international hockey?
Not to mention the cool sweaters.
One of the greatest, and most fascinating tourneys I ever saw was the World Cup of 1996, dominated by three teams with divergent rosters and styles: Russia (speed, puck movement, and precise creativity), Canada (size and talent), and eventual tournament winner USA (a blend of all of the above—and a lot of desire).
This year’s teams all feature future half of fame players. They all have great depth, but one will win and the rest will line up for consolation prizes.
So here’s my take.
TEAM CANADA
This team, as always, is stacked top to bottom.
STRENGTHS:
Tremendous depth in elite players. Goaltending
WEAKNESSES If another team has a lot of speed up and down their roster, it might expose some of Canada’s slower players.
TEAM NORTH AMERICA
There’s a lot of talent here—but by the nature of its selection criteria, very little experience.
STRENGTHS Speed upfront
WEAKNESSES Depth, proven consistency
TEAM USA
Could smaller Canadian ice sheets help out the team with arguably the most physical, snarliest roster (Abdelkader, Byfuglien, Backes, Kesler, etc) ?
STRENGTHS Nice combination of physicality and skill Goaltending
WEAKNESSES Defensive and forward depth
TEAM EUROPE
Another team whose lack of depth could be their undoing. But they have one possible advantage in some great speed upfront (Hansen, Hossa, Gaborik, Boedker, etc).
I also question what the motivation is for a Team Europe, as opposed to a national team, or even a Team North America (“the young guys with something to prove…), but time will tell.
STRENGTHS Speed upfront Top defensive pairing (Chara/Josi)
WEAKNESSES Depth Goaltending
TEAM SWEDEN
A perennial international power, this team is as good as ever, especially defensively.
STRENGTHS Defense Speed Goaltending
WEAKNESSES Scoring/offensive firepower
TEAM RUSSIA
After a protracted period of spotty international play (by Russian standards), Russian hockey seems to be coming back around a bit. This is a strong club, especially upfront.
STRENGTHS Forwards, especially speed and scoring on the wings
WEAKNESSES Blueline
TEAM CZECH
Another entry from a typically solid international program, this team (on paper) lacks the elite talent to finish in the money in this year’s World Cup.
STRENGTHS International experience. Cohesion.
WEAKNESSES Lack of depth and elite players
TEAM FINLAND
A lot like Czech, this is a team with boatloads of international experience and the cohesion that arises out of that on a national team. But it lacks the elite players that other national teams have in this tourney.
STRENGTHS Goaltending
WEAKNESSES Depth and overall talent level
PREDICTED ORDER OF FINISH:
CANADA SWEDEN USA RUSSIA
I love Sweden’s proven ability and the long-term experience their players have in these types of tourneys together—year after year, tourney after tourney, you don’t see a lot of turnover or “tryouts… on Team Sweden. And they build their roster to win hockey games in international play—not as a national version of an NHL all-star team.
But Canada is so strong and so deep and playing on “home… ice. The pressure will be high in the most intense hockey media market in the world. But Team Canada’s leadership is also supreme and proven in Jonathan Toews and Sidney Crosby, among others.
I went with the US over Russia because of the North American venue. If Dustin Byfuglien shows up in shape, he could be a difference maker for Team USA.
I’m sure this will incite robust message board discussion. Have at it.
JJ