Who is your All-American Team? (can it beat Canada?)

[Kevin Biestra]

15 hours ago, IBatch said:

Sure would be.   I remember Morrow getting a spot over a bunch of stars.   Brendan Morrow.   You can't build a team without building the lines as well.   Will say, that this is probably the first time in Canada's history, that you can't build two teams and the "B" team wouldn't wax the best of the rest.  Times are changing.   As in decade to decade. 

 

Morrow was actually a heck of a player.  I remember Dallas took the C from Mike Modano to give it to him.  He was kind of like one of those Mel Bridgman / Terry Ruskowski guys I was talking about in another thread.  Had a bit of Trevor Linden in his game.  Definitely not one of the guys you would have picked for the 20 man roster on pure scoring...but some people said the same thing about Trevor Linden for the 1998 Olympics and he was the reason they even got to overtime in the semifinal so there would be a shootout against the Czechs.  I remember Rob Zamuner for the 1998 Olympic team was one where I was just straight up surprised but...hey they're the experts.

[IBatch]

2 hours ago, Kevin Biestra said:

 

Morrow was actually a heck of a player.  I remember Dallas took the C from Mike Modano to give it to him.  He was kind of like one of those Mel Bridgman / Terry Ruskowski guys I was talking about in another thread.  Had a bit of Trevor Linden in his game.  Definitely not one of the guys you would have picked for the 20 man roster on pure scoring...but some people said the same thing about Trevor Linden for the 1998 Olympics and he was the reason they even got to overtime in the semifinal so there would be a shootout against the Czechs.  I remember Rob Zamuner for the 1998 Olympic team was one where I was just straight up surprised but...hey they're the experts.

Zamuner over Corson was a big head scratcher.     Brad Richards was 3rd in scoring for Canadian centers at the time of the Olympics, and like usual, the previous playoffs was clutch (tied a record for assists in one period or something, against the mighty Sharks).  Heck our own Owner was so bonkers over acquiring him it cost Nonis his job.   2009-2010 7th in the league for points, 91, playing with LE lol, Brad Richards was more or less at the peak of his powers, and had proved he could do it with two teams.  Instead Mike Richards and Morrow made the team ... of course it wouldn't matter, but for sure it was a snub to other guys.   Have nothing against Morrow, was a solid puck hound, and it worked.     Don't see St. Louis on the roster either, even though he was having a typical season, 6th in scoring, 94 points.   Lecavalier, 70 points but good for 10th in scoring for Canadians that year...for sure there was some question marks.   St. Louis was a big snub.   At least they fixed that, at age 38 in Sochi. 

Edited August 20, 2023 by IBatch

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

12 hours ago, shiznak said:

Hockey player who take the collegian route do so because they want a degree after hockey, or it’s an insurance if they don’t make it into the NHL. It really has nothing to do with a better program. The CHL focuses 100% on hockey development. Whereas, college hockey is more academic driven.

 

It’s not arrogance calling Canada, number one in hockey. Just look around the league, Canadian almost double the amount of American players. While having over 20,000+ more points.

 

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/nhl-players-by-country#

That's a very shortsighted perspective when it comes to demographics and a fundamental misunderstanding of how players track going pro.

 

When it comes to hockey nationalities, obviously there are more Canadians and more points accumulated.  All the star American players are around 25 years old or younger.  Who has more points - Corey Perry or Jack Hughes?  Are you going to pick Perry over Hughes today?  Singular stats alone are meaningless.  This demographic chart is the only thing you should be thinking about right now:

 

 

This second chart shows the growing trend of American players originating from non-hockey states:

 

 

Digest that.  For you to say Canada will always be number one?  Come on.  It's difficult to predict when these curves will flatten out, if ever.  But right now, the data is suggesting we're about 10 years away from USA overtaking Canada.  

 

As for your dismissal of the NCAA... that's just major disrespect against the Big 10.  It's not just an insurance policy for post-hockey careers (although that is a compelling perk).

Do you really think Cale Makar chose the college route because he didn't believe he'd make pro?  Here are the facts: CHL players get one year of free postsecondary tuition covered for each season they play.  But this offer comes with major strings attached: you forbidden to play hockey anywhere other than a CIS school (vastly inferior competition compared to NCAA) or you immediately forfeit your scholarship.

 

If you go major junior, you are also restricted from playing in the AHL.  Not the case if you go Junior A and then switch over to college.  Those players can either continue to play within the NTDP and develop with grown-ups in NCAA or go pro and develop in the AHL.  A lot of Canadians might opt for Major Junior and that's fine but the US system is a perfectly valid option that's been exercised by plenty of Canadians lately.

 

Here is another statement that goes against your premise: USA Hockey has a dedicated national development program that has clearly worked wonders for them.  Hockey Canada... doesn't.  They're a joke of an organization that does nothing to actually help grow the sport here in Canada.  I fully expected Hockey Canada to implode following the scandal a couple years back, but it looks like they'll live on...

 

Long story short, major junior hockey in the CHL is still the #1 development league in the world, and Canada (at least on the men's side) is still the top hockey nation in the world.  But for how long?  Nations like Sweden, the United States, and a resurgent Slovakia have all benefited from strong development programs and now we've only started to see those efforts bear fruit.  It won't be long before Canada becomes the underdog hockey nation.

Edited August 20, 2023 by Bob.Loblaw

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

5 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

This is my All-Russian team:

 

Alex Ovechkin           Evgeni Kuznetsov      Nikita Kucherov

Artemi Panarin          Evgeni Malkin             Kirill Kaprizov

Andrei Kuzmenko     Pavel Buchnevich       Matvei Michkov 

Andrei Svechnikov   Ivan Barbashev           Valeri Nichushkin

Ilya Mikheyev           Yakov Trenin               Vladimir Tarasenko

 

Vladislav Gavrikov      Mikhail Sergachev      

Dmitri Orlov                 Artem Zub

Ivan Provorov             Nikita Zadorov

Alexander Romanov   Ilya Lyubushkin

 

Andrei Vasilevskiy    Igor Shesterkin     Ilya Sorokin 

 

@Bob.Loblaw  I dunno Bob, this team looks like it can score.  We are talking multi 50 goal scorers here.  Their centre depth is not strong though and their defence is week compared to the others.  But one thing the Russians do have that no other team has is literally 3 Vezina goalies.  This is nuts.  You could basically rotate all 3 goalies and play them for one period each to keep them fresh.  The Russians could conceivably score 2 or 3 goals and then hang on for dear life and let the goalies win the game for them.

 

In any event, you are right.  We really need to see a world competition soon.  Too bad there is nothing coming up anytime soon.  It's a shame really...

Hehe if that first line ever loses possession it's a three-on-zero going back...

 

You're 100% right about center depth.  Russia is spoiled with elite wingers so it's wild that you have to fill the middle with crap.  Kuznetsov has really fallen off and will probably return to KHL when his contract ends.  I don't know if I'd even put him on my team.  There are a handful of two-way forwards to work with, so lemme try to balance things out.

 

Kaprizov - Malkin - Kucherov

Panarin - Buchnevich - Nichuskin

Ovechkin - Shipachyov - Kuzmenko

Svechnikov - Trenin - Mikheyev

Dorofeyev - Barbashev - Tarasenko

 

Gavrikov - Sergachev

Orlov - Zadorov

Nikishin - Zub

Romanov - Lyubushkin

 

Shesterkin - Vasilevskiy - Sorokin

 

Realistically you only need one really good goaltender.  After all, if your first guy gets chased out, you're already in trouble trying to mount an epic comeback.

 

 

Let me try Finland - probably the last good country that has any chance for winning gold...

 

Hintz - Aho - Rantanen

Lehkonen - Barkov - Laine

Haula - Kotkaniemi - Kakko

Lundell - Luostarinen - Tolvanen

Maccelli - Pärssinen - Teräväinen

 

Lindell - Heiskanen

Välimäki - Ristolainen

Määttä - Hakanpää

 

Saros - Raanta - Husso

 

Finland seems to have the opposite problem that Russia has - no wingers, only centers.  Maybe Saros steals the game, but I guess Finland has zero chance here...

[Elias Pettersson]

44 minutes ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

Hehe if that first line ever loses possession it's a three-on-zero going back...

 

You're 100% right about center depth.  Russia is spoiled with elite wingers so it's wild that you have to fill the middle with crap.  Kuznetsov has really fallen off and will probably return to KHL when his contract ends.  I don't know if I'd even put him on my team.  There are a handful of two-way forwards to work with, so lemme try to balance things out.

 

Kaprizov - Malkin - Kucherov

Panarin - Buchnevich - Nichuskin

Ovechkin - Shipachyov - Kuzmenko

Svechnikov - Trenin - Mikheyev

Dorofeyev - Barbashev - Tarasenko

 

Gavrikov - Sergachev

Orlov - Zadorov

Nikishin - Zub

Romanov - Lyubushkin

 

Shesterkin - Vasilevskiy - Sorokin

 

Realistically you only need one really good goaltender.  After all, if your first guy gets chased out, you're already in trouble trying to mount an epic comeback.

 

 

Let me try Finland - probably the last good country that has any chance for winning gold...

 

Hintz - Aho - Rantanen

Lehkonen - Barkov - Laine

Haula - Kotkaniemi - Kakko

Lundell - Luostarinen - Tolvanen

Maccelli - Pärssinen - Teräväinen

 

Lindell - Heiskanen

Välimäki - Ristolainen

Määttä - Hakanpää

 

Saros - Raanta - Husso

 

Finland seems to have the opposite problem that Russia has - no wingers, only centers.  Maybe Saros steals the game, but I guess Finland has zero chance here...

Yeah, I don't think Finland has a chance against the other teams.  Not enough depth to fill an entire roster.

 

One thing that would be cool is if trades were allowed.  If so, the Canadians could trade for Ilya Sorokin.  He is their 3rd string goalie.  The Russians need a centre so I'd give them Mark Scheifele or PLD...

Edited August 20, 2023 by Elias Pettersson

[shiznak]

15 hours ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

That's a very shortsighted perspective when it comes to demographics and a fundamental misunderstanding of how players track going pro.

 

When it comes to hockey nationalities, obviously there are more Canadians and more points accumulated.  All the star American players are around 25 years old or younger.  Who has more points - Corey Perry or Jack Hughes?  Are you going to pick Perry over Hughes today?  Singular stats alone are meaningless.  This demographic chart is the only thing you should be thinking about right now:

 

 

This second chart shows the growing trend of American players originating from non-hockey states:

 

 

Digest that.  For you to say Canada will always be number one?  Come on.  It's difficult to predict when these curves will flatten out, if ever.  But right now, the data is suggesting we're about 10 years away from USA overtaking Canada.  

 

As for your dismissal of the NCAA... that's just major disrespect against the Big 10.  It's not just an insurance policy for post-hockey careers (although that is a compelling perk).

Do you really think Cale Makar chose the college route because he didn't believe he'd make pro?  Here are the facts: CHL players get one year of free postsecondary tuition covered for each season they play.  But this offer comes with major strings attached: you forbidden to play hockey anywhere other than a CIS school (vastly inferior competition compared to NCAA) or you immediately forfeit your scholarship.

 

If you go major junior, you are also restricted from playing in the AHL.  Not the case if you go Junior A and then switch over to college.  Those players can either continue to play within the NTDP and develop with grown-ups in NCAA or go pro and develop in the AHL.  A lot of Canadians might opt for Major Junior and that's fine but the US system is a perfectly valid option that's been exercised by plenty of Canadians lately.

 

Here is another statement that goes against your premise: USA Hockey has a dedicated national development program that has clearly worked wonders for them.  Hockey Canada... doesn't.  They're a joke of an organization that does nothing to actually help grow the sport here in Canada.  I fully expected Hockey Canada to implode following the scandal a couple years back, but it looks like they'll live on...

 

Long story short, major junior hockey in the CHL is still the #1 development league in the world, and Canada (at least on the men's side) is still the top hockey nation in the world.  But for how long?  Nations like Sweden, the United States, and a resurgent Slovakia have all benefited from strong development programs and now we've only started to see those efforts bear fruit.  It won't be long before Canada becomes the underdog hockey nation.

That chart doesn’t show the importance of the player though. Also, the rise of the US players has more to do with the population of the country compare to Canada. Look at how many American players that have Canadian roots, because their parents worked in the US and decided to stay there. 
 

It isn’t a disrespect saying the college route is a lower development league, because it is. The only benefit of playing college hockey is, you’re playing guys 2-3 years older than you, but doesn’t that mean much? For example, if Bedard plays in a beer league against men would that make him a better player? Makar even mentioned why he choose the college route over the CHL. It was because he thinks it would have better prepared himself, playing against men, but all the tools he learnt was playing in the AJHL. I also want to point out with his talent, Makar could have easily turned pro, after just one year of college, but he decided to stay the extra year to finish off his degree.

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

2 hours ago, shiznak said:

That chart doesn’t show the importance of the player though. Also, the rise of the US players has more to do with the population of the country compare to Canada. Look at how many American players that have Canadian roots, because their parents worked in the US and decided to stay there. 
 

It isn’t a disrespect saying the college route is a lower development league, because it is. The only benefit of playing college hockey is, you’re playing guys 2-3 years older than you, but doesn’t that mean much? For example, if Bedard plays in a beer league against men would that make him a better player? Makar even mentioned why he choose the college route over the CHL. It was because he thinks it would have better prepared himself, playing against men, but all the tools he learnt was playing in the AJHL. I also want to point out with his talent, Makar could have easily turned pro, after just one year of college, but he decided to stay the extra year to finish off his degree.

 

 

Makar played two years at UMass. What kind of degree did he get going to college for only 2 years? 

[shiznak]

29 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Makar played two years at UMass. What kind of degree did he get going to college for only 2 years? 

It’s not hard to get an associate degree within a year or two.

Edited August 21, 2023 by shiznak

[Elias Pettersson]

12 minutes ago, shiznak said:

It’s not hard to get an associate degree within a year or two.

UMass is a major university.  They don't offer 2-year programs, it's not some small community college.  Makar stayed an extra year because he needed to.  He had 21 points in 34 games as a freshman in college.  Those numbers don't scream superstar.  He wasn't even in the top 10 finalists for the Hobey Baker Award.  One freshman player made the top 10 so he wasn't even the best freshman in college that year.

 

Hobey Baker Memorial Award announces 2018 Top 10 finalists | NCAA.com

 

His second year at UMass is when he really took off and got 49 points in 41 games and won the Hobey Baker Award, so that is when he decided to leave school and sign in the NHL.  He obviously didn't stay an extra year to get some associate degree...

[shiznak]

17 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

UMass is a major university.  They don't offer 2-year programs, it's not some small community college.  Makar stayed an extra year because he needed to.  He had 21 points in 34 games as a freshman in college.  Those numbers don't scream superstar.  He wasn't even in the top 10 finalists for the Hobey Baker Award.  One freshman player made the top 10 so he wasn't even the best freshman in college that year.

 

Hobey Baker Memorial Award announces 2018 Top 10 finalists | NCAA.com

 

His second year at UMass is when he really took off and got 49 points in 41 games and won the Hobey Baker Award, so that is when he decided to leave school and sign in the NHL.  He obviously didn't stay an extra year to get some associate degree...

I’m not going to filter through their entire program list, but arboriculture management literally says it’s a two year program. Also, athletes who decide to leave to play in the major league, could finish up their program once their career are over. 
 

Makar had the third highest PPG as a freshmen in the his division. Could’ve possibly been the top scorer amongst defensemen, if he didn’t play in the World Juniors. The Avs expected him to join the team next season, and he easily could’ve made the team or further his development in the minors.

[Elias Pettersson]

3 minutes ago, shiznak said:

I’m not going to filter through their entire program list, but arboriculture management literally says it’s a two year program. Also, athletes who decide to leave to play in the major league, could finish up their program once their career are over. 
 

Makar had the third highest PPG as a freshmen in the his division. Could’ve possibly been the top scorer amongst defensemen, if he didn’t play in the World Juniors. The Avs expected him to join the team next season, and he easily could’ve made the team or further his development in the minors.

So, Makar went to school to become an arborist?  

 

He went back to school to get better at hockey, which he did.  If you are not even in the top 10 in voting for the Hobey Baker, then you have every right to go back for a 2nd year.  He had 21 points in 34 games as a freshman.  Adam Fox had 40 points in 35 games in his freshman year and he stayed in school two more years after that.  Not every player is going to jump to the NHL from college after their first year.  Adam Fantilli did it because he won the Hobey Baker Award in his first year, so there was no reason for him to stay any longer.  Miro Heiskanen was drafted ahead of Makar.  He had a fabulous season in the Finnish top league in 2017-18 and so he jumped to the NHL at 19.  Even then he didn't have a great first season in the NHL.  He came out in his second season at age 20.  

 

Staying in school an extra year and winning the Hobey Baker Award greatly helped Makar in his first season in the NHL, he was much more mature and ready to take on the NHL at age 20.  He didn't stay in school an extra year to get his arborist associate degree...

[shiznak]

3 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So, Makar went to school to become an arborist?  

 

He went back to school to get better at hockey, which he did.  If you are not even in the top 10 in voting for the Hobey Baker, then you have every right to go back for a 2nd year.  He had 21 points in 34 games as a freshman.  Adam Fox had 40 points in 35 games in his freshman year and he stayed in school two more years after that.  Not every player is going to jump to the NHL from college after their first year.  Adam Fantilli did it because he won the Hobey Baker Award in his first year, so there was no reason for him to stay any longer.  Miro Heiskanen was drafted ahead of Makar.  He had a fabulous season in the Finnish top league in 2017-18 and so he jumped to the NHL at 19.  Even then he didn't have a great first season in the NHL.  He came out in his second season at age 20.  

 

Staying in school an extra year and winning the Hobey Baker Award greatly helped Makar in his first season in the NHL, he was much more mature and ready to take on the NHL at age 20.  He didn't stay in school an extra year to get his arborist associate degree...

Did you not read what I wrote? I said I’m not going to filter through their 100+ programs and look up which of them only require two years. You stated they don’t offer two-year programs, which simply isn’t true. 
 

Fox stayed the entire 4 years because he wanted to become a free agent. Like I said, Makar could have easily made the team or further his development in the AHL, like Zegras did. Last time I checked, AHL was a better development league than college.

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

6 hours ago, shiznak said:

That chart doesn’t show the importance of the player though. Also, the rise of the US players has more to do with the population of the country compare to Canada. Look at how many American players that have Canadian roots, because their parents worked in the US and decided to stay there. 
 

It isn’t a disrespect saying the college route is a lower development league, because it is. The only benefit of playing college hockey is, you’re playing guys 2-3 years older than you, but doesn’t that mean much? For example, if Bedard plays in a beer league against men would that make him a better player? Makar even mentioned why he choose the college route over the CHL. It was because he thinks it would have better prepared himself, playing against men, but all the tools he learnt was playing in the AJHL. I also want to point out with his talent, Makar could have easily turned pro, after just one year of college, but he decided to stay the extra year to finish off his degree.

This is an incredibly weak response.  You have absolutely nothing substantive to say, so you're just making excuses now.

 

The importance of the player....?  You are desperately grasping at straws here, man.  Just look at the teams I constructed in my opening post.  American players are extremely talented.  In terms of pure skill, they have just as much talent as the Canadian superstars.  The USA has a larger population?  What kind of argument is that?  You are acting as though suddenly the United States became a bigger country than Canada.  Why should it matter where someone's parents are from?  Brett Hull is one of USA's best players of all time.  

 

Just accept it, man.  The United States is quickly becoming a powerhouse in men's hockey and will likely overtake Canada in both quantity and quality, probably within a decade.

 

Note how Connor Bedard played in the CHL but Adam Fantilli did not.  Why is that?  Why did a Canadian player (a phenomenal kid) opt to develop his game in the United States?  I'm sure if you tried to tell Makar all his skills were learnt in Junior A and not college, he'd just ignore you.

 

Try to approach this with an open mind.  Instead of dismissing the numbers and trends, try to understand why more and more hockey players (both Canadian and American) are choosing the US development system over the CHL.  Try to understand what USA Hockey has done much better than Hockey Canada.  Get over this uber-Canadian patriotism.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/torontosun.com/sports/hockey/nhl/more-canadians-taking-ncaa-route-to-the-nhl/wcm/e3c639e1-8986-4bd0-a9f1-4b67a0026eb7/amp/

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

2 hours ago, shiznak said:

Did you not read what I wrote? I said I’m not going to filter through their 100+ programs and look up which of them only require two years. You stated they don’t offer two-year programs, which simply isn’t true. 
 

Fox stayed the entire 4 years because he wanted to become a free agent. Like I said, Makar could have easily made the team or further his development in the AHL, like Zegras did. Last time I checked, AHL was a better development league than college.

College free agency, an early track into the AHL, and a quality education (which can be completed at any pace over any period of time) are fantastic examples on why the American development system is increasingly becoming an attractive option for hockey players of any nationality.  You made some great points here.

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

@Elias Pettersson I'm gonna try and make a team of Canadian NCAA alumni.  A fun task...

 

Zach Hyman - Jaden Schwartz - Reilly Smith

Alex Killorn - Jonathan Toews(??) - Alex Kerfoot

Brandon Tanev - Evan Rodrigues - Warren Foegele

Tyson Jost - Adam Fantilli - Ryan Lomberg

*Joe Nieuwendyk*

 

Devon Toews - Cale Makar

Brandon Montour - Chris Tanev

Colton Parayko - Carson Soucy

Zach Whitecloud - Matt Benning

Matt Irwin - Justin Schultz

 

Cam Talbot/Devon Levi

 

Looks like... a legit NHL team, doesn't it?  It's not perfect but the blueline looks completely stacked.  It does feel like a lot of Canadian defencemen opt for NCAA because it has a longer development track.  Makes sense.

 

Edited August 21, 2023 by Bob.Loblaw

[Down by the River]

6 minutes ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

@Elias Pettersson I'm gonna try and make a team of Canadian NCAA alumni.  A fun task...

 

Zach Hyman - Jaden Schwartz - Reilly Smith

Alex Killorn - Jonathan Toews(??) - Alex Kerfoot

Brandon Tanev - Evan Rodrigues - Warren Foegele

Tyson Jost - Adam Fantilli - Ryan Lomberg

*Joe Nieuwendyk*

 

Devon Toews - Cale Makar

Brandon Montour - Chris Tanev

Colton Parayko - Carson Soucy

Zach Whitecloud - Matt Benning

Matt Irwin - Justin Schultz

 

Cam Talbot/Devon Levi

 

Looks like... a legit NHL team, doesn't it?  It's not perfect but the blueline looks completely stacked.  It does feel like a lot of Canadian defencemen opt for NCAA because it has a longer development track.  Makes sense.

 

Gotta have Paul Kariya

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

50 minutes ago, Down by the River said:

Gotta have Paul Kariya

We also get Ed Belfour and Marty Turco.  That makes it a cup team for sure.

[Elias Pettersson]

5 hours ago, shiznak said:

Did you not read what I wrote? I said I’m not going to filter through their 100+ programs and look up which of them only require two years. You stated they don’t offer two-year programs, which simply isn’t true. 
 

Fox stayed the entire 4 years because he wanted to become a free agent. Like I said, Makar could have easily made the team or further his development in the AHL, like Zegras did. Last time I checked, AHL was a better development league than college.

Sure. And you stated that he stayed in school for one more year to finish his degree. What evidence do you have that this is true?  Or did you just make it up?  

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, Bob.Loblaw said:

@Elias Pettersson I'm gonna try and make a team of Canadian NCAA alumni.  A fun task...

 

Zach Hyman - Jaden Schwartz - Reilly Smith

Alex Killorn - Jonathan Toews(??) - Alex Kerfoot

Brandon Tanev - Evan Rodrigues - Warren Foegele

Tyson Jost - Adam Fantilli - Ryan Lomberg

*Joe Nieuwendyk*

 

Devon Toews - Cale Makar

Brandon Montour - Chris Tanev

Colton Parayko - Carson Soucy

Zach Whitecloud - Matt Benning

Matt Irwin - Justin Schultz

 

Cam Talbot/Devon Levi

 

Looks like... a legit NHL team, doesn't it?  It's not perfect but the blueline looks completely stacked.  It does feel like a lot of Canadian defencemen opt for NCAA because it has a longer development track.  Makes sense.

 

To be totally honest, if that is the all time Canadian NCAA team it is not as strong as I thought. Adding Paul Kariya helps. 
 

The best Canadian players are still coming out of Canada. That may change. Celebrini is going to college. Bedard didn’t. Seems like a lot of top players in the NHL are now coming from Europe, which is why those European teams are so strong. The Canucks seem to be focusing on the Swedish players right now. 

[Miss Korea Bob.Loblaw]

12 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

To be totally honest, if that is the all time Canadian NCAA team it is not as strong as I thought. Adding Paul Kariya helps. 
 

The best Canadian players are still coming out of Canada. That may change. Celebrini is going to college. Bedard didn’t. Seems like a lot of top players in the NHL are now coming from Europe, which is why those European teams are so strong. The Canucks seem to be focusing on the Swedish players right now. 

It is not the all-time team.  It is the current team.   Nieuwendyk, Kariya, Belfour are all. HHoFers so they were easy to find.  I'm not sure how many more retired stars there are.  But even if there were, the point of my post was to show that there are already a bunch of high-profile Canadians today that picked college over the CHL.  Honestly, it makes sense for defencemen, since they can avoid toiling away in junior and also avoid getting rushed into pro.

 

It's insane to ridicule the NCAA when we see college players going pro and becoming superstars year after year.  It's already been a viable options for Canadians in the past, and it seems like more and more kids are opting for that path.  American hockey is... the future.  Ugh.