The Hockey PDOcast - Taking Stock of Where the Top Teams Are at Coming Out of the Group Stage of the Olympics

Episode Date: February 16, 2026

Dimitri Filipovic is joined by Thomas Drance to use the day off between the end of the group stage and the start of the elimination rounds to take stock of where all of the top teams are at right now after getting to watch each of them 3 times. If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

dressing to the mean since 2015. It's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filippovich. Welcome to the Hockey PEDEOCast. My name is Dmitra Filippovich and joining me in studio, my good buddy Thomas Trans. Tom, what's going on, man? Fired up to be with you here. Today, I mean, the round robin of the Olympics. Look, I know there's some sort of sniping at what the tournament looks like from various people.

I love this tournament. From whom? Well, like, mostly on. none of our listeners. Mostly like Canadian political commentators are like, oh wow, Canada versus France. It's like, yeah, I mean, it was a once in a generation opportunity to see Canada go full tilt at a minnow team with one of the most loaded groups of forwards we've ever seen.

And yet every time France, despite how undermatch they were from a talent perspective, every time they entered the offensive zone, I was like, oh, oh. Is there something there? I mean, there was a little bit feeling that, certainly. I mean, ultimately, the consequences of it are very limited because you feel like regardless of what happens at that end of the ice in a matchup like that, Canada is going to be able to come back down and put up an even more crooked number on the board. And it wasn't necessarily up for debate in that game. But as we progress later into this tournament, I'm sure we're going to talk about looking ahead into the qualifying round.

Canada's goal-tending decisions. Yeah. The, yeah, so I thought though, like, obviously they got smashed against Finland, but we saw some heart. out of Italy. I thought we saw some hard out of Denmark. I thought some of the, you know, quote unquote, non-traditional hockey powers acquitted themselves pretty well. I think the floor is a lot higher. You know, like one guy that stands out to me at this tournament is Loredson for Denmark, a former Philadelphia Flyers heavy. That would be the first player that you mentioned on today's show.

Well, it's not about his performance individually so much as it's the fact that every single one of these European teams now seems to have a guy like that in their lineup, like just like, a nasty big guy. Like there's no pushing around any teams at this tournament. The floor, like there's sort of two big picture forces that I feel like we're witnessing here. One is that the floor of sort of the less regarded smaller European countries is a lot higher at this tournament than it has been at previous tournaments.

Like at least you're getting four or five NHL players for the most part on every roster except France and Italy. And you're getting things like there's a heavy on all of these countries. There's, you know, some of the things you need to hang around in these games even against the, you know, traditional powerhouses. I also think with Russia gone, right?

And this is not political commentary, but with Russia not in this tournament, the stratification between the have teams and the have not teams is wider and feels wider. And you could notice that. I also think there's a, a level to which the ceiling that Canada and the United States have brought to this tournament,

I don't really actually think there is a path to Finland and Sweden matching it, especially not with some of the center injuries that they've dealt with. Maybe with those, you know, like maybe if Sweden had a healthy Simone Edvenson and Leo Carlson and William Carlson were having a different conversation. But as it stands, I don't think we are. The Finns, I think, can upset anybody. I think they're the third best team in this tournament, but without Sasha Barkov, the high end, like the case for how are Celebrini McDavid and McKinnon going to handle the

Hayskine and Barkov minutes? Like that's a totally different conversation than the one we'll be having in the event that these teams meet in the semifinal. So, you know, I think there's like a higher floor, but also a higher ceiling. And it's just that, you know, the like traditional big six or big seven of international hockey can't all hit that ceiling. Like that ceiling is only accessible right now by the North American Goliaths. And that's sort of, those are the two big picture takeaways I have coming out of the round Robin stage. I've got so many smaller picture takeaways.

Yeah, well, we'll get into those too. We're going to get into today, certainly. You know, while you mentioned Finland there, I do feel personally aggrieved that we've had two straight years now of these remarkably entertaining and fun. Best on Best last year was obviously limited to just four teams, but we still got to see some great matchups along the way. And despite that, we have yet to see. Sasha Barkov and Miro Hayskin in on the ice at the same time,

mostly because we don't have the shot attempt data for a tournament like this, but I'd love to see what the possession metrics would look like for their shared minutes, because I imagine it would be approaching those like Datsuk and Hosa levels from that one year they played together, where they just were always with the puck. Or those, remember those seasons where it was like, Bergeron and Charo played 655 on five minutes together and they allowed one goal, and then you'd go find the goal,

and it was like a double deflection off a couple skates and it was like what? Yeah. It would look a lot like that. Yeah. And, you know, Finland's going to be interesting. We're going to talk more about them. I'm trying not to allow my most recent viewing of them

to not only overinflate my stock in them, but also like jade me in terms of my excitement of this tournament because I've taken on this personal endeavor of tracking all these games and having scoring chance data that you can find on the Patreon and the newsletter and all that sort of stuff. And Jay Fresh's Twitter account where he's putting out a nice little chart on it, but the most recent game, I saved it for last because I knew the result being an 11-0 0-0 score.

Finland demolishing Italy. And that was when you started to question your life choices? And then I watched it with like blurry bloodshot eyes late in the night. And I was like, I feel like I should not be watching this right now. It is upsetting what's happening. Like, I feel like the 11-0-0-0 score doesn't even do justice how miserable that game was. scoring chances are 28 to nothing for Finland halfway through the game. And so it was a tough one.

But I think otherwise for the most part, I mean, your points well taken about, you know, Italy versus Sweden early, and then against Slovakia, France, like the three straight goals they scored against Czechia. And I love that, by the way, Louis Baudouin, just like going off. And it being such a great story. And then obviously the bottom fell out. But like still providing these cool little wrinkles to this tournament. I think my favorite part of the.

group stage games has been the obvious importance that's placed on goal differential and its significance for tiebreakers and seeding because one of our frustrations in the NHL is not only that as you start approaching the finish line in individual games either teams kind of have this gentlemanly agreement to get into overtime so they each get a point or when a team is up you don't want to rub it in the face of your opposition and so you pull your best players you're in guys who never typically play on the power play for advantage opportunities and you're just kind of trying to kill the clock

and make sure nothing happens so it doesn't get out of hand. And that's the opposite of what we've seen in these games, right? Where teams have clearly approached it through the perspective of we need to, especially when we're playing a clearly outmatched opponent, put up a crooked number and try to really bank as many goals as we can here. And so you're seeing McDavid and Eichel and the best players in the world on the ice late in like 7-1 games

still trying to create goals and still playing the way they typically would otherwise and I saw it I think from like a motivation and incentive perspective these last minutes in otherwise decided games

actually still forcing you to keep watching and potentially seeing something cool happen I feel like it's been a really fun part of these games yeah the third period of Slovakia Sweden was art right I mean the first of all the Slovakian power play one of our micro takes right we'll talk about Dvorsky and Slefkowski and Nemich up high,

but they get that power play goal. You could see the intensity in a 5-2 game with which Sweden was trying to kill the penalty. It doesn't work. It's a bit of a softie. And so it's now 5-3 and then Sweden pulls their goalie. Yep. Right? And then just the absolute celebrations,

like the absolute scenes from the Slovakian side celebrating their absolute guts out after a five three defeat. It's just where else do you ever get a scene like that with NHL players involved? Not to mention the fact that that period featured one of the sickest Lucas Raymond takeovers. That might be one of the coolest individual 20 minutes we've seen all tournament. I loved every single second of that. I thought it was interesting to watch. Like one thing about Canada versus France,

even though that game got silly from a final score perspective, is I thought Canada came in and basically just decided that they'd keep doing their hard rims game anyway. Yep. Like they actually didn't chase the goal differential, and it seemed like a calculated decision. Like, we're not, they weren't hitting. I mean, that was one thing immediately that you could notice about Canada versus how they'd played against Czechia and Switzerland was the hits disappeared. They were playing a no-hitter. Business decisions.

Business decisions were made, but, you know, hard rims, same style of play. No one cheating for all. offense. And, and, you know, there's something to that, too. Like, there's a lot of information that we can glean in terms of how Cooper feels about the importance of maintaining this team's style of play in terms of the self-confidence of this side to do that. So whether a team's chasing the goal difference or not, too, there's just reams of information from creating these sorts of, you know, sensible incentive structures, right? And I love that versus the all we can gather from this last five minutes of a tied third period is that both teams would prefer to sort

it out in overtime and both get a point. Well, I think especially for the teams who wound up getting a top four seat and aren't going to be having to play an extra qualifying round game, banking some of these additional reps of on-ice minutes together is incredibly valuable. Like when we talk about USA, I know we were texting throughout their game against Denmark and you were talking about some of your concerns potentially down the road about their offensive creation and how they're going to manufacture. But you know, really got them going was essentially that sequence of offensive zone draws

that Eichol was winning either for sets back to Brady Kachuk or getting a bounce and then coming back to him and burying it. It feels like that is going to have a pronounced impact. We've already seen it, I'd argue, in the NHL this year where teams are getting so much more thoughtful about trying to use those opportunities

to micromanage specific set plays the way you'd see in basketball or football and don't often see it in 5-on-5 hockey. But in this tournament would make sense because defensively I feel like there is a level of like miscommunication or not necessarily being in the in rhythm in terms of who's going to pick up who

in a specific situation. And so I think you're going to get more breakdowns or opportunities for breakdowns on some of those sets on offensive zone draws. And so I think hammering that stuff out is obviously very, all of the coaches, I will say though, in that France-Canada game, your points well taken about the first period

and their approach heading in. I feel like once we got into the later stages of the second, they were starting to tee off all in the rush with like two-on-ones and breakways and the celebrini. penalty shot goal. But they were getting them. You were still seeing them play the hard rims style. I actually was kind of watching it thinking the problem with this game is that they're trying to play, you know, Florida Panthers hockey without hitting. And Florida Panthers hit hockey without hitting is toothless, right? Like that's not a ton of fun to watch. So, but, you know, I still thought they struck to their structure throughout that game personally. That was my observation. You watched it more closely.

but yeah i'll say that another fun part of this tournament has been the top players reinforcing why they hold that status yes right and for some it's more obvious than others like connor mc david seems hell bent on having three points in every single game he plays i think everyone can understand that that is unbelievable but i argue even someone like matthews who for whatever reason has been more maligned in terms of evaluations on his game yet keeps producing and dominating regardless the best players at this tournament have been the best players that we'd expect them to be and all the scoring chance that I have

it's like McDavid and Dreythel are one two in a very fitting fashion and then you get into Dreysidal, Ranton Eilers, all the guys who you'd expect to carry their teams and are doing so despite the circumstances for some of them where the other team knows they're their only threat really and yet they're still creating

and showing why they're the best. The service that you did are doing, by the way, for the hockey world, counting scoring chances in every game of this tournament, is only matched by the service that Miko Ranton gave the bookkeepers by not scoring a goal in an 11-0-0 game. Just like the absolute-and-the-absor. The absolute parlay killer. Like, I guarantee you, every single odds maker was just like, thank you, Miko. I think my favorite part of that game was, I think Sebastian Aalho scored a second of the game to make a 9-0.

Yeah. And force of habit, he put his arm up to celebrate, and then in a split second, realize he shouldn't be celebrating necessarily, given the score, and then, like, grabbed his own head as part of the celebration in one, in one relatively smooth motion. But if you go back and watch it, it's funny because you can just see him going through the motions of like, oh, no, I should stop. So there's so many different things we can discuss,

but I do think the big picture storyline that dominates for me is just how we assess Canada versus the U.S. Do you want to handle that here or do you want to handle it in the second segment? Well, I think we should go team by team. Okay. And maybe go through a couple notes on each of them in terms of the most important. So we're doing this entire segment on Denmark and Slovakia. Let's go ahead.

I mean, I think that'll be pretty on brand for us. I don't know. Did we even do an intro off the top? No. I feel like we just jumped right into it. You did your monologue. Partial monologue. And then we just started talking about depth, Danish defenders.

Honestly, I mean, honestly, even your point about the offensive zone set plays, like, one thing that I always think when we see those really matter over the course of an NHL game, like where a team's getting a differential with margin of looks off of those sorts of plays against the other is there's a coaching gap, a coaching caliber gap. Now, I think partly what was happening with the United States and Denmark is that there's also obviously just like a center talent gap that's going to exist in every, every game the U.S. plays until they face off with Canada. But the, I do sort of wonder if there's also a gap opening up between the caliber of coaching that Canada and the United States have versus the rest of the world, too,

especially when you watch Sweden and hear the conversation around Sam Halam online in various Swedish spaces. Like, you know, I wonder if some of these national team programs maybe should be trying to hire NHL coaches. Right? Like you don't need to be from the country. But, you know, I think you are seeing a gap emerge there in addition to obviously what's happening with sort of overall talent development because it's, you know, it's mixed between the two. I think that, you know, one of the reasons perhaps that the ceiling on these Canadian U.S. teams has become inaccessible for a lot of the European powers, the traditional European powers, I do think might come down too to like coaching and player development and that, you know, something. of these countries might want to consider importing some ideas.

You hear about this in the broadcast that the Panthers players on the Finnish team? Wanted Paul Maurice. Wanted Paul Maurice? Yeah. So I think it was... Finland was like, we hear you, but no. Yeah, I think it was ill to Santa Matt that reported that.

How sick would that be? Especially because John Cooper showed up at this tournament and is basically like doing a Paul Maurice cover band bit in terms of the systems that he has Canada playing. Right? I mean, very clearly, do you think the Florida Panthers hard rims have like kept him up at night a few years? Because he's like, hey, I'm going to do this, but with the most loaded talent,

Lotus loaded, with the most loaded roster imaginable. And it's been awesome. Yeah. But it is, I feel like there's something there in terms of, you know, the way that Cooper's been thinking about his greatest NHL opponent. Yeah. I think that's fair. All right, let's start up top. Yeah.

And we can maybe even go by seating. Sure. So we're going to start with Canada, who exits the group stage with a 20 to 3 goal differential in their three wins. You know, we didn't get to do a show following the second game against Switzerland. I was on with you during the game on your show, Canucks Talk, on Friday. I felt like throughout that game and obviously at the end, the score made it kind of portrayed the game as being a one-sided blowout. Yeah. I think especially for the first period and a half, maybe even stretching it out to the first 40 minutes, it was an incredibly competitive game, much more so than the opener against Chequilla was.

And I was really impressed by the pace Switzerland was able to play with, not only in terms of punishing Canada when they got a little bit loose with their positioning and the offensive zone encounter against them, but just getting in on the forecheck and sort of disrupting and making them have to make quicker decisions in Canada eventually figured out the timing of it a little bit. but that made me feel pretty bullish about them as potentially being the third best team and then obviously Kevin Fiala's very unfortunate, devastating injury at the end, really dampens the enthusiasm in terms of that outlook. I still think I have it.

To be honest with you, I think there's speed. Anyway, we can get to Switzerland when we get to Switzerland, but I was impressed as well. Anyways, the reason why I brought that up was we haven't really necessarily seen Canada have to be fully tested. And a lot of my notes on them are questions I have for you in terms of potential wrinkles that they have in their sleeve that they haven't leaned on yet as a result of that. And wondering if that is actually the way they're approaching it and whether they are saving it for elimination do or die games and maybe most specifically a final against USA. And in particular, in the power play where they've been four for nine so far. Like you're going to take that efficiency every day of the week.

and that yet I still think as cool as it is seeing Crosby, McKinnon, and McDavid out there together in terms of how they're actually aligning, I've got a couple suggestions that I'd like to see them explore if they either go on a bit of a cold spell or need to really push for offense in an elimination game. And I'm curious your take on which one you're more intrigued by. Okay. The first one is replacing Reinhart with Celebrity and putting Celebrity in the...

the bumper. We've seen how lightning quick his release is in this tournament on a couple of occasions already. He's comfortable shooting from that spot, finding ways through timing and deception to get open despite the coverage, trying to pack the paint against him. And he's been so good that I feel like leveraging that even further and being like, let's just see how much more we can even squeeze out of him from a production perspective. I think is an interesting option. The other one would be putting Crosby in that spot. and then putting Mark Stone on the goal line. And I think Mark Stone has been phenomenal at this tournament at 515 and even on the PK.

And on PP2 against France, he set up a great horbat opportunity. I forget which one of the first two games, but PP2 gets out there at the end. He sends it cross-ice the way we've seen him do with the Golden Knights a thousand times this year to Celebrini. And he rings it off the bar. And I just feel like he's the best player in the world at that position. and I feel like would unlock more. You could use Crosby with tips and redirections in front as well and keep them in the middle of the ice.

Which one of those to you would be like the higher upside, more intriguing option right now? Because I think both are probably more optimal than what they're going with right now despite the success they've had. Yeah, I think, honestly, I don't know that I prefer either to how they're aligned up right now just because at the end of the day,

the alignment now, at least in thought, and I think in execution is, we have Connor McDavid pulling the strings and three right-handed options for him to use. Reinhardt as sort of the player in the bumper,

the mislabeled spot on the power play, right? Because he's a primary shooting threat. What is it? Adam Oates, who invented the one-three-one, calls that guy the cheese, by the way.

So I like that, the cheese. Then you've got Kail McCar up top and Nathan McKinnon at the left flank. To me, that's three right-handed options and then Sidney Crosby causing havoc down low and interchanging with McDavid. I think conceptually that makes a ton of sense and I wouldn't want to lose that. I don't think.

Yeah, I just wouldn't want to lose that. So it's really hard for me to figure out like Mark Stone at least would give you the righty, but they'd have to be, you'd have to have if you put Mark Stone in that spot, they'd have to be really disciplined about swapping off. Like you'd have to get Mark Stone as a rightee into the bumper fairly regularly. And they could do it because those guys are so smart. So I think that would be my answer. To just answer your question and not squirrel the question,

the one with Mark Stone is more interesting to me. I just think that the reason why I presented that way is in the part of the game where you're most likely to score, I would prefer to have your best players on the ice. And Celebrity and Stone have clearly been two of their best. five players so far in this tournament. No question. And so the fact that they're not getting those reps

has not hurt them to this point clearly, but there will come a point at this tournament, presumably where they're going to need to create a power play goal, and the current formation might be able to still do so, but I'd like that as something to at least explore. I would have liked to see it in a game against France, for example, where the outcome isn't in doubt and you can experiment,

as opposed to just continuing to do what you've done so far every step of the way. Well, I think down the line, right flank, for Celebrini is like where he's going to live. And I guess one advantage of the way that they're lining up now is you do have him as that sort of shooting threat and power play two really has been built around that. And I think that, you know, makes a copious amount of sense. So I'm at least okay with that.

But I think long term as Canada thinks about what a, you know, international hockey future looks like with McKinnon, Celebrini and McDavid, you know, McDavid on his downhill side where he cooks for the Oilers with a with a lefty one-time option on the on the right flank. the way he's used to with dry-sidal. I'm not saying that Celebrini is the finisher that dry-sidal is from that flank, because no one is.

No one ever has been. But the dynamic, at least, there's some familiarity there. And that also gives Celebrini the option to pop pass into the bumper where you'd ideally have Nathan McKinnon, right? To me, anyway, that's sort of the future alignment and that's nasty too.

That might be your highest upside look, to be totally honest with you. Like, if you want to get Celebrini involved, it might be at the same spot that he's in now as opposed to the bumper. Okay, next step, the top six. Yeah. So we had Travis in the Discord, and you're going to like this.

He says, how's the pace differential of Canada's two best forward lines with McDavid, McKinnon and Celebrini when we've seen them together? Sure. And then Crosby with Stone and Marner. Yeah. Created difficulties for opponents, particularly from a speed differential. And I love this concept because one is the most warp speed possible unit when McKinnon's with them.

and then the other one is this much more methodical in plotting orientation that's still effective and I imagine gets trickier to deal with when like you calibrate for a shift against the top guys and then all of a sudden they come out and you're like trying to adjust in terms of the pace everything's happening at and it almost like speeds them up in a way and so I don't know I think it's a really fascinating concept I imagine John Cooper did probably we put some thought into this in terms of setting these lines up. And maybe this is a good opportunity for us to talk about McKinnon on that top line and sort of whether,

because we saw them go away from it for the most part against France after really leaning on it pretty heavily in the later stages of the Switzerland game. In the later rounds, do you think that's something they're going to really lock in on as a long-term fit or more situational for ozone draws, post-BK, stuff like that? I think we're going to see it a lot. Yeah. I think we have to.

It looks too good. It works too well. it's too nasty. It's also probably the biggest differentiator for this team in terms of something they can do that no one else can. We talk about like, three heart trophy candidates on line and some of the stuff their defensemen can do and that being a calling card for them or a potential path to victory. I feel like this is like, this is our best line.

What are you going to do about it? Yeah. And the answer is not much is probably the way you go. This might be the best line anyone's seen in 25 years, 30 years. Like you might have to go 40 years. Like you might have to go 40 years. You might have to go back to the mid-80s for, you know, Lemieux, Gretzky, Howardchuck. And I think they use a Goulet there, too.

I mean, that's the sort of firepower and potency that that line has. Okay. So two things. One is I actually think the change-up effect, while absolutely unequivocally real, is sort of neutered by how quickly the Crosby line is playing. They're moving the puck so fast that I actually don't personally feel any whiplash when you've got the clear warp speed supersonic mock three line on

versus the you know like geometric slow moving excellence of Marner's stone and Crosby versus the uncline? The uncline, yeah I don't feel any whiplash whatsoever because of how quickly Marner, Stone and Crosby are moving the puck around the zone like they are

they might not be fast but because all three of them are thinking the game at such a high level and all three of them are so lethal in one-on-one engagements they're just making place and they're willing to put the puck into open ice and let the other ones skate onto it because they're arriving on time they're winning the battle and then they're making quick plays so i actually think what's fascinating to me anyway about that crosbie line is less the pace differential and more

how quickly they're able to play despite the lack of foot speed it is a good reminder that like the puck moves faster than connor mac david right like that well and no no it does and and there's you know applications i think only a Darren Raddish slap shot moves faster than economy. And then so, and I think your point about the differentiator is critical because, you know, we talked about this a little bit in the lead up to the tournament, like, you know, how Canada had to lean on their depth to do damage in the four nations because they hadn't found chemistry at the top of their lineup, right?

They didn't in the four nations at any point. But that there was a path to Canada winning this tournament where they just tore opponents asunder at the top of the line up. lineup. We haven't seen them do it against rosters filled with NHL players as NHL laden as the Czech and Swiss rosters are. So we'll have to see if this is possible once

you're talking about, you know, probably not for Zling Dahlin minutes, but certainly you know, Hayskin and Lindell, Yowell Erickson Eckminitz. I mean, we'll see if that edge becomes neutered a bit, but I mean, I think we're seeing that

in application and I think fundamentally, NHL teams too, I think sometimes are a little too stuck in the idea that like our third line will win it. Our depth will win it. But sometimes if you have the horses to just win at the top, you can roll lines. Everything sort of simplifies. For sure. And that's what I think Canada has the opportunity to do, whether it will actually work against the states or Finland or Slovakia or some of these stronger teams will see.

Because I don't think they've played a team of that quality yet. But well, maybe not Slovakia. But certainly of the four nations teams. They haven't played a team of that quality yet. But yeah, I mean, I think we're seeing sort of one of the oldest and simplest tricks in the book kind of working in Canada's favor. And it might be a meaningful advantage, a durable advantage, even when they face the United States. Well, and also I think there's something to be said about kind of dictating the terms in terms of like when there's that level of threat, the opposition has to worry so much about it. It impacts not only their own decision making as soon as they get the puck or the risks they take positionally, but then also from like a matchup perspective.

making sure you got certain guys out there and then you get into a spot where maybe like if you're USA you're using a third line or a fourth line much more than you really should because you're so worried about getting them out there for specific sequences and then you wind up oh our top players didn't play as much and that's why we didn't score really quick can we just want to dwell on celebrating with one last sort of note you know the thing that's come to the four that people are really i think processing as we watch him forecheck like an absolute demon on a ship by shift basis. Coming out of the box against

Switzerland was insane. Insane. So good. Yeah. So there's there's like two things that I just love about watching this guy play. But there's that work rate and the consistency of the work rate. It's really important that we

I think hone in on and remember the offensive value or just the skill value, frankly. that being a puck winner that maximizing touches for your line, yourself, your team has. You know, I talk a lot about like setting the table versus eating, right? Like the idea of guys who can feast, guys who can set the table. But Celebrini's already setting the table at like a preposterous rate.

And he does it too off puck in zone where because he's always working so hard to get open and find quiet ice, whether he's actually like stealing a puck or lifting a stick or getting the puck back himself. Even when his linemates have the puck, he's making so much space because he's such a high value decoy. And the way he darts about is just so annoying. And the second part of this is we're in this phase right now where because he's sort of the young kid, he's got such a like humble personality. He looks cherubic, right? The way he plays, like to compete that hard shift by shift, to be that way.

willful in how you compete. Like, you have to be a killer. Like, there's a, there's a core of steel there that I think people aren't maybe appreciating because of how likable he is as a personality that is indisputably there. Like, you can't, he's competing like a demon shift by shift. Like, he's a killer, flat up. I still think as productive as they've been. Yeah.

There are certain times I've seen, like, early in the Switzerland game where I think whether it's just because they don't have. a lot of reps together yet or because I think like Celebrini is so appreciative of the opportunity of playing with McDavid. There's times where like he's deferring a little bit or sometimes like spatially they're kind of bumping into each other where I imagine

they're going to iron that out as well. So the idea that they're going to be more efficient in their minutes together I think is very real. Moving forward in this tournament and I think that's obviously a nightmarish proposition for whoever's going to have to try to defend him. Let's put a pin in the Canada discussion. I wanted to talk about their defensemen, their goalies,

but we're going to do their postings. game show on Wednesday after their quarter final matchup. And so we're going to have a lot of time to dig into that then. Let's take our break here. And then when we come back, we'll run through the rest of the teams. You're listening to the Hockey-Pediocast streaming on the Sportsnet Radio Network. Hey, it's Jamie Dodd and Thomas Drance. Get your daily dose of Canucks Talk with us weekdays from 12 to 2 on Sportsnet 650.

Or catch up on demand through your favorite podcast app. All right, we're back here on the Hockeyedogacast, drive by Thomas Drans. We're doing her Sunday special on a Monday morning. We did so because of the schedule logistics. using the day between the group stage games and the start of the qualifying round to take stock and get a lay at the land of where we're at with these Olympic games. We did Canada before the break, Tom. Let's get into Team USA.

What do you think is the most interesting component coming out of their first three games that, you know, they felt a little more challenging in the moment in terms of like especially the first periods with some of the scores and some of the wacky stuff that was happening in their games against Latvia, all the disallowed goals via coaches challenge against Denmark, Jeremy Swimming getting beaten from center ice, even against Germany where they go in and it's like, well,

we're probably not going to beat Germany by 10 goals to secure the first seed, but with this team, it's always entirely possible, especially playing a team on a second leg of a back-to-back that ran tricytel and all their top players in the ground, and then they don't score for the first like 19 and a half minutes and almost remove any layer of intrigue there, and you're like, man, why isn't this team scoring?

And then eventually you look up, and they've won 5-1 or 6-1 or 6-2 or whatever the final scores were in every one of those games. And near the end of them, all of those teams, obviously all more limited depth-wise and talent-wise teams felt entirely defeated by the proposition of having to match them for 60 minutes. Just completely worn into ground, all the offensive zone pressure, their pace and range that they have throughout the lineup, just ground everything to a halt for those teams. And by the end, you could see they were just tapping out and being like, let's just get this game over with. They're completely wearing out opponents.

And you could see with Denmark too. I thought Denmark looked exhausted by the end of the second period. And they gave their best shot. Like their forecheck was really getting home early on to a way, to an extent I wasn't expecting against that U.S. blue line. I thought Latvia did the same, to be honest with you. It's one of the things that I'm most interested in with this U.S. team, because on paper they should be such a tough matchup for Canada's hard rims style,

like the heavy forecheck that Canada's brought. and yet we've seen far lesser forward groups get to them for stretches. They just can't sustain it at all against this U.S. team. There's too much depth. There's too much skill. I think the offensive generation, the rate at which this U.S. team is leveraging their ability to grind into quality scoring chances is going in and out.

In my opinion, in my opinion, when I'm watching this U.S. team play, I thought they'd be more creative offensively as a group. And I think we're only seeing it in fits and starts as opposed to, I mean, what, the Canada like 50 scoring chances against France or, you know, the 30 scoring chances. I mean, they'll get to those numbers, but it's in a 20-minute stretch where they put up a ridiculously dizzying run of play. I also think because they haven't necessarily been generating early in games as many scoring chances or as much sustained zone time as Canada has, I think you've seen moments where they

start to press, where they've looked a bit frustrated. And because they've looked a bit frustrated, it makes those moments feel like bigger crisis moments than they are. I think there's a, there's certainly a ceiling case where the USA might be just the best team at this tournament. I don't know if they are, because I don't know yet, and we'll learn more tomorrow or we'll learn more on Tuesday. But I don't know, like, are we sure that Germany, Latvia and Denmark are at the level of either Switzerland or Czechia. Yeah, it's a fair question. Right? Like, is it possible that the U.S. hasn't played?

I have such rose-tinted glasses because I've enjoyed Eilers and dry-siddle this tournament so much. Yeah. That maybe I'm, like, inflating my perception of those teams otherwise beyond that. But just count the raw NHLers. Yeah. Like, just on a raw count of NHLers, you know, Chequia is what? almost every forward but two and two defensemen and a goalie. You know,

Switzerland was 10, 9 without Fiala. You know, Denmark's 5, right? Yep. Denmark's 5 and that's if we count Fisker Mulberg. Fisker Moulgard, which we should. Moldgarde, excuse me. Because he's been awesome. He's been awesome.

Even though he's only played three games this year in the NHL. But you know what I'm saying, right? So I think those are more NHL-laden rosters that Canada has played and Canada is generating a more consistent offensive threat. There feels like there's more trust in how Canada plays, more self-confidence in how they want to approach this, that I don't think the U.S. is found. But when the U.S. turns up like they did in that third period against Denmark,

like they did throughout, I thought throughout Sunday against Germany. I thought that was far and away their best game. They were getting looks in the first period and they just weren't going in. Yeah. And then eventually broke through. I thought the German game, the game they played against Germany was scary. Like that was where you could see what this looks like if the U.S. can sustain a 60-minute effort,

and their ceiling is as high as Canada's, I think, but I don't know exactly how to weigh the quality of competition side of that question. I just don't know that they've been able to sustain that level consistently or certainly not as consistently as Canada, especially in terms of actually being creative and making creative plays within that structure that they want to play. They've looked slow and methodical at times in this,

round robin in a way that I'm shocked by because I thought they'd be the most breakneck. And then that's not to say that we haven't seen what they look like at that at full gallop. Because we have. Yep. But it's been in fits and starts as opposed to, you know, in sustained 60 minute efforts. I do think that the calling card that we were excited about in terms of the defensive ability throughout the lineup has been there for the most part. Like these teams other than a couple breakdowns here or there, which you're going to get anyways. All the goals against have been unlucky.

Yeah. And so I do think that's clearly going to be their path. Obviously, this is going to bring back the roster selection debates we had in terms of how you could construct this team without bringing at least one of Coffield or Robertson or, I mean, even going further into a depth chart, a Debrinkette or Cutter Gochi or go on and on would be an interesting piece to have in terms of offensive firepower and shot-making ability on this team that they don't really possess. at the same time the optionality up front is interesting to me and I think that's probably the conversation I want to have most because in the midst of that third period against Denmark that shift they had in the third period where they put Jack Hughes out there with Matthews and Gensel

was probably the best individual shift I've seen at this tournament so far and I think they need more Jack Hughes I think he's only been playing like 11, 12 minutes in each of these games it looks so much different they look so much more like Canada does in terms of being nigh unguardable and translating some of the cool stuff they do off the forecheck and with their size

and with their range and with their disruptiveness into actual scoring chances when Jack Hughes is on the ice. Hughes, Boldie and Gensel for me, have been, and obviously like Brady Cachuk and Jack Eichl have been incredible. But for me, those three have that sort of pace and ability to manufacture offense through a sort of bump and grind style, like the U.S. grind game,

that I just don't think is played as that consistently. I think all three need to be, like, they need to play the wheels off all three of those guys once they start playing the best teams. Yeah. The reason why Hughes works so well with Matthews, and Gensel and, like, we talked a lot during Four Nations time about how good that combination of Matthews and Hughes was.

They weren't scoring at all. Yeah. But they were doing so much stuff in terms of territorial play and transitionability and chance creation that they weren't being rewarded for. He's moving so well right now, Hughes is. and like when he's doing that act of like probing around the zone and kind of cycling up high. Yeah. Matthews and Gensel are probably two of the best players in the world that regardless of what the coverage is,

if you give them enough time, they're going to get open. So it's like in football, you know, if the pass protection holds up long enough and you've got these receivers that are like eventually going to find a way to win their route, like those guys will. Yeah. And so Hughes just getting in the puck in the slot is just a free-for-all from a scoring chance generation perspective. And probably their likeliest path of like getting into the. middle of the ice on some of those sequences. Boldie's so good too, though, and he's been so

productive at this tournament that I understand why they just keep using him in that spot. But I wonder if at some point using him with either Eichel or with Larkin and using them as like your defensive matchup combination against McDavid McKinnon and Celebrini is probably the likelyest path of success and then freeing up Hughes, Matthews, and Gensel to be your main scoring line. Yeah. There's They're going to need to find, you know, for example, this would be one of the downsides to using Eichol head to head, I think, against McDavid, Celebrini and McKinnon, if that's, in fact, where this goes, is what Canada is really focused on doing is using, you know, the perimeter areas of the ice to pull defenders into and then relentlessly attacking shots from high danger areas. And the best way, I think, to dissuade that is you've got to have some counterattacking threat. there's got to be some cost to doing some of the higher risk plays at the point or with a forward coming out to the high half wall. There's got to be some risk to that for Canada.

I think if you're going to contain those three especially with the way that they're using the ice. So, you know, for me anyway, yeah, finding some way to get a more potent counterattacking threat on the wings has the defensive value of dissuading them, you know, in those moments from making the like high leverage. pass, try to, you know, feather it through a winger to taves at the, you know, left point or what have you. You know, having a guy like Boldie and the way that he can make you pay for those errors if they happen. I think that's going to be a huge factor. So I like that idea a lot. Even though it does feel like it's like a predestined collision course in the final

between these two teams, it's not. But also I think what's interesting for the U.S. by virtue of finishing second is they're most likely going to have to play Sweden and Finland if those teams win their previous matchups in the lead-up to this. And I think that's going to like force them to come together, come together, but also like think about what the best orientation of this entire group, but especially the forward lines, is going to be to win those matchups as opposed to getting into the final and then getting punched in the face and being down to nothing and then realizing that's when you have to make the call. Totally.

I think those teams are going to force them to get there a bit earlier and that's probably going to benefit them. Yeah, I think so too. The, the, I think you can, I haven't been over the moon with how they've played, but I've been wildly impressed, even scared by what their top gear looks like. And I would add that, you know, I think there have been signs that they're coming together, right? Like that they're beginning to peak as the, as this tournament really gets going this week for the elimination round. All right, let's get into Sweden. Undo them next.

So you mentioned the coaching staff and the purport. flexing forward usage in particular, where they start tournament with Philip Forger's at the 13 forward. They wind up mixing them in once they go down 3-1 in their second game against Finland. Justper Brat replaces him in the doghouse. And the Forsberg one in particular is just maddening because ever since he came back into the lineup and started being featured, all he's done is create scoring chances and look awesome as you'd expect from Philip Forsberg. And because they did that, they dug themselves a deficit in the stand. endings and wind up having to go through this path where they're going to have to most likely play

the U.S. in the quarterfinal, which certainly isn't ideal for them. I know you had a lot of notes about some of the practice lines we're seeing coming out in terms of what they're going to do for their qualifying round matchup and kind of whether that could write some of the wrongs we've seen in terms of the process right now for them. They're clearly better than they've played. There have been moments where, I mean, this is a real star turn for Lucas Raymond that I think has been. hidden by the fact that they're probably the most disappointing team at the tournament through their round-robin performance to this point. But the pace of their back end in this dump-and-chase environment has been problematic.

And at their practice today, you know, they've sort of dispensed with like the headman-carlson pair, right? Broberg with Carlson is sort of the second pair. Forsling with Dalling. Right, forzling with Dalling. I mean, that's such an obvious, like, perfect fit for this tournament especially. You know, and I think that has a chance anyway to make them a more imposing side, right? To sort of stabilize the top end of their lineup.

Philip Forsberg also finally in the top nine, which what were they doing there? Yeah. They've made some baffling choices. I think even though Edvenson ultimately got hurt and probably wouldn't have been an option, when you see how this tournament plays and when you think about his skill set, he was probably mission critical. Clearly one of their six best defense. Well, and, you know, probably one of their four best defensemen for this tournament specifically and how these games are playing. And the fact that he was left off the roster, irregardless the fact that there's no actual harm done

because of his pre-termment injury, I think is a question mark that if, like, if we were Swedish and covering Swedish hockey obsessively, I think we'd be saying that that's, like, disqualifying, right? Like, we'd be really upset about it. I am. I should be. I don't cover it, and I still aren't upset. Yeah, me too.

So, you know, and then. Look, their problem ultimately is I just don't think, like, I think if you add Leo Carlson and William Carlson, you know, I think this would look different because you'd have the sort of center depth that can, you know, really hold up. I don't know that they do in terms of playing the United States and Canada. They still, you know, can get the goaltending performance they need or convert on the power play or what have you. Like, there still are the fourth best team at this tournament, probably, probably, especially. with this alignment. And so they have a chance, especially with these lineup tweaks, to change their narrative, change the narrative around them, score and upset, maybe even in the quarter final against

the United States, although they'll be heavy dogs and should be. So yeah, I'm hopeful that they've sort of sorted it out, but it's clear that they didn't bring enough mobility on the back end and that their center issues are severe. They certainly are. I think just bad vibes in general as a result of a lot of that. And, you know, it's kind of a follow-up to the Four Nations where I think you could kind of say the same, obviously, some different usage wrinkles. But similarly, we're probably the most disappointing team there in terms of what we got from them as opposed to what you typically associate from it or expect from it and the talent level. I do love that it's fascinating because I really feel like this last five, six years of Swedish talent that has been coming through and coming into the NHL and is young still, you know, has, has, I feel like we're.

going to be having a very different conversation around this team in four or four years and again in eight years um sweden's clearly producing some of the best players in the world but for whatever reason the national team is it a low ebb and and i think the injuries to leo carlson have really exposed yeah well they've been pretty slow at like handing over the keys to the next generation i do love watching their top power play and mostly because they funnel everything through nielander and raymond yes we've clearly distinguished themselves as They're two biggest game breakers and biggest offensive threats. And then Dahlian obviously at the point as well in what he's doing.

And so that's really fun to watch. But yeah, beyond that, I think they're pretty exploitable. With the right game plan, Finland is almost the opposite in the sense that I have a lot of faith that they're going to get the most out of their roster. For the most part, I know like after the first game, everyone was worrying about the loss of Slovakia and then Mikoranton's ice time. time and like all of that. I think they're clearly the third best team at this tournament. I like, I think there's margin between them in Sweden,

even if Sweden's lineup wrinkles sort of are effective at, at, you know, plugging the holes that they've, that they've had in this tournament. I just think Finland's got more juice, more depth. I like their, I even like their defense better. You know,

I think, I think Miro Haskinen's at a level that's above that of anyone on Sweden as good as Rasmus Dahlin is. And I think Finland's outright better in this tournament. You and I were texting about this during one of their early games. We've got this Nikolmikola Rasmus Ritalin pair. Oh. And I didn't realize that they were the same guy.

Well, in thinking about it, I cannot believe that Bill Zito is not acquired Rissalainen yet. A former top 10 pick who's big and toolsy and finish. Yeah. That's literally his entire checklist for acquisitions. And everyone's like, yeah. Is he good? Everyone's posting charts being like his underlying numbers are not very good.

But the moment he starts playing, you know. He just exclusively gets to skate downhill and hit guys. 100%. Yeah. I mean, I mean, yeah. Poor man Seth Jones, right? Yeah. Well, the first scoring chance they got in that game against Italy where they piled it on

was Aristolainen rush attempt, followed up with a Mikula rebound where he was like trailing him and it was a two-man rush by them. And I was like, oh my God. It was amazing. Yeah, no, I. I love this team. I do too.

It's very upsetting the Barkovs, not here. I think they'd be a gold medal threat. I seriously think they'd be a gold medal threat. Even with him, but especially now, like, they're very game script dependent for me. Where if they get an early goal and they can kind of get into their sets in terms of like the forecheck and not necessarily needing to push for offense and expose themselves, I think they can be very scary. If they give up a soft goal early or just go down for whatever reason, take a penalty and give up. a short-handed goal, all of a sudden, I think the game entirely changes for them.

If you're a Canada or a U.S. fan, though, and you end up in a two-two game third period, and you see Miko Randen carry the puck through the neutral zone, you're going to be terrified. Yeah. I thought you were going to say, and you see Joel Armea and Ericola, we're checking. Or also be terrified. Or Capo-Cacco. He's been amazing. He's been, like, one of their coolest forwards.

And then obviously, Lundell and Lister. Well, I was going to say, playing with Lusterina makes a lot of people look very good. 100%. But he's been awesome. And he's, even his, like, reactions. Like, he's been, like, hilarious to watch play. Like, his reaction to Patterson being on the, put on the bench or his reaction to all the goals.

Like, he's just been awesome. Slovakia. Now, I think a lot of people have sort of framed it as them being the team you want to play in the quarterfinals. Yeah. I think, understandably so when you compare the alternatives. I don't think that should diminish the fact that it's pretty bullish for their future outlook, that all of their success is being driven by Slavkovsky, Dvorsky, and Nemitz.

Yeah. And they're all 22 and under. Yeah. And so I think that's very exciting. They've all looked awesome in very different ways. Like Nemitz gets walked by Raymond, but I think still you can see how good he can be offensively and what the upside is and why that's always going to be tantalizing. I've got this note on Slavkovsky.

I was watching the game against Sweden. And the broadcast and MJ was pointing this out. But in the third period, they get a power play. He's like visibly frustrated with his teammates for not getting him the puck as they're cycling it around the zone. And he feels like he's being left out. And he like lets them have it. And then the next time they're out there, the puck gets to him. And he instantly creates a scoring chance out of it.

And that was just such a badass statement from him in terms of get me the puck. I'm going to make something good happen. He's been doing that all tournament. He's phenomenal. He's also been doing it for months now in Montreal. all and that's why I hate this idea that like I understand from a goal scoring perspective right now Olympic Slavkovsky is a different animal but he's just been an entirely different player outright all season and so it's nice to see him get this shine um you got any other quick notes on

slovakia i don't think they're as dangerous as the results would suggest i know they're kind of a darling of the round robin but i suspect that they're not as dangerous a dark horse as a team like switzerland to be totally honest with you just based off of their depth and pace as a team, but that three high look on the power play is, you know, a big difference maker, right? Like if they can do damage against a big team five on four, they can make those margins tight at the pointy end of a single game elimination contest, and that makes you live. So I think they're live in that vein, but I'm not sort of as high on them as I think

the general hockey world just based off of the fact that they won their group. I think when you are watching them play and looking at your scoring chance stat, I don't actually think they're as imposing as the Swiss. Yeah, I think that's fair. I think still so fun to watch, though. And I think this tournament definitely needed that. And live, and, you know, and live.

Yeah, for sure. All right, buddy, what do you want to promote in the way out? Yeah, I mean, this, I want to promote this, and I want to promote your work doing scoring chances. I really don't think we should undersell just how valuable that's been, but I'm really excited to spend this week watching a absolute boatload of international hockey with you. We're also going to sneak out to Langley to watch the CHL Top Prospects game,

so that'll be a blast. Look at us, boots on the ground scouting. Well, boots on the ground scouting and waking up early morning to get in the studio and just like crush a bunch of international hockey. I feel like we got to go and really empty the notebook, too, once this tournament's done with like Albert Smith's takes and stuff. Oh, oh, yeah. It's so sick.

So like... I can go deep in that. I can go with Frederick Tiffels. I've got Fisker Moulgar takes I got a lot Sven Andregetto Oh brother Yes

Yeah no there's some guys who I like think should be targets Yeah to come back to the NHL Like priority targets for teams So we'll once this tournament's done We'll really get into that But I'm just excited to watch that all unfold with you And then share our takes with the listeners Well this is a great way to start

What's going to be an awesome week As you said we're going to be hanging out in studio all week Watching these games and then After every Team Canada game We're going to be hopping on the mics here in studio and recording post-game shows. So look forward to that. Give us a five-star review wherever you listen.

Subscribe to the PDOCS Patreon as well, where you can get some of that scoring chance data. We've been citing throughout. That is all for today. Thank you for listening to the Hockey PEOCast streaming on the Sports Night Radio Network.