I split from Scotiabank Place after Canada's afternoon rout of the Kazakhs and caught the second and third periods of Sweden vs Slovakia at the Civic Centre.
(Had I known that the Czechs would actually show up and take the U.S. to the wall I might have done things differently.)
Sweden won 3-1 and was never really threatened in the game. At 3-zip going into the second intermission, you just couldn't see Slovakia climbing back into the contest. The Slovaks saved their best stuff for the final frame (they only managed a total of 14 shots at Jacob Markstrom through the first two periods but managed to rack up 13 SOG and several scoring chances in the third.) Slovakian goaltender Jaroslav Janus deserved more support--he turned aside 41 of 44 shots.
Okay ... if you're going to mention Sweden at the WJC, then Victor Hedman should be in the first or second sentence. I'm stalling here. Hedman, the 6-foot-5, maybe 6-foot-6, defenceman is easy to pick out in a crowd or on the ice. He looked good ... but not great. Truth is, it would have been tough if not impossible for him to look great. He needs some challenges on the other side of the ice and they'll start coming with the Sweden-Russia game on Wednesday. Scouts I talked to after the game liked Hedman's game ... but only so much. Sorta the shrug-bob-your-head-yeah-yeah-what-we-expected, etc. They conceded that he was good but they weren't excited about him. Technically (skating, puck-handling) he's a plus-plus guy, but there's a decided absence of edge and no big urgency in his game (at least off the Slovakia game and the exhibition loss to Canada back before Xmas). In that way he`s a complete contrast to Erik Karlsson, his partner on the blueline and Ottawa`s first rounder in the last draft--Mutt meet Jeff, Karlsson might be 5-foot-9 though one friend in the scouting ranks insists Karlsson is 5-foot-11. Either way with his elbow he can reach much higher. A risk-taker, the first guy to jump into the rush or pinch in, Karlsson`s a lot of fun to watch (and, in fairness, his game might be why Hedman goes safety-first).
The scouts had a completely different reaction compared to their reviews on John Tavares. "On a mission" was the way one scout described Tavares's play here and in the O this year. JT seems to have read somewhere or heard it floated that Hedman had passed him as the favorite to go first overall in the 2009 NHL entry draft--and he's taking the snub personally.
You can`t even be sure what position Tavares will play--centre, wing, off-wing, people have different opinions. What they`re sure of is that he will be a catalyst. Hedman is a tougher one to project.
The comps: Chara doesn`t work. Hedman is way ahead of where Chara was at this age in technical aspects of the game but as a pure athlete (i.e. strength) Chara would get points on him. And Chara was one of those players who didn`t even realize how tough he was. Pronger: Again, Hedman is ahead of where Pronger was as a draft eligible both technically and athletically but Pronger smokes him out on aggression.
There's still a lot of hockey to play and still a chance for Hedman to show his stuff--against Russia, against Canada and/or the U.S. down the line.
Indifferent reviews on Magnus Svensson-Pjaarvi, the Swedish forward who`s the consesns second-best draft-eligible on the Swedish team. Two opinions from NHL scouts: 1. ``He`s been okay.`` 2. ``He`s in the wrong sport. A plus-plus guy skating-wise, one of the best here. But he`s not making plays happen, not even involved in the play.`` I sorta lean to the second off two periods last night and the exhibition vs Canada at the ACC. When he steps on the ice, it`s like the short program sans the music.
