Finland 2006 WJC tournament review

By Pekka Lampinen

The Finnish U20 squad returned with another medal from the World Junior Championships after a year off, but the team didn’t make the task easy for itself, nor were the results reached in a pretty way.

Once again the problems stemmed from the defense, who couldn’t handle the pressure of the forecheck, failed to make the first pass and committed giveaways. Once in the neutral zone, the team had little direction and cohesion. Combined with the lack of talented playmakers, that led to the puck being given to the fastest and best puckhandlers Lauri Tukonen and Lauri Korpikoski to be carried all the way. Once in the offensive zone, there wasn’t enough skill to break up the defense and the inexperienced players took far too many low percentage shots.

The Finnish developmental system is often criticized for not producing skilled forwards, but in the past few years the lack of talented defensemen has become more critical. The blueliners have been downright humiliated in the last two WJC tournaments and those who reach the NHL are few and far between. What is described above explains why Finland couldn’t properly challenge the finalists and had to defeat the odds in order to medal, but the success factors are also typical of the hockey culture. A team full of hard workers made it possible for splendid goaltending to save the day and for a few key players to score the important goals.

A Difficult Start

Canada is a familiar opponent to Finland from previous years. Still, facing the best team of the tournament was the most difficult start possible. In addition to the issues mentioned above, the Finns didn’t defend the net and rebounds given up by Tuukka Rask proved fatal. Against a very cohesive defense system the forwards ran out of space, and even some of the most skilled stickhandlers were rendered ineffective. Canada won 5-1.

Finland can’t play many games like the opener and still be considered an opponent to be taken seriously. In the second game against the USA it was imperative that the Lion Cubs restore their dignity, and that they did. The defense still leaked under forechecking, but now the offense worked and Finland was left only one goal short of a tie. Scoring with an extra attacker to set the score to 5-6 boosted the players’ confidence.

The third game against Norway was of little consequence. A 7-0 score in the first period effectively ended the game, the final score was 9-1. The team had to defeat the Swiss in the last game of round robin to make the quarterfinals, but that didn’t show on the ice. Finland was outshot 33-20 and carried for two periods by Rask, who had returned to the net after the game against the USA. Finland scored thrice in the third period and was victorious, 4 goals to 1.

Rask in the Spotlight

Finland and Sweden hadn’t met in the WJC cup phase lately. An important characteristic of the Nordic rivalry is that the losses have often been particularly painful to the defeated team, and fate did its best this time, too. The Swedish staff had scouted Team Finland well, and the strong Swedish team played hard forecheck and efficient penalty kill. In fact they had done their scouting a bit too well and crashed the net to chase rebounds. However, the Finns’ defense of the net had gone from bad to very good all of a sudden and the Swedish offense wasn’t as effective. The Swedes kept winning physical struggles and took the puck time and again to Finland’s zone but couldn’t fire accurately up high from good spots.

It still took a superhuman effort to diffuse all the scoring chances. That effort was provided by Rask, who stopped all 53 shots. Each and every one had to be stopped, lest Finland would have been eliminated before Teemu Laakso scored on a rebound in the last minute of overtime. In the post-game ceremonies teammates stopped Rask to thank him again as he skated to receive his personal award.

Things didn’t look good for Finland in the semifinal against Canada. They had fought for 70 minutes the day before while the Canadians rested, and the gap in talent was still there. Rask held the fort for two periods, but whatever scoring chances the forwards could create they squandered with inefficient finishing. Team Canada advanced 4-0.

The Redemption

The team’s official goal for the tournament was to return with a medal, and the players welcomed the opportunity available in the bronze game. Like the semifinal it was another rematch, this time against the USA. Injuries to defensemen Juho Jokinen against Norway, Tommi Leinonen in the semifinal and Risto Korhonen in the last game proved a challenge. Finland had but four defensemen left and the natural center and captain Petteri Wirtanen was converted to defense. Perhaps this motivated the defensemen to play their best game of the tournament, and the handling of pressure neared acceptable levels for the first time.

Finnish attacks rolled toward the net consistently throughout the game, another thing not yet seen in the tournament. Jack Johnson (CAR) tied the game on power play with only nine minutes to go, but soon after Tukonen scored the game-winning goal with a sharp wrist shot and Jesse Joensuu‘s just as accurate slap shot quelled the American pursuit. Rask had one more good game in him at the end of an exhausting schedule and workload, and the Lion Cubs reached their goal.

Team Finland’s most common line-up

Tukonen-Lindgren-Seitsonen
Joensuu-Komarov-Korpikoski
Sailio-Wirtanen-Sinisalo
Kolehmainen-Heino-Lehtonen

Seppänen-Laakso
Koistinen-Leppänen
Leinonen-Korhonen

#1 Karri Rämö, G – drafted by Tampa Bay


GP

MIN

GA

SV

SV%

GAA

SO

W

L

T
158637.8616.210010

The starter’s role had not been decided by the beginning of the tournament. When Rask struggled in the opener, it was natural to give Rämö the start against the USA. The forecheck was still just as merciless against the Finnish defensemen and Rämö was pressured to the maximum. He gave up four goals normal to the circumstances and made several difficult and important saves, but he also allowed two soft goals. That was too much in a clutch situation and Rask gave Rämö no second chance.

The tournament didn’t raise the slightest doubts about Rämö’s status as a prospect. However, playing worse than on average this season is unacceptable in a short and vital tournament, and Rämö’s battle against himself resulted in defeat. He will fortunately get to face more relevant challenges elsewhere in hockey.

Role: Backup goalie
Performance: Failed to meet expectations

#30 Tuukka Rask, G – drafted by Toronto


GP

MIN

GA

SV

SV%

GAA

SO

W

L

T
636913203.9402.111420

Rask earned the first shot at becoming the starting goalie with his play in December. He was disappointing in the opener, giving too many rebounds and flopping around. Rämö did no better against the USA, so Rask started again against Norway and from that point on until the end of the tournament. He saved the team against Switzerland, managed a heroic 53-save shutout in the quarterfinal, showed the best effort of a top prospect in the semifinal and made it possible for Finland to win the bronze game.

Rask has the movement and recovery of an air hockey paddle, and he put it to good use by reading the game surprisingly well. He often went to butterfly stance in advance because he can move quickly and make reflex saves even from that position. His rebound control for shots up high was decent, but he had several shots taken at his pads which he couldn’t direct to the corners. In the cup phase, the team’s defense of the crease finally helped with that deficiency, and Rask was the man to carry the team.

Canada’s Justin Pogge (TOR) and Rask were the best goalies of the tournament. Rask was credited with both the media and the directorate’s personal awards.

Role: Starting goalie
Performance: Exceeded high expectations

#2 Matti Koistinen, D


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway10002+1
the rest60118+2
total701110+3

Koistinen never ranked high on the age group’s depth chart and he joined the team in a small role. From the first game on it became evident that the team’s oldest and shortest defenseman was making far fewer mistakes than most others and was soon given a larger role. Throughout the tournament he remained in a defensive role. He still helped the first stage of the offense a lot by succeeding in his passes whereas others didn’t.

By the end of the tournament he was by far the team’s second best defenseman behind Teemu Laakso, and that eventually reflected Koistinen’s ice time. A total of five penalties was quite a lot, but they were generally necessary violations instead of failures to react to the refereeing. All in all, Koistinen’s emergence was crucial to Finland’s success.

Role: Core defenseman
Performance: Exceeded expectations

#4 Risto Korhonen, D – drafted by Carolina


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway10000+2
the rest60002-3
total70002-1

Korhonen’s recovery from injury in November had to be monitored closely before he could be picked to play in the WJC. In the end, the member of the 2005 squad couldn’t elevate his play to a good enough level and he remained the last defenseman to get ice time throughout the tournament. Korhonen couldn’t handle the puck well enough to make successful plays. Defensively he managed to stay invisible by making very simple decisions but also when a more difficult play would have been needed. The team’s biggest and slowest defenseman didn’t lay many hits as he avoided the corners to keep from getting caught out of position. On the positive side, Korhonen cut down on penalties drastically from last year despite that obstruction was generally called more often.

Korhonen’s tournament ended prematurely in the bronze game due to a painful knee injury, which he suffered as a result of being hit and crashing violently against the boards.

Role: Depth defenseman
Performance: Failed to meet modest expectations

#6 Timo Seppänen, D


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway12020+3
the rest60224+1
total72244+4

The underaged defenseman Seppänen was a somewhat surprising pick to the team, but he had earned that with his play in fall season. In the WJC he was paired with his HIFK teammate Teemu Laakso, thanks to which Seppänen was on the ice in many important situations.

Things didn’t go as hoped. Seppänen was the team’s second biggest defenseman but he didn’t respond to forechecking well and his puck control suffered. To his credit, in the offensive zone he was confident and efficient with the puck, which was naturally a prerequisite for scoring a total of four points. Seppänen’s worst problem was continuously incorrect positioning and poor decision-making in the own zone. He wasn’t going in the right direction to keep up with the opponents and several decisive passes were made past and around him. Due to that Seppänen was a defensive liability this year.

Role: Depth defenseman
Performance: Failed to meet expectations

#7 Erkka Leppänen, D


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway10000+1
the rest60002+2
total70002+3

Leppänen has never been considered a particularly solid defenseman. He did manage to stay fairly invisible near the beginning of the tournament while other defensemen were mostly humiliated. Unfortunately that was also thanks to shying away from physical play, but again on the plus side he took only one penalty in the tournament.

Unlike other players who mostly got better near the end of the tournament, Leppänen regressed slowly from decent to downright bad over the course of the tournament. He couldn’t handle the big minutes in the injury-ridden defense corps and kept fumbling the puck over to the opposition in the cup phase. His best offensive weapon is his shot, but without the smarts and experience to avoid blocking players, he was left scoreless.

Role: Depth defenseman
Performance: Met modest expectations

#8 Juho Jokinen, D


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway11010+1
the rest20110-2
total31120-1

Jokinen’s tournament was cut short by a knee injury in the third game. His games didn’t start well, as he took a beating from Canadian forwards and didn’t defend the crease with dignity. By the time the defense’s reactive play improved, Jokinen was already out of action.

Even if Jokinen didn’t take to the forecheck well, he was Finland’s best defenseman at taking the puck out of the own zone. In fact, he was the only one trying anything more sophisticated. He was also planned to be the team’s main power play quarterback along with Teemu Laakso, and he had a relatively positive start to that as well. Also one of the alternate captains, Jokinen’s importance to the team showed near the end of the tournament when the team created better opportunities to make offensive plays, but the actual playmaking was equally good at best.

Role: Core defenseman
Performance: Met expectations

#14 Tommi Leinonen, D – drafted by Pittsburgh


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway10000+3
the rest50228-4
total60228-1

The young Leinonen was pegged for an important role, but he had a lousy start to the tournament. He failed to make physical plays and took two penalties for stickwork, which opened Canada’s floodgates. His other two penalties in the tournament were no smarter. Leinonen’s offense would have been sorely needed after the injury to Juho Jokinen, but he tallied no points and managed few other offensive plays during that period of time. One of his two assists against the USA was an impressive long pass to release Lauri Tukonen to breakaway.

Leinonen’s defensive game improved notably in the playoffs and at that time he was good to have on the ice. Unfortunately he only got to play in two games when doing better, as he suffered a shoulder injury against Canada.

Role: Core defenseman
Performance: Failed to meet expectations

#28 Teemu Laakso, D – drafted by Nashville


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway10110+3
the rest630312+4
total731412+7

Laakso was the team’s youngest, most experienced and best defenseman as planned. He logged huge minutes right from the start. The youngster did make some mistakes in the beginning against tough opponents, but soon they became far fewer. Generally his all-around game couldn’t be beat on even strength, and he also carried his pairing Timo Seppänen with him. Laakso had the most penalty minutes out of all Finnish defensemen, but that reflected his ice time, and considering the stature of the defense corps, his aggressive take to the game was welcome.

Laakso didn’t make flashy offensive plays, but he picked his shots right. He led all defensemen in goals and all Finnish skaters in goals outside the game against Norway. One of the goals was a cold-blooded finish on a rebound in the overtime of the quarterfinal, which earned Laakso a big hug from the overjoyed Finnish team. It was well-deserved that the team’s defensive cornerstone got to decide their fate in the most important game of the tournament. Laakso had an excellent WJC and was a most positive surprise after an unimpressive fall season in the domestic league.

Role: No. 1 defenseman
Performance: Exceeded expectations

#9 Lauri Tukonen, LW – drafted by Los Angeles


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway11340+5
the rest62460+4
total737100+9

Among forward lines full of professionals, Tukonen was the only prolific club team scorer on the team. He had to assume the top role when Petteri Nokelainen‘s (NYI) absence was confirmed and didn’t fail. He held and carried the puck more than anyone else and got near the net more often than anyone else. The line Tukonen-Lindgren-Seitsonen had a decent start, but Tukonen’s linemates faded away a little as the tournament progressed, and soon Tukonen resorted to harpoon attacks. He was often successful in carrying the puck to the offensive zone all by himself, but he lost his passing game every now and then and didn’t help the unit be successful. Another minor flaw in his game is typical of Tukonen: the bigger his offensive role, the less he hits — significantly.

Tukonen started his scoring against the USA and tallied points throughout the tournament. In the bronze game he got new linemates and was lethal at an unfamiliar position between Jesse Joensuu and Lauri Korpikoski. Tukonen scored the game-winning goal and ended up leading the team in points by a wide margin. He was by far the best offensive talent on the team and that convinced the media to make him part of the tournament’s all-star team.

Role: #1 forward
Performance: Met high expectations

#10 Mikko Alikoski, LW


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway100000
the rest610100
total710100

Small utility forwards are a typical part of the Finnish WJC squad. A top scorer in years long past, Alikoski was now a fourth-line forward. He started the scoring with an important goal as he caught the American defense off guard.

Alikoski’s ice time was shortened when he was moved to the role of the 13th forward in round robin. Sometimes he would create some offense, sometimes the talent and the support just weren’t enough. The diminutive forward tried his best with physical play and was hard to stop occasionally, although a couple of times he was just stopped hard.

Role: Fourth-line winger
Performance: Met modest expectations

#11 Janne Kolehmainen, RW – drafted by Ottawa


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway11122+2
the rest610112+2
total721314+4

The veteran of the 2005 WJC was chosen to be one of the alternate captains this year. Kolehmainen started the tournament on the third line and had some success offensively playing with Petteri Wirtanen. Strong physical play is still what makes Kolehmainen’s game and his hard work was utilized also on special teams. He appeared focused at all times, which provided the team with leadership.

Kolehmainen wasn’t the team’s only chippy player but turned out to be the most effective agitator. Unfortunately that came with a price: He took too many penalties, most of them ill-advised to boot. A performance otherwise very fine was set back by the problems he caused by leaving the team short-handed.

Role: Third-line winger
Performance: Met expectations

#13 Petteri Wirtanen, C


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway100000
the rest60112+1
total70112+1

Wirtanen wore the C for Team Finland. Together with his linemates he was one of Finland’s most productive forwards in the practice games. Things didn’t go quite as planned in the actual tournament: Wirtanen fought the Canadian defense valiantly, but his left wing Jari Sailio wasn’t there to complete the work. A change from Janne Kolehmainen to Tomas Sinisalo on the right wing wasn’t helpful either, although Wirtanen himself regressed as well. On the defensive side, however, he had also results to complement his effort. Smart defense and hard work on the third line kept the opponents at bay.

By the time of the bronze game, Wirtanen had only one assist to his name and there was no chance for heavy stat-padding. The captain found another way to heroism; injuries took their toll among Finnish defensemen and the center was converted to defense. After one glaring mistake on a one-on-one right in the beginning, Wirtanen played solid as he fought alongside the four natural defensemen for the rest of the game. He embodied the team’s fighting spirit and was certainly the right player to receive the bronze team’s award plate. He was also named one of the team’s best three players over the high-profile cornerstones Teemu Laakso and Lauri Korpikoski.

Role: Third-line center
Performance: Exceeded expectations

#15 Perttu Lindgren, C – drafted by Dallas


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway11450+5
the rest610120
total72462+5

The gifted finesse center aged 18 years and four months walked a paved way to the Lion Cubs’ first line. Lauri Tukonen and Aki Seitsonen helped Lindgren play his best games early in the tournament. His adjustment to the style of play was a strange one; he challenged the Canadian defense relatively well but slowly regressed as the tournament went on, and in the last games he was knocked off the puck very easily.

Lindgren scored against Switzerland when Reto Berra allowed a soft goal on his shot. That reveals the ugly truth behind the stat totals that despite a high ranking in the Finnish point leader table Lindgren didn’t register a single point with a challenging play against strong opposition. Based on domestic SM-liiga performances Lindgren should have been up to the task of the first line center, but his age, his stature and reality told a different story. He will return next year to take another try at the same personal goal.

Role: First-line center
Performance: Failed to meet expectations

#16 Leo Komarov, C


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway10110+1
the rest602228-2
total703328-1

Komarov found chemistry with Jesse Joensuu and Lauri Korpikoski before the tournament, and so he got quality wingers to play together with. The center position of the second line was quite a challenge, and Komarov’s effort was up to the task. In the offensive zone he protected the puck well, carried it near the crease often and managed some decent playmaking. Things looked a lot worse in the neutral zone, though. Komarov had no eye for the best passing lanes and also committed worse giveaways than any other forward.

Komarov can appear very unpleasant in the eyes of the opponents, but this time his agitation backfired. In the end he didn’t draw many penalties but sure took them himself. His disgusting total of nine minors included two crucial power plays negated by greedy blows in the offensive zone. Since Komarov is underaged, his impact on the team’s success must be evaluated more closely than usual, and the penalties jeopardize his status. He isn’t likely to develop as much as the other youngsters over the next year and will have to battle to make the team in 2007, but he will very likely make it.

Role: Second-line center
Performance: Met expectations

#18 Aki Seitsonen, RW – drafted by Calgary


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway12130+4
the rest62134-1
total74264+3

One of the team’s most experienced players was also the only forward out of juniors, as Seitsonen plays in the WHL. He seemed to be at home in his second WJC and was largely Finland’s best player in the first games. The versatile forward played the right wing of the first line and produced with the aid of Lauri Tukonen. Like last year, his splendid shot was taken advantage of at the quarterback position of the first power-play unit.

Even though Seitsonen ended up tied to lead the team in goals, his production died after the game against Norway. It wasn’t just bad luck but an effect of him growing ever more invisible on the ice. By the time the lines were rearranged for the bronze game, Seitsonen was no longer good for the top line. Still, he proved a very solid and important player for the team.

Role: First-line winger
Performance: Met expectations

#19 Jesse Joensuu, LW


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway10110+1
the rest62138-1
total722480

The team’s youngest player was expected to add punch to the offense and contribute from the second line. The environment was somewhat of a shock for Joensuu, who now had to stickhandle in smaller spaces than ever before and simply failed at that task. His line wasn’t as efficient as to help him out with the maimed offense. Joensuu was also the biggest and strongest of the three, so he moved to blue-collar duties more and more as the tournament progressed. He still couldn’t score from the front of the net, though, and made even fewer sharp plays.

Soon observers were so agreed on Joensuu being disappointing that it wasn’t noticed that he started playing the kind of hockey he could be expected to in the semifinal. He was still shut out with the rest of the team, but things changed in the bronze game. Team Finland packed the offense as dense as it could and Joensuu found himself next to Tukonen and Korpikoski on the first line. Joensuu’s success in scoring had only been a matter of time when the puck bounced from his leg to the American net. Later he finished the job with a slap shot and ended up with decent personal statistics.

Joensuu was given an A to wear upon Juho Jokinen’s injury. He captained the 1987-born age group in the U18 WC and will be likely to do so next year, too.

Role: Second-line winger
Performance: Failed to meet high expectations

#21 Jari Sailio, LW


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway100000
the rest6101120
total7101120

Although seemingly placed in the right role on the left wing of the third line, Sailio looked lost right from the start. His positioning was incorrect and he looked detached from the rest of the line. He doesn’t have the talent to get things done offensively all by himself and he couldn’t improve on his problems gradually. Sailio joined the endless line of hopelessly ineffective small Finnish speedsters in the WJC.

Sailio never stopped trying and his style of play is far from timid, so penalties are not unheard of to him, but they were far too numerous and made him a liability to the team.

After six games of disappointment, Sailio completely turned it around in the bronze game. Suddenly he managed to stay involved and worked like a maniac. The effort was rewarded when he fought hard for the puck in front of the American net and finally scored his first goal. The goal was the team’s first in the game and invaluable, which helped make Sailio a key player in the game, even when the others reached their best contribution as well.

Role: Third-line winger
Performance: Failed to meet modest expectations

#23 Mikko Lehtonen, LW – drafted by Boston


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway10112+1
the rest60000-1
total701120

The first games of the season hinted that Lehtonen might be a force to be reckoned with in the WJC, but the latter half of the fall season was really just a mess for him. Without a proper role and good performances to support him, he couldn’t get much done in the tournament.

Lehtonen was the 13th forward at first but gained a role on the fourth line in favor of Mikko Alikoski in the third game. The line didn’t try anything fancy and neither did Lehtonen, even though he is known for his flashy plays. Lehtonen can do a good job at the checking game when he focuses on it, so he filled the spot well.

In the bronze game, Lehtonen was promoted to the second offensive line and managed some skilled attacks playing with Perttu Lindgren, but they didn’t score. The bronze game is typically a good time for underaged players to pick up their game and gain momentum for next year – Lehtonen may be one of the successful ones.

Role: Fourth-line winger
Performance: Met modest expectations

#24 Tomas Sinisalo, RW


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway100000
the rest610120
total710120

Sinisalo was practically the only forward to have gained a roster spot thanks to domestic practice games. Like Mikko Lehtonen he also had a weak November on the club teams, and without extreme confidence in himself, he couldn’t do wonders. He started out on the fourth line and was later moved to another checking role on the right wing of the third line.

Sinisalo was likely the most average forward on Team Finland. He would make attempts at offense more often than most of the other grinders, but his talent was a little too lacking all around in order to make a difference. His sole tally was an important game-winning goal against Switzerland.

Role: Fourth-line winger
Performance: Met expectations

#25 Lauri Korpikoski, RW – drafted by NY Rangers


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway10220+1
the rest613440
total71564+1

Korpikoski had been clearly outscored by his teammates in the domestic SM-liiga, but he now had to pick up his confidence as the Lion Cubs were in great need of his talent. He didn’t disappoint. The most impressive feat in the tournament was his predator-like takeaway and a dash to score a shorthanded goal against the USA in round robin. Korpikoski used his speed and agility on several occasions and left opposing defenders behind by the dozens.

When Team Finland’s neutral zone offense broke apart in the opening game, Korpikoski along with Lauri Tukonen assumed responsibility and carried the puck all by themselves. They were both successful, but Korpikoski started to ignore his linemates and the line lost all of its cohesion. His stats are not indicative of the phenomenon that was not so much puck hogging but poor positional play and planning by both parties; many of Korpikoski’s assists were awarded on power play where the puck was often played to the talented stickhandler.

Korpikoski was a key player and a creator of offense the likes of which the team would have needed more. He gave everything he had got when fighting along the boards with impressive efficiency.

Role: Go-to winger
Performance: Met high expectations

#29 Henri Heino, C


against

GP

G

A

P

PIM

+/-
Norway11010+1
the rest600000
total71010+1

Few things were clearer about the team prior to the tournament than Heino being the fourth line center. He was always a fringe junior national team player and in a checking role also back home in SM-liiga. He remained in that role throughout the tournament. Under his leadership the line was successful in avoiding allowing goals.

Offensively the fourth line couldn’t do much else than dump and chase, so Heino stayed farther behind while the wingers went after the puck and his offensive contributions were largely limited to creating something out of faceoffs in the offensive zone.

Role: Fourth-line center
Performance: Met expectations

The Future

Finland amassed the second consecutive young squad partly because of the poor depth of the 1986-born age group. Talent-wise the country has another good year left in it for the 2007 WJC. The differences in quality are small on paper at each level of each position except that the defense should improve notably. As the tournament returns to European rinks, that should also help with the degradation that has plagued the defense for two years now.

The following is a possible Finnish roster for the 2007 WJC. It is not meant to predict who will make the team but to show which spots there are returning, experienced players for and what roles this year’s underaged players could then possibly assume. The returning players are in bold.

Jesse JoensuuPerttu Lindgren – Sami Sandell
Robert Nyholm – Jonas Enlund – Mikko Lehtonen
Ville Korhonen – Miika Lahti – Leo Komarov
Oskar Osala – Max Wärn – Tommi Huhtala
Teemu Ramstedt

Juho Mielonen – Teemu Laakso
Tommi Leinonen – Mikael Kurki
Timo Seppänen – Eetu Heikkinen
Joonas Lehtivuori

Tuukka Rask – Juha Toivonen

Copyright 2006 Hockey’s Future. Do not reprint or otherwise duplicate without permission of the editorial staff.