Almost all of those hits would be illegal. Especially the last one. Huge elbow to a defenceless player.
I don't think that's true.
I think it's relatively easy to find comparable hits from today's era that were unpunished.
They are devastating hits for sure, and a couple would probably receive supplemental discipline in today's NHL, but many others are the types of hits you see thrown Marc Staal, Phaneuf, Orpik etc.
I think it's relatively easy to find comparable hits from today's era that were unpunished.
They are devastating hits for sure, and a couple would probably receive supplemental discipline in today's NHL, but many others are the types of hits you see thrown Marc Staal, Phaneuf, Orpik etc.
Its very true. Stevens himself has alluded to wanting to put guys out of the games at all costs in interviews. He knew exactly what he was doing and his famous hits were generally unpunished charges and elbows to the head.
__________________
I hate to tell you this, but I’ve just launched an air biscuit
So, you have chosen to raise this lament from watching nearly three minutes of guys stumbling around on all fours on the ice, and struggling to get to their feet? Beyond Stevens's devastating hits I personally don't see anything special or above bar in the level of actually hockey being played in those clips. I can only fathom from your response that you somehow relish in seeing the potential for brain damage, because there is virtually nothing else different or notable compared to the "new NHL" in this short montage.
While I love hard checking hockey, I can do without this sort of stuff in light of how much faster the game has become, and with a much higher emphasis on puck possession and sustained movement. Especially considering that the game is probably fundamentally safer as a result, I for one can't imagine that there is anything even worth missing in the low scoring, slow, interference plagued old NHL. Give me Johnny Hockey over this antiquated nonsense.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
So, you have chosen to raise this lament from watching nearly three minutes of guys stumbling around on all fours on the ice, and struggling to get to their feet? Beyond Stevens's devastating hits I personally don't see anything special or above bar in the level of actually hockey being played in those clips. I can only fathom from your response that you somehow relish in seeing the potential for brain damage, because there is virtually nothing else different or notable compared to the "new NHL" in this short montage.
While I love hard checking hockey, I can do without this sort of stuff in light of how much faster the game has become, and with a much higher emphasis on puck possession and sustained movement. Especially considering that the game is probably fundamentally safer as a result, I for one can't imagine what there is anything even worth missing in the low scoring, slow, interference plagued old NHL. Give me Johnny Hockey over this antiquated nonsense.
Well that's what it had turned into but as with a lot of things, it goes in cycles. Before that it was high scoring and before that it was low scoring. If you go back to before helmets were mandatory and there was no instigator it was fast and entertaining and likely less dangerous than it is today. For me old time hockey was the Flying Frenchmen of Montreal.
Players have gotten bigger and faster and equipment has improved so that players skate around as if they are invincible and complain now when they get clocked with equipment that has turned into a weapon.
I'd like to add there is nothing wrong with low scoring games as long as the skill and effort are there. I read an article once where it was shown that as the skill goes up, the scoring goes down and visa versa. An example is the 70s and 80s where there was lots of expansion and the WHA lowering the skill levels causing the scoring to go up. Now they've changed the rules in order to raise the scoring but I look at it as just trying to keep the casual fan interested.
Well that's what it had turned into but as with a lot of things, it goes in cycles. Before that it was high scoring and before that it was low scoring. If you go back to before helmets were mandatory and there was no instigator it was fast and entertaining and likely less dangerous than it is today...
Bullocks. Yes, probably less dangerous, but the players have never been faster, stronger, and more skilled as a collective whole in any era than they are right now. The goalies are better, defensemen can ALL skate, and with the present emphasis on fitness, nutrition and off-ice attention to performance enhancement, nothing comes even close by comparison. When watching archived games from the '90s, the '80s, the '70s, the '60s there is a noticeable difference in speed, but beyond even that, better skates make for better, more agile players, and greater attention to strength training and conditioning makes for all-around more complete players.
I will repeat: the game is better now than it ever has been, and all the pining for "old time" hockey is just nostalgic revisionism. Anyways, my point was that that was a really strange collection of highlights for inducing nostalgia.
...And more Johnny Gaudreau.
On that note, I was watching the highlights from his first NHL game yesterday, and was starting to wonder if there is a close comparison with any other player. We have spent a couple of years now attempting to project how he might do at this level based on how other skilled, small players play the game; players like Martin St Louis, Patrick Kane, Steve Sullivan, and Paul Kariya. And I got to thinking yesterday while watching him that he really is almost unique. The way that he plays is very distinct.
I don't have the benefit of HD, and all of my hockey viewing takes place via internet streams on my computer. But even viewing poor quality, low-res, pixelated streams in which it is even difficult to make out the numbers on their jerseys, I never have any difficulty finding and following Gaudreau, simply because he moves differently, skates differently, tracks and carries the puck differently. In my mind, perhaps this is part of what makes him a special player, since he seems to play the whole game on a different level—when I say that, it is not to say that he is a better player than everyone else, only that he is just so different from everyone else.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
Bullocks. Yes, probably less dangerous, but the players have never been faster, stronger, and more skilled as a collective whole in any era than they are right now. The goalies are better, defensemen can ALL skate, and with the present emphasis on fitness, nutrition and off-ice attention to performance enhancement, nothing comes even close by comparison. When watching archived games from the '90s, the '80s, the '70s, the '60s there is a noticeable difference in speed, but beyond even that, better skates make for better, more agile players, and greater attention to strength training and conditioning makes for all-around more complete players.
I will repeat: the game is better now than it ever has been, and all the pining for "old time" hockey is just nostalgic revisionism. Anyways, my point was that that was a really strange collection of highlights for inducing nostalgia.
...And more Johnny Gaudreau.
On that note, I was watching the highlights from his first NHL game yesterday, and was starting to wonder if there is a close comparison with any other player. We have spent a couple of years now attempting to project how he might do at this level based on how other skilled, small players play the game; players like Martin St Louis, Patrick Kane, Steve Sullivan, and Paul Kariya. And I got to thinking yesterday while watching him that he really is almost unique. The way that he plays is very distinct.
I don't have the benefit of HD, and all of my hockey viewing takes place via internet streams on my computer. But even viewing poor quality, low-res, pixelated streams in which it is even difficult to make out the numbers on their jerseys, I never have any difficulty finding and following Gaudreau, simply because he moves differently, skates differently, tracks and carries the puck differently. In my mind, perhaps this is part of what makes him a special player, since he seems to play the whole game on a different level—when I say that, it is not to say that he is a better player than everyone else, only that he is just so different from everyone else.
Yeah, I totally agree.
I think the player that he is most similar to is Datsyuk. I like your description of playing on a different tier. I view it like he plays hockey differently than everyone else.
It's not that their plays styles are alike, though they are in some respects, they are just so alike in being unique. They both play in short spurts. Even when holding the puck, it's not a big, long, fluid motion, it's a series of small precise ones in sequence. Same with the skating. I don't know a lot about the dynamics of skating, but they are both effin' tricky with how they move and use their skates.
That clip of Gaudreau peeling out from the corner against that German defender was just so impressive. It's great stick skills, but he covers so much ground so quickly, and doesn't lose his balance.
Maybe someone who knows something about the mechanics of skating can tell me whether that's impressive or not? It sure seems like it to me.
Very Datsyukian:
Really fun player to watch.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Flash Walken For This Useful Post:
Bullocks. Yes, probably less dangerous, but the players have never been faster, stronger, and more skilled as a collective whole in any era than they are right now. The goalies are better, defensemen can ALL skate, and with the present emphasis on fitness, nutrition and off-ice attention to performance enhancement, nothing comes even close by comparison. When watching archived games from the '90s, the '80s, the '70s, the '60s there is a noticeable difference in speed, but beyond even that, better skates make for better, more agile players, and greater attention to strength training and conditioning makes for all-around more complete players.
I will repeat: the game is better now than it ever has been, and all the pining for "old time" hockey is just nostalgic revisionism. Anyways, my point was that that was a really strange collection of highlights for inducing nostalgia.
...And more Johnny Gaudreau.
On that note, I was watching the highlights from his first NHL game yesterday, and was starting to wonder if there is a close comparison with any other player. We have spent a couple of years now attempting to project how he might do at this level based on how other skilled, small players play the game; players like Martin St Louis, Patrick Kane, Steve Sullivan, and Paul Kariya. And I got to thinking yesterday while watching him that he really is almost unique. The way that he plays is very distinct.
I don't have the benefit of HD, and all of my hockey viewing takes place via internet streams on my computer. But even viewing poor quality, low-res, pixelated streams in which it is even difficult to make out the numbers on their jerseys, I never have any difficulty finding and following Gaudreau, simply because he moves differently, skates differently, tracks and carries the puck differently. In my mind, perhaps this is part of what makes him a special player, since he seems to play the whole game on a different level—when I say that, it is not to say that he is a better player than everyone else, only that he is just so different from everyone else.
Yeah, sure the players are bigger, faster, more skilled than they were in the old days. You'll find that with all athletes in any sport but we were discussing the style of play and the danger. As said the style changes with the times depending on what is successful and if rule changes are needed because it's gone down one path too far. I enjoyed hockey just as much in the 50s, 60s, 70s etc as I do today except now I get it in HD when not in person. So bullocks to you.
What does this even mean? Sandra Bullocks? A baby bull thrown in your general direction?
Part of me misses the days when Scott Stephens or Denis Gauthier would clobber opponents with open-ice hits. The logical, reasonable human in me is glad there are more safe-guards for players and these head-shots are illegal now.
Has Johnny ever missed a lengthy period of game-time through injury? Has he ever been clobbered by a corn-fed behemoth NCAA defenceman? He just seems to have the ability to bounce off big checks, or avoid them entirely. I think the Force is strong in this kid. We can all take solace that anyone who actively head-hunts him will be suitably punished in the modern NHL.
I'd rather sacrifice big open ice hits than having star players' seasons and careers cut short thus depriving us of watching the best play. I also don't get alot of joy watching a guy hit so hard he can't stand and is subject to potentially long term brain injury. That's just me though.
The Following 20 Users Say Thank You to Tinordi For This Useful Post:
I'd rather sacrifice big open ice hits than having star players' seasons and careers cut short thus depriving us of watching the best play. I also don't get alot of joy watching a guy hit so hard he can't stand and is subject to potentially long term brain injury. That's just me though.
Definitely sucks to see anybody have their dream job cut short / quality of life skewed by a bad hit. Turn hitting up on ea NHL and we can get our fix there haha.
__________________
Long time listener, first time caller.
Yeah, sure the players are bigger, faster, more skilled than they were in the old days. You'll find that with all athletes in any sport but we were discussing the style of play and the danger.
I'm not sure where you get that, because this is not at all what I was getting at. I recognise that there are trends in gameplay and "style", but this has less to do with my argument about quality as primarily a product of skill. Put simply: better players make for a better product. Players are better now than they were 10, 20, 30, 50 years ago. Players 10 years from now will likely be better than players today. So again, my point was twofold:
1. There is nothing really to miss from bygone NHL eras, since the game is a higher quality now.
2. It is puzzling to disturbing that a fan would miss the old days based on a collection of video clips that feature a potentially high number of head injuries. If this is indeed what Zarley means by his identification "the old NHL", then I really do have a problem with that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulcan
As said the style changes with the times depending on what is successful and if rule changes are needed because it's gone down one path too far. I enjoyed hockey just as much in the 50s, 60s, 70s etc as I do today except now I get it in HD when not in person. So bullocks to you.
I looked again at your post and more carefully read the final paragraph, which I find quite redeeming:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulcan
...I'd like to add there is nothing wrong with low scoring games as long as the skill and effort are there. I read an article once where it was shown that as the skill goes up, the scoring goes down and visa versa. An example is the 70s and 80s where there was lots of expansion and the WHA lowering the skill levels causing the scoring to go up. Now they've changed the rules in order to raise the scoring but I look at it as just trying to keep the casual fan interested.
I completely agree, and should point out that it was quick and careless of me to characterise the "old NHL" as poor on the primary basis that it was low-scoring. Much like you, I also enjoy hockey from all eras, and appreciate the skill that was on display in the 80s and 90s—when I first became a hockey fan. However, that does nothing to alter the fact that today's game is played at a higher level, and requires a higher skill set than it once did.
__________________
Dealing with Everything from Dead Sea Scrolls to Red C Trolls
Quote:
Originally Posted by woob
"...harem warfare? like all your wives dressup and go paintballing?"
What does this even mean? Sandra Bullocks? A baby bull thrown in your general direction?
Part of me misses the days when Scott Stephens or Denis Gauthier would clobber opponents with open-ice hits. The logical, reasonable human in me is glad there are more safe-guards for players and these head-shots are illegal now.
Has Johnny ever missed a lengthy period of game-time through injury? Has he ever been clobbered by a corn-fed behemoth NCAA defenceman? He just seems to have the ability to bounce off big checks, or avoid them entirely. I think the Force is strong in this kid. We can all take solace that anyone who actively head-hunts him will be suitably punished in the modern NHL.
I don't know why you referenced me using the word bullocks, it was Textcritic who used it on me.
I'd like to add that no where in this thread will you find me defending the big open ice hits. What I was getting at is old time hockey isn't the same for everyone.
To me old time hockey was before the Broadstreet Bullies. It was good hardnosed hockey and fast. Sure there were a few brawls just as there are today but the viciousness wasn't common.
Today there is such big money involved that some players have been willing to do anything to get the big pay cheque.
Last edited by Vulcan; 05-26-2014 at 07:42 AM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Vulcan For This Useful Post:
I'm not sure where you get that, because this is not at all what I was getting at. I recognise that there are trends in gameplay and "style", but this has less to do with my argument about quality as primarily a product of skill. Put simply: better players make for a better product. Players are better now than they were 10, 20, 30, 50 years ago. Players 10 years from now will likely be better than players today. So again, my point was twofold:
1. There is nothing really to miss from bygone NHL eras, since the game is a higher quality now.
2. It is puzzling to disturbing that a fan would miss the old days based on a collection of video clips that feature a potentially high number of head injuries. If this is indeed what Zarley means by his identification "the old NHL", then I really do have a problem with that.
I'm not basing it on video clips, I was there to watch it. There was far more respect in the game in the 50s and 60s.
I looked again at your post and more carefully read the final paragraph, which I find quite redeeming:
I completely agree, and should point out that it was quick and careless of me to characterise the "old NHL" as poor on the primary basis that it was low-scoring. Much like you, I also enjoy hockey from all eras, and appreciate the skill that was on display in the 80s and 90s—when I first became a hockey fan. However, that does nothing to alter the fact that today's game is played at a higher level, and requires a higher skill set than it once did.
I said the players are bigger, faster more skilled today so I don't know what you are going on about.
I actually used to love those hits, but that was when I was blissfully unaware of the long term affect it was having on the players away from the game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic Bullocks. Yes, probably less dangerous,......
I've never been a big fan of S. stevens or head hunting. I wish players would keep their heads up though so they can protect themselves. I also had kids who played hockey and at a pretty good level, one is now coaching.
The only thing I really miss about old school hockey was the viciousness in front of the net. I miss old battles like Regehr vs Pronger battling for room. Where standing in front of the net meant you had to earn your space and might result in you getting knocked on your ass. That I miss. Other then that, speed and skill are the priority these days and it's made for an overall better product.
Which is why I think Johnny will excel. Can someone even find 1 single video of him getting bowled over? I don't think I've ever seen him take a big hit. It's wishful thinking that he might not even got clocked in the best league in the world. But more often then not someone goes for a hit on him and he just dodges out of the way. I think he wants defensemen to come at him. It allows them to play directly into his hands where he can shift out of harms way and get a scoring chance.
I've never been a big fan of S. stevens or head hunting. I wish players would keep their heads up though so they can protect themselves. I also had kids who played hockey and at a pretty good level, one is now coaching.
Yet another reason why I'm not too worried about Johnny (I know you aren't saying we should be worried, Vulcan.)
I had to watch all those .gifs from last week in super-slow motion. One of the main things I noticed is Gaudreau's head is on a swivel; he always has his head up and he's seeing the play a couple of seconds faster than anyone else. Although it was a pretty bad German team...
I really hope we can find a big, powerful RW with a scoring touch who can capitalise on the chances Gaudreau makes. Maybe JG can get a few more goals out of David Jones next season.
