View Single Post
Old
02-08-2014, 03:33 PM
  #196
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,535
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
1) League size is irrelevant to the size of the talent pool. The number of hockey players didn't magically double in 1968.

Yes what you say is true but the number of teams and distribution of thsoe top players, ie the number of top line, top PP units, ect... does change the opportunity for players depending on the amount of teams in the league.

No one is saying that the NHL talent pool (from the same pool and no influx form other sources) changed in 68 for instance, but the opportunities did and scoring was affected.

Quote:
2) The league is still approximately 50% Canadian
Sure but just go look at all of the province, BC and the Maritimes specifically, which in the past produced very few NHL players, or elite ones as well and now do. That's a change (and rate of growth that has outdistanced expansion).

Quote:
3) A deeper talent pool does not necessarily make the players at the top better.
No you are right but it's not just 1 country producing elite talent now but the US, Russia, Swedes, Finns, Czechs and some smaller ones that simply didn't contribute any NHL talent pre 1972ish (basically pre 1980ish, except for a trickle of players, the US leading the growth spurt) in the NHL.


The attempts to downplay the extremely significant impact of these changes when comparing players over time is frankly astonishing at times.


Last edited by Hardyvan123: 02-08-2014 at 03:39 PM.
Hardyvan123 is online now   Reply With Quote