HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Hockey Talk by Country > Hockey Talk by Country
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Hockey Talk by Country Talk about the other countries that are playing the world's greatest game!

Hitting hurts Canada's talent depth

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-11-2009, 06:27 PM
  #51
nthnnoel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Saint John, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
As you can see in the Stanley Cup finals the hitting is a very low factor in this series. With the speed of the game the players are really hard to nail and takeaways are 10 times more valuable than hits. To me undoubtfully Malkin has been the best takeaway player and Datsyuk is probably the second best. All the swedes are really great at it, some Canadians are decent but I think that as a skill it is missed by Canadians a little because at the junior level thay are trained to hit the player more instead of attempting a clean takeaway.
I like your argument about Malkin being the best takeaway player in the Stanley Cup Finals. However, you fail to point out that when he can't acheive his goal of stripping the puck from somenone cleanly, he resorts to cross-checking, slashing, hooking, holding, tripping......you know, everything but hitting. If he laid the body into someone more often he'd might possibly be the greatest player on Earth. (or just not in the penalty box as often.)

nthnnoel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2009, 12:14 AM
  #52
xicethug13x
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: ADDISON
Country: United States
Posts: 696
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
Doug Weight is slow and old and this video didn't prove anything except for the fact that playing physical hockey very young does not give you any advantage at all. Ask Keith Primeau, who was sent to retirement by a Russian who started playing physical hockey when he was 16 years old.
ok but did sutter quite playing hockey after that hit cause he was affraid???...nope he got back up and kept on going...
like i said kids that quite because they are affraid or get hurt have no place in the game anyways....this is a game where you have to be fast and skilled as you say...but you also have to be tough both physically and mentally...not everyone has that makeup

xicethug13x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2009, 03:56 AM
  #53
Zine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xicethug13x View Post
ok but did sutter quite playing hockey after that hit cause he was affraid???...nope he got back up and kept on going...
like i said kids that quite because they are affraid or get hurt have no place in the game anyways....this is a game where you have to be fast and skilled as you say...but you also have to be tough both physically and mentally...not everyone has that makeup

You can't equate NHLers/CHLers to 11-12 year olds; that's just ridiculous.


I don't think hitting scares kids away as much as it serves no purpose when kids are that young. The negatives far outweigh any benefits especially considering most 11-12 year olds haven't even developed proper muscle mass to make hitting an effective part of their game.....it does nothing but risk injury.
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/175/2/155

Of course you must be tough both physically and mentally to play, but that IS secondary to the basic fundamentals of the game (skating, passing, shooting, etc.).....especially when you're 12.
You're typical 11-12 year old isn't anywhere near as physically or mentally as tough as even a 15 year old.....nor should they be expected to be.

Zine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2009, 05:45 PM
  #54
wjhl2009fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
You can't equate NHLers/CHLers to 11-12 year olds; that's just ridiculous.


I don't think hitting scares kids away as much as it serves no purpose when kids are that young. The negatives far outweigh any benefits especially considering most 11-12 year olds haven't even developed proper muscle mass to make hitting an effective part of their game.....it does nothing but risk injury.
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/175/2/155

Of course you must be tough both physically and mentally to play, but that IS secondary to the basic fundamentals of the game (skating, passing, shooting, etc.).....especially when you're 12.
You're typical 11-12 year old isn't anywhere near as physically or mentally as tough as even a 15 year old.....nor should they be expected to be.
The issue is some players start playing junior at 15.So you could have some players who are just learning to hit while some have been playing contact for 4 or 5 years.

wjhl2009fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2009, 07:08 PM
  #55
NHLHammerbound*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
I understand that hitting in Canada is considered an important skill and it is significant, it is one of the reasons Canada is superior to other countries at the U-20 level, but it is not really that significant at the higher level. It doesn't take relatively long to learn how to hit and take hits.

Look at many NHL players who had to end their career prematurely. Majority of these guys are Canadian. The problem is that if you get concussed two or three times in junior you already are rattled. One more concussion at senior level and the doctors may tell you you are done. Also, after concussions players are usually not the same, so that takes away talent in a way as well. Starting hitting at the age of 14 is a great idea. The kids will learn quickly.
Without bothering to read thru this entire thread, I'm sure most of ur contentions are right Siberian. We need more practise and less game time, less focus on winning and more stress on skill development. + We'd be better off with no full contact hitting till 13 or 14. However, I seriously doubt Hockey Canada's old guard will support such changes.

I'll even agree that the Russian developmental system is better...accomplishing ( per capita/ hockey playing youngster ) far more with far less...

CHEERS

NHLHammerbound* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-20-2009, 11:58 PM
  #56
eric71*
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
You're kidding, right. Which of these players is a proven elite player?
He was getting at the depth we are still managing to produce for the future

eric71* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 12:09 AM
  #57
BadHammy*
MSL For Hart!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Right Behind Me!
Posts: 10,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
I think that as of right now Canada does not produce enough of elite talent. If you look past Crosby there are no supreme offensive players coming from Canada and it is surprising considering the amount of young players playing hockey in this country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zine View Post
You can't equate NHLers/CHLers to 11-12 year olds; that's just ridiculous.


I don't think hitting scares kids away as much as it serves no purpose when kids are that young. The negatives far outweigh any benefits especially considering most 11-12 year olds haven't even developed proper muscle mass to make hitting an effective part of their game.....it does nothing but risk injury.
http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/175/2/155

Of course you must be tough both physically and mentally to play, but that IS secondary to the basic fundamentals of the game (skating, passing, shooting, etc.).....especially when you're 12.
You're typical 11-12 year old isn't anywhere near as physically or mentally as tough as even a 15 year old.....nor should they be expected to be.
I very much agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NHLHammerbound View Post
Without bothering to read thru this entire thread, I'm sure most of ur contentions are right Siberian. We need more practise and less game time, less focus on winning and more stress on skill development. + We'd be better off with no full contact hitting till 13 or 14. However, I seriously doubt Hockey Canada's old guard will support such changes.

I'll even agree that the Russian developmental system is better...accomplishing ( per capita/ hockey playing youngster ) far more with far less...


CHEERS
I very, very much agree. I was having a discussion with a teammate the other day about the 10 most skilled NHL players and we both kept ending up with 8 or 9 non-Canadians (I think all were Russians actually) and were both like wtf? I really think hitting needs to be bumped off until at least 14. It's counter productive before then.

BadHammy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 09:39 PM
  #58
TRVIPERS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Home of the Jets
Country: Canada
Posts: 263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
I don't think you understand what I am talking about. The guys you listed currently would not even make top 500 players in the world. They may be elite junior players but that doesn't translate into the level of national teams. I am talking about the best hockey players in the universe and Canada does not have very many.
Are you serious?

I thought we were talking about developing skilled players and you poo poo his list by saying (They may be elite junior players but that doesn't translate into the level of national teams).

Are we talking about developing skilled prospects or about proven elite players?

Could you please tell me the names of these best hockey players in the universe that you are talking about?

Just who exactly do you consider a proven elite player?

In the top 30 scorers in the NHL this past season,of those 30 there were 17 Canadians.

Now are you going to tell me that the top 30 scorers in the NHL are not on your list of (the best hockey players in the universe).


Last edited by TRVIPERS: 07-22-2009 at 11:30 PM.
TRVIPERS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 10:51 PM
  #59
TRVIPERS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Home of the Jets
Country: Canada
Posts: 263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Le Golie View Post
Canada's downfall has always been it's depth.
Are you kidding me?

Canada is probably the only country in the world capable of putting together more than one team capable of winning any tournament that they play.
Canada has more depth than any other country in the world, just by the fact of the number of players that we produce that play pro in the NHL and all over the world.


Last edited by TRVIPERS: 07-22-2009 at 11:31 PM.
TRVIPERS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 10:56 PM
  #60
Siberian
Registered User
 
Siberian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Saint Pierre
Country: France
Posts: 3,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRVIPERS View Post
Are you serious?

I thought we were talking about developing skilled players and you poo poo his list by saying (They may be elite junior players but that doesn't translate into the level of national teams).

Are we talking about developing skilled prospects or proven elite players?

Could you please tell me the names of these best hockey players in the universe that you are talking about?

Just who exactly do you consider a proven elite player?

In the top 30 scorers in the NHL this past season,of those 30 there were 17 Canadians.

Now are you going to tell me that the top 30 scorers in the NHL are not on your list of (the best hockey players in the universe).
Why 30? Why not 100? Of course Canada takes by sheer numbers, that's the whole point of my original message.

Top 5 (Regular season) - 1 Canadian (Crosby) 20%
Top 5 (Playoffs) - 1 Canadian (Crosby) 20%
Top 10 (Regular season) - 4 Canadians 40%
Top 10 (Playoffs) - 4 Canadians 40%
Top 20 (Regular season) - 10 Canadians 50%
Top 20 (Playoffs) - 6 Canadians 30%

53% of all NHL players from last season were Canadians. So don't you think that even this stats actually proves that Canada underperform at the elite level?

Siberian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 11:03 PM
  #61
TRVIPERS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Home of the Jets
Country: Canada
Posts: 263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
Why 30? Why not 100? Of course Canada takes by sheer numbers, that's the whole point of my original message.

Top 5 (Regular season) - 1 Canadian (Crosby) 20%
Top 5 (Playoffs) - 1 Canadian (Crosby) 20%
Top 10 (Regular season) - 4 Canadians 40%
Top 10 (Playoffs) - 4 Canadians 40%
Top 20 (Regular season) - 10 Canadians 50%
Top 20 (Playoffs) - 6 Canadians 30%

53% of all NHL players from last season were Canadians. So don't you think that even this stats actually proves that Canada underperform at the elite level?
Thanks for answering none of my questions..

TRVIPERS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2009, 12:51 AM
  #62
Siberian
Registered User
 
Siberian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Saint Pierre
Country: France
Posts: 3,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRVIPERS View Post
Thanks for answering none of my questions..
Here is basically all you need to know: take away freak of nature Crosby and in top five players in the NHL you have zero Canadians, even top 6.
Here they are:

Malkin, Ovechkin, Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Datsyuk, Parise. I could also make a case for Kovalchuk, so that would be top 7.

If that is not enough to understand what I am talking about I don't know what will. And please, stop this lunacy about several teams Canada that could win, when we talk about the elite competition last time Canada managed to put the best under its flag they were shut out three times in 6 games including to lowly Switzerland.

Siberian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2009, 02:56 AM
  #63
TRVIPERS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Home of the Jets
Country: Canada
Posts: 263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siberian View Post
Here is basically all you need to know: take away freak of nature Crosby and in top five players in the NHL you have zero Canadians, even top 6. And then 6 of the next 7 are Canadians.

Here they are:

Malkin, Ovechkin, Zetterberg, Lidstrom, Datsyuk, Parise. I could also make a case for Kovalchuk, so that would be top 7.

If that is not enough to understand what I am talking about I don't know what will. And please, stop this lunacy about several teams Canada that could win, when we talk about the elite competition last time Canada managed to put the best under its flag they were shut out three times in 6 games including to lowly Switzerland.
Are you talking about the 06 Olympics when Canadian-born Paul DiPietro scored twice and goalie Martin Gerber turned aside 49 shots in an 2/0 upset that came only two days after the smallish Swiss - No. 8 in the world, but normally far behind the other seven - beat the world champion Czech Republic 3-2.

Ok if you want to put it that way,take away Malkin and Ovechkin and then 7 of the top 11 scorers are Canadian.

Ok, keep them in and Canada still has 10 of the top 20 and 17 of the top 30.

TRVIPERS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2009, 10:06 AM
  #64
NHLHammerbound*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRVIPERS View Post
Are you talking about the 06 Olympics when Canadian-born Paul DiPietro scored twice and goalie Martin Gerber turned aside 49 shots in an 2/0 upset
Not that it matters, BUT I seem to recall that we also had a goal waved off in that game, which should have counted. Upsets happen, remember mighty Poland beating CCCP ? Belarus over Sweden...yadda yadda

***

It seems to me, that the original points brought up by Russians remain valid. Based on the number of kids playing hockey, compared to other nations, Canada SHOULD be doing even better! So why are so many of the top skilled guys in the NHL Russian ?

And less we forget, Russian Nat teams ,with plenty of KHL guys, have won the WC's 2 years running. They DID have a long periiod of International futility , prior to this, but there was also a lot of tummult in Russian society - following fall of Iron Curtain etc., so it could be argued that this was something of an aberration.

Surely, the lack of a transfer agreement, combined with a pretty sizeable cultural divide, also leaves many talented contemporary Russians out of the NHL. So presumably , IF things were different, the impact of Russians in NHL might be even significantly Greater.

***

The bottom line is that a lot of what Russians are saying here , makes sense. Teaching kidz puck skills should always be paramount, and puck wizardry ( a la a Gretzky or Orr etc ) is best learned ALONE on the Pond, or failing that; by giving EACH kid a damn puck!

By Contrast, teaching a kid to give and take a hit properly, can be done in mere months. At an early age there also tends to be a huge disparatity btwn kidz , in terms of size/weight/muscle mass.

Full contact kidz hockey does represent too great a risk, with minimal rewards. And yes, it doesn't need to happen till 14, a la the Russian model. Hockey Canada's old guard has it's head up its arse, on this score. ENDOSTOREY !

CHEERS ET AL

NHLHammerbound* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-23-2009, 11:09 PM
  #65
Jill Sandwich
Master of Unlocking
 
Jill Sandwich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Arklay Mansion
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,676
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Jill Sandwich
I can't in good faith disagree with raising the bodychecking level to 13 or 14. As much as the hockey fan in me says that hitting is a part of the sport, the human being in me says that I would feel bad seeing 11 year old kids out there looking for blood. A big reason why injuries get jacked up as the hitting starts at that age is because they don't know how to throw a check or how to take a check.

I think it would benefit our guys. Any player who makes it into the NHL because of their physical game is not going to be hindered by less experience hitting... but I'm sure there's a lot of guys who maybe could've used the extra year or two or skating and stickhandling focused play, because at a young age, it's very hard for small guys to outskate or maneuver around the bigger guys. I bet you'd see an increase in smaller guys getting drafted.

Jill Sandwich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2009, 03:05 AM
  #66
Anderson9
Registered User
 
Anderson9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Kazan, Russia
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 270
vCash: 500
To no one in particular, here's my tuppence.
A lengthy 1998 report, A Game In A Crisis put it bluntly that hockey in its birthplace was diagnosed stagnant as placing beef over brains, moronic player development, encouragement of sure physical game, the result being Canada's repeated helplessness agst top European opposition.
The report ridiculed some hotheated Canucks for insisting that nothing wrong had happened at Nagano, only 'Lindros hit the post in the SO' ignoring the fact that the semi agst Czech Republic was humiliatingly close and resulted in a well-deserved loss. The early 2000s though showed signs of recovery, but currently Canada seems overtaken by events bc natural-resourse- driven Russia has launched several ambitious national projects to show the world it's "getting up off its knees". State investment is huge and believe me, unless there's a dramatic drop in oil prices, Russia's proven superiority in big- time sports, including hockey is a matter of time. I don't see why Canadians so stubbornly ignore two latest WCs -they show that 'times they are a changing'. Face facts - you cant beat the Soviet style mammoth system.

Anderson9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2009, 04:08 AM
  #67
BadHammy*
MSL For Hart!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Right Behind Me!
Posts: 10,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by anderson9 View Post
To no one in particular, here's my tuppence.
A lengthy 1998 report, A Game In A Crisis put it bluntly that hockey in its birthplace was diagnosed stagnant as placing beef over brains, moronic player development, encouragement of sure physical game, the result being Canada's repeated helplessness agst top European opposition.
The report ridiculed some hotheated Canucks for insisting that nothing wrong had happened at Nagano, only 'Lindros hit the post in the SO' ignoring the fact that the semi agst Czech Republic was humiliatingly close and resulted in a well-deserved loss. The early 2000s though showed signs of recovery, but currently Canada seems overtaken by events bc natural-resourse- driven Russia has launched several ambitious national projects to show the world it's "getting up off its knees". State investment is huge and believe me, unless there's a dramatic drop in oil prices, Russia's proven superiority in big- time sports, including hockey is a matter of time. I don't see why Canadians so stubbornly ignore two latest WCs -they show that 'times they are a changing'. Face facts - you cant beat the Soviet style mammoth system.
I am American and think the less physical focus of the post-lockout NHL will result in more top players from the US, because USA Hockey is so ticky tack about hitting with younger players. Simply put, this will hurt Canada in the long run and I think we're already seeing clear signs of it.

BadHammy* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2009, 10:06 AM
  #68
Anderson9
Registered User
 
Anderson9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Kazan, Russia
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by donGjohnson View Post
I am American and think the less physical focus of the post-lockout NHL will result in more top players from the US, because USA Hockey is so ticky tack about hitting with younger players. Simply put, this will hurt Canada in the long run and I think we're already seeing clear signs of it.
The less physical US game doesn't win them endless titles though. Canada's still the front runner, but the hot shot Russia's aiming high. As for team USA, it's a cute team, yet disastrously short on defensive talent.

Anderson9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2009, 12:09 PM
  #69
Siberian
Registered User
 
Siberian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Saint Pierre
Country: France
Posts: 3,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by donGjohnson View Post
I am American and think the less physical focus of the post-lockout NHL will result in more top players from the US, because USA Hockey is so ticky tack about hitting with younger players. Simply put, this will hurt Canada in the long run and I think we're already seeing clear signs of it.
I don't think this statement is correct though. Hockey USA is basically trying to mimic everything Hockey Canada does. US teams are often as physical as Canadians at U-18 and U20 levels. For example at U-18 levels it is so obvious that Americans a re far more advanced than other Europeans teams and that's why US had so much success at the U-18 Worlds. So even though I am not that familiar with US youth system I am more than sure that they have their hitting game going fairly early.

Siberian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2009, 01:08 PM
  #70
noobman
Registered User
 
noobman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kareem View Post
If Canadians wanted to learn something from European hockey, it's not the lack of hitting that they should be incorporating. It's the techniques they use to developp skills like skating, stickhandling and shooting. The kids can hit, there are even leagues where you can play without getting hit, but skills need to be taught better. It doesn't have to do with hitting as much as the lack of proper coaching. That and the system play is killing the fun in hockey, let the kids be creative.
There's too much emphasis on playing games, and not enough emphasis on practicing and developing skills. A European kid would play about 25 games in a season and spend the rest of his time developing skills where a Canadian player would play 60 games in a season.


I think that Canadian players who succeed in the game are doing so in spite of the system, not because of it.


There are three problems with hitting at a young age:
1) Some kids get too excited about hitting, and start headhunting
2) Some kids don't know how to receive a hit
3) Some kids don't know how to throw a hit

I'd be willing to bet that most of these injuries come from this fact. I'm sure that there are kids who have separated shoulders or given themselves concussions by throwing a hit incorrectly. Likewise, I'm sure there are even more kids who have been blindsided by hits from behind, headshots, or just general unpreparedness when they see a hit coming.


Something that doesn't seem to register in the heads of many is that hitting is in the game as a means to knock the opposing player off of the puck. In practice, hitting is used as a physiological and a psychological tactic to wear other players down.

noobman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-24-2009, 04:20 PM
  #71
PDO
Registered User
 
PDO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,220
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to PDO
Hitting should be incorporated from the second kids start playing the game.

The longer you wait to incorporate it, the bigger size discrepancy there will be, and the more kids will get smoked.

PDO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2009, 11:09 AM
  #72
NHLHammerbound*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDO View Post
Hitting should be incorporated from the second kids start playing the game.

The longer you wait to incorporate it ( hitting ), the bigger size discrepancy there will be, and the more kids will get smoked.
That's utter nonsense. Size discrepancy ( which tends to be most pronounced from ages 11 to 15 ) is genetic . Ergo, u can't coach it out of existence ! Secondly, even in Canada, there are NO studies supporting ur contentions. Every single study, I've read or heard of, has concluded that the earlier u introduce hitting, the more serious injuries WILL occur. And , contrary to popular opinion, it isn't strictly because kidz haven't been taught to give / receive hits properly. Geez Luise...It's NOT Rocket Science; it's simple physics/ probability. Violent hits can and DO Hurt; the greater the number, the higher the incidence of serious injuries...

Some of my fellow Canucks remain unwilling to WAKE UP & SMELL DA COFFEE...All the weight of scientific evidence comes out strongly in support of the Russian argument/ system. So too, does the evidence ON THE ICE !

IF Canada wants to stay #1 in hockey, we should be doing better at skill development than we are. Those fat cats at Hockey Canada cant continue to rest on their laurels. A la our 1998 Hockey soul searching & instigation of the ' program of excellence, Canadian hockey must keep on innovating + changing with the times. Rather than perpetually ignoring a plethora of studies ( not to mention common sense on Ice evidence ) suggestive that all is NOT well here, in the Great White North. I also agree with someone who said that our Canuck superstars have honed their puck wizardry moreso in spite of ( rather than because of ) our devlopmental system...which seems dedicedly inefficient...

CHEERS ET AL

NHLHammerbound* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2009, 11:22 AM
  #73
wjhl2009fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHLHammerbound View Post
That's utter nonsense. Size discrepancy ( which tends to be most pronounced from ages 11 to 15 ) is genetic . Ergo, u can't coach it out of existence ! Secondly, even in Canada, there are NO studies supporting ur contentions. Every single study, I've read or heard of, has concluded that the earlier u introduce hitting, the more serious injuries WILL occur. And , contrary to popular opinion, it isn't strictly because kidz haven't been taught to give / receive hits properly. Geez Luise...It's NOT Rocket Science; it's simple physics/ probability. Violent hits can and DO Hurt; the greater the number, the higher the incidence of serious injuries...

Some of my fellow Canucks remain unwilling to WAKE UP & SMELL DA COFFEE...All the weight of scientific evidence comes out strongly in support of the Russian argument/ system. So too, does the evidence ON THE ICE !

IF Canada wants to stay #1 in hockey, we should be doing better at skill development than we are. Those fat cats at Hockey Canada cant continue to rest on their laurels. A la our 1998 Hockey soul searching & instigation of the ' program of excellence, Canadian hockey must keep on innovating + changing with the times. Rather than perpetually ignoring a plethora of studies ( not to mention common sense on Ice evidence ) suggestive that all is NOT well here, in the Great White North. I also agree with someone who said that our Canuck superstars have honed their puck wizardry moreso in spite of ( rather than because of ) our devlopmental system...which seems dedicedly inefficient...

CHEERS ET AL
You really beleave if canada bans hitting say 16 and under that would help.

wjhl2009fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2009, 11:43 AM
  #74
NHLHammerbound*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjhl2009fan View Post
You really beleave if canada bans hitting say 16 and under that would help.
No, full contact hitting should probably begin circa age 14 ( not 16 ) same as in Russia. And , of course, that's only part of the equation.

Hammer
Quote:
...We need more practise and less game time, less focus on winning ( ditto less focus on team strategy/systems play, with a greater allowance for creativitiy )...and ( in practise ) more stress on ( individual ) skill development ( more time, wherein every kid gets his own puck...yadda, yadda )

NHLHammerbound* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-25-2009, 11:53 AM
  #75
wjhl2009fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 9,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHLHammerbound View Post
No, full contact hitting should probably begin circa age 14 ( not 16 ) same as in Russia. And , of course, that's only part of the equation.

Hammer
The probleam is some player start playing junior a at 15 a year to learn and how to take hits is not alot of time.

wjhl2009fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:06 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.