HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

The all encompassing "players of today vs players from the past" thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-26-2012, 01:36 AM
  #176
Dalton
Registered User
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Ho Chi Minh City
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 2,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
I think normalizing helps put achievement in context, because environments vary greatly. I have attempted to create a true normalization factor based on actual performance of top skaters from one year to the next. It would suggest that even after simply adjusting scoring stats, the post-WHA period ('80 to present) has been a lot tougher than before that time. The main exception would be the few years right before the O6 initially expanded (mid-60s).



I'm guessing the key word is "attempt", because I have not seen any math suggesting Crosby would even come close to Gretzky's peak/prime/career numbers. The median NHL player has been steadily getting better for decades, but the top end can vary. I think polls, voting for awards, etc. are one way of evaluating players, but probably shouldn't be the primary way, and certainly not the only way of doing so.
I can appreciate working with the numbers as you've done and apologize if anything I say or have said trivialize or otherwise offend that hard work, dedication and process.

The Crosby thread was on this board but maybe not this particular area of it. It was silly. The posts or threads suggesting Gretzky would be a 50-55 goal scorer with maybe 125-135 points are equally silly. He has more assists then the next guy has points over his career. What does a guy have to do? LOL

I think the numbers themselves need context or explanations. To say scoring is down and relate two eras in this way is not the whole story. We have to ask why. The answer may lead to readjusting for eras.

A small league with a high level of talent per player compared to a large league with a low level of talent per player may not compare 1:1 especially without consideration of the talent distribution among teams.

The numbers are important, measuring is a necessary and indispensable part of the process but IMHO it's only part of the process. We have become very clever at measuring and applying math to physical processes but it's the interpretation that leads to insight and of course, more measuring and math.


Last edited by Dalton: 02-26-2012 at 06:21 AM.
Dalton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-05-2012, 05:24 AM
  #177
chcl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 228
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Second issue is that NHL teams lack coaching who are able to develop young players. The Canadiens had Claude Ruel from the mid sixties, well into the eighties as did some of the other teams. Such coaches are not around today - evidenced by the NIno Neiderreiter with the Islanders last year.
On the other hand kids these days are starting to train earlier and the training is vastly superior. That kind of youth training did not exist in the past.

I actually thought of this thread when I saw this pictures. The fundamentals of the vault have not really changed through out the years, both girls jump.


chcl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-05-2012, 10:21 AM
  #178
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chcl View Post
On the other hand kids these days are starting to train earlier and the training is vastly superior. That kind of youth training did not exist in the past.

I actually thought of this thread when I saw this pictures. The fundamentals of the vault have not really changed through out the years, both girls jump.

You still have to have the talent in the first place and there would be absolutely nothing stopping the the girl on the left being the same as the girl on the right if she was born today and given the same training.

Talent can be better fulfilled through training, fundamentals like skating for example but instinct and hockey sense are not trainable.
It's that instinct and hockey sense that makes great players great not how much training they have had.

Wayne Gretzky was not the greatest player because he was the fastest skater, had the hardest shot or was the strongest. He was none of the above, far from it in fact.
He was the greatest player because he had some of, if not the greatest instincts and hockey sense ever.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 08-08-2012 at 11:41 AM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 10:52 AM
  #179
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chcl View Post
On the other hand kids these days are starting to train earlier and the training is vastly superior. That kind of youth training did not exist in the past.

I actually thought of this thread when I saw this pictures. The fundamentals of the vault have not really changed through out the years, both girls jump.

Awesome. This should be posted over and over again in this section whenever someone pretends nothing has changed. Anyone who doesn't think it's similar in hockey is only fooling themselves.

The speed, precision, dedication and intelligence required to be the best have all generally increased with time. It's happened in all sports and athletic events and will continue to do so as long as humans continue to multiply and compete.

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 11:41 AM
  #180
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Awesome. This should be posted over and over again in this section whenever someone pretends nothing has changed. Anyone who doesn't think it's similar in hockey is only fooling themselves.

The speed, precision, dedication and intelligence required to be the best have all generally increased with time. It's happened in all sports and athletic events and will continue to do so as long as humans continue to multiply and compete.
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...&postcount=170

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 11:49 AM
  #181
Ivan13
Avs/Habs fan
 
Ivan13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,489
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
I doubt you'll change their mind even tough you're completely right.

Ivan13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 11:55 AM
  #182
BubbaBoot
Registered User
 
BubbaBoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Mission Hill
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 10,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Awesome. This should be posted over and over again in this section whenever someone pretends nothing has changed. Anyone who doesn't think it's similar in hockey is only fooling themselves.

The speed, precision, dedication and intelligence required to be the best have all generally increased with time. It's happened in all sports and athletic events and will continue to do so as long as humans continue to multiply and compete.
Fundamentals are fundamentals.....things have progressed, via he science of sport, training and equipment. One quick glance, take a good look at the vaulting horse itself. I'm betting this also enhances the performance, much like a wood v composite stick, or even better, clunky leather skates v plasma-coated, laser-welded alloy / high-impact polyamide with 35 percent glass-fiber reinforcement skates.

BubbaBoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:05 PM
  #183
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Don't worry, I read your post earlier. I wasn't going to respond because I'm tired of wasting my time with such thought.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
there would be absolutely nothing stopping the the girl on the left being the same as the girl on the right if she was born today and given the same training.
This is an absoluately huge assumption considering what each athlete is actually doing in these clips.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
It's that instinct and hockey sense that makes great players great not how much training they have had.
With a greater talent pool today why wouldn't the top hockey players also have greater "instincts and hockey sense" to go along with being bigger, stronger and faster? When I watch a current game vs. an 80's game I see it being a more precise and faster game in every aspect, not just the trainable parts. It only makes sense.

Like usual you can't see the forest for the trees. No doubt Gretzky was a hockey wizard, and he could play on my team anytime, but when you watched him at his peak you missed the fact that the guys he was playing against were generally weaker players than what we see today. This includes the opposing forwards, defenders and especially goaltenders. It's silly to think players only got stronger and faster and didn't improve in other areas as well. They have to think and react faster as well.

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:06 PM
  #184
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan13 View Post
I doubt you'll change their mind even tough you're completely right.
Hehe, the difference in those clips is too huge to discount. You obviously won't change your mind even though it's right in your face.

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:14 PM
  #185
Ivan13
Avs/Habs fan
 
Ivan13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,489
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Hehe, the difference in those clips is too huge to discount. You obviously won't change your mind even though it's right in your face.
Difference in what? Preparation, training technique, equipment and similar things I'll agree with. Pure talent? Absolutely not.

Ivan13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:14 PM
  #186
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,174
vCash: 500
Please keep the "players are better than they used to be;" "You're wrong, old players were just as good / even better"'discussion in this thread where it belongs


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 08-08-2012 at 12:37 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:38 PM
  #187
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan13 View Post
Difference in what? Preparation, training technique, equipment and similar things I'll agree with. Pure talent? Absolutely not.
...and how can WE tell that those two gymnasts have the same amount of pure talent? You must be a better judge than me if you can see this. To me, one is clearly better across the board and you're really insulting her by saying both are equal when one is doing amazing things and the other is simply doing a cartwheel over a vaulting horse.

Usain Bolt vs. Jesse Owens is along the same lines. One guy would be eating dust if both were trained in the same era and it wouldn't be Bolt. The same generally applies with hockey players.

It's a silly debate and I'll leave it at that.

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:54 PM
  #188
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
...and how can WE tell that those two gymnasts have the same amount of pure talent? You must be a better judge than me if you can see this. To me, one is clearly better across the board and you're really insulting her by saying both are equal when one is doing amazing things and the other is simply doing a cartwheel over a vaulting horse.
Or, you're insulting the other by judging her based on circumstances beyond her control. This stuff always goes both ways, and as such goes nowhere.

It is a silly debate, and shouldn't be brought up. It doesn't help anything.

Iain Fyffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 12:57 PM
  #189
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post

Like usual you can't see the forest for the trees. No doubt Gretzky was a hockey wizard, and he could play on my team anytime, but when you watched him at his peak you missed the fact that the guys he was playing against were generally weaker players than what we see today. This includes the opposing forwards, defenders and especially goaltenders. It's silly to think players only got stronger and faster and didn't improve in other areas as well. They have to think and react faster as well.
Funny, I seem to remember Gretzky dominating vs the best of the best in international play too. Not just the regular NHL "4th line scrubs" you believe everyone else in the 80's was

The whole point though is that you can take modern training, equipment and drive defense first into their heads from age 7 and add that to any player from any era.
What you can't do is take Gretzky's talent and instinct and add it to any player from any era.

Gretzky himself is THE biggest hole in your newer is always better theory period.
Here's a guy that wasn't the fastest, no where near the biggest or strongest and certainly didn't have the hardest shot even among the "scrubs" you classify 80's players as.
Yet, even well past his prime, in his late 30's, he was still a 100 point player against many of these modern "supermen" you like to go on about.

Maybe I can't see the forest for the trees, or in this case for A tree, a huge mother ****ing redwood named Wayne freakin Gretzky

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:09 PM
  #190
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,980
vCash: 500
One Dimensional

Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
...and how can WE tell that those two gymnasts have the same amount of pure talent? You must be a better judge than me if you can see this. To me, one is clearly better across the board and you're really insulting her by saying both are equal when one is doing amazing things and the other is simply doing a cartwheel over a vaulting horse.

Usain Bolt vs. Jesse Owens is along the same lines. One guy would be eating dust if both were trained in the same era and it wouldn't be Bolt. The same generally applies with hockey players.


It's a silly debate and I'll leave it at that.
Overlooking that Usain Bolt is a one dimensional sprinter - 100m and 200m. Jesse Owens was a world champion sprinter - same distances plus the long jump and the hurdles and other disciplines.

Today's hockey players fit the one dimensional mold whereas the previous generations featured players with greater versatility and the ability to play various offensive and defensive styles blended into short or long shift games.

BTW, Iain is quite correct when he speaks about an athletes circumstances. Every athlete has a basic - goal optimize performance with what is available at the time they are competing.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:09 PM
  #191
Ivan13
Avs/Habs fan
 
Ivan13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,489
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
...and how can WE tell that those two gymnasts have the same amount of pure talent? You must be a better judge than me if you can see this. To me, one is clearly better across the board and you're really insulting her by saying both are equal when one is doing amazing things and the other is simply doing a cartwheel over a vaulting horse.

Usain Bolt vs. Jesse Owens is along the same lines. One guy would be eating dust if both were trained in the same era and it wouldn't be Bolt. The same generally applies with hockey players.

It's a silly debate and I'll leave it at that.
So as the time goes on people get more and more talented?

Ivan13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:28 PM
  #192
Doctor No
Retired
 
Doctor No's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 23,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Awesome. This should be posted over and over again in this section whenever someone pretends nothing has changed. Anyone who doesn't think it's similar in hockey is only fooling themselves.
Who in the world is pretending that nothing has changed? I've even posted a stickied post on the topic (that you may enjoy reading):

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...php?p=20296230

Doctor No is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:33 PM
  #193
Hanji
Registered User
 
Hanji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 898
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivan13 View Post
So as the time goes on people get more and more talented?
If the talent pool grows during said time, certainly.

Hanji is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:41 PM
  #194
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanji View Post
If the talent pool grows during said time, certainly.
That would explain a larger number of people at a certain level of talent, not there being a level of talent that could not exist in the past.

Iain Fyffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:56 PM
  #195
Ivan13
Avs/Habs fan
 
Ivan13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,489
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain Fyffe View Post
That would explain a larger number of people at a certain level of talent, not there being a level of talent that could not exist in the past.
Agreed.

Ivan13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 01:58 PM
  #196
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Gretzky himself is THE biggest hole in your newer is always better theory period.
Here's a guy that wasn't the fastest, no where near the biggest or strongest and certainly didn't have the hardest shot even among the "scrubs" you classify 80's players as.
Yet, even well past his prime, in his late 30's, he was still a 100 point player against many of these modern "supermen" you like to go on about.
Do you see what you're saying here? Did you not consider the problem here while typing this?

Why would age matter if Gretzky was all about hockey sense and instincts as you explained above? Did that diminish with age too?

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 02:08 PM
  #197
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,103
vCash: 500
BS Baffles Brains

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Overlooking that Usain Bolt is a one dimensional sprinter - 100m and 200m. Jesse Owens was a world champion sprinter - same distances plus the long jump and the hurdles and other disciplines.

Today's hockey players fit the one dimensional mold whereas the previous generations featured players with greater versatility and the ability to play various offensive and defensive styles blended into short or long shift games.

BTW, Iain is quite correct when he speaks about an athletes circumstances. Every athlete has a basic - goal optimize performance with what is available at the time they are competing.
First of all, 6'5" Bolt would blow 5'10" Owens off the track no matter how multi-demensional each one was purely based on talent and body type. I don't care if Owens also played water polo or snakes and ladders in his spare time, you have no argument here.

Secondly, how many times have I heard the legends of hockey admit "not everyone could shoot the puck or skate back then like they can today"? Countless times so, no, the avarge player in todays NHL are far more balanced and multi-demensional than in the past.

You've brought up Hal Gill's name in past threads numerous times as some evidence that not everyone can skate today. The problem is he's 6'7", and even though I agree he appears to be a slug on skates, no one in the past was 6'7" and had his reach and if there was a guy back then who could skate as well as he can and was that size they'd be a force on the ice. It was unheard of in the past.

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 02:11 PM
  #198
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanji View Post
If the talent pool grows during said time, certainly.
Agreed. In very general terms going from 3 billion people on the planet back in 1960 to 7 billion now had at least some affect on talent pool and available competition. Who are we kidding here?

danincanada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 02:14 PM
  #199
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Agreed. In very general terms going from 3 billion people on the planet back in 1960 to 7 billion now had at least some affect on talent pool and available competition. Who are we kidding here?
Please explain how the unchecked population explosions in India, Africa, and the Middle East are affecting the pool of actual or potential hockey players

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2012, 02:24 PM
  #200
tazzy19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Do you see what you're saying here? Did you not consider the problem here while typing this?

Why would age matter if Gretzky was all about hockey sense and instincts as you explained above? Did that diminish with age too?
Make no mistake, Gretzky's physical skill set was one of the best skill sets in history. Take a look at the opening segment of this video:



While his primary asset was his hockey sense and anticipation, he had to rely more and more on this attribute -- almost solely -- as he got into his late 30s. In his late 30s, he was finishing top 4 in scoring (one point out of second place at age 37) simply because of his hockey sense and passing abilities. Make no mistake, if he still had the physical skill set of his prime, you could add another 60 points onto his late career season totals, and 80 points if he were playing for a great team. Gretzky was unbelievable in his prime -- even against the best players in the world (see the 1987 Canada Cup for details).

tazzy19 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 02:47 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.