- Feb 24, 2012
- 62,982
- 47,243
What’s the point here?
Quite frankly, when our pro scouts get obsessed with somebody they tend to make it happen one way or another... even if it doesn't make sense.
What’s the point here?
It's one year at league minimum, who cares?
I really can't help but think that Dano would be a passible NHL player if he slimmed to 195. Hockey players and front offices get so obsessed with weight that I think it becomes a huge detriment to players especially those with below average skating, made even worse for those with wide frames like Dano. I'll point out Kase in Anaheim as a guy who has resisted the push to become heavier, he hovers in the 185 range and looks almost meek as his frame could handle 200 easily. It keeps his skating up and capable so his skill set can come out.
He’s obviously talented, but I’m not expecting much. I hope Bednar can convert him into a more defensive forward who chips in offensively, like he did with Nieto.
What if he scores 50 points in 20 games?If he plays more than twenty games I will eat one of my shoes
If he scores 40-50 points I will eat all of them
I will eat all of my shoes, as the statement suggestsWhat if he scores 50 points in 20 games?
What if he scores 50 points in 20 games?
Come on, I would eat something bigger if Nichushkin scored 50 points in 20 games, like a building as long as it's mostly made of woodI will eat all of my shoes, as the statement suggests
I consider twelve shoes to be a much more intimidating meal than one shoeCome on, I would eat something bigger if Nichushkin scored 50 points in 20 games, like a building as long as it's mostly made of wood
@Doctor No , can we get confirmation that this is true?
My kid eats his shoes all the time, doesn't seem to be a big dealI consider twelve shoes to be a much more intimidating meal than one shoe
Eating a building just seems impractical to me, I'm not sure you've thought this through
39 points in 19 games ?If he plays more than twenty games I will eat one of my shoes
If he scores 40-50 points I will eat all of them
Quite frankly, when our pro scouts get obsessed with somebody they tend to make it happen one way or another... even if it doesn't make sense.
Interesting thought. I have to admit to always sorta figuring that wider framed guys put that muscle on more naturally...meaning the muscle fit onto their frame more naturally...and so the increased mass wouldn't impact their movements/fluidity as much as it did narrower guys who bulked up, thus assuming it didn't impact their mobility as much and so not really thought about that angle much. Gunna have to keep that in mind moving forward to see how my preconceptions on this track with reality.
Mack said in that Chicklets interview that he now plays between 195-200. But you are right about him not being as effective when he was heavier.Keep in mind I'm more on the extreme end of the weight argument. I'd much rather a player be a bit too lean than a bit to heavy. Each player is different and carries weight differently, but just because a frame can support a weight, doesn't mean a player should be that weight. I remember MacK getting near 220 and not being nearly as effective of player and not having that burst. Now the 200-205 range, he's much more explosive and doesn't seem any less powerful.
Even better! The old hockey thinking of bulking up as much as possible should be completely tossed out the window. It always scares me when I hear a team tells a player to bulk up, or they gained 15lbs in a summer. It almost never works out well.Mack said in that Chicklets interview that he now plays between 195-200. But you are right about him not being as effective when he was heavier.
Ya he even kind of chuckled and pretty much admitted he was playing at a much too heavy weight for him. He said something like "Ya I was a UNIT back then" hahahahahahMack said in that Chicklets interview that he now plays between 195-200. But you are right about him not being as effective when he was heavier.