Are we in the next "Golden Age" of hockey?

[madhi19]

Golden age of hockey was between 1970 and 1995.

If I were to pick a 25 year period where I could watch any game live, those would be the years I chose.

So this is more of a renaissance period.

 

[aufheben]

I think the early 90's will always be the peak. Honestly don't think it will ever be better. The transitional period from the high-flying 80's to the dead-puck era.

 

[Randy Randerson]

You are right in this sense, but it takes long periods of boredom that lead to these highlight reel plays. There are some absolutely great highlights from the 90s as well though. Before that, not so much IMO.

Butterfly goaltending was in full effect by the early 90's I believe. I think the wrist/snapshot velocity from the composite sticks made the game better, but ya I agree that once players had to get around a goalie or elevate the puck that the game got prettier.

It would be great if the league could figure something out to improve the number of chances without making it easier to score on a given chance, easy goals aren't fun to watch IMO. They keep taking skaters off the ice for overtime and that seems to work, but probably not a viable option for regulation time without bastardizing the game completely

 

[BayStreetBully]

I believe the 1993-94 season has the most players who eventually went into the Hall of Fame. Currently at 49 former players. Selanne will make it 50 in 2017, then Brodeur makes it 51 in 2018, and finally Jagr makes it 52 in 2029:

Mario Lemieux
Bryan Trottier
Michel Goulet
Peter Stastny
Wayne Gretzky
Joe Mullen
Denis Savard
Viacheslav Fetisov
Mike Gartner
Dale Hawerchuk
Jari Kurri
Grant Fuhr
Pat Lafontaine
Ray Bourque
Paul Coffey
Larry Murphy
Cam Neely
Patrick Roy
Mark Messier
Al MacInnis
Scott Stevens
Ron Francis
Glenn Anderson
Igor Larionov
Brett Hull
Brian Leetch
Luc Robitaille
Steve Yzerman
Dino Ciccarelli
Ed Belfour
Doug Gilmour
Mark Howe
Joe Nieuwendyk
Pavel Bure
Adam Oates
Joe Sakic
Mats Sundin
Chris Chelios
Scott Niedermayer
Brendan Shanahan
Rob Blake
Dominik Hasek
Mike Modano
Sergei Fedorov
Phil Housley
Chris Pronger
Nicklas Lidstrom
Sergei Makarov
Eric Lindros
(Teemu Selanne)
(Martin Brodeur)
(Jaromir Jagr)

Among the 52, I would consider about 10 of them to be an "all-time great" (Lemieux, Gretzky, Bourque, Coffey, Roy, Messier, Hasek, Lidstrom, Brodeur, Jagr). And yes, I know the last 4 were not all-time greats in 1993.

I don't know if the NHL will ever have the quality of iconic names like that playing in the same season again, but the near future is shaping up to be better than what we previously had just prior to 2015.

 

[Zalos]

These threads will always amount to the same thing. Older fans will brag about the good old days of the 70s and the 80s, and the newer fans will laugh and say we are enjoying the best hockey ever.

I think the truth is found in between. There were certain things that hockey had in the 70s-80s that have gone nowadays (a lot of goals, plenty of fighting, plenty of nastiness, dynasties, very dominant teams, etc.) and there are some things that hockey has now that lacked back then (tighter matches and scores, more parity in the league, a focus on skills rather than on fights, very athletic goaltenders, greatly improved team systems, superstars from every country).

Now, what is preferable is up for debate. I personally enjoyed the game back then just as much as I enjoy it nowadays. I never understood the people who whine about the game becoming boring. Hockey could always be boring. Some games are exciting, some games are not.

I have to say that I have never had so many teams I want to watch. Aside from my Habs, obviously, I follow the Oilers, the Leafs, the Red Wings and the Penguins! A really good time to be a hockey fan!

 

[delled]

Its definitely an odd concept that as talent has become uniform, the game has become less dramatic than the past. But the fact that the stars of today and the up and comers still shine among great peers makes their play all the more impressive. I'll admit its less exciting than the frequency of show stopping plays back in the day, but I'm not sure how you improve that...will reducing goalie equipment make that big of a difference when you have a lot more shot blocking these days than the past? I think it all equals out in the end.

 

[joe89]

I don't know about golden age, but I find myself excited to watch more games than I have since the seasons right after the 04/05 lockout. Games are fast paced, skillful and boring role players are on the way out.

I also think it helps that the players coming up have played against butterfly goalies their entire lives, butterfly goalies are starting to get solved even with current equipment by the new generation IMO. And it's the speed and really quick passing that does it.

 

[chauron]

I'd say the second golden age is starting, definitely. Game itself however has evolved into more tactic version of hockey, where puck control and speedy turnovers is the key to win.

 

[Ziostilon]

The high scoring 80s was an age of talent disparity not the Golden Age

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

Its definitely an odd concept that as talent has become uniform, the game has become less dramatic than the past. But the fact that the stars of today and the up and comers still shine among great peers makes their play all the more impressive. I'll admit its less exciting than the frequency of show stopping plays back in the day, but I'm not sure how you improve that...will reducing goalie equipment make that big of a difference when you have a lot more shot blocking these days than the past? I think it all equals out in the end.

Imo it doesn't equal out at the end because in the end there are far less goals scored than there used to be in the 70's and especially the 80's and early 90's.

 

[that is unfortunate]

Depends on your definition of "Golden age". There's more talent in the league than ever so in that aspect yes.

The high scoring 80s was an age of talent disparity not the Golden Age

Pretty much, most of the lesser players from the so called """"""Golden era""""""" wouldn't even be NHLers.

The talent disparity back then was so big that it's really hard to say just how good the top players actually were, every half decent player can look like a superstar if he's playing against much lesser talent. Comparable to todays career minor leaguers that look incredible at that level but are incapable of taking the next step forward.

 

[CpatainCanuck]

Golden age of hockey was between 1970 and 1995.

If I were to pick a 25 year period where I could watch any game live, those would be the years I chose.

The nhl of the 1970s was an incredibly watered down era due to rapid expansion. Between 1967 and 1974 the nhl ballooned from 6 to 18 teams, and that's not even taking into account 14 teams in the WHA. That's a total expansion of 6 teams in North America competing for top end talent to 32 in 8 years. That is insane. All this while Canadians continued to make up over 90% of nhl rosters. http://www.quanthockey.com/TS/TS_PlayerNationalities.php

I guess if you just consider the scoring chances generated by the top end stars skating circles around the 60% of the league's players that had no business being in the league, and the fisticuffs that resulted from most teams dressing 4+ goons simply because there were not enough skilled players in North America to ice, you might consider it a golden era of hockey. But by most standards it is by far the weakest era in the nhl's history.

 

[Canuck21t]

You think the 90s were the golden age of hockey?

IKR? The '90s were probably the worse decade; there were plenty of pylons playing hockey in those days.

No if anything we're in the dark age of hockey still trying to come out, 2010-2015 is arguably the least talented era in NHL history for top end talent. We're only 1 year removed from arguably the weakest Art Ross winner in NHL history in Jamie Benn, and 5 years removed from likely the first ever forward Hart Trophy winner who will be locked out of the Hall of Fame in Corey Perry. The only other time period where players of this caliber could potentially win these awards is the early 2000s.

I couldn't disagree more with this. Back in the '90s, Canadian hockey was having a skills issue and since the majority of players in the NHL were Canadian, well the league had the same problem.

 

[Grate n Colorful Oz]

The nhl of the 1970s was an incredibly watered down era due to rapid expansion. Between 1967 and 1974 the nhl ballooned from 6 to 18 teams, and that's not even taking into account 14 teams in the WHA. That's a total expansion of 6 teams in North America competing for top end talent to 32 in 8 years. That is insane. All this while Canadians continued to make up over 90% of nhl rosters. http://www.quanthockey.com/TS/TS_PlayerNationalities.php

I guess if you just consider the scoring chances generated by the top end stars skating circles around the 60% of the league's players that had no business being in the league, and the fisticuffs that resulted from most teams dressing 4+ goons simply because there were not enough skilled players in North America to ice, you might consider it a golden era of hockey. But by most standards it is by far the weakest era in the nhl's history.

I am aware of all that, just look at my other post after for confirmation.

The point is that all the milestones that were achieved and the greats that played in that era made for better entertainment. Point is, if you put too much alcohol into a drink, it won't taste as good.

Also, a guy like Lemieux dominated like no other even in the dead puck era, which is also why I consider him the GOAT.

 

[habsrule4eva3089]

The future of Hockey and sport and society is with youth.

Going to local rinks and seeing the way the youth of today, skate, stickhandle, pass, and create is impressive, there is so much new talent being cultivated. The way the next generation skates is mind boggling, players all with motors.

If this is the Hockey of your dreams, then yes a new Golden age will be arriving. Players in this mould to create new era are being formed, everything is based on skills first, speed of hand, speed of feet, speed of mind is still most important though. The view of how the game should be played by Tarasov back in the 60's is coming to fruition, as Hockey is definitely entering a new skilled era.

Violence, fighting, those days are done, thankfully. I see no need for that stupidity. Society was different back in those days, times have changed and barely any of these kids need to know to fight, it's not a skill needed in this sport anymore.

Could the nhl be more entertaining? Yes, but when you have too much teams, it becomes to spread out but with the influx of talent coming from the 2000 and beyond birthdates, there's a whole plethora of elite players on their way.

Hockey is evolving, and for the better.

 

[Sam Spade]

Nope, not even close. Need more goals and offensive flow to the game. The goalies and their equipment is comical and a mockery to the game.

This.

We are in the golden age of grinders for sure though.

 

[SnowblindNYR]

Bingo.

Talent-wise, the league has never seen the amount of high-end talent we see today.

But the on-ice product is at it's lowest point in history IMO.

I'd honestly rather watch games from the dead puck era of the late 90s/early 2000s than the product we see today.

Bring back the red-line, bring back the old sized offensive zones, reduce the size of goaltender equipment. Refine the video review and coaches challenge (we had an 8 min delay for a friggin' offsides call last night, 8 mins!), and let players police the dirtbags out of the game, not the inconsistent player safety administration which is largely ineffective.

Sounds to me you're longing for goon era hockey. I mean, that's fine if it's your thing but I don't think that it's a quality of play thing, but your preference.

 

[authentic]

Sounds to me you're longing for goon era hockey. I mean, that's fine if it's your thing but I don't think that it's a quality of play thing, but your preference.

It's not so much quality of play as it is style of play and effectiveness of goaltending and defensive players/systems. There are games even between really good teams that give me headaches these days. 90s/2000s was easily more entertaining hockey than today.

 

[Sam Spade]

Sounds to me you're longing for goon era hockey. I mean, that's fine if it's your thing but I don't think that it's a quality of play thing, but your preference.

Not sure what this poster actually means but I see his point.

90% of hockey now is battle on the wall, battle some more, get it to the point, shot, hope for screen or deflection.

Yes there are some talented players who exhibit skill but those player are few and far between. And those players only make those plays once or twice a game, if that.

 

[Nsjohnson]

Either I've been duped or I have seen more talent come into the NHL in the last 2-3 years, young, fast, agile, passionate, wild, focused, hockey players than I have ever seen except for maybe the early 90's. But, even then, the average player- as ALL the old guys will tell you- that comes into camp has more skill, skates better, and is smarter than the previous generations'.

I personally like fast, pivoting, skilled hockey over hard hitting hockey with fights. The great news?

Hitting will never go away. You will always have big hits here and there. And the faster hockey gets as the players can skate and make decisions at full speed, the more force in every hit.

I like hockey in the year 2016. I like it a lot.

 

[CarpeNoctem]

No, not even close. With so many darn players blocking shots, and teams collapsing 5 men down low, to employ the always popular six goalie strategy, it can quickly get dull.

 

[Coastal Kev]

No, not even close. With so many darn players blocking shots, and teams collapsing 5 men down low, to employ the always popular six goalie strategy, it can quickly get dull.

It really is this simple. Hockey went from where the objective was to score to now, play defense first, second and third.

 

[daver]

Insane how much young talent we have today in a game with stifling offense the last couple of years. As the stars of the league hand the torch over in the next couple of years, I don't remember being this excited about hockey in a long time, since the 90s! What do you think?

What wasn't there to like about the 2005 - 2010 era? Three generational talents in Crosby, OV and Malkin, great 2-way centres in Datsyuk and Zetterburg, a great playmaker like Thornton, a young gun sniper in Stamkos, and blossoming talents like Toews and Kane.

It's interesting that when scoring tightens up like it has from 2011 to today, how much elite offensive talent can be stifled. Conversely, when offense was free flowing in the 80s and 90s, it seems there was much better top end talent putting up big numbers.

 

[Kakko]

nothing is more boring than 80's hockey. to see Messier skate across the blue line and let go a weak wrist shot from the top of the circle and find the top corner 80% of the time...that isn't exciting hockey. The game's speed and skill is increasing. The youth are carrying the league. It is getting good. Embrace it and quit whining about the past.

Agreed. A majority of the goals scored in the "golden age" were garbage shots that would get stopped 99% of the time today. Tighter defense and better goalies/equipment means that scoring generally requires great shots or beautiful plays to set up open nets.

 

[Morgoth Bauglir]

Agreed. A majority of the goals scored in the "golden age" were garbage shots that would get stopped 99% of the time today. Tighter defense and better goalies/equipment means that scoring generally requires great shots or beautiful plays to set up open nets.

Funny, the term "garbage goal" used to refer to things like pucks deflected off someone's ass that wind up in the net on a fluke.....which describes 90% of the goals scored in today's NHL.