Does size matter in hockey?

mashedpotato

full stack.
Jan 10, 2012
2,153
385
It's all stick checks, speed and agility from here boys.

Becoming less and less of a contact sport.
 

NDiesel

Registered User
Mar 22, 2008
9,185
9,534
NWO
It’s a tool. You want players with as many tools as possible.
I didn't read anything after this post because it is spot on. Size does and doesn't matter. If all else is equal between two players you are always going to pick the bigger player.

That being said we know that generally small players have speed and quickness as their main tool due while generally bigger players have size, strength and reach as their main tools. Shooting, puckhandling and passing is a tool that players of all sizes can master.
 

NDiesel

Registered User
Mar 22, 2008
9,185
9,534
NWO
It's all stick checks, speed and agility from here boys.

Becoming less and less of a contact sport.
Either way being big would still be an advantage in a "non contact" league because you can use your superior reach to protect the puck from people.
 

Slap

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
875
1,081
The Devils of the 90's were a huge team, yes.

The Avs were above average size but nothing to write home about. The Stars weren't a big team at all.

The Habs and Oilers dynasties had size in the bottom six but all of their star players were very small.

The only bonafide dynasty that had a really big roster were the 80's Islanders. All the others were pretty small unless you count the Devils as a dynasty.

The late 90's and early 00's Red Wings were also not a big team.

Messier 6'1
Kurri 6'1
Tikkanen 6'1

They were all 200+ lbs too. Not exactly small for the time.
 

Retire91

Stevey Y you our Guy
May 31, 2010
6,163
1,580
It matters less than it used to now that the game is more about speed/skill but you will still see the bigger guys drafted first every year. A coach wants size and skill not just size and not just skill. It's a full contact sport and the more mass you have behind your skill the better.

Some of the best size and skill packages I can remember were Sundin, Lindros, Lemuix. Crazy to see guys built like linebackers with that much skill.
 

TurboLemon

Registered User
Mar 11, 2013
120
55
Messier 6'1
Kurri 6'1
Tikkanen 6'1

They were all 200+ lbs too. Not exactly small for the time.
I have a feeling measurements used back then were with out skates. seems like nowadays measurements are with skates.
 

Jeti

Blue-Line Dekes
Jul 8, 2011
7,141
1,683
MTL
Height and size are two different (but correlated) things. Players need to have some strength and mass to them but height (aside from the correlation with weight) in itself really only directly affects reach.

Weight is more important than height IMO, especially because players adding muscle should primarily be training their lower bodies.
 

North Country

Registered User
Oct 24, 2012
494
95
It's all stick checks, speed and agility from here boys.

Becoming less and less of a contact sport.
Until the playoffs start.

The two absolute biggest teams in the league have won the last two Stanley Cups.

Washington was dead in the water two years ago against Tampa and then changed their game plan (well documented ) to hit anything that moves in game 5. All of a sudden you could tell that Tampa was too small and didn’t stand a chance. St. Louis did the same thing this year with size, physicality and no real star players.

The small trend is over as quick as it came.
 

Todd from Leduc

Connor “The Next Great One” McDavid
Nov 15, 2017
1,411
918
Leduc
We are seeing the game rapidly transition from big hulking meatheads like Lucic dominating to small agile quick honey badgers like Yamamoto taking over.
 

abo9

Registered User
Jun 25, 2017
9,087
7,179
You always pick Johnny Gaudreau before Jordan Staal but at equal talent yes it matters. It's one of so many factors though that in a vacuum I'm never gonna say that player A is better than player B just based on sizes.
 

bert

Registered User
Nov 11, 2002
36,080
22,036
Visit site
I think teams with big forwards that can skate are going to eat all these tiny skilled d men alive in the near future.

I also find this thread funny considering St Louis just won the cup with one of if not the biggest most physical team in the league.
 

vshun

Registered User
Sep 21, 2016
153
52
Tyler Johnson was the top scorer in 2015 playoffs and he is what, 5.8? Kane was the second to him in total points and her is about same size.
In a year when refs swallow the whistle and grab-and-hold takes place, teams with big and comparatively slow players who swarm the blue line win the cup (e.g. 2014 Kings or 2019 Blues). In a year when refs punish for obstruction with penalties in playoffs, skilled players win over size (e.g. dominant Pens playoffs run in 2016, or Hawks in 13 and 15).
 

Krewe

Registered User
Mar 12, 2019
1,676
1,917
Skill is more important than size, but all else being equal you choose the bigger guy
 

CanadianPensFan1

Registered User
Jun 13, 2014
7,051
2,049
Canada
As with most things, context is key.

Is size important? Sure. But its not the only factor. Speed, skill, finesse, attitude/personality all play a role.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eisen

lomiller1

Registered User
Jan 13, 2015
6,409
2,967
Size matters because reach and 1 on 1 battles are still a big deal. Size is not, however, separate from overall performance. IOW you should only care about how good the player is because size is already factors into that. If you look at size separately you are probably double counting it, and therefor overestimating it’s impact.
 

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,967
8,453
"All things equal, you choose a guy with size"

I liked an earlier comment that size is a tool. If all things are equal other than size, then the player with the additional size has the additional tool/advantage. Obviously he would theoretically be better than the guy with less tools.

I do like the comment about the make up of the team. There isn't an issue with size unless the make up of your team allows size to be easily exploited like an Achilles heel. A coach can also utilize certain strategies to get the most out of their roster, but also utilize certain strategies that will be easily exploited by other teams. Ignoring size, this feels to me like the same way where it seemed like the trend for the cup winners for the last decade or so was fast and skilled vs grinding. It felt like at times it was a tortoise and the hare comparison.
 

Howboutthempanthers

Thread killer.
Sponsor
Sep 11, 2012
16,441
4,186
Brow. County, Fl.
Obviously, yes.
Hockey IQ, puck handling, speed, and such all come first regardless. Afterwards, if both players have all of the same number of those tools, you pick the bigger player. (All intangibles being equal too of course)
 

blankall

Registered User
Jul 4, 2007
14,965
5,296
It's all stick checks, speed and agility from here boys.

Becoming less and less of a contact sport.

Size still matters. A bigger player can stand in the way of smaller players, and this will force a smaller player to expend more energy to move against them. Even without hits, there'd still be a lot of pushing required.

Hockey is also like any other team sport, where different players have different roles on the ice. Some players are better on the fast break, and other players are better battling it out in front of the net.
 

Bertuzzzi44

Registered User
Jun 26, 2018
3,401
2,980
In the playoffs size does matter, but size has to be accompanied by speed and skill to be useful.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad