Then why don't all top players play similar minute to Kane? Crosby and Ovi haven't touched 21 minutes a game since they were 25-26. If a few shifts don't matter, surely teams would be playing their best players more.
Speculation: Don't look now, Hawks 2 points from the 5th place in the lottery
- Thread starter Malagahawks
- Start date
Then why don't all top players play similar minute to Kane? Crosby and Ovi haven't touched 21 minutes a game since they were 25-26. If a few shifts don't matter, surely teams would be playing their best players more.
Unless you're Kane. Whose average shift length is nearly a minute.
This "too much ice time" is complete nonsense. I've played hockey my entire life. You don't physically deteriorate because you're spending more time on the ice. If anything, it actually HELPS your conditioning, your legs, your endurance...
Guys deteriorate as the season goes on because of the accumulation of minor injuries, bumps, bruises, etc., that never have time to properly heal.... Players have plenty of time to rest and recover from general fatigue between games.
Because you have 12 forwards and 6 defensemen who also need enough playing time to be effective?
Hawkaholic
Registered User
May as well play Keith, Toews, Dcat, and Kane 30mins a game then. You have never played in the NHL travelling in planes every night, don't even compare your situation to these guys. Players talk about getting tired quite often, but i'm sure you're the expert.
AmericanDream
Thank you Elon!
well there are a number of reasons why, but they both play over 22 minutes a night in a decent amount of games.....they are usually 20-23 minutes plus...also consider they both play for teams that are pretty loaded up front, they don't have to play 23-25 a night even though they could. I didn't say it is easy to play those minutes, just a heck of a lot easier than it was 10 years before- as long as you can still skate out there offensive players can play longer per game than they have a decade ago..
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,509
- 11,904
Johnny’s West 2-3 games a week =/= playing NHL hockey. You overstep your bounds with this way too often man.
ColdSteel2
Registered User
- Aug 27, 2010
- 34,759
- 3,578
We aren't talking about 30 minutes a night, and playing every other shift. We are talking about AN EXTRA SHIFT OR TWO A GAME. As long as these guys have enough time on the bench to recover for the next shift, why would this ever be an issue??? What physiological reason do you have for the "mileage" theory? Or the "too many minutes" theory?
I'm no expert on playing in the NHL, and what effect it has on you. I never claimed to be. That said, I have a hell of a lot more insight into how playing time affects your body than those that don't play the game. I'm also a pretty big student of physiology, fatigue, and rest and recovery. You know, since I have to find a way to balance playing 3-4 games a week, and skating an additional 2-3 times, with normal, everyday life? Physiology is physiology.
Again, why would an extra shift or two a game compound into the ineffectiveness we have seen from Kane lately? IT MAKES NO SENSE.
What would you call people that don't play, or have never played, claiming an extra shift or two a game has Kane "burned out" and "exhausted" then? Give me a break.
Last edited:
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,509
- 11,904
I would call it someone being...
...no expert, just like you.
You’re not an authority on NHL endurance, and your men’s league/lifetime of hockey credentials don’t bring you much closer to being one. Unless one of us on HF Hawks is also currently employed by the Blackhawks strength and conditioning staff, none of us really know what we’re talking about so you waiving around your hockey experience doesn’t do much for anyone.
ANYWAY, back to the actual topic...there’s clearly a direct correlation between increased ice time and fatigue and for you to ask others to “prove it” is ridiculous. It’s just simple chemistry. More minutes=more work=more required energy. Granted, Kane isn’t flying up and down the ice so his high minutes are probably not as intense as others due to his playstyle, but I personally don’t believe for a second that his “extra shift or two” a game doesn’t collectively wear down on a guy a little bit at the very least. It’s only the extent of this wear and tear that’s in question, not if it exists.
Ultimately it’s the Hawks training staff and Colliton who manage this, and not my personal opinion. They seem to think Kane can handle it so that’s good enough for me. I think we can trust them have a professional gauge on the situation and not to run him into the ground.
I find these arguments fascinating. Going to move it to health and fitness as that's where it really belongs.
AmericanDream
Thank you Elon!
most of the top NHL players were playing almost 30 minutes a game in junior. their body was accustomed and used to those minutes. once you get to the NHL, things change and your body adjusts to the minutes you typically are getting. it is why a 4th liner who plays 5-7 minutes a night gets gassed if then pressed to play 15-16 minutes a night for a few week stretch - his body simply is not used to that and needs time to adjust. once he adjusts they typically have no problems keeping up unless they are named Lucic and Seabs.
I think many of these top players are adjusting to more minutes now (depending of course on the usage on the ice), and in most cases the jump that I am seeing isn't too severe. They certainly are putting more chance of damage on their body in doing so, but for the most part the body just needs that repetition to be able to handle the workload. It is why we work out every day, and by the following week you can lift more weight, run for longer, swim for longer- whatever it is you are doing. Conditioning the body is the most important part here and yes one size does not fit all...but for Kane I can see him adjusting just fine to more minutes as his style of play is less indicative to wear and tear versus Toews who more minutes I think will take a toll on him with how he plays and the areas on the ice he frequents.
more minutes at older ages is eventually going to catch up, that is common sense, but I think what Pez is saying is pretty true, the jump in minutes is moderate and depending on the player and what type of style they play it really isn't asking a ton especially when many did those minutes plus an additional 5-7 minutes a game back in juniors.
I think many of these top players are adjusting to more minutes now (depending of course on the usage on the ice), and in most cases the jump that I am seeing isn't too severe. They certainly are putting more chance of damage on their body in doing so, but for the most part the body just needs that repetition to be able to handle the workload. It is why we work out every day, and by the following week you can lift more weight, run for longer, swim for longer- whatever it is you are doing. Conditioning the body is the most important part here and yes one size does not fit all...but for Kane I can see him adjusting just fine to more minutes as his style of play is less indicative to wear and tear versus Toews who more minutes I think will take a toll on him with how he plays and the areas on the ice he frequents.
more minutes at older ages is eventually going to catch up, that is common sense, but I think what Pez is saying is pretty true, the jump in minutes is moderate and depending on the player and what type of style they play it really isn't asking a ton especially when many did those minutes plus an additional 5-7 minutes a game back in juniors.
Exactly... We are talking about a 10% increase in icetime. There are more than 40 players in the NHL playing more minutes than Kane, and every single one of those guys plays harder minutes than him. If we were talking about Kane consistently playing 28-30 like he did in a couple games this season, sure. There might be something there. Even then, I might suggest that Kane is capable of playing those minutes...
Forwards play less minutes because....there are more forward lines than defensive lines... That's it. It's a pure numbers game. There's just not enough time for everyone. If defensemen can log 30+ minutes a night, why the hell would one-way wingers not be capable of doing so?
"Man, if only I wasn't getting so much ice time, I might be performing better." Said no hockey player, EVER.
Forwards play less minutes because....there are more forward lines than defensive lines... That's it. It's a pure numbers game. There's just not enough time for everyone. If defensemen can log 30+ minutes a night, why the hell would one-way wingers not be capable of doing so?
"Man, if only I wasn't getting so much ice time, I might be performing better." Said no hockey player, EVER.
Blue Liner
Registered User
I think the greater thing I’m trying to figure out in all of this is how your wife allows you to be at the rink so much on top of every day life. I’ll hang up and listen.
Ever ask yourself why there are more forwards? Why not just run 3 lines since the 4th line on most teams are garbage? If guys could just play more, they would. You think Q wanted to run Bollig or Mashinter for 7 minutes a night? They should have just played Kane 26 minutes a night since plenty of defense do it
Blackhawks
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2007
- 5,679
- 1,137
This is hilarious, I can guarantee you most players complain about not enough time they are getting on the ice and not the other way around, Kane would play 30 minutes a night if he was given a chance, he’s figure skating out there most of the game anyway, when does Kane ever get hit? Lol
BK
"Goalie Apologist"
I am not sure about 30 minutes a night but I think you are not off that moat players want as much ice time as possible.
Plenty of reasons. None of which have to do with a player's ability to play more.
I mean, the Hawks won a cup playing 4D.
Why is a defenseman capable of playing 25-30 minutes a night, and a forward is not?
ClydeLee
Registered User
- Mar 23, 2012
- 11,787
- 5,324
This is so strangely formulated I'm not sure what of any actual standard persons argument is being argued at.
And you're conclusion is truthfully forwards play less solely because theres more forwards? Yet why did the functionality of the sport create a system with more forwards active than defensemen?
Players arent gonna always be honest but Seabrook admitted not liking it but playing less in the stretch he was last year he had more pace and step to his game. Yes some people can break an absolute case and admit they have better performance when limited in time.
Married a woman who I share the same love(addiction) with. Half the time we are at the rink with my son, so.
The same reason you never see center backs subbed off in soccer but midfielders get subbed all the time. Let me get this straight, you think the Hawks top forward could play defensemen minutes but just don’t because the coaches like to have worse players out there more often?
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,509
- 11,904
@Pez68 I'll respond to the other stuff in the other thread.
Specifically with Kane's ice time, like I said, I think if it were an issue then JC would handle it appropriately. I'd be way more concerned as an Oiler's fan with the way McDavid is playing and his 23+minutes a game. High minutes with rockets on his skates, just logically seems like his likelihood of injury and/or exhaustion before the playoffs is way higher playing like that.
@AmericanDream I liken the modern day decrease in minutes to Starting Pitchers in the MLB. It used to be that they'd roll a 3 man rotation and they'd all pitch mostly complete games. Nowadays it's 5 men, throwing 6ish innings. Endurance is a lot of just what you're body is used to. Agree with you there
Specifically with Kane's ice time, like I said, I think if it were an issue then JC would handle it appropriately. I'd be way more concerned as an Oiler's fan with the way McDavid is playing and his 23+minutes a game. High minutes with rockets on his skates, just logically seems like his likelihood of injury and/or exhaustion before the playoffs is way higher playing like that.
@AmericanDream I liken the modern day decrease in minutes to Starting Pitchers in the MLB. It used to be that they'd roll a 3 man rotation and they'd all pitch mostly complete games. Nowadays it's 5 men, throwing 6ish innings. Endurance is a lot of just what you're body is used to. Agree with you there
AmericanDream
Thank you Elon!
yeah starting pitching has turned into something so ridiculous. guys were capable of hitting 200 plus innings yearly while throwing 90 mph plus..but now everything has a limit, and I get that but as you said I think it comes at a risk that when needed these guys will not be able to hit 100 plus pitches in the next few years. the damage was done on so many of these pitchers arms back in the early to mid 00's when travel teams was the end all be all...now that people realize how full of shit a lot of that was and the unnecessary amount of stress and added innings it put on developing arms, people are figuring less games is better at younger ages (12-15 years old)...but back on topic lol...
RayP
Tf
- Jan 12, 2011
- 94,109
- 17,878
Don't pitchers now throw significantly more breaking pitches which are more stressful on the elbow and shoulder?
Hawkaholic
Registered User
Playing over 82 games, tough minutes, against tough opponents every other night wears and tears on your body. The more you are out there, the more chances you have of getting an injury or exhausting your body. Playing 24mins some nights is not normal for a forward. That is more than a couple of extra shifts. It averages out when he gets less mins than that, but that doesn't mean his body wasn't over exerted. You also tend to put yourself in bad positions when you are tired, which could mean an injury.
I'm not saying it's the sole reason he isn't playing well, just that it could be a factor in why he is. And I've played the game before, pretty much my whole life.
AmericanDream
Thank you Elon!
I don't think much has changed on that in 20 years. Pitchers were throwing sliders, cutters, split finger, sinkers, curve balls, etc when I was coming up...difference is the velocity is up now. pitchers are throwing harder than ever before - better training/muscle building as well as pitchers now throwing for shorter length. guys can bear down now and hit 95 knowing they are only going out there for 1-2 batters for relief at most, or 5-6 innings as a starter.
I used to think throwing "junk" was what hurt your arm, and typically sliders were one of the main culprits in that..,.but guys just throwing a 2 seem/4 seem can blow out their arm as well - mileage and usage at developing ages has a lot to do with it as well with such an unnatural motion as is.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Series Talk: WCQF: (C3) Colorado Avalanche vs (C2) Winnipeg Jets | Avs Lead 2-1- Latest: Polite HKYDiscussion
-
-
-
-
