- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,506
- 11,901
#nobodycares
#stopboringuswithyourpersonallife
#doyouevenliftbro
#seriouslythoughgoodforyoumanthatsawesome
OT: Health and Fitness Thread - The Second
- Thread starter Easy E
- Start date
#nobodycares
#stopboringuswithyourpersonallife
#doyouevenliftbro
#seriouslythoughgoodforyoumanthatsawesome
RayP
Tf
- Jan 12, 2011
- 94,109
- 17,878
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,506
- 11,901
Totally forgot about Pez and his nhl endurance argument. I’ll get to it today.
@Pez68 do you mind sharing some specifics about who you play with and against in men’s league? Not names of course, but their general ages and levels they used to play at? As well as the leagues you played in when you were younger
@Pez68 do you mind sharing some specifics about who you play with and against in men’s league? Not names of course, but their general ages and levels they used to play at? As well as the leagues you played in when you were younger
ChiHawks10
Registered User
Just out of curiosity, but what is the relevance of that stuff? If you read his actual post, he pretty much shells out the reasons why level, competition, etc. doesn't really factor into anything.
I get you're sick of him bringing up the fact that he plays, and has played his whole life, but I thought you never played the sport at any competitive level? So how can you make your argument that his playing isn't relevant to the discussion and/or doesn't provide quality insight into it? I see you continually say "Your play experience and career have nothing to do with NHL players, and what they go through." but you couldn't be more wrong, for all the reasons listed in his last post. So... not quite sure what you're getting at with the questions? How does someone that has never played the sport at any kind of competitive level try to argue that 30 years of playing the sport doesn't provide enough insight into things?
It seems like your questions are literally just you trying to take a shot at where he played, and who he plays with, and the levels he played at growing up, and nothing more, because you're tired of him regularly mentioning that he plays a lot, and you think it comes off as condescending.
Last edited:
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,506
- 11,901
It’s completely relevant. He’s trying to make an argument from authority and I’m inferring about his authority.
I don’t play. I’ve just watched hockey for 12 years and see how coaches manage player’s ice time. He’s arguing against traditional ice time I’ve seen coaches used for years by saying an extra two shifts a game played out over a full 82 game season would be no big deal and is using his playing experience as authority for it.
It’s not a shot, or a put down, he’s played hockey his whole life so there’s no way I’d be unimpressed
I don’t play. I’ve just watched hockey for 12 years and see how coaches manage player’s ice time. He’s arguing against traditional ice time I’ve seen coaches used for years by saying an extra two shifts a game played out over a full 82 game season would be no big deal and is using his playing experience as authority for it.
It’s not a shot, or a put down, he’s played hockey his whole life so there’s no way I’d be unimpressed
ChiHawks10
Registered User
30 years of playing the game, and another 15 years of coaching would give anyone plenty of authority on the subject. And you'll be hard-pressed to find anyone who thinks otherwise.
On the other hand, how, having never played the game, and having only watched it for the past 12 years, can you justify saying "his view from playing for 30 years and coaching another 15 has no authority on the subject" because it's not at the professional level? Seems a little goofy that someone who never played is telling someone who has spent his life playing/coaching the sport, that he has no authority to speak on something, "because it's not pro experience".
It's not really relevant, if you read that post, though. And he's outlining why. Because the training/practice/skills/development from age 5 or 6, now, is no different than what the pros go through. The kids in elite programs are using the exact same things to develop that the pros use on a daily basis. Same drills. Same fundamentals practice. Same methodology for teaching the game. So on and so forth. The kids who are 5 or 6 now, are learning the game the exact same way that Patrick Kane was developed, and learned the game. And that is all aspects of it. Training, endurance, practice, skills, etc.
As far as what he's saying about a couple extra shifts a game...
It translates out to about 82 minutes of TOI per season difference.
Kane's TOI per season has varied by that much, year to year, every single season he has been in the league, basically.
Last edited:
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,506
- 11,901
There’s no noteworthy difference in speed, agility, endurance, wear and tear, injury risk etc...from the NHL and the levels your brother played/coached in? None? It’s not a significantly faster game, both mentally and physically than any level beneath it? There’s no relevant difference between superstar athletes in peak physical condition playing hockey and being the best in the world at everything they do than guys playing in the levels your brother coached/played in? They’re not given millions of dollars and every opportunity available to be in freakishly great physical condition?
Come on man. I don’t think I know more than anyone, which is why I don’t say I do. Only people who say “I played the game, you didn’t” are the ones doing that. I’m NOT the one challenging convention here. Kane’s minutes are what, top 2, by forwards this year? It’s readonable to question if it’s finally caught up to him. Like I said in the other thread, I don’t personally think it’s tge case and I appeal to the experience and wisdom of Colliton, the Hawks training staff, and Kane himself to manage his limits of playing time. I’d certainly not use my 0% NHL experience to make it seem like I know what NHL players are dealing with physically.
ChiHawks10
Registered User
1. Yes, there are obviously differences in those things. What he's saying is the fundamentals that train them are no different at the different levels. A 10 year old kid playing AA is doing the same drills for endurance that a 25 year old NHL player is...
2. NHL athletes typically aren't your "superstar athletes in peak physical condition". Put the average hockey player next to a football, basketball, soccer, or baseball player, and you'd never know the hockey player was a professional athlete. Obviously there are exceptions to this, but for the most part, pro hockey players typically look like "just a guy."
And no, based upon my experience playing the sport for 30 years, I don't think his minutes have "caught up to him."
His TOI year to year since he entered the league.
07-08: 1506
08-09: 1493
09-10: 1574
10-11: 1408
11-12: 1656
12-13: 943
13-14: 1353
14-15: 1211
15-16: 1674
16-17: 1754
17-18: 1655
18-19: 1730
His yearly TOI varies by more than 82 minutes per season, most the time. So no, I think it's pretty safe to say that another 1 minute per game, or 1 minute less per game, is not going to drastically affect him. If you're talking another minute a game, you're only talking about beating his career high minutes by about 55 right at this moment. That's not a lot in the grand scheme of things...
And perfectly fine to "certainly not use my 0% NHL experience to make it seem like I know what NHL players are dealing with physically." (How are you not taking shots at people again?
)But to think that someone who has played the sport for 30 years, and coached it for 15, doesn't have more to stand on than you in that conversation... is absurd. To think that his experience as a player and a coach is not relevant because we're talking pros and not youth, or college players, to the extent that you throw a tantrum every time he brings it up in discussions here... yeah, dunno what to tell you on that. I'd say it's perfectly fine to use my "30 years of hockey at a high level experience" to draw conclusions regarding things relating to hockey, whether that be related to pro hockey, college hockey, or youth hockey.
If I have an opinion on something, and said opinion is formed based upon my experiences as a player, and I mention that as the reason why I'm forming said opinion, why is that frowned upon by you? Because we weren't pros? Gimme a break. 30 years of experience in the sport is going to provide a lot of insight, whether at the pro level or not...
Last edited:
BK
"Goalie Apologist"
It all depends on what you played. If you played AAA (or even AA) through midgets and/or high level high school plus juniors you would have gone through the same training, had the same coaches, and pretty close to everything else.
ChiHawks10
Registered User
BK
"Goalie Apologist"
It is not just one path either. My group of friends in high school had a mix of AAA (Compare, LC, Belle Tire,etc), top high school players, and a USNDP player all in the same group. Hell we all sat together at lunch. All played at different programs but went through the same training. 6-7 of played juniors and 3-4 played D1 and 2 played pro (1 NHL).
ChiHawks10
Registered User
Which is why I'm saying it's pretty damn ridiculous for TI to discount(let's be honest, he basically wants to throw it away completely from the conversation) the 30 years of experience playing(and we both played AA+ hockey our whole lives) and his 15 years of coaching, simply because he doesn't like the fact that it's not "pro" experience, ,so it must not be relevant/related
Even though all the training/practice/drilling is identical to what the pros were/are actually doing, when playing at those levels... I was doing off ice training/practices as a 1st year peewee at 11-12 years old on "gold level" travel teams for Christ's sake...
ColdSteel2
Registered User
- Aug 27, 2010
- 34,759
- 3,578
Fact is if playing a few more minutes didn’t have a negative effect all of the star players would be playing a few more minutes.
ChiHawks10
Registered User
How is this a fact? You have no way to prove it one way or the other.
I just posted Kane's stats for TOI over his career. His minutes vary by 80+/- every single season, basically. So how is that a fact?
Every player is like this. TOI is just a product of circumstances/health.
Ryan Suter leads the league currently: 2120:58 is his TOI.
Last year he had 30 less than that. The year before that? He had 120 MORE.
ColdSteel2
Registered User
- Aug 27, 2010
- 34,759
- 3,578
They absolutely are not. If they are, they aren't being coached well. Age specific training matters and any coach that is conditioning a 10 year old like he is a 16 or 18 year old doesn't know what the hell he's doing.
- Aug 24, 2011
- 27,506
- 11,901
I’m not talking about drills. I’m talking about athletic ability, speed of players, speed of the game, physicality, injury risk, etc...that stuff at the lower levels is NOT the same in the NHL. It’s just not.
RememberTheRoar
“I’m not as worried about the 5-on-5 scoring.”
Don’t want to get into another Kane’s ice time argument, because it devolved into chaos last time I did, but looking at Kane’s time spread out over the season isn’t providing the full picture.
Look at his individual game ice times since December 27th. Most are higher (some significantly higher) than his season average.
Ignoring the uptick in his ice time from December 27th on doesn’t give you the full picture.
Look at his individual game ice times since December 27th. Most are higher (some significantly higher) than his season average.
Ignoring the uptick in his ice time from December 27th on doesn’t give you the full picture.
Right, the effort NHL players put out in 17 minutes a game is different than what a kid in juniors puts out in that same amount of time.
ChiHawks10
Registered User
From the time I grew up, I did suicides(60 second drill) or whatever else you wanna call it for endurance, because that's what was taught then. Goal line - blue line, goal line - red line, goal line - blue line, goal line - goal line.
Professional players, college players, etc. did this same drill for endurance purposes...
I know, because I used to watch pros practice then.
Obviously there are things that are age-specific, but the physiology behind hockey and our bodies is no different at age 12 or age 30. Training for endurance, the exact same drills can be done whether you're 12 or 30. They do the exact same thing for the player at the respective age. The youth hockey training coming from USA hockey is all pulled directly from the pros, and based upon the professional systems. All your AAA teams these days are basically coached by former pros.
ChiHawks10
Registered User
RayP
Tf
- Jan 12, 2011
- 94,109
- 17,878
ChiHawks10
Registered User
No it's not. WTF is this logic? A kid in the juniors puts out 100% effort on the ice. A pro in the NHL puts out 100% effort on the ice. Both push their bodies to the maximum each and every game.
Their maximums may be different due to physical development, but the same f***ing principles apply.
BK
"Goalie Apologist"
No it's not. WTF is this logic? A kid in the juniors puts out 100% effort on the ice. A pro in the NHL puts out 100% effort on the ice. Both push their bodies to the maximum each and every game.
I was pretty hung over some games...
From the time I grew up, I did suicides(60 second drill) or whatever else you wanna call it for endurance, because that's what was taught then. Goal line - blue line, goal line - red line, goal line - blue line, goal line - goal line.
Professional players, college players, etc. did this same drill for endurance purposes...
Obviously there are things that are age-specific, but the physiology behind hockey and our bodies is no different at age 12 or age 30.
Right and now coaches are all taught that thats a total waste of time, especially at the younger ages.
Getting Rid Of Old-School Conditioning | USA Hockey Magazine
You think there's no physiology differences in someones body pre and post puberty?
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
Game 3 Florida Panthers @ Tampa Bay Lightning - Florida Panthers leads series 2-0Wagers: 9Staked: $6,233.00Event closes- Updated:
-