Is the current league another level above the 80s and 90s?

bb_fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,504
1,350
boston
Visit site
You know how you have sequential leagues based on talent level like
ECHL
AHL
NHL

Is today's NHL in another league compared to the 80s or 90s like would those players have to work hard in that NHL to get a call up to today's league?
Like
ECHL
AHL
NHL 80s/90s
Modern NHL

Todays NHL is barely above the AHL.
 

Bank Shot

Registered User
Jan 18, 2006
11,328
6,840
We can all cherry pick some numbers .
How many 6 point games did the leading scorer have in the year you are talking about.
McDavid has a couple this year. Feast.
Did any player have a six point period that year.
Zabenajev just had one last week. Feast.
Cherry pick numbers all you want.

There have been lousy teams and great teams and everything in between since hockey started.
Sabres just tied the record for most losses in a row. 18. ...set by the Pens in 2003. Feast.

Tonight - Lightening feasting on Jackets. 5 minutes into first period.... its 3-0.

93 had 5 players score 60+ goals. There obviously was more of top players feasting on the weak than what exists today.

If you can't see that, I think you just don't want to see it.
 

Louie the Blue

Because it's a trap
Jul 27, 2010
4,753
3,081
I’d argue that the top end talent would be as good or better than today while the bottom tier players from back then would be worse.
 

PaulD

Time for a new GM !
Feb 4, 2016
28,745
15,805
Dundas
93 had 5 players score 60+ goals. There obviously was more of top players feasting on the weak than what exists today.

If you can't see that, I think you just don't want to see it.
I watched both eras.
Its my opinion. You disagree.
Cheers
 

lottster14

Registered User
Feb 10, 2019
3,274
1,913
Slowly take hitting/intensity out of the league and call 10 minor penalties a game and the league will be the worst it's ever been. And that seems to be the direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MattMartin

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Post #84 by tarheelhockey was absolutely correct and I encourage everyone to read it now, if you haven't.

It's not a simple "yes" or "no" answer, and anyone claiming that it is has a dismissible opinion.

First of all, the NHL in, say, 1980, and the NHL in 1999 are almost two decades apart and are completely different. Those periods are probably far more different than comparing the NHL in 1998 and today. Further, even the early 1980s and late 1980s are very different. I've heard several other people say -- and I tend to agree -- that the NHL improved and changed more, and more quickly, during the 1980s than at any other time before or since. For me, the average team in 1981 and the average NHL team in 1989 are very, very different. The game changed an enormous amount in this period. The early-80s still resembles the early-70s, not long after the first expansion, but watching top teams from the late-80s is very similar to watching hockey of today, just with two-line offsides, more holding, and less shot blocking.

Good players born in the early or mid-1950s (stars of the mid/late-1970s) tended to have foreshortened careers -- even shorter careers than players of the 40s, 50s, 60s. Why? Because the game changed so much in the early/mid-1980s that players who were already established found it hard to keep up. It's amazing how many players who were still stars in about 1980-81 were "dinosaur-ed" by the NHL of the mid-to-late-1980s. As examples: Guy Lafleur [though his first retirement was premature], Bill Barber, Craig Ramsay, Mike Rogers, Mario Tremblay, Thomas Gradin, Daryl Sutter, Danny Gare. These were all All-Star or semi-elite players at one point, but by their early-30s, in the mid-1980s, they were all washed up.

However, players born in about 1960 to 1965 tended to have MUCH longer careers that stretched well into the 1990s and beyond. You've got the 1979-80 rookies like Bourque and Messier, who played to 2001 and 2004 respectively. You've got Yzerman coming in in 1983 and lasting until 2006. Sakic from 1988 to 2008. Jagr from 1990 to 2017. Chelios (who is only one year younger than Gretzky) played to 2010.

This same longevity was witnessed sometimes from players in the 1950s to 1970s (Howe, Plante, Delvecchio, Mikita), but it was not witnessed by players who peaked in the 1970s. They were dinosaur-ed quickly during the 1980s. All of this is to say that the game began changing rapidly during the 1980s, and that the early 1980s is a completely different game from the late-1980s.

I would say the NHL had a certain "quality control", stability, and consistency from around 1986-87 through 1995-96. For me, I think roughly 1989 to 1996 is the peak of the NHL's entertainment value and also its star power. Since many of the 1980s' players were still superstars well into the 1990s, and because so many young players (incl. more Europeans) were also emerging superstars, it was a very "superstar" heavy period with an unusual concentration of elite talents that just hasn't existed since. I think, by the mid-1990s, the NHL was just the right size (expanding from 21 to 24 teams), and, in terms of entertainment value, had just the right mix of speed, toughness, offense, defence, rivalries, etc.

From 1996-97 or so onward (as Mario Lemieux, Brett Hull, and others pointed out), the NHL was becoming too scrappy, too rough, too dirty, with far too much obstruction and semi-legal play being permitted. In my opinion, at the same time this was happening, the NHL began over-expanding, with the result that today there are too many teams to ideally frame the available top talent.

The League sorted out the dirty-play problem during the 2004-05 lockout (by calling a lot of penalties), players eventually adjusted, and today we have the new, super-clean NHL.

But do we have the talent levels of the late-80s to mid-90s? It's hard to say. Obviously, in a short-shift, systems-rule style of hockey, it is harder for elite talents to stand out from the herd, so it's not just a case of looking at scoring domination. To me, it's more a question of: How many teams today have individual players I'd pay money to watch? Or: how many teams play entertaining-enough hockey that I'd enjoy watching them even if I don't cheer for them?

As others have pointed out in this thread, the demographic of families producing NHL players has changed drastically from the pre-1990s period to now. Current and future NHL-ers will, by and large, be products of upper-middle class, educated, urban families... which is fine, but since the bulk of people (and therefore the bulk of talent) are working class and won't be able to afford hockey, we are sure to miss out on many, many elite talents who simply won't play hockey because it's too expensive. (There is a current 1st-overall draft pick, playing in the NHL, who had to skip an entire year of hockey when he was young because his parents couldn't afford it.) This is to say nothing of the foreign-born population in countries like Canada ever increasing, and fewer and fewer young people (proportionately) playing hockey in Canada.

I'd generally agree that today's bottom-end players are more consistently skilled, and certainly skate consistently better, than comparable players in the mid-1980s and early 1990s, though how much of that is up to equipment changes I'm not sure. The NHL of today is closer to the NHL of 1986-87 (the first version I remember well from childhood) than any other version of the League I've seen since the mid-1990s (though with lots of differences, obviously).

Numerous examples from the history of the sport prove conclusively, as far as I'm concerned, that elite players are elite players in any era (let's pause to remember that Jagr aged 43 was doing better at even strength than prime Crosby in 2016-17). The clear changes in the game over the years have little or nothing to do with talent levels, but have a lot to do with the size of the League and the changes in equipment.

(Also, some of you need to give up this "everyone smoked during games in the 1980s" silliness. Believe it or not, there were regular fitness routines in the 1980s, hard training, goalie coaches, etc., etc. There's a reason Chris Chelios lasted until 2010.)
 

Minar

Registered User
Aug 27, 2018
328
288
Don't know what the fascination is with the time machine stuff. Isn't it possible to appreciate all the eras including now for what they were?
 

Paperbagofglory

Registered User
Nov 15, 2010
5,557
4,730
Don't know what the fascination is with the time machine stuff. Isn't it possible to appreciate all the eras including now for what they were?
If you had a time machine and talked to yourself 10 years ago bet your opinion would be different. The question is which version of you wins in a no holds barred brawl?
 

Oneiro

Registered User
Mar 28, 2013
9,438
11,002
I think the last five years have been the biggest jump in the floor of the whole league that I've ever witnessed.

The post-2003 crew was probably the last time it felt like there was a clear jump but that's not on the level of the amount of speed and skill we're seeing right now. I'd say there's probably a little less discipline and positioning smarts but that's the trade off when so much is created off the rush.
 

Seachd

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
24,937
8,946
I used to believe the "talent is talent, no matter the era" type stuff, but I've come off that a long way.

I think if you plop your average top-6 player today into the 80s, he'd be a fantastic player.

We'll never know, and it's fun to argue about, but it seems really clear in my mind, anyway.
 

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
12,273
7,723
Ostsee
Meh, it was just a very different game because of goaltending equipment. The best players in the 80s were still the best players in the 90s, just less video game numbers.

For much of the 1980s it was still essentially a Canadian league, in the 1990s almost all of the best players in the world played in the NHL.
 

TheAngryHank

Expert
May 28, 2008
18,009
6,666
Yes and no.

Good players of 80s/90s would still be start players today.

4th liners of 80s/90s would have hard time getting to NHL today.
Honest question..Would the grind line be in todays game , maybe the best 4th / 3rd line ever..Im asking as cracking the wings lineup was near impossible for a rook , as well as the best shutdown like gods ever created.
I agree with you 4th lines today are more skilled but much better skaters.
 

Satire

Registered User
Nov 20, 2016
2,889
3,637
The skill floor is certainly much higher... I think the absolute skill ceiling is pretty close to the same. This makes the disparity in skill lesser on average, but I would bet my lunch money Mario and Gretzky would still be monster top players if magically teleported into the League right now at their primes with the same advantages players now have.
 

Stephen

Moderator
Feb 28, 2002
77,840
51,503
If you go back and watch 90s highlights and slow pace of the game jumps out at you, one of the things to consider is the players aren’t necessarily worse skaters than today or bogged down by wooden skates or whatever. It’s because there was two line offsides and you didn’t necessarily have the runway to go for the stretch pass.
 

ItWasJustified

Registered User
Jan 1, 2015
4,280
5,270
You hear a lot of ex-players saying the current guys are way better. I'll take their word for it.
Not because of some kind of innate talent they're not.
If you go back and watch 90s highlights and slow pace of the game jumps out at you, one of the things to consider is the players aren’t necessarily worse skaters than today or bogged down by wooden skates or whatever. It’s because there was two line offsides and you didn’t necessarily have the runway to go for the stretch pass.
Hooking and holding was also basically accepted, which dragged the pace down immensely,
 
  • Like
Reactions: AD Skinner

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
For much of the 1980s it was still essentially a Canadian league
NHL players in the 1980s (all playing no later than 1987):

Europeans:
Vaclav Nedomansky
Peter Stastny
(#2 scorer of the 1980s)
Anton Stastny
Marian Stastny
Rick Lanz
Kent Nilsson
Peter Ihnacak
Petr Klima
Frantisek Musil
Ivan Boldirev
Stefan Persson
Thomas Gradin
Kent-Erik Andersson
Mats Naslund
Bengt-Ake Gustafsson
Patrick Sundstrom
Anders Kallur
Borje Salming
Jorgen Pettersson
Tomas Jonsson
Hakan Loob
Jan Erixson
Ulf Samuelsson
Michael Thelven
Kjell Dahlin
Frederik Olausson
Calle Johansson

Willy Lindstrom
Anders Hedberg
Miroslav Frycer
Tomas Jonsson
Tomas Sandstrom

Petri Skriko
Pelle Eklund
Pelle Lindberg
Jari Kurri
(#3 scorer of the 1980s)
Ilkka Sinisalo
Risto Siltanen
Matti Hagman
Kari Eloranta
Esa Tikkanen
Reijo Ruotsalainen
Mikko Makela
Kari Takko
Christian Ruuttu
Uwe Krupp


Americans:
Brian Lawton
Reed Larson
Joe Mullen
Brian Mullen
Brett Hull
Phil Housley
Mike Ramsey
Mark Johnson
Dave Christian
Neal Broten
Aaron Broten
Bob Mason
Mark Pavelich
Joel Otto
Tom Kurvers
Nick Fotiu
Mathieu Schneider
Gordie Roberts
Ken Morrow
Mark Howe
John Vanbiesbrouck
Wayne Presley
Kelly Miller
Al Iafrate
Kevin Hatcher
Jimmy Carson
Chris Nilan
Bob Carpenter
Jack O'Callahan
Phil Bourque
Tom Barrasso
Paul Fenton
Steve Leach
Bob Sweeney
Doug Brown
Gordie Roberts
Chris Chelios
Tom Fergus
Mike O'Connell
Mike Zombo
Ed Olcyzk
Craig Ludwig
Gary Suter
Craig Janney

This is not even close to an exhaustive list -- just the most memorable players. I may have missed some well-known ones.

(A lot of Massachusetts players appear towards the end of the 80s whom I didn't list, such as Scott Young, Jeff Norton, Kevin Stevens, Darren Turcotte, Jeremy Roenick, etc. They all played in the 1980s. And Mike Modano, at #1 in the draft in 1988, along with Brian Leetch. They both played in the 1980s, too. Tony Granato, as well.)


So... no.

 

Dr Beinfest

Registered User
Jun 11, 2012
3,846
2,849
Washington, DC
Whoever says “talent and athleticism doesn’t change” is entirely wrong.
Everything is driven by money. There’s more money in the sport. There’s more money at the youth levels. Talent and athleticism are fostered far more than they’ve ever been for every sport, because sports sell.
If you’re asking whether or not the league is watered down because of expansion or something, I’m not sure. Hard to compare directly. But it’s pretty easy to infer that we as a civilization have been getting better at tapping into potential because of $$$.
Sorry if this post was simple and boring, the interwebs ate my carefully thought out and better written post and I’m annoyed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AD1066

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
Whoever says “talent and athleticism doesn’t change” is entirely wrong.
Everything is driven by money. There’s more money in the sport. There’s more money at the youth levels. Talent and athleticism are fostered far more than they’ve ever been for every sport, because sports sell.
If you’re asking whether or not the league is watered down because of expansion or something, I’m not sure. Hard to compare directly. But it’s pretty easy to infer that we as a civilization have been getting better at tapping into potential because of $$$.
Sorry if this post was simple and boring, the interwebs ate my carefully thought out and better written post and I’m annoyed.
Raw talent across any human population doesn't change.

You are quite right (I think) that the pro-game is much more lucrative now than before the early-1990s when salaries exploded, and thus the competition for the top-end (i.e., NHL) jobs is tougher...in a way (but easier in that there's more teams). But it doesn't necessarily follow that the according talent available also goes up.

For example, if any of Bobby Orr, Wayne Gretzky, or Mario Lemieux were born in 2000 (and thus of NHL-age today), none would be playing, because their poor-ish families wouldn't have been able to afford to put them in hockey. The expense of the sport would have prevented them from playing.

The available demographic of potential pro players, at least in Canada (and probably in Europe, too) is shrinking, while the salaries and number of jobs is increasing.
 

Dr Beinfest

Registered User
Jun 11, 2012
3,846
2,849
Washington, DC
Raw talent across any human population doesn't change.

You are quite right (I think) that the pro-game is much more lucrative now than before the early-1990s when salaries exploded, and thus the competition for the top-end (i.e., NHL) jobs is tougher...in a way (but easier in that there's more teams). But it doesn't necessarily follow that the according talent available also goes up.

For example, if any of Bobby Orr, Wayne Gretzky, or Mario Lemieux were born in 2000 (and thus of NHL-age today), none would be playing, because their poor-ish families wouldn't have been able to afford to put them in hockey. The expense of the sport would have prevented them from playing.

The available demographic of potential pro players, at least in Canada (and probably in Europe, too) is shrinking, while the salaries and number of jobs is increasing.

the points you make are valid, and as you’ll note I did say that it’s hard to know if they’re more or less talented but it’s certainly easier to know they're probably more athletic.

and if I didn’t say that, it was in my older post that got chewed up. Too lazy to scroll back up. But, I would imagine that all things considered, average talent in each league has gone up because of $$ proliferation in sports. In hockey, you might be right that there’s a rebound because the sport is expensive and geographically aligned, but in football/baseball/basketball, I’d say it’s a safe assumption that we are still getting better and better at identified and tapping into talent.
Yes though, raw talent is raw talent, and raw athleticism probably takes more than a few decades to truly make a some kind of genetic difference.
 

Armourboy

Hey! You suck!
Jan 20, 2014
19,005
10,371
Shelbyville, TN
world population 1920: 2 billion

2021: 8 billion


The lower end talent is most likely better at the least. "floor" is higher.
Using raw population numbers aren't exactly the best tool. While obviously the US has jumped tremendously in those years the largest bulk of world population is in countries like India and China, places where hockey isn't really a thing. Also part of that in the US will be from expansion from Latin American countries where once again hockey isn't a thing.

These debates aren't just exclusive to hockey and just like with other leagues the games have changed so much that I think for every plus you give an era there would be an offsetting negative.

Personally I say we stop worrying about it and cheer the greats while we also appreciate the greatness we have today. This topic will never have a provable correct answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sr edler

Albatros

Registered User
Aug 19, 2017
12,273
7,723
Ostsee
NHL players in the 1980s (all playing no later than 1987):

Europeans:
Vaclav Nedomansky
Peter Stastny
(#2 scorer of the 1980s)
Anton Stastny
Marian Stastny
Rick Lanz
Kent Nilsson
Peter Ihnacak
Petr Klima
Frantisek Musil
Ivan Boldirev
Stefan Persson
Thomas Gradin
Kent-Erik Andersson
Mats Naslund
Bengt-Ake Gustafsson
Patrick Sundstrom
Anders Kallur
Borje Salming
Jorgen Pettersson
Tomas Jonsson
Hakan Loob
Jan Erixson
Ulf Samuelsson
Michael Thelven
Kjell Dahlin
Frederik Olausson
Calle Johansson

Willy Lindstrom
Anders Hedberg
Miroslav Frycer
Tomas Jonsson
Tomas Sandstrom
Petri Skriko
Pelle Eklund
Pelle Lindberg
Jari Kurri
(#3 scorer of the 1980s)
Ilkka Sinisalo
Risto Siltanen
Matti Hagman
Kari Eloranta
Esa Tikkanen
Reijo Ruotsalainen
Mikko Makela
Kari Takko
Christian Ruuttu
Uwe Krupp


Americans:
Brian Lawton
Reed Larson
Joe Mullen
Brian Mullen
Brett Hull
Phil Housley
Mike Ramsey
Mark Johnson
Dave Christian
Neal Broten
Aaron Broten
Bob Mason
Mark Pavelich
Joel Otto
Tom Kurvers
Nick Fotiu
Mathieu Schneider
Gordie Roberts
Ken Morrow
Mark Howe
John Vanbiesbrouck
Wayne Presley
Kelly Miller
Al Iafrate
Kevin Hatcher
Jimmy Carson
Chris Nilan
Bob Carpenter
Jack O'Callahan
Phil Bourque
Tom Barrasso
Paul Fenton
Steve Leach
Bob Sweeney
Doug Brown
Gordie Roberts
Chris Chelios
Tom Fergus
Mike O'Connell
Mike Zombo
Ed Olcyzk
Craig Ludwig
Gary Suter
Craig Janney

This is not even close to an exhaustive list -- just the most memorable players. I may have missed some well-known ones.

(A lot of Massachusetts players appear towards the end of the 80s whom I didn't list, such as Scott Young, Jeff Norton, Kevin Stevens, Darren Turcotte, Jeremy Roenick, etc. They all played in the 1980s. And Mike Modano, at #1 in the draft in 1988, along with Brian Leetch. They both played in the 1980s, too. Tony Granato, as well.)


So... no.

In 1987 there were still 18 Canadians among the top 20 scorers, or 79 among the top 100 (twenty Europeans in top 200). Ten years later about a half were from elsewhere. Among goalies Minnesota backup Kari Takko was the only European in the league in 1987.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->