billybudd
Registered User
- Feb 1, 2012
- 22,049
- 2,249
Lemieux might have had a bit more longevity (then again, neither his lymphoma nor AFIB would benefit that much. Lumbar pain might have), but I doubt his actual peak performance would improve greatly. Hockey is the game of skill and intelligence first, and with massive skill gap of the 80s even more so. I don't think we've seen that many cases of players who converted their physical ability improvement into great performance increase.
I think this is right. The basis of his game was reach, spatial awareness, hand-eye coordination and improvisation. Three of these are mental and the other isn't particularly affected by better nutrition (unless you're malnourished in youth). Could he have been more durable with better nutrition? Maybe. More dominant in any significant sense? I doubt it.
If he was a Ken Daneyko style drinker, not doing that could have seen a sustained production increase, but he was more of a "two glasses of wine" guy, which doesn't have the same negative neurological consequences (indeed, there's some research suggesting that limited, regular alcohol ingestion is healthy).