Penguins Size and Weight

[billybudd]

What this thread tells me:

NFL football players would be better at hockey than NHL players because they are just larger in height and weight.

What I learned from this thread:

Nothing.

Size means very little if you don't have talent behind it. Sure there are certain positions (D and G) that benefit from being larger if all others are equal. The current refereeing style also benefits larger players because they can power through some penalties that obviously aren't being called. The current NHL does not play into our team's strengths. If the NHL starts calling penalties again, it will.

The problem with all this is that you are making a very risky bet that current NHL reffing will stay the same for many years, and obviously there is a cross-over point where a more talented (yet smaller) player is still more effective than a larger player of slightly less talent.

I still feel that size is vastly overvalued by fans and many organizations. Those small skilled players can gain size over time while the large players can't always gain skill.

I'll acknowledge this.

But the reason I'm making this bet is because I believe the obstruction that makes size matter so much in an NHL player is back in specifically to show that action has been taken when the NHL is dragged into court on a class-action lawsuit.

 

[Honour Over Glory]

The fact that this thread even exists is asinine.

My goodness...this forum is at this point of lunacy. We've fallen quite hard here.


A guy that is 6'3" and 195 isn't skinny, he's likely in very good shape or not, just like a 230lb 6'2" player is either jacked or just a bit too much body weight and fat that an athlete in this sport should or shouldn't have.

It indicates jack ****.

 

[Ugene Magic]

I wouldn't read too much into stats online. There's a bunch of players here supposedly 6'2 according to stats (and sid).

Bennett certainly doesn't look 6'2". Everyone in front of him is listed at that height.

 

[Russian Factor]

You aren't understanding the usefulness of size. It's not just about hit stats, it's about strength and durability. If you are trying to grind out a defense in a 7 game series, it's a lot harder to do if they are mammoths. How about trying to win battles in the corner or in front? The point is, Tampa isn't intentionally trying to not be big.

Also, you seem to be forgetting that they went out and signed Brian Boyle up front, who is huge.

The bolded is absolutely not correct. Sustr and Hedman act like jackets on people. The only reason Boyle's even in the NHL--let alone as a big money free agent in Tampa--is his size. Boyle might have the worst balance in the sport. If he's even 6'1, he's probably kicking around the AHL or a European league.

We'll see how useful Tyler Johnson and the midget brigade are in this year's playoffs. I'm betting they are far from effective and that unless they get some team in freefall (bruins, for example), the Lightning get bounced in round 1 just like last year.

Oh come on. Of course they aren't "trying to not be big." No team is like "let's pick the smaller guys cause they're like super cute and stuff!" that doesn't make any sense and it's not what I said or even implied. My point was that size should ALWAYS be a very secondary consideration and certainly in the drafting of those players that seems to be born out with results at the NHL level.

Of course I know they signed Boyle. His size is appealing, sure, I never said size is a BAD thing necessarily. But Boyle is a good player and I would want him on my team because he can score goals and is good defensively. When I evaluate him I look at that first and foremost. If he did those same things at like 5'11'' or whatever I would still value him just the same.

And for gods sake do you really believe that come playoffs these guys who have lit up the BIG BAD MEN of the NHL all year are not going to be effective at all? MSL has done just fine for years in the postseason. Brandon Sutter (who isn't even that great of a player) even performed well against a very physical CBJ team in the playoffs and that guy's arms are like spaghetti noodles. Also you even hedge your bet by adding the disclaimer "unless they get some team in freefall"

Size is a factor, but as an evaluative measure it should be used without putting too much weight (excuse the pun) in it at all

 

[Russian Factor]

Also all this talk about "size" and whether or not it matters is reaching pretty ridiculous levels of unintentional hilarity

 

[Jacob]

Bennett certainly doesn't look 6'2". Everyone in front of him is listed at that height.

Judging by the clothes he might be wearing shower sandals or maybe even just socks compared to the guys in front who probably have dress shoes on. He's probably more realistically 6'1" though (that's including the standard 1" height increase all NHLers tack on).

 

[cygnus47]

So maybe Sid isn't so far off 5'11. 5'10 at worst.

 

[billybudd]

Oh come on. Of course they aren't "trying to not be big." No team is like "let's pick the smaller guys cause they're like super cute and stuff!" that doesn't make any sense and it's not what I said or even implied. My point was that size should ALWAYS be a very secondary consideration and certainly in the drafting of those players that seems to be born out with results at the NHL level.

Of course I know they signed Boyle. His size is appealing, sure, I never said size is a BAD thing necessarily. But Boyle is a good player and I would want him on my team because he can score goals and is good defensively. When I evaluate him I look at that first and foremost. If he did those same things at like 5'11'' or whatever I would still value him just the same.

Brian Boyle doesn't have the balance to be in the national hockey league if he was 5'11. He would be toppling face first into the boards any time anybody pushed him. It would be foolish to want a guy with that deficiency at that size.

And for gods sake do you really believe that come playoffs these guys who have lit up the BIG BAD MEN of the NHL all year are not going to be effective at all? MSL has done just fine for years in the postseason. Brandon Sutter (who isn't even that great of a player) even performed well against a very physical CBJ team in the playoffs and that guy's arms are like spaghetti noodles. Also you even hedge your bet by adding the disclaimer "unless they get some team in freefall"

Size is a factor, but as an evaluative measure it should be used without putting too much weight (excuse the pun) in it at al

What was Sutter's assignment against the Jackets? It was Atkinson's line as often as not, wasn't it?

Bookmark the quote. I've watched hockey for enough years to make an educated guess that a guy like Tyler Johnson is irrelevant in April. If I'm wrong, gloat.

 

[Russian Factor]

Brian Boyle doesn't have the balance to be in the national hockey league if he was 5'11. He would be toppling face first into the boards any time anybody pushed him. It would be foolish to want a guy with that deficiency at that size.





What was Sutter's assignment against the Jackets? It was Atkinson's line as often as not, wasn't it?

Bookmark the quote. I've watched hockey for enough years to make an educated guess that a guy like Tyler Johnson is irrelevant in April. If I'm wrong, gloat.

You are talking about what makes Boyle's game effective for Boyle. That is irrelevant to anyone but Boyle himself. I am not saying "shrink current Boyle down to 5'11'' and that's the guy I want!" I'm talking about a hypothetical Brian Boyle that puts up his same numbers, contributes defensively in the same way, and plays with the same intensity. Hypothetical Brian Boyle possesses the same attributes, he is just smaller. I'm talking about objective player valuation, the perspective of someone involved in roster decisions. Yeah I'd say if Brian Boyle was suddenly shrunk down to 5'11'' he might have just a tad bit of difficulty with balance. Lol. Not the point. If you want, it may be easier to imagine a stand in player that does all the same things as Boyle but is smaller.

Ok man let's say he is ineffective. After all, there is no guarantee that anyone will perform well in the postseason. Hell, not even for Sid as we've seen (although he still dominated play he just couldn't score). There is still a plethora of smaller guys that do fine in the postseason. I named some examples but of course they are not exhaustive. There is no causation showing that size determines effectiveness in the playoffs. To say that is to hold on to preconceived notions/assumptions. These old cliches don't come from experience watching games. They come from stereotypes.

 

[Candyman]

Despres has enough weight to go around.

You beat me to it.