OT: Size matters?

[BroadwayJay*]

This year's height and weight list:

http://mirtle.blogspot.ca/2014/10/2014-15-nhl-teams-by-height-weight-and.html

Click to read more...

 

[Darth Milbury]

I'd love to see a list like this for top nine forward and top five defenders.

Having Boychuk and Hamonic as big guys on defense is way different than having Boulton or Carkner.

 

[charlie1]

Jay-- it might be easier to see patterns if you ranked by height or weight.

 

[Strummergas]

Here come the **** (Edit) jokes!

 

[Richie Daggers Crime]

So, the Isles are 25th in height, but 11th in weight? What a bunch of fatties!

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Having Boychuk and Hamonic as big guys on defense is way different than having Boulton or Carkner.

I concur with that.

 

[islesfan186]

Wow the isles have a higher average weight than big teams like the Flyers or Bruins? Hmmmm...

 

[Richie Daggers Crime]

Having Boychuk and Hamonic as big guys on defense is way different than having Boulton or Carkner.

Boulton doesn't play defense, you doof!

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Jay-- it might be easier to see patterns if you ranked by height or weight.

Not my list. I could do that manually, but I really don't care enough about this.

I thought some other folks might be interested though and it gave me an opportunity to make that headline.

 

[Strummergas]

I concur with that.

So big and skilled is better than small and skilled? Any way to get the defensive rankings by team and cross-reference that with the size and weights of the D?

 

[BroadwayJay*]

So big and skilled is better than small and skilled? Any way to get the defensive rankings by team and cross-reference that with the size and weights of the D?

Absolutely. But why do I have to do it?

 

[BroadwayJay*]

So big and skilled is better than small and skilled?

Of course, big and equally skilled is better than small and equally skilled.

I'll take small and skilled over big and unskilled though.

 

[Bones45]

Of course, big and equally skilled is better than small and equally skilled.

 

[Strummergas]

Absolutely. But why do I have to do it?

Because you love this sort of ****!

 

[Strummergas]

Of course, big and equally skilled is better than small and equally skilled.

I'll take small and skilled over big and unskilled though.

Yeah, I don't think anyone wants a defense corps of Carkners on their team.

 

[Darth Milbury]

Boulton doesn't play defense, you doof!

I didn't say he did! (although I still consider myself to be a doof, but for other reasons).

 

[BroadwayJay*]

Because you love this sort of ****!

I do.

I'll give a list of the team's in order who allowed the fewest corsi events against at 5v5:

Now that is for last season. The rest is up to you.

 

[Darth Milbury]

So big and skilled is better than small and skilled? Any way to get the defensive rankings by team and cross-reference that with the size and weights of the D?

Or, you can be like me: small and unskilled. And, no, I'm not talking about hockey.


When I played hockey (in high school and college), I was generally considered to be the team's version of Matt Martin. My coach used to say that he always wanted me on the ice against the other team's toughest players because he knew that I could take abuse and wouldn't back down. But, I was also one of the first guys to get benched when we were down a few goals and the team needed offense.


I suppose there is a lesson there.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Something I find interesting, especially with regards to the notion that you need size down the middle in the big, bad Western Conference. Chicago goes into the season with the following four centers: Toews, Richards, Shaw, Kruger.

Based on the heights/weights for them listed in the Hockey News Yearbook, they are:

Toews - 6'2, 208 lbs.
Richards - 6'0, 196 lbs.
Shaw - 5'10, 180 lbs.
Kruger - 6'0, 181 lbs.

I just found it a bit interesting that one of the heavy favorites for the Cup is actually rather small down the middle, despite the media constantly talking about how size down the middle is absolutely crucial, particularly for teams in the West.

 

[CupHolders]

Or, you can be like me: small and unskilled. And, no, I'm not talking about hockey.


When I played hockey (in high school and college), I was generally considered to be the team's version of Matt Martin. My coach used to say that he always wanted me on the ice against the other team's toughest players because he knew that I could take abuse and wouldn't back down. But, I was also one of the first guys to get benched when we were down a few goals and the team needed offense.


I suppose there is a lesson there.

Lesson?! Well, yeah... you should have grown your hair out like the Oleg "the helmetless" Kvasha. There is a reason why he was so great.

 

[Wilch]

We all know why Winnipeg is high up on the list.

 

[The Underboss]

I've made support aware of the ad that was a problem. Also, if you have an issue please PM it to me rather than posting it on the forums or post it on the support forum on page II of the site. Thanks!!

 

[boredmale]

I've made support aware of the ad that was a problem. Also, if you have an issue please PM it to me rather than posting it on the forums or post it on the support forum on page II of the site. Thanks!!

I thought they got rid of the lounge, didn't know "page 2" existed. I always wondered where it went but never chirped up

 

[The Underboss]

I thought they got rid of the lounge, didn't know "page 2" existed. I always wondered where it went but never chirped up

Top right, you'll see Page 2 of the site.

 

[BroadwayJay*]

This article ought to rile people up.

It is for Insiders only, I believe the forum rules instruct me not to paste in the text.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nhl/stor...g-nhl?ex_cid=InsiderTwitter_Vollman_Enforcers

The gist of it is explaining away the three most common explanations for having "enforcers" in the lineup:

1. Enforces protect your stars.
2. Fights generate momentum.
3. Enforces create space for your stars to score more points.

All three of the above claims are not supported by the evidence.