Prospect Info: [2024 - 21st] Michael Hage, Chicago Steel (USHL), Committed to U of Michigan

1909

Registered User
Jul 6, 2016
21,391
11,910
No he dominated on wing and his coach will barely use him.
Why don’t they do what they did with Michkov. Lent him to another KHL team…. OR they can easily send him dowm to the MHL or VHL. They are really punishing him by keeping him and not using him much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MarkovsKnee

WeThreeKings

Demidov is a HAB
Sep 19, 2006
95,958
108,158
Halifax
Why don’t they do what they did with Michkov. Lent him to another KHL team…. OR they can easily send him dowm to the MHL or VHL. They are really punishing him by keeping him and not using him much.

Hes one of the best players in the KHL and they perform better when they use him correctly. So while they can't loan him to another team they could trade him; but logic isn't being used here so to try to talk about this logically ironically doesn't make any sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jurivan Demidovsky

FrankMTL

Registered User
Jan 6, 2005
12,575
14,571
Hage has missed Michigan's last two games and Michigan has been shut out in those two games...coincidence?

Now obviously i'm not saying Michigan would have won either of those two games, and perhaps they would have been shut out anyways, but Hage is a difference maker on that team.
 

BehindTheTimes

Registered User
Jun 24, 2018
7,528
10,442
Not fiction. The game was definitely slower and the average athlete less talented and the difference in equipment is highly overstated.
Totally disagree here Oz. The equipment is by far the single greatest cause for improvement. It’s not even close, it’s like this in every sport, from track and field to golf, to tennis to hockey. Players and human just don’t evolve that fast.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1909

Grate n Colorful Oz

Pure Laine Hutson
Jun 12, 2007
36,628
35,182
Hockey Mecca
Totally disagree here Oz. The equipment is by far the single greatest cause for improvement. It’s not even close, it’s like this in every sport, from track and field to golf, to tennis to hockey. Players and human just don’t evolve that fast.

Social learning is what evolves and yes, social learning can evolve really quickly. One generation after another, techniques and teaching get better, especially for unnatural specializations like skating and stickhandling/shooting, on top of physical training which also has evolved. Go look at the training McDavid had as a teen. The previous generations neither had these specific format of training, nor the same set of developed skills (from the previous generation) to draw upon. Stickhandling, shooting and skating techniques of training have all evolved through the generations.

Our evolution as humans, our brains, since we've started to massively neotenize around 80kya, is done in great part through social learning.

Evolution is a lot more complicated than you think. It's not just random mutation and selection. There's more to it than that once we reached a much greater period of social learning. We've massively neotenize to reach the longest juvenile period of all living creatures.

The sport has also evolved, as with the increase of both population pool to draw on and the training, increasing the level of talent you'll find league-wide.
 

BehindTheTimes

Registered User
Jun 24, 2018
7,528
10,442
Social learning is what evolves and yes, social learning can evolve really quickly. One generation after another, techniques and teaching get better, especially for unnatural specializations like skating and stickhandling/shooting, on top of physical training which also has evolved. Go look at the training McDavid had as a teen. The previous generations neither had these specific format of training, nor the same set of developed skills (from the previous generation) to draw upon. Stickhandling, shooting and skating techniques of training have all evolved through the generations.

Our evolution as humans, our brains, since we've started to massively neotenize around 80kya, is done in great part through social learning.

Evolution is a lot more complicated than you think. It's not just random mutation and selection. There's more to it than that once we reached a much greater period of social learning. We've massively neotenize to reach the longest juvenile period of all living creatures.

The sport has also evolved, as with the increase of both population pool to draw on and the training, increasing the level of talent you'll find league-wide.
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, but the degree to which it matters. We’ve seen this in many new sports as well. You look at mixed martial arts (UFC), the sport is still in its infancy and ppl say the same thing, the newer, younger fighters have better training methods etc etc. it means very little with the best ever is 37 years old and none of the young up and comers with better/improved techniques could beat him. Same as GSP. You could drop a prime GSP into the WW division today and he would still be the champ.

We’ve had players whose careers had crossed over several decades and they were still the best of the best even against the newer, younger players. Ray Bourque was a 1st team all star in 1979-80 and a 1st team all star in 2001. Surely, this 40 year old player who was a shell of himself should have been lapped by the field if what you say were true. Yet a past his prime Ray Bourque was still a better player than a prime Lidstrom. We know this because when they were in the league together Ray was still better. There are hundreds on examples of this. Raymond is one of the extremes just to highlight the point.

The training is different, but there’s only so far you can push to make a difference. There are limits on everything. The older athletes were still in outstanding shape, strong and highly skilled. Al Macinnis would still have a deadly slap shot today and would still likely be the hardest in the league because his graphite/flex stick would give him the same advantage as everyone else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BaseballCoach

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad