Comparing Women's Olympics Hockey to Men's level

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
I agree. To me the biggest overall weakness in the women's game is that they can't shoot the puck very well. For the most part, they need to be close to net to score.

I've watched a fair amount of live women's hockey and this is quite true.

Hayley Wickenheiser was easily the best player in women's hockey history and she could shoot it about 106% better then virtually any of the other women.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Past Considerations


Hillary Knight on USA's olympic team is 5'll weighs in at 185lbs. Placed 3rd in NHL's accuracy competition. Brian Boyle was intimidated following Hilary Knight in the NHL Skills Accuracy Competition and for good reason

Brian Boyle's 'intimidated' by her in the skills comp. He only beat her by one fourteenths of a second. I don't think I'd want my 13 year old playing her, and I think she plays at a higher level than most Midget AAA/ Prep school leagues. As someone who went to prep school, I don't think any of the boys could shoot with the accuracy yet. And I disagree w/ everyone saying they have issues lifting the puck. Let me know how Ms. Knight lifts the puck after watching the vid?
 
We were wondering, checking aside, what would be a comparable level of play to the women's olympics in a men's league?

We won against Finnish female NT as 13yo with our local tiny team in 90s. It was a slaughter too, so reserves on most of the game.

12yo national teams?
 


Hillary Knight on USA's olympic team is 5'll weighs in at 185lbs. Placed 3rd in NHL's accuracy competition. Brian Boyle was intimidated following Hilary Knight in the NHL Skills Accuracy Competition and for good reason

Brian Boyle's 'intimidated' by her in the skills comp. He only beat her by one fourteenths of a second. I don't think I'd want my 13 year old playing her, and I think she plays at a higher level than most Midget AAA/ Prep school leagues. As someone who went to prep school, I don't think any of the boys could shoot with the accuracy yet. And I disagree w/ everyone saying they have issues lifting the puck. Let me know how Ms. Knight lifts the puck after watching the vid?


Empty praise to sell stuffs. In reality you can push them off the puck at anytime and they can't do anything about it. Somehow they are not solidly planted on their skates.

(Goalies have much less performance gap.)
 
Why would you bump this? (why does the thread still exist?)

Women's hockey is just not ever going to be as interesting as mens.
 
Seriously???

I played against (in scrimmages) the highest level of women in WNY when in my early forties, and 25 years removed from competive hockey.

I had no problems keeping up.

But I'd love to test Hillary Knight in the crease.....:naughty:
 


Hillary Knight on USA's olympic team is 5'll weighs in at 185lbs. Placed 3rd in NHL's accuracy competition. Brian Boyle was intimidated following Hilary Knight in the NHL Skills Accuracy Competition and for good reason

Brian Boyle's 'intimidated' by her in the skills comp. He only beat her by one fourteenths of a second. I don't think I'd want my 13 year old playing her, and I think she plays at a higher level than most Midget AAA/ Prep school leagues. As someone who went to prep school, I don't think any of the boys could shoot with the accuracy yet. And I disagree w/ everyone saying they have issues lifting the puck. Let me know how Ms. Knight lifts the puck after watching the vid?

Nice first post. No agenda at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fearnot
Considering the best female hockey player (Wickenheiser) was at best decent in men's Finland 3rd league, they are pretty far from the Men's level.
 
Well, why the hell there should even be this comparison - what does it accomplish? Women's sports are still very interesting and sometimes more entertaining than men's competitions. Obviously in a sport like hockey the level is much lower but so what? Sounds really insecure when you have to emphasise such a selfevident thing. They are not competing against men but against other women.
 
Women's hockey is still in it's infancy in comparison to men so the comparison isn't really fair. Men have been playing hockey for a century. Whereas women's hockey teams didn't even exist when Hillary Knight, a current olympian was growing up. To the people saying their 13 year old hockey team beat a women's national team in the 90's that is an extremely inaccurate standard to hold women to hold women to today. that was 25 years ago, and considering women's hockey is on the rise and still growing that isn't valid. Women have come a far way in 25 years. Although Women's hockey is still in it's infancy it has improved a lot in the past 25 years. Up until last year the women's program didn't have half the funding that goes into the mens program and their youth programs. I attended a NEPSAC boarding school. I played on the women's hockey at my boarding school and we played against a team with Cayla Barnes, captain of USA's U18 team and she kept up with a bunch of the varsity guys of her prep school. Stop using outdated examples when comparing mens and women's hockey. Look at Hillary Knight for an example.
 
Well, why the hell there should even be this comparison - what does it accomplish? Women's sports are still very interesting and sometimes more entertaining than men's competitions. Obviously in a sport like hockey the level is much lower but so what? Sounds really insecure when you have to emphasise such a selfevident thing. They are not competing against men but against other women.
The person who bumped the thread didn't think it was self evident...which is why the discussion began back up.
 
Women's hockey is still in it's infancy in comparison to men so the comparison isn't really fair. Men have been playing hockey for a century. Whereas women's hockey teams didn't even exist when Hillary Knight, a current olympian was growing up. To the people saying their 13 year old hockey team beat a women's national team in the 90's that is an extremely inaccurate standard to hold women to hold women to today. that was 25 years ago, and considering women's hockey is on the rise and still growing that isn't valid. Women have come a far way in 25 years. Although Women's hockey is still in it's infancy it has improved a lot in the past 25 years. Up until last year the women's program didn't have half the funding that goes into the mens program and their youth programs. I attended a NEPSAC boarding school. I played on the women's hockey at my boarding school and we played against a team with Cayla Barnes, captain of USA's U18 team and she kept up with a bunch of the varsity guys of her prep school. Stop using outdated examples when comparing mens and women's hockey. Look at Hillary Knight for an example.
There is a lot of value to women's sports, they can be very entertaining. They have their promise.

The Canadian national team usually schedules AAA teams for their Olympic tuneups, as others mentioned, with varying results. This is true for Vancouver, Sochi, Pyeongchang. That's why people are saying that they are the same level. One year they played a AA all star team, which is similar to a good AAA team.

The US has played a myriad of opponents. They've typically played U18 teams and Prep School teams in preparation for the Olympics before. Before last Olympics when they won the gold medal, they played the Florida Jr. Blades of the USPHL Premier league.

When the women and their coaches feel they can take on competition better than U18 teams, they'll do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MaryClare
As others have said, the goaltending in the women’s game is high quality. That, coupled with the lower shooting ability, leads to some low scoring games despite the good pace.

The goaltending can be at Junior hockey level, while the rest is AAA midget for Canada and the US, and probably AA midget or lower for the second tier teams.
 
It's improved a great deal in a very short period of time.

When I was in university, my future wife (who was a ringette player) played intramural hockey.

When she was growing up, girls couldn't play hockey, only ringette.

As a result, a lot of them were excellent skaters but poor shooters, as the sport relies heavily on ring possession.

In first year at university (1997), there were teams out there with women who couldn't skate and wore improvised equipment on the ice. Obviously some of the teams (e.g. Phys-Ed) had quality players.

By the final year, every team had legitimate players throughout their entire line-ups, with full equipment. It was quite a stark contrast.

Women's hockey becoming an Olympic sport in 1998 essentially sealed ringette's fate in Canada, along with the Title 9 scholarships available at American colleges and universities for women.

It's improved dramatically since then.
 
Last edited:
I've wondered the similar: where in the IIHF men's standings would the Canadian women's team slot ... I'm under the impression that they would defeat the bottomfeeders like Kuwait and Luxembourg and South Africa (is even this wrong?)... so where in the IIHF men's rankings would one find the teams that would be close to a 50-50 likelihood of winning matches against the top nations' womens' programs? Spain/Iceland?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad