Hockey players' body weight

LGB

Registered User
Feb 4, 2019
2,234
2,325
Purely anecdotal, but I’ve seen some Blues players in person and I do think some weights are exaggerated. I’m 5’11 and about 177 lbs. I lift weights and am in pretty good shape. I’d be really surprised if all these guys were 20+ lbs heavier than me.
 

MessierII

Registered User
Aug 10, 2011
28,568
17,999
Purely anecdotal, but I’ve seen some Blues players in person and I do think some weights are exaggerated. I’m 5’11 and about 177 lbs. I lift weights and am in pretty good shape. I’d be really surprised if all these guys were 20+ lbs heavier than me.
It’s the legs man. The vast majority of hockey players strength training is lower body not upper body like 99% of people going to the gym.
 

Acallabeth

Post approved by Ovechkin
Jul 30, 2011
10,079
1,556
Moscow
Why the hell would you think that NBA players are representative of the population? They're genetic freaks like, but in different ways than, NFL players. I'm not going to look up stats from NFL players to back my argument because that would be silly.
NBA players are definitely more representative of persons at healthy weight than general population (which is very likely to have a terrible diet and exercise insufficiently), but it's also true for most sports that require a balanced development of athlete's attributes.

Once again, the point is that not only are 6'2, 170-pound men not emaciated, but they can be professional athletes in contact sports. And that your idea that a 6'2 man should be 200+ lbs is incorrect.

Purely anecdotal, but I’ve seen some Blues players in person and I do think some weights are exaggerated. I’m 5’11 and about 177 lbs. I lift weights and am in pretty good shape. I’d be really surprised if all these guys were 20+ lbs heavier than me.
I would expect their training to be very different from yours.
 

Masked

(Super/star)
Apr 16, 2017
6,776
5,026
They got the donuts? Excellent....
NBA players are definitely more representative of persons at healthy weight than general population (which is very likely to have a terrible diet and exercise insufficiently), but it's also true for most sports that require a balanced development of athlete's attributes.

Once again, the point is that not only are 6'2, 170-pound men not emaciated, but they can be professional athletes in contact sports. And that your idea that a 6'2 man should be 200+ lbs is incorrect.

NBA athletes are not representative of anything other than being complete genetic outliers. Nor do they play a contact sport. Maybe the big guys do but not the emaciated 6'2" guys.
 

Plural

Registered User
Mar 10, 2011
33,817
5,010
Mass and density is not something that's as apparent as height is.

I'm 256. Granted, I could eat less ice cream, but I'm far from obese. You wouldn't see me from a distance and say "holy shit that guy's fat." You would never think I'm 256. People have guessed as low as 205.

I'm just really, really dense. I would imagine a disproportionate amount of successful athletes (not me, I'm worthless!) are also really dense.
I'm also 105kg and people never believe me when I say it. I'm not an athlete either, but dense. Head and body.
 

LeafGrief

Shambles in my brain
Apr 10, 2015
7,881
10,142
Ottawa
You can absolutely add 10 pounds of muscle in an offseason without steroids. Lots of athletes train doing silly stuff in those 10 years instead of a novice progression of strength training.
Guys who made the NHL haven’t been doing all sorts of silly stuff. You think OHL, SHL, NCAA and national teams are having their guys fart about in the gym? A raw nobody who’s never worked out before in their entire life might (won’t) put on 10lbs of muscle in fiv months, a world class athlete who’s been working out since pre-puberty doesn’t get newbie gains like that. They aren’t squatting and deadlifting for the first time when they turn 20.

bodies are incredibly adaptable, but 10lbs of lean muscle in five months is not happening. A few pounds of muscle and 7 lbs of fat? Sure.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad