He had the skills that I was referring to.Al Iafrate said that's a stretch.
He had the skills that I was referring to.Al Iafrate said that's a stretch.
I think that there are a lot of exaggerations on here by guys who haven't spent enough time with wooden sticks. There was variation within them too, as you could get ones that had whippier shafts by using thinner or softer wood. Guys like Steve Shutt, Lemaire, and Bossy could snap shots just fine with wooden sticks. It's just different technique.
I am a woodworker by trade, and have absolutely no doubt that modern wooden sticks flex and kick points could be changed by use of different types, compositions, and thicknesses of woods. You only have to look and see what they are doing with baseball bats, and they are far more restricted by MLB rules than hockey sticks are. They would still have their limitations, but in general, I think that really good wooden sticks( I used to love the old Kohos) are way less limiting than other factors like the old equipment. The new skates, helmets(or no helmets!) and pads are much lighter and more protective for position players. I am not a goalie so I will let them chime in on the equipment , but my understanding is that they are even more affected by the new equipment.AFAIK the very lowest flex on the market for wood sticks was 85. A lot of today’s stars use sticks with flexes well below that. Gaudreau’s is a 55 which would basically be impossible with natural wood.
Also it’s not just about the flex score itself, but also where the stick is flexing. A wood stick flexes where you put your weight, and you have to get to know your stick to find that sweet-spot. Composite sticks, especially expensive NHL-quality ones, allow for a customized kick point.
Between the whippy flex and unnatural kick point, a guy like Gaudreau barely needs to move his hands in order to get good flex for a hard high shot. He can take a pass in his skates and almost instantly whip a laser beam shot from that position. Lafleur, taking that same pass in the skates, would need to pull it back out far enough to get some torque on the shaft, otherwise he’s going to end up just sweeping the puck toward the net.
There was a Sherwood "Sundin" curve that I really liked. Was straight for most of the blade, then curved right near the end, and had a really nice sweet spot. Good for point shots, backhands, but if you used it just right you could rip one high. I got about 5 of them, then they became unavailable.I always played with wooden sticks when I played in my teens. The sticks would have players name on them that matched the curve they used. Lemiuex, Messier were my go tos.
Aluminium shafts just started coming out and rich kids would have those.
Is it really a huge difference? Wood sticks were great imo. I could see aluminum bats in baseball being a huge advantage but a lighter hockey stick?
Not only should players go back to wooden sticks, they should stop doing so much rigorous training and exercise. And for that matter, they should start smoking on the bench. Old time hockey!
Contrary to popular opinion, the shots would be as hard. Guys like the Hulls and Lemaire hammered the puck. What would change is the type of shot. The wrister and snap shot take a different technique when using a wood stick. The drag shot would make a comeback.
I grew up with wood sticks, and am old enough to have tried to steam a curve into my old straight sticks. I got back on the ice as a coach many years later, and when fooling around on the ice grew frustrated with the new sticks, especially on the point shots, as the trampolining effect on the new sticks caused my shots to be unpredictable. I could never get the hang of the new style of shooting where you are actually just flinging the puck more like a lacrosse player.
IMO, forwards would be the most affected, but I have no doubt that a guy like Ovi would figure things out pretty quickly. I think Dmen might love the way they could keep the puck down with the old wood sticks, and I know net front players would rather be deflecting pucks coming in below their knees than worry about one coming in at neck level.
The biggest game changer to me was the the curve on sticks, rather than the material they were made out of. Goalies freaked out when Hull and Makita started firing pucks at them that rose, dove, and wobbled in ways they had never seen before, and at higher speeds.
100%.The release time and how quick you get it off is what really matters, not the sheer MPH of the shots. The release on shots using wood sticks would be impacted greatly.
As opposed to the cheap composites we have now?Have you seen lumber prices lately? It may bankrupt the sub $5mil/yr players.
I am a woodworker by trade, and have absolutely no doubt that modern wooden sticks flex and kick points could be changed by use of different types, compositions, and thicknesses of woods. You only have to look and see what they are doing with baseball bats, and they are far more restricted by MLB rules than hockey sticks are. They would still have their limitations, but in general, I think that really good wooden sticks( I used to love the old Kohos) are way less limiting than other factors like the old equipment. The new skates, helmets(or no helmets!) and pads are much lighter and more protective for position players. I am not a goalie so I will let them chime in on the equipment , but my understanding is that they are even more affected by the new equipment.
The BBCOR bat, and now the USSA bat have been vg ideas, as they dampen down the exit velo. The young players, especially pitchers, simply can't protect themselves against comebackers, and batters get a bad swing because all you have to do with the -10 bats is just square it up and it flies. They get quite the shock when they 1st use a BBCOR, nvm a wood bat.My guess is the real limitations are industrial in nature. Manufacturing wood sticks requires a lot more manual input than composites. It might be possible to imitate the qualities of a composite with natural materials, but there’s no incentive for a company to put that much extra into the product just to imitate a better version that they’ve already developed.
(FWIW I think the league missed the opportunity to make MLB-style rules requiring natural materials in both sticks and padding, which fundamentally harmed the game down to the youth level)
DO ITidk they should do it for heritage classic or something. for lulz
Contrary to popular opinion, the shots would be as hard. Guys like the Hulls and Lemaire hammered the puck. What would change is the type of shot. The wrister and snap shot take a different technique when using a wood stick. The drag shot would make a comeback.
I grew up with wood sticks, and am old enough to have tried to steam a curve into my old straight sticks. I got back on the ice as a coach many years later, and when fooling around on the ice grew frustrated with the new sticks, especially on the point shots, as the trampolining effect on the new sticks caused my shots to be unpredictable. I could never get the hang of the new style of shooting where you are actually just flinging the puck more like a lacrosse player.
IMO, forwards would be the most affected, but I have no doubt that a guy like Ovi would figure things out pretty quickly. I think Dmen might love the way they could keep the puck down with the old wood sticks, and I know net front players would rather be deflecting pucks coming in below their knees than worry about one coming in at neck level.
The biggest game changer to me was the the curve on sticks, rather than the material they were made out of. Goalies freaked out when Hull and Makita started firing pucks at them that rose, dove, and wobbled in ways they had never seen before, and at higher speeds.
Have you seen lumber prices lately? It may bankrupt the sub $5mil/yr players.