Players That Relied Heavily on Athleticism/Tools to be Elite?

[DitchMarner]

I think PK Subban is a great answer. Once his speed and athletic ability declined, he fell off and was a shell of his former self.

Taylor Hall seems like a good answer as well. He wasn't really elite that long to begin with. He had two or three good seasons early on and then was somewhat disappointing for a short while before having his career season (in which he won the Hart Trophy). He won the Award near the end of his physical prime and promptly declined.

Someone like Ovechkin would be a bad answer. He was probably one of the best athletes in the sport at his peak and then successfully altered his style of play and continued to be a premiere goal scorer.

Click to read more...

 

[MadLuke]

Lindros maybe, not sure the 5foot10 version would have been in the conversation of the most dominant 5v5 ice shifter in the history of the sport (or could have ever developed in the same player to start with).

It is hard to be more than very good without a special amount of athleticism that said, that would include a lot of them (everyone that are no longer elite at 40 did rely on their athleticism), still a physical and hard to practice on skate sport without a position that let you hide it well.

 

[carjackmalone]

Pavel Bure
Mike Palmateer
Peter Zezel
Joe Conacher
Grant Fuhr

 

[Michael Farkas]

What does "tools" mean here? Only athleticism is referenced in the OP...just asking before I commit to an answer that I may then later disagree with myself about...

 

[MadLuke]

"tools" mean here?

I interpreted it like having Lindros or Chara strength-size

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Lindros maybe, not sure the 5foot10 version would have been in the conversation of the most dominant 5v5 ice shifter in the history of the sport (or could have ever developed in the same player to start with).

It is hard to be more than very good without a special amount of athleticism that said, that would include a lot of them (everyone that are no longer elite at 40 did rely on their athleticism), still a physical and hard to practice on skate sport without a position that let you hide it well.

imo what was special about lindros is he was so skilled that he wouldnhave been a superstar if he was cliff ronning’s size. he would have played completely differently but he would have been a 100 pt scorer nonetheless.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

but what about hasek? the man was an absolute physical freak but if he wasn’t feeling 100% about his body he didn’t even want to play

 

[MadLuke]

would have been a 100 pt scorer nonetheless

Maybe, but he did once with all his size and strength.

Could be all wrong, maybe 5'10'' Lindros would have been elite (and not just a Top 20 player at peak type) and we cannot use the fact his game completely felt apart once he lost that physical edge over the league, those head injury would mess a long list of things more than just that.

 

[tabness]

honestly it seems opposite is more interesting as a discussion topic since most elite players would rely heavily on at least some physical skills/tools/athleticism?

you can have a genius situational awareness hockey sense type but if he can't skate or can't handle the puck or is like 5'3" and can't bench the bar even once or doesn't have endurance...

if you a guy with a full toolset but don't know nothing about cars you may still be able to figure out and fix a few things on your hoopty even if you also may mess a lot of things up but a master mechanic without any tools is outta luck

 

[MadLuke]

you can have a genius situational awareness hockey sense type but if he can't skate or can't handle the puck or is like 5'3" and can't bench the bar even once or doesn't have endurance...

1999 Gretzky is maybe the most it was stretched (that would be the least surprising thing if true) ? Leading a team in points with that amount of strength, speed, etc.... is quite something. But that brain-eyes was quite the tools set.

Lemieux always had size and reach, but also by 2006 was becoming quite limited. In both case they were not really elite anymore.

 

[WarriorofTime]

All of them, lol. Hockey is a very physically oriented sport. It's like.. not far below Boxing in terms of physical demands to be successful.

 

[MadLuke]

double post

 

[JackSlater]

I don't know, probably Lionel Conacher or someone like that. Wildly athletic in a variety of sports, learned hockey late but carved out a HHOF career.

I find that in hockey it is difficult to get a sense of where athleticism really starts because the skill requirement is so high. For example to my eyes Orr stands out the most athletically among peers of any player I've ever seen. I don't know that he couldn't have been elite otherwise though, as seen by the time of the 1976 Canada Cup hen he is hobbled. Harvey was apparently extremely athletic but his style of play sounds completely cerebral and largely unathletic, and you never really hear about physical feats with him. Bobby Hull looks extremely athletic, but he's so good that he could probably have figured out a way to score a lot even without overpowering strength and speed... ala Brett maybe. Among recent players I remember hearing about Logan Couture being notable athletically, but nothing about his game looks particularly athletic.

If you are scouting basketball the athletes stand out very quickly. Hockey, not that I have ever scouted at all, it isn't so obvious because so many different things are going on that require skill/experience as opposed to athleticism.

 

[DitchMarner]

What does "tools" mean here? Only athleticism is referenced in the OP...just asking before I commit to an answer that I may then later disagree with myself about...

Physical attributes.

So basically, looking for things like stamina/endurance, a heavy build, blazing speed as opposed to a high hockey IQ, a deft passing touch, great control of the puck.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

imo what was special about lindros is he was so skilled that he wouldnhave been a superstar if he was cliff ronning’s size. he would have played completely differently but he would have been a 100 pt scorer nonetheless.

His biggest skill was bullying his way through people. Make him 6'/190 and he's an average 2nd liner at best.

Which isnt a knock, not everyone that's big knows how to actually utilize it (see Boris Valabik and Jimmy Hayes)

 

[Michael Farkas]

Ok, so I'll throw out an unconventional answer here...there's a lot of answers, but if Chara was 6'0" would he have gotten all that rope to figure it out?

He developed into a player, no question. But he was way behind the curve. He was probably just about the worst player in the NHL when he first came in. It finally started to click at 25 or whatever...would he have gotten that kind of rope at 6'0", even 6'2"...?

 

[DitchMarner]

honestly it seems opposite is more interesting as a discussion topic since most elite players would rely heavily on at least some physical skills/tools/athleticism?

you can have a genius situational awareness hockey sense type but if he can't skate or can't handle the puck or is like 5'3" and can't bench the bar even once or doesn't have endurance...

if you a guy with a full toolset but don't know nothing about cars you may still be able to figure out and fix a few things on your hoopty even if you also may mess a lot of things up but a master mechanic without any tools is outta luck

Good post. I'm thinking more along the lines of athleticism and physical tools/attributes versus hockey IQ and physical skills, though.

So more guys who could bully their way through teams or skate circles around the ice than guys who could dominate with puck control and manipulation.

Guys like Marner, Kane and I think even Gretzky would be exceptions (though Gretzky had ridiculous stamina). Marner has a high school build (obviously hyperbole) and isn't that fast but gets it done (in the regular season anyway).

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Maybe, but he did once with all his size and strength.

Could be all wrong, maybe 5'10'' Lindros would have been elite (and not just a Top 20 player at peak type) and we cannot use the fact his game completely felt apart once he lost that physical edge over the league, those head injury would mess a long list of things more than just that.

i’ll admit i was very young but i remember him as a huge guy with superstar small guy skills. he knew how to score goals, had elite playmaking, and if he didn’t have the body to initiate contact so much i don’t think he has the constant injury issues.

and per 80 or 82, wasn’t he on pace for 100 pts for most if not all of the 90s?

the later lindros, well, we saw new york lindros for his first stretch there regularly in the top 5 in scoring and leading the league for real stretches. and that’s lindros actively avoiding contact. if he didn’t bave to worry about another bump on the head i think he would have kept scoring big into his 30s. for ex, i don’t see why he couldn’t have been… a less playmakey doug weight in those years? hard to think of a star center in the DPE below the sakic/forsberg/modano tier.

His biggest skill was bullying his way through people. Make him 6'/190 and he's an average 2nd liner at best.

Which isnt a knock, not everyone that's big knows how to actually utilize it (see Boris Valabik and Jimmy Hayes)

idk about that. in 2004, we saw bertuzzi stop using his physical advantages and trying to skill his way through the league. he was a much less talented player than lindros and he still put up 70 pts.

 

[MadLuke]

and per 80 or 82, wasn’t he on pace for 100 pts for most if not all of the 90s?

Prime Lindros was always pacing like he would have scored 100pts if he played 75 games in a high scoring enviromment, he certainly had a 100 pts offense.

1.33 ppg are 100 pts player (does not need to have a prefect 80-81-82 game season to do it), Lindros pre scoring going down, was comfortably above that:

1993-94 NHL 1.49 (3rd)

1994-95 NHL 1.52 (1st)

1995-96 NHL 1.58 (3rd)

1996-97 NHL 1.52 (2nd)

2002 rangers Lindros scored like Jason Allison, he had nice stretch for sure with Fleury:

https://www.nhl.com/stats/skaters?reportType=game&dateFrom=2001-08-01&dateTo=2002-01-01&gameType=2&sort=points,goals,assists&page=0&pageSize=50

So did Mike York,Kapanen and Conroy.

https://www.nhl.com/stats/skaters?reportType=game&dateFrom=2001-08-01&dateTo=2001-12-01&gameType=2&sort=points,goals,assists&page=0&pageSize=50

Parrish and Samsonov did the same, we give credit to Lindros here for being more than a Top 30-40 offensive best player in the league in a hot steak but are we right ?

Could just be that the most time I actually saw him play live that year, not in sport 30 clips was in the Olympics that year, I remember being happy for him when he scored that nothing goal (late third in the 7-1 belarus game), it was a painful tourney for him, at time looking like one of the worst Canadian forward.

 

[JackSlater]

Ok, so I'll throw out an unconventional answer here...there's a lot of answers, but if Chara was 6'0" would he have gotten all that rope to figure it out?

He developed into a player, no question. But he was way behind the curve. He was probably just about the worst player in the NHL when he first came in. It finally started to click at 25 or whatever...would he have gotten that kind of rope at 6'0", even 6'2"...?

Chara was horrible at first. Then serviceable, then good. He's pretty much the patron saint of all tall project players.

Rod Langway is another guy. Very good athlete, not particularly skilled at hockey, turned into an excellent player with Montreal know-how and great size/athleticism.

 

[JJ18Sniper]

Wouldn't any reflex reliant goalie qualify here?

 

[Midnight Judges]

I can think of a lot of players who relied on an attribute, but elite players? That's a tough one.

 

[Sadekuuro]

Ok, so I'll throw out an unconventional answer here...there's a lot of answers, but if Chara was 6'0" would he have gotten all that rope to figure it out?

He developed into a player, no question. But he was way behind the curve. He was probably just about the worst player in the NHL when he first came in. It finally started to click at 25 or whatever...would he have gotten that kind of rope at 6'0", even 6'2"...?

I don't think he would have been in the NHL at all. (But perhaps he starts dominating Europe and works his way up as an overager instead.)

 

[KevinFinnerty]

Bure
Subban
McDonagh

 

[Michael Farkas]

McDonagh? Oh, I don't think so...