Weird Jersey Numbers | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League

Weird Jersey Numbers

Air Budd Dwyer

Registered User
Feb 11, 2012
471
657
John Wayne Gacy’s Basement
What’s up with players the last decade or so wearing unconventional, some might say, offensive lineman jerseys numbers? I mean you see guys wearing numbers like 65, 72, 63, 75, etc.

This isn’t something I noticed until a bit more recently. Growing up it seemed like most jerseys didn’t go above 40 or so and only a handful of guys had numbers like these. You’d see 68, 96, 77, or a 91 but they definitely weren’t the norm.

Is this a trend or am I just an unobservant silly goose?
 
Rebelling. There's too much Respect in hockey to wear normal numbers, so people wear weird shit like #83 and #95 to try and stand out. Stuff like defencemen wearing #9 and goalies wearing #19 should see lifetime bans from the sport.
 
I realize this is baseball but it's simultaneously both the funniest and weirdest number in sports history
7852566060a9145e30f488a5b31d0b11.jpg
 
With the Sharks, it seems like they assign a player a training camp number, and they are stuck with it as long as they're here. Cases in point Braun (#61), Labanc (#62), Simek (#51), and so on.

Sharks even keep their jersey numbers uniform when shuttling players between the NHL and AHL. Whatever number you wear for the Sharks, that's also your number for the Barracuda. So if San Jose's NHL jersey numbers bother you, I'd suggest not looking at the roster page for the Barracuda.
 
Some might have something to do with their preferred number but backwards or somehow related to it. I know Spezza wanted a number with a 9 here but 9, 19, and 91 weren't available so he picked 90.

More recently I noticed Montour is wearing #62 with Buffalo, which I thought was unusual at first, but then I realized it's because he wore 26 with Anaheim but Dahlin wears that so he wears 62 because its 26 backwards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JoeThorntonsRooster
0 or 00 can't be worn anymore. Apparently it messes with "the system" or something. I believe the last player to wear either was Marty Biron in the early 2000s.

As for the OP, you're just unobservant. And that's okay.

You beat me to it, but it was actually 1995-96 when Biron wore "00"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quicklime
Biron, along with Rob Ray and Dominik Hašek, was one of the three Sabres against whom, in three consecutive years, the NHL made a specific rule. After NHL statisticians discovered a bug in their new stat-tracking software, the "Biron rule" restricted jersey numbers to whole numbers between 1 and 99 (later limited to numbers between 1 and 98 after the league-wide retirement of number 99 for Wayne Gretzky). Biron was the only NHL player affected, as only he wore "00" at the time. (Goaltender John Davidson also wore 00 during his playing career, without rebuke, at various points between 1973 and 1983.) Upon his return to the NHL three seasons later, Biron switched to number 43, and wore that number until the end of his career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anomie2029
The story on Tomas Holmstrom going from #15 to #96 after the Wings got Dmitri Mironov (who wore #15), was that he picked it because it was the year he entered the league. Upon hearing this, Scotty Bowman suggested he go with #98. When asked why, he said it was because that would be the year Holmstrom would be leaving...
 
Rebelling. There's too much Respect in hockey to wear normal numbers, so people wear weird **** like #83 and #95 to try and stand out. Stuff like defencemen wearing #9 and goalies wearing #19 should see lifetime bans from the sport.

I don't mind defensemen wearing number 9 at all. In fact, I like it! Defensemen should wear single digit numbers. Or at the very least, numbers in the '20s or '40s.

I can't stand seeing defensemen wear goofy football numbers like 72 Chabot, 62 Montour, 54 McQuaid, 65 Dekeyser, 73 McAvoy, and the list goes on.
 
I don't mind defensemen wearing number 9 at all. In fact, I like it! Defensemen should wear single digit numbers. Or at the very least, numbers in the '20s or '40s.

I can't stand seeing defensemen wear goofy football numbers like 72 Chabot, 62 Montour, 54 McQuaid, 65 Dekeyser, 73 McAvoy, and the list goes on.

eh. 72 is just 27 backwards; I'm betting a good chunk of the kids coming up will be wearing it for Scotty Nieds
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voight
Its honestly one of my biggest pet peeves.

Koskinen wearing 19 or Kadri wearing 43 for example. Mackinnon with 29.

Rookies typically get assigned numbers but they can change them after a full year where they establish themselves as roster players. I dont know why some of them dont.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Machinehead
I don't mind defensemen wearing number 9 at all. In fact, I like it! Defensemen should wear single digit numbers. Or at the very least, numbers in the '20s or '40s.

I can't stand seeing defensemen wear goofy football numbers like 72 Chabot, 62 Montour, 54 McQuaid, 65 Dekeyser, 73 McAvoy, and the list goes on.
On our team we are going for a trend:
Shatty: 22
Claesson: 33
Pionk: 44
Lindgren: 55
Deangelo: 77

I was actually hoping we would trade for Ho-Sang and convert him to a D man. :)
 
I prefer traditional numbers. 1-31.

I wish teams would not retire numbers. I like the history of a team and a number and the honour having that number brings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RegDunlop

Users who are viewing this thread

Ad

Ad