Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
Okay Mr small sample size (when it suits your purpose for Sid), lets look at the number of non Canadians over say a reasonable sample size in the top 10 in points.
As I'm sure you took the 86 sample year randomly right?
In goals it would be much different as the guys from Europe tend to be snipers in the NHL at the top.
Here is the amount of the non Canadians in the top 10 in scoring since 80 (Wayne's 1st season)
80-0
81-2
82-1
83-2
84-2
85-1
86-4 your random sample no doubt
87-1
88-3
89-3
90-1
91-0
92-2
93-3
94-4
95-4
96-5
97-5
98-6
99-6
00-5
01-7
02-5
03-5
04-5
05-zero, hell that must mean I'm wrong I guess
06-4
07-2 (10 of top 20)
08-6
09-5
10-5
11-5
12-5
so as we can clearly see using your criteria of the top 10 scorers the increase was pretty much in the early 90's and has held constant till today.
It would be even more clear if we just had the number of guys as good as or better than the top 10 Canadians, as that's been pretty much how the NHL was for the entire time period pre 1980.
Well as you can see above, in the large and broad example, both can be and were true.
All you're showing here though is that there are now 90 guys getting first line minute spots and more importantly, first unit PP spots in the league instead of 63.
I'm sorry but you'll have to bring forth a lot more evidence (or even some evidence) to convince anyone that the select very top tier of players has increased.
Because all I see is a small group of 3-5 top players that are always there, that are clearly above the rest, just like the 70's, just like the 80's, just like the 90's. What I don't see is a Jagr like player (not quite yet with Crosby anyway) and I don't even remotely see a Gretz or Mario level player.
Really has it come to this?
You're right, it was unnecessary. I didn't need to spell out what most already figured out
Well we have alot of evidence that hitting is up and we can always go back and watch film too right?
Yeah, by all means go watch some film, please do!!!
Go watch the insane punishment that Bossy and Dino took around the net in the equipment they wore with lumber that actually was real lumber.
While you're at it, go look up some interviews of Hawerchuk, Trottier or Lafountaine talking about injuries, not even really knowing what concussions were or about the mentality of being tough and not reporting things, playing through them.
Seriously, give your head a shake and research this stuff a little, no, A LOT more first.
Well it's pretty obvious that the league has at least 43% more talent looking at the top 10 finishes from the 80's to 90's to today.
That's before we look at goalies and Dmen of course.
Saint33 claims that he doesn't care where the makeup of NHL talent comes from but we can see quite clearly at the top with top 10 scoring that there always has been the norm (top 10 Canadians in scoring) and now they compete with probably an equally talented group of elite non Canadian talent (as evidenced by the top 10 scoring breakdown).
For the life of me how in the name of God can this change not matter when evaluating players from different eras?
Anyone on that island of thought that a top 10 finish in 1970 is the same as post early 90's is drowning in the overwhelming evidence against it.
Hey, I would have no problem if we got rid of the whole top 10 idea and increased that number by the same % as the league increased in teams.
Top 10 in '85 becomes the top 12 in '95 and the top 14 in '05.
The thing is though, we're still going to see the same names over and over and over again in the top 3-5 every year while the "tier II" players fight over literally a point or 2 to hold on to one of the other spots in the top 10/12/14.