Originally posted by: -Jeremy-
Originally posted by: -Jeremy-
how is basketball "athletically superior"? Because they're on shoes instead of skates?
Originally posted by: swerve
athleticism in it's sheer form is the ability to jump, sprint and move and an incredibly mobile clip.
yeah, but the thing is hockey players aren't near the size of NFL or NBA players. usually, as standard definition in athletics, a taller/larger athlete is preferable because it opens more opportunities to his athletic limit.
each hockey player in the NHL possess skill that rivals and mainly surpasses all skill sports, but skating is a skill. i mean, yes, there are naturally gifted skaters. that is more balance and an acquired skill however. a guy who can run a 4.0-4.3 40 yard dash or have a 48" + vertical leap is someone who generally is born with that capability athletically.
if you're going to tell me NHL players, man for man, would match NBA or NFL players in athletic combine work outs (i.e. bench press, squats, 40 yard dash, wind sprints, vertical leaping) I'd have to question if you're speaking out of loyalty to hockey.
i'm not dissing the sport, like i said: if you took Chris Bosh or Wade or Rondo at age 10 and put them on skates, they wouldn't be as capable I believe.. but i'm not arguing that. i'm saying, if you put most of the NHL players on a level athletic playing field against NBA or NFL athletes, the differential is monstrous.
like i said, skill wise... precision, timing, balance, probably even stamina, hockey players are incredibly high level. but i'm talking raw athletics: jumping, running, agility. i don't doubt hockey players can match man for man the agility because of the great balanced needed to skate at such a high level; but can you honestly say the NHL medium of players could put up the same "combine" type numbers as basketball or football players?
i'm arguing sheer, raw athletic ability. not skill, which is more acquired than natural (but not necessarily always the case, as i said before)