How NHL players have grown
When Insider asked me to look at the personal data for thousands of professional athletes dating back to the 19th century, I was fairly sure what I'd find. As expected, the numbers show that athletes from the big four leagues have grown larger since the first of the leagues (MLB) was established in 1876. For example, the average professional baseball player is nearly five inches taller now than when the sport first went pro. But in general, jocks have added even more weight than height over the decades. The average NFL player is 1.4 inches (or 1.2 percent) taller today than in 1950, but 41 pounds (or 19.7 percent) heavier since then. On a pounds-per-inch basis, players are 24 percent bulkier in the NFL, 12 percent bulkier in the NHL, 8 percent bulkier in the NBA and 5 percent bulkier in MLB than they were in 1950.
And there's a pretty neat graphic here that charts the results of this data in all four major professional sports.
NHL players have gone from an average of 5-foot-9 and 172 pounds in 1920 to 5-foot-11, 180 by 1955, 6-foot and 190 in 1980 and then, finally, up to the 6-foot-1, 205 pounds hockey players have averaged the last 15 years or so.
Here's a question to ponder: Just how big can the average NHLer get? Have we hit the limit?
0 recs |
29 comments
| Add comment
|
Comments
Because hockey isn’t really a vertical sport (ie out jump some guy) there really is no need for huge players. Obviously, you don’t want nothing but tiny guys out there, but height isn’t the huge advantage it is for other sports.
by Hansmoleman on Oct 21, 2009 4:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Tell Chara and his long stick that.
Silver Seven: the Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators blogs.
by DarrenM on Oct 21, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s becoming a bigger and bigger factor for goaltenders, for obvious reasons.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 21, 2009 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember Pierre talking about this once (take it for what its worth), but he said guys who screen the goalies don’t have to be as big, due to the butterfly. The quicker a goalie goes down, the smaller a guy can be to block his vision
by Hansmoleman on Oct 21, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was just going to post about that.
I remember going to GDI goalie camp as a kid, and we had an instructor there who’s name I cannot remember for the life of me, and he had crazy-good stats in the Dub (top 3/top 5) but had just went undrafted because he was pretty short. Or that’s how I remember it, at least.
Silver Seven: the Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators blogs.
by DarrenM on Oct 21, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’d be curious what the position specific trends are over the years. I’d imagine D would be the largest, with teams coveting a Chara, Gill, or even Myers. Goalie would probably next, but I could easily see there being a height limit to that position. Forwards could be any size
by Hansmoleman on Oct 21, 2009 4:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This isn’t really all that surprising.
Scientifically speaking, humans over the last century have gained around an inch and a half of height. This can certainly account for some of the change, but the biggest change comes from strength and conditioning.
In baseball, people didn’t lift weights because they thought a bulky form would slow their running or damage their swing. Yet, as sport science developed, players found additional muscle mass tends to increase power and short-term speed.
Weight is gained in different ways as well. In football with the O-line and D-line there’s been a movement toward larger players, simply because they are more difficult to move and get around. Shear size, in this instance, trumps strength-per-pound.
Size is largely a product of necessity for competitive advantage, smarter training, and sport-specific nutrition. The maximum size of the players will be dictated by the flow of the game. There’s a point at which size ceases functionality and becomes a liability.
Also, be wary of numbers a team gives for weight and height. There’s a prolific inflation of both in sports from high school to the professional level.
by hallock on Oct 21, 2009 4:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Also, I meant to point out, teams have begun to specifically seek out larger players, so I don’t believe there a sound correlation you can make between contemporary size and previous generations.
by hallock on Oct 21, 2009 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
In additional to growth by position (great idea Hansmoleman) I’d also be curious to know the average non-pro athlete growth during the same period. Are these athletes representative of normal human increases in height and weight during the period or is this extraordinary?
MG
by puckreport on Oct 21, 2009 4:56 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Average height among US men, ages 20-74 1960-5 feet 8 1/2 inches 2002-5 feet 9 1/2 inches
Average weight among US men, ages 20-74 1960-166.3 lbs 2002-191 lbs.
As you can see these closely parallel the gains among NHL players. Gains in height/weight in the general population in the developed world have been greater than in the “rest” of the world and are generally correlated with GDP among the world’s populations.
by Big Picture Guy on Oct 21, 2009 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
my goodness do i ever feel undersized now
Silver Seven: the Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators blogs.
by DarrenM on Oct 21, 2009 5:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The average man is 5-foot-9 and 190 pounds?
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 21, 2009 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Those are the latest findings from the 1999-2002 National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey, which is considered the gold standard of assessing Americans’ weight. It is the first government study to look back four decades at the size of Americans. USA TODAY
Canadians, btw, are probably taller (but not heavier) than US men on average since the US has a more diverse population and mirrors the world averages more closely. But the statistics on Canada are not readily available.
by Big Picture Guy on Oct 21, 2009 6:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
A site which claims to have gotten its info direct from Statistics Canada says the average height of men in Canada is 175 cm (68.9 inches), weight is 182 lbs as of 2005. So I was half right.
by Big Picture Guy on Oct 21, 2009 7:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Every time I hear things like that, I’m always surprised too. I’m about 6 foot even, and don’t feel particularly tall. Most of the people I know that are shorter than me are maybe 5’10" instead, and I know a lot of people that are taller. 6’ even feels pretty average to me.
http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.
by IAmJoe on Oct 21, 2009 7:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Averages include people who also weigh 400 pounds. The ‘epidemic’ of obesity has dragged that number up methinks.
by hallock on Oct 21, 2009 7:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the younger generations (no idea how old you are) are dramatically taller, too.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 21, 2009 8:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think so too. If you wanted to start getting picky, you’d need to restrict your comparison of professional athletes to the average of men under 40.
I've been looking at the sky
by Back In Black on Oct 21, 2009 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The last cohort in the CDC study which included US men born in 1980 (they were 20 years old when the data was collected) was a full inch taller than the overall average.
by Big Picture Guy on Oct 21, 2009 8:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That could definitely be true. I’m 22, and thats an observation I’ve made mostly in my peer group.
Maybe the older folks are just starting to shrink?
http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.
by IAmJoe on Oct 22, 2009 1:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Incidentally, I’m amazed by what great athletes basketball players are for their size. Most hockey players taller than 6’5" have been pretty unimpressive. Baseball players who are that big are limited to a few positions, primarily pitching. The really tall football players are often large linemen. And yet, in basketball, guys as tall as 6’9 can be pure skill players.
by Hawerchuk on Oct 21, 2009 5:02 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
also, jeez, Chara looks like Sacha Baron Cohen there,
by Hawerchuk on Oct 21, 2009 5:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s a completely different mechanic and motion though. You deal with a much larger object, played by the hands, which is put into a net ten feet in the air. When hockey players get too tall, it’s easier to slip by them, put it through their legs.
by hallock on Oct 21, 2009 5:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The whole height/weight advantage is a terrible thing, though. It’s something completely out of a person’s control that has such huge ramifcations for your athletic future. It’s hard to express how frustrating it was growing up the shortest, lightest boy in my grade (or even the grade below) and trying to compete athletically. How guys like Marty St. Louis, Theo Fleury, and Spud Wbb kept competing and working toward the top is just astounding considering how much is working against you.
The preference for size doesn’t extend only to pros. By the time I was 8 or so I was advised to stop being a goaltender because I was too short (my parents liked this because they didn’t want to buy the equipment). When I was 13 I was on a regional soccer all-star team and the coach refused to let me play defense, despite the fact that it was the only position I’d played since I was 5, and I was always a starter with previous coaches. And of course, I was kept away from playing front row on the high school volleyball team for obvious reasons
On the plus side, last year I won gold medals as a coxswain for my University’s novice men’s rowing team – the only time my miniature size has been beneficial to athletic competition.
Silver Seven: the Daniel Alfredsson of Ottawa Senators blogs.
by DarrenM on Oct 21, 2009 5:34 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yes, but on the flip side, I’m too tall to be a fighter pilot. You can though!
http://sacrificethebody.blogspot.com/
Sacrifice the Body - Examining the NHL through statistical analysis, reasoned thought, and blind conjecture.
by IAmJoe on Oct 21, 2009 7:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Have we hit the limit?
The answer is probably NO. As the focus on daily nutrition and fitness increase in the NHL to go along with the enhancement of the supplementation provided to the athlete’s the muscle mass to body fat ratio will only decrease over time which may result in larger, more physically toned athlete’s over time. It’s been an essential lately for all NHLers to be involved physically over the summer with fitness as well as nutrition, which has now played a more prominent role. This wasn’t the case not to long ago as Chelios and Roberts (Station 7) were one of the few pioneers in this off-season training regimine, now it’s demanded by all 30 NHL organizations that their players participate in these off-season programs.
It's never about the eventual destination, but rather the long journey and its challenging obstacles that are presented and what it takes to overcome them, that makes the taste of success all the more worthwhile!!!
by hawks61 on Oct 21, 2009 6:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Do you know if there was any breakdown done according to position? For instance in the NFL it seems to me the average wide receiver is probably 4 inches taller then the average cornerback/safety.
by stormshadow on Oct 21, 2009 8:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I’ve posted one for NHL players at the top of the site. Goaltenders are getting taller.
Blogging on hockey at fromtherink.com
by James Mirtle on Oct 21, 2009 8:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
there's a good reason players won't get much bigger
You know the expression, the bigger they are the harder they fall?
Larger people are more likely to get injured doing activities that would be comparatively low-risk for smaller, lighter people. I’m talking about things like car accidents, falling down stairs, etc.
Exactly at what point the human physique starts to become brittle simply via size I don’t know. And hockey does bring other challenges because people of different sizes compete with each other.
It’d be interesting to see how much of an NHL player’s career is spent injured versus size. But it would probably only be really interesting if there was a reliable way to sort out the injury-due-to competition with other-size players versus injuries that had more to do with you than what other people are doing to you.
by delooper on Oct 24, 2009 3:19 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 

















