Hockey players speed vs. other sports

[dsjunior1388 81]

Having an argument with a friend about what sport has the best athletes. In particular in regards to speed.

His evidence is the fastest guys in the NFL run 4.2 and 4.3 40 yard dashes. My evidence is the fastest skaters, in particularl Pavel Bure in his prime, are clocked at up to 35 miles per hour. Can anyone give me some perspective on this?

[chk hrd 164]

speed is relative to what you are doing. Just because Bure can go 35mph doesn't mean he can run the 40 fast or vice-a-versa.

Is hockey a faster sport than football, IMO, yes.

[furlanitalia 1]

Our responses might be biased but I'd say hockey is faster, and has far better (more well rounded) athletes. Football is stop, go. Hockey you have to be able to accelerate and change directions (Front to back, not side to side) on a moments notice.

[porky45 1]

you're comparing top speed to quickness.

[Kevin 5]

The fastest NFL players run faster than the fastest NHL players.

The fastest NHL players skate faster than the fastest NFL players.

Any further comparison is fruitless.

[KryptOng 9]

lace up some skates on a football player and have him skate as fast as he can on ice...probably won't even make 3' before he falls on his ass

have a hockey player sprint 40 yards on a football field..will still run average-above average

hockey players are far more well rounded athletes :D

[fawn111 0]

That's a ridiculous argument.......But a fun one.

Speed is relative to your sport.....

Look at boxing and the hand speed of it's top athletes.... Baseball with both pitching and hitting... bat speed is what hits home runs (not brute force)

Also, speed is but one factor that makes an athlete great. Barry Sanders was not the fastest running back to ever play the game, but he was arguable the quickest.

[IniNew 53]

lace up some skates on a football player and have him skate as fast as he can on ice...probably won't even make 3' before he falls on his ass

have a hockey player sprint 40 yards on a football field..will still run average-above average

hockey players are far more well rounded athletes :D

Seeing as skating is a skill that isn't a natural human action, comparing the two is very ignorant. However, I notice the smilie, and can only assume you're joking.

[epstud74 24]

Having an argument with a friend about what sport has the best athletes. In particular in regards to speed.

His evidence is the fastest guys in the NFL run 4.2 and 4.3 40 yard dashes. My evidence is the fastest skaters, in particularl Pavel Bure in his prime, are clocked at up to 35 miles per hour. Can anyone give me some perspective on this?

Very few players run a 4.3, even fewer run in the 4.2 category..Perhaps 1-2 players in the entire league

[Patrick67 1]

I'll go out on a limb and say the NFL recievers/cb's/rb's are the best allround athletes in pro sport.

If you look at video's of them offseason training or weight lift training, this discussion would be a moot point. Also try to see clips from a field/sideline vantage point, they are just inhumanly fast and strong.

I'll also go out on a limb and say NHL players are the fastest thinking athletes in pro sport.

Hockey is a thinking man's game, just look at gretzky and the number or 40+ players in the league.

How many 40+ players besides kickers are there in the NFL.....

[eric42434224 1]

The NFL quarterback is a far faster thinking athelete. The depth and complexity of things they need to evaluate and act upon in fractions of seconds may be un-rivaled in pro sports.

[epstud74 24]

I'll go out on a limb and say the NFL recievers/cb's/rb's are the best allround athletes in pro sport.

If you look at video's of them offseason training or weight lift training, this discussion would be a moot point. Also try to see clips from a field/sideline vantage point, they are just inhumanly fast and strong.

I'll also go out on a limb and say NHL players are the fastest thinking athletes in pro sport.

Hockey is a thinking man's game, just look at gretzky and the number or 40+ players in the league.

How many 40+ players besides kickers are there in the NFL.....

That has more to do with skating ability than anything else. Similar to long distance running, you'll see many 35+ runners out there

[Aussie Joe 0]

In regards to Pavel, he was trained by his father Vladimir who was a former Soviet Olympic swimmer. His training pre/during the season was grueling and his fitness for most of his career was at the Olympic level, far above the NHL median. His speed was a product of his freakish skating style, fitness and strength levels.

Ultimately but, this is an argument that could go on for pages and pages. There is just no comparison to grass v's ice, little though anything else you can think up!

[dsjunior1388 81]

I guess my question is when a guy like andrew cogliano runs a 40 during off ice training whats his time? or another guy with similar speed?

[shotty 7]

look at a sprinter's body compared to a triathlete's body compared to a running back's body compared to a hockey player's body.

they're all conditioned differently for the vastly different sports they excel in. the one thing they all have in common is the ability to perform at the highest level and most pro athletes have a history of being great in other sports, too. how many times have we heard "he could have been a starting pitcher" or "he was the star of his college basketball team" when refering to an athlete of a different sport.

i think when it comes down to it, all pro athletes are of similar calibre and if given the opportunity to turn back time and focus their life on a different sport, they'd have similar results. if dan marino grew up in toronto instead of pittsburg, and focused his time on stickhandling and skating as opposed to throwing footballs through tires and reading playbooks and getting sacked, he'd probbly would have made a fine hockey player. why? because he has the natural ability to excel in athletics.

[Kevin 5]

Based on his inability to run, Marino would likely have never been a very good skater.

Being an athlete does not make you good at all athletic endeavors.

Different athletes have different muscle fiber compositions and different builds, which are best suited for different sports. These differences are genetic and further enhanced by training.

E.G.:

Shaq could never have been a good gymnast

Lance Armstrong could never have been a good sprinter or Olympic weightlifter

etc.

look at a sprinter's body compared to a triathlete's body compared to a running back's body compared to a hockey player's body.

they're all conditioned differently for the vastly different sports they excel in. the one thing they all have in common is the ability to perform at the highest level and most pro athletes have a history of being great in other sports, too. how many times have we heard "he could have been a starting pitcher" or "he was the star of his college basketball team" when refering to an athlete of a different sport.

i think when it comes down to it, all pro athletes are of similar calibre and if given the opportunity to turn back time and focus their life on a different sport, they'd have similar results. if dan marino grew up in toronto instead of pittsburg, and focused his time on stickhandling and skating as opposed to throwing footballs through tires and reading playbooks and getting sacked, he'd probbly would have made a fine hockey player. why? because he has the natural ability to excel in athletics.

[RecLeagueHero 0]

Personally, I just don't think you can compare skating and running, or hockey to gridiron football. But just for the sake of discussion:

American, or gridiron, football just has a level of specialization that you don't see in other sports. Every sport has positions with certain duties that out pace others. For example, in hockey scoring isn't a defenseman's primary focus. But he still has to be able to handle the puck, pass, and shoot. In rugby a forward's job isn't scoring tries, but you have to be able to handle the ball and score if the situation presents itself. This is compared to a down lineman who will never intentionally handle the ball, unless you're dealing with one of a few trick plays but you're not going to see those past high school. In youth football kids over a certain weight limit are usually prevented, by rules, from handling the ball in any intentional fashion. I don't really believe this level of position specalizing develops well rounded athletes.

[Hidious 0]

A popular saying here is that "Hockey is the fastest sport in the world". Players reach much higher speeds on ice than on land. The projectile also moves at very high speed but a fastball or a tennis serve can compare to a slapshot. The pace of the game itself is also rather fast with players changing up during the play after only about 40-50 seconds on the ice.

As for which sport has better athletes, i don't think this can be answered. Is a swimmer getting across a 42km long lake a better athlete than an Olympic gymnast? But... some of the best athletes around, in my biased opinion, are tennis players. Playing 5-setters in sometimes intense heat during Grand Slams shows some impressive athletic skills and endurance.

[Cams 7]

Generally, I'd say hockey players are better athletes, because you are constantly moving, it's a very physical game and you really do have to excel in all of speed, strength, agility, endurance. In pro football, I agree the positions are more specialized. As for conditioned athletes - I'd say soccer, without a doubt. 90 mins, always moving, and a huge playing surface too!

[Machinehead2k5 32]

I'd have to say that MMA/Boxers, hockey players, and cyclists are the top three best athletes.

MMA/hockey - speed, strength, endurance, agility

Cyclists - speed, strength, endurance How many of y'all could go 30mph for 2-3hrs straight, very little rests if any, and possibly up a 7%-10% grade at the same time?

[Kevin 5]

Cyclists?

A sport where you sit on your ass and your upper body does practically nothing is a poor assessment of general athletic ability. Long distance cyclists have endurance, but not speed (all slow twitch fibers), strength (maybe in the quads only), or hand eye coordination.

[IniNew 53]

Cyclists?

A sport where you sit on your ass and your upper body does practically nothing is a poor assessment of general athletic ability. Long distance cyclists have endurance, but not speed (all slow twitch fibers), strength (maybe in the quads only), or hand eye coordination.

Cycling is a lot more than just sitting and pedaling. Hills require bursts of acceleration to keep up with your pace introducing their speed element, and although there isn't a whole lot of hand-eye coordination it takes immense concentration to bike for hours on hours; especially when you get tired.

You're being a bit ignorant on this one.

[Neo5370 132]

I know speculation is fun but this is purely an apples to oranges argument. You simply can't do it by sport because they all emphasize a certain few physical aspects.

Defining "athletic" ability is almost as difficult as defining "intelligence".

Could Stephen Hawking compose a timeless symphony? Could Mozart understand quantum physics?

Can a shaolin monk play hockey? Can michael jordan kill 30 ninjas with his pinky toe? :P

Before we can even pick an athlete or sport, we have to define what we mean by "athlete".

- strength?

- speed/quickness?

- hand eye coordination?

- decision making

- etc...........

list goes on, and so can this argument.

Just for fun though, I'm going to say it might be an olympic gymnast. Strength to body size ratio; off the charts, agility; only spiderman is better, endurance; pretty high but not like a Lance Armstrong. The only thing I can think of at the moment that they lack is mental reaction to an opponent.

Next I will say some type of combatant (navy seal, soldier, gladiator, etc.) or a highly skilled martial artist (not the no contact kind, the kind fights to survive/kill kind which might not really exist anymore). There's no greater pressure to win when the price is your life. They may not be as strong or fast as an NFL player but ideally they should be above average in those departments, and more importantly have the ability to compensate for that.

Lastly, if we have to narrow it down to modern team sports, I will have to concede to pro football players. Those guys are freaks of nature. Period.

[shotty 7]

Cyclists?

A sport where you sit on your ass and your upper body does practically nothing is a poor assessment of general athletic ability. Long distance cyclists have endurance, but not speed (all slow twitch fibers), strength (maybe in the quads only), or hand eye coordination.

and what about time trials... where those same cyclists cover up to 39 km in around 45 minutes?

you're absolutely right, they're a poor example.

Based on his inability to run, Marino would likely have never been a very good skater.

Being an athlete does not make you good at all athletic endeavors.

Different athletes have different muscle fiber compositions and different builds, which are best suited for different sports. These differences are genetic and further enhanced by training.

E.G.:

Shaq could never have been a good gymnast

Lance Armstrong could never have been a good sprinter or Olympic weightlifter

etc.

look at a sprinter's body compared to a triathlete's body compared to a running back's body compared to a hockey player's body.

they're all conditioned differently for the vastly different sports they excel in. the one thing they all have in common is the ability to perform at the highest level and most pro athletes have a history of being great in other sports, too. how many times have we heard "he could have been a starting pitcher" or "he was the star of his college basketball team" when refering to an athlete of a different sport.

i think when it comes down to it, all pro athletes are of similar calibre and if given the opportunity to turn back time and focus their life on a different sport, they'd have similar results. if dan marino grew up in toronto instead of pittsburg, and focused his time on stickhandling and skating as opposed to throwing footballs through tires and reading playbooks and getting sacked, he'd probbly would have made a fine hockey player. why? because he has the natural ability to excel in athletics.

dan marino CAN'T run, or he isn't able to run as fast as terrel owens (or whoever)? Just because running the ball wasn't part of marino's game doesn't mean he was unable. with the shaq argument, you're alienating someone with extreme physical rarity... arguing the exception, not the rule.

if dan marino would have been born in toronto instead of pittsburg and used his natural athletic skill to focus his passion on a sport like hockey, i'm sure he would have done well.

[Machinehead2k5 32]

Cyclists?

A sport where you sit on your ass and your upper body does practically nothing is a poor assessment of general athletic ability. Long distance cyclists have endurance, but not speed (all slow twitch fibers), strength (maybe in the quads only), or hand eye coordination.

They don't have Hand eye coordination?? I'd like to see you bike 30mph after 2 hrs and still be able to be only 6inches behind someone's back tire without hitting them while drafting.

After watching Tour of France I have a new found respect for cyclists.