Byfuglien boating drunk, hmm, but 286lbs wow

[tro 4]

via Darren Wolfson tweets,

Got a tip that Dustin Byfuglien was at the Hennepin County Jail last night. DBWI test refusal. Here it is.

Re: Byfuglien - told now refusal of BWI (boating) test. Also told he weighed in at 286 lbs. Holy crap! He played at about 245 lbs last year.

[psh 25]

via Darren Wolfson tweets,

Got a tip that Dustin Byfuglien was at the Hennepin County Jail last night. DBWI test refusal. Here it is.

Re: Byfuglien - told now refusal of BWI (boating) test. Also told he weighed in at 286 lbs. Holy crap! He played at about 245 lbs last year.

Maybe the Hawks knew what they were doing. 286?!

[Chadd 916]

He has always been a big guy, I think the 245 was on the low side.

[Buzz_LightBeer 969]

Being from Milwaukee, doing anything while intoxicated is reasonably forgivable, sometimes laughable.

But I've always though his playing weight was 25 lbs understated.

[goaliemanshark 6]

Perhaps it's all muscle and he just really beefed up?

[skyscrape 5]

All I can say being a big guy is that, he always looked a lot heavier to me than OVI and OVI is a big boy! I am 6'6 and a lot of people ask me if I am 250-270! I always laugh, I am 300-325! I have always believed his 245 to be on the low side. Plus big guys drop weight pretty quick. I bet 8 lbs was just beer alone! One hard week and clean diet and he is back around 270. High 250's, low 260's by October.

[bigdmac 12]

All I can say being a big guy is that, he always looked a lot heavier to me than OVI and OVI is a big boy! I am 6'6 and a lot of people ask me if I am 250-270! I always laugh, I am 300-325! I have always believed his 245 to be on the low side. Plus big guys drop weight pretty quick. I bet 8 lbs was just beer alone! One hard week and clean diet and he is back around 270. High 250's, low 260's by October.

Very good post. I'm 6'7 and am usually between 240-250 lbs, depending on the day. If I eat like crap throughout the day, I can put on about 6-7 pounds, go to hockey and come back weighing the same as I did at the start of the day. Some peoples weight can shift drastically throughout the day, although I notice it more in bigger people.

[tro 4]

I was trying to think of a NHL player 280+ and couldn't think of one, I'm sure Buff won't be 280 when camp arrives and the season starts, my question, who is the heaviest player ever?

[fastbrother7 0]

The drunken boating is what it is, but you make how much a year and you step out in public like this?:

C'mon D-Buffs, you're shaming the brothers buddy......Hit the gym and lose the Rocawear.....

[skyscrape 5]

I was trying to think of a NHL player 280+ and couldn't think of one, I'm sure Buff won't be 280 when camp arrives and the season starts, my question, who is the heaviest player ever?

Not sure, but I read somewhere that in the AHL he played at 310.

[Hawkeye 0]

I follow the Hawks pretty close. He was never close to 310, 260 seemed to be his average.

[camhockey16 5]

makes you wonder how much better/faster he would play if he had under 10% body fat. if he is relatively out of shape but still putting up a lot of points - he could be even better.

[wrangler 157]

I follow the Hawks pretty close. He was never close to 310, 260 seemed to be his average.

Yeah, the last Blackhawks program I've got for 2010 listed him at 257.

[sitzlejd 0]

makes you wonder how much better/faster he would play if he had under 10% body fat. if he is relatively out of shape but still putting up a lot of points - he could be even better.

Just out of curiousity, how many NHL players do you think are under 10% BF? Isn't that a really low number? I'm a relatively skinny guy and I usually come in around 18-20% BF (5' 10", 175lbs)

[camhockey16 5]

Just out of curiousity, how many NHL players do you think are under 10% BF? Isn't that a really low number? I'm a relatively skinny guy and I usually come in around 18-20% BF (5' 10", 175lbs)

i would imagine there are a couple guys on every nhl team that are under 10% body fat - not that that instantly makes you faster and better - but it certainly doesnt hurt. I dont know if the numbers exist of what percentage of nhl players are under 10% body fat - but i would bet players would be more likely than goaltenders.

[Krev 86]

i would imagine there are a couple guys on every nhl team that are under 10% body fat - not that that instantly makes you faster and better - but it certainly doesnt hurt. I dont know if the numbers exist of what percentage of nhl players are under 10% body fat - but i would bet players would be more likely than goaltenders.

Mike Fisher comes to mind.

[Quintin 16]

Jarret Stoll, Ethan Moreau, Mike Cammalleri to add to that

[skyscrape 5]

[

I follow the Hawks pretty close. He was never close to 310, 260 seemed to be his average.

ESPN had an article pop up when I googled it but when I clicked on it took me somewhere else. It stated in the WHL he played at 280.

[Jason Harris 31]

i would imagine there are a couple guys on every nhl team that are under 10% body fat - not that that instantly makes you faster and better - but it certainly doesnt hurt. I dont know if the numbers exist of what percentage of nhl players are under 10% body fat - but i would bet players would be more likely than goaltenders.

When I was in my late teens to early twenties, I think I was just under 7% body fat. Based on my stomach then and guys I've seen in professional locker rooms, I'd estimate that it's probably around 80% to 90% who are under 10% body fat, with the remainder under 15%.

Just out of curiousity, how many NHL players do you think are under 10% BF? Isn't that a really low number? I'm a relatively skinny guy and I usually come in around 18-20% BF (5' 10", 175lbs)

It's also dependent on how muscular you are -- as well as the methodology for measuring. The calipers are the quick way to measure body fat, but each person has a propensity to store more fat in specific locations, so the readings can get slightly skewed. Years ago, we did the water testing, where greater muscularity would help the body sink.

[Caz 0]

Perhaps it's all muscle and he just really beefed up?

No way, simply impossible without PEDs. Interesting that he put on that much fat though.

When I was in my late teens to early twenties, I think I was just under 7% body fat. Based on my stomach then and guys I've seen in professional locker rooms, I'd estimate that it's probably around 80% to 90% who are under 10% body fat, with the remainder under 15%.

Agreed.

[camhockey16 5]

would you say that the rule doesnt apply to goaltenders?

I'm sure there are some that are really in shape - but i think there are others that are over the 15% but it doesnt affect their play.

[sitzlejd 0]

When I was in my late teens to early twenties, I think I was just under 7% body fat. Based on my stomach then and guys I've seen in professional locker rooms, I'd estimate that it's probably around 80% to 90% who are under 10% body fat, with the remainder under 15%.

It's also dependent on how muscular you are -- as well as the methodology for measuring. The calipers are the quick way to measure body fat, but each person has a propensity to store more fat in specific locations, so the readings can get slightly skewed. Years ago, we did the water testing, where greater muscularity would help the body sink.

Hmm...I think I'm fairly muscular and have decent ab definition, if the stomach is the indicator as Jason said. But at my stats 5' 10", 175lbs, the little handheld gizmo always tells me I'm around 20%. If I was at 10% I think I would be cut beyond belief, but it seems like the NHL guys I see aren't really cut like that.

[Caz 0]

Hmm...I think I'm fairly muscular and have decent ab definition, if the stomach is the indicator as Jason said. But at my stats 5' 10", 175lbs, the little handheld gizmo always tells me I'm around 20%. If I was at 10% I think I would be cut beyond belief, but it seems like the NHL guys I see aren't really cut like that.

Handheld 'gizmo's are usually near the bottom in terms of accuracy. The Scale's aren't any better. The best two ways to actually get it measured is with 1, underwater testing (hard to explain) and 2, Skinfold tests. Its also pretty easy just to Google '20% Body Fat' or whatever number you want, and get a accurate look at what it looks like to be at that percentage. For a 5'10", 175lbs guy, 20% would give you little if not no definition at all in your abs unless under strange lighting and heavily dehydrated/intensely flexed. Even at 10% you won't probably see your lower 4 of your '6 pack' very well, and your obliques will probably be pretty visible. Around 8% you get a clear 6 pack usually, and around 6% you get 'shredded' physique, entire abdominal region should be distinctly visible, if not veiny. You get the freeks that are around 3-5%, which is where you see the guys in ad's at, most of them are also dehydrated.

The average hockey player, like I said before, is at 10% BF. Some of the guys who actually put lots of effort into it (strict nutritional program, cardio, etc) might be around 7-8%, but anything less than that is unhealthy for an endurance athlete. On the other side of things, anything more than 15% in the NHL would be considered out of shape. Unless they are above 6'4"ish, or really densely muscle packed. Keep in mind that it really depends on how much muscle you have on your frame also, if you have more muscle (greater percentage of muscle burns more calories than those without) and more fat, you could have the same % of BF as a guy that has 30 lbs less muscle.

/rant

[Scotty 8]

Handheld 'gizmo's are usually near the bottom in terms of accuracy. The Scale's aren't any better. The best two ways to actually get it measured is with 1, underwater testing (hard to explain) and 2, Skinfold tests. Its also pretty easy just to Google '20% Body Fat' or whatever number you want, and get a accurate look at what it looks like to be at that percentage. For a 5'10", 175lbs guy, 20% would give you little if not no definition at all in your abs unless under strange lighting and heavily dehydrated/intensely flexed. Even at 10% you won't probably see your lower 4 of your '6 pack' very well, and your obliques will probably be pretty visible. Around 8% you get a clear 6 pack usually, and around 6% you get 'shredded' physique, entire abdominal region should be distinctly visible, if not veiny. You get the freeks that are around 3-5%, which is where you see the guys in ad's at, most of them are also dehydrated.

The average hockey player, like I said before, is at 10% BF. Some of the guys who actually put lots of effort into it (strict nutritional program, cardio, etc) might be around 7-8%, but anything less than that is unhealthy for an endurance athlete. On the other side of things, anything more than 15% in the NHL would be considered out of shape. Unless they are above 6'4"ish, or really densely muscle packed. Keep in mind that it really depends on how much muscle you have on your frame also, if you have more muscle (greater percentage of muscle burns more calories than those without) and more fat, you could have the same % of BF as a guy that has 30 lbs less muscle.

/rant

Great to hear someone with some actual knowledge of the body's composition bring some sense and knowledge into this.

Everyone thinks that every player in every professional league is in world-class shape because they're the best of the best at their sport. They receive better training than most of us, are expected to keep themselves at least somewhat in shape, and potentially may have access to meals and nutrition made for them. However, this isn't always true. Some of these guys are just average people with average physiques that are exceptionally good at their given sport. Being around some pros makes you realize that some of them take the training, nutrition, and all-around athletic ability and strength very seriously: Rod Brindamour, Mike Cammalleri, etc. However, seeing others makes you realize that this person is basically living the lifestyle of a college guy and he just so happens to be incredible at hockey.

I'll agree that Byfuglien could be even better if his take on nutrition, fitness, and the overall composition of his body were that of one of the previously mentioned guys. Yeah, he's a good NHL player at his playing weight of a supposed 245 lbs, but you can tell he's certainly packing a good amount of extra weight around. Imagine if he were closer to single digit BF % numbers and was potentially stronger, quicker, and more agile. Not to mention the increased health and energy he would potentially gain from eating better. It's sometimes a shame to see such talent left untapped because someone won't treat their body the way it should be treated.

[Chadd 916]

The average hockey player, like I said before, is at 10% BF. Some of the guys who actually put lots of effort into it (strict nutritional program, cardio, etc) might be around 7-8%, but anything less than that is unhealthy for an endurance athlete.

Hockey players are not endurance athletes. Marathon runners, cyclists, triathletes; those are endurance athletes and their bodies look nothing like any hockey player I've ever seen.

Great to hear someone with some actual knowledge of the body's composition bring some sense and knowledge into this.

A lot of it is bunk, take it with a grain of salt.