2024 Entry Level Draft - Confirmed Flyers pick at #12

[flyercanuck]

5 hours ago, ctid said:

Someone said here that he is a Matthew Tkachuck on defense.

 

So, shows up for one game in the cup finals?

[AlaskaFlyerFan]

17 hours ago, radoran said:

 

What if, and hear me out here, they're able to bring back a legendary name who can really harken back to the glory days of Flyer Hockey and serve as an inspirational figure to the fans and the room?

 

Zach McEwen is coming back!!!  

[mojo1917]

On 6/19/2024 at 9:00 AM, jammer2 said:

he strikes me as the kind of guy that you win in spite of his play...not because of it. 

I wouldn't say this because it implies he's bad. That's how I would describe Ristolainen.

 

I would say he doesn't hurt the team with his game.

Also, I think his stick-on-puck defensive skill is elite. I think it's why he was able to play those minutes down the stretch and be effective. Wheb he wasn't effective, he was holding his own and not getting caved in by the opponents top 6. 

 

I think the question, is York a player on Edmonton or Florida's top 2 pairs? is interesting. 

I think I've seen a lot of stupid **** from Montour in these playoffs.

McDavid especially has owned him, Knobloch has seen that and gets him out vs Montour as much as possible. I think York would fair the same. 

Faint praise I know, but I do think he could be in that mix. 

 

Going to add, I still think defensemen take a minute to develop too.  I don't know if at 23 we've seen York's best. He's pretty good right now, and there is room for him to improve as he sees more NHL ice. 

 

 

 

Edited June 20 by mojo1917
added the York bit

[jammer2]

3 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

I wouldn't say this because it implies he's bad. That's how I would describe Ristolainen.

 

I would say he doesn't hurt the team with his game.

Also, I think his stick-on-puck defensive skill is elite. I think it's why he was able to play those minutes down the stretch and be effective. Wheb he wasn't effective, he was holding his own and not getting caved in by the opponents top 6. 

 

I think the question, is York a player on Edmonton or Florida's top 2 pairs? is interesting. 

I think I've seen a lot of stupid **** from Montour in these playoffs.

McDavid especially has owned him, Knobloch has seen that and gets him out vs Montour as much as possible. I think York would fair the same. 

Faint praise I know, but I do think he could be in that mix. 

 

Going to add, I still think defensemen take a minute to develop too.  I don't know if at 23 we've seen York's best. He's pretty good right now, and there is room for him to improve as he sees more NHL ice. 

 

 

 

I didn't mean to imply York was bad...mid, meh yes. Perhaps that was not the best phrasing by me. Reasonable assertion, ie stick work. Elite may be a stretch, but better than average...agreed. I do think what you see is what you get at this point...but hey, been wrong before. 

 

  In the end, he is just not what I envision as part of an elite top 4. I'd rather move up in the draft, secure elite talent and get a top 4 do over. Lots of time...this team is not a few pieces away. Even with everything going thevFlyers way they are 3-4 yrs away. Top 4 wise I'd like 2 strong offensive studs that don't compromise the defensive end. Paired with that, two nice skating beasts that force you to turn your head every time you go in the corner...the kinda guys opponents know where they are at cause they can injure you with a legal hit. These are just my preferences ....and I don't see York fitting into either group I described. Others will have differing opinions...I get it. 

[JR Ewing]

3 hours ago, mojo1917 said:

I think the question, is York a player on Edmonton or Florida's top 2 pairs? is interesting.

 

If the Oilers were in a rebuild, Mattias Ekholm out and Cam York in would be interesting, since he's only 23.. In terms of straight-up value today, Eklholm is far better, though. The Athletic has York with a +1 Net Rating, Ekholm with a +21. There are only five other defensemen (Evan Bouchard, Quinn Hughes, Adam Fox, Roman Josi, Josh Morrisey) who had a higher one.

 

Second pair; Darnell Nurse? Oh. My. God. Let's make that happen.

 

Quote

 

I think I've seen a lot of stupid **** from Montour in these playoffs.

McDavid especially has owned him, Knobloch has seen that and gets him out vs Montour as much as possible. I think York would fair the same. 

Faint praise I know, but I do think he could be in that mix. 

 

 

Paul Maurice has done everything in his power to keep Brandon Montour away from Connor McDavid, so they've only shared the ice for 16 minutes. Those minutes weren't pretty for the Panthers. McDavid's line produced 2 goals, good for 7.5 gf/60.

 

For what it's worth, it's the Ekblad/Forsling pair that McDavid has been abusing the most, putting up 7 (5.31 gf/60). This is really something else, actually. McDavid's line not-very-shockingly was the most productive line in the NHL during the regular season, scoring 4.42 gf/60. In the Finals, against the Barkov line and Ekblad pair, McDavid's offense has increased.

 

 

Quote

Going to add, I still think defensemen take a minute to develop too.  I don't know if at 23 we've seen York's best. He's pretty good right now, and there is room for him to improve as he sees more NHL ice. 

 

There's lot of room to grow, and like we've all seen, most guys don't really know how to defend until they're in their late 20s. I like his legs and the way he jumps into the rush. He's not small, but I wish he was taller/had more reach. He would 100% be a part of my core going forward if I were running things in Philly.

 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

On 6/19/2024 at 9:00 AM, jammer2 said:

I admit I'm not a fan of York. I did acknowledge eating minutes is valuable...just very replaceable also. 

 Here are the questions that apply to York in my opinion.

1)Is he a top 4 defenseman on a Championship team?

2)Could he play top 4 for Edmonton or Florida, the current finalists?

3)What special attributes does he have besides eating minutes? What skill is he exceptional at?

 

 I dunno...he strikes me as the kind of guy that you win in spite of his play...not because of it. 

1) Yes he would be. The skating and the hockey IQ alone is more than enough. 

2) Yes, he could definitely play on Florida or Edmonton's top four. Once again, the skating and the hockey IQ alone is more than enough. 

3) York is an incredibly smart player. He makes good decisions with the puck all the time. He can skate and carry the puck and not handle it like a grenade. He might not have the 'shot' to run the point on a power play, but he's a more than capable puck distributor that could play on a 3 forward/2 defensemen power play and his play alone could allow that one defenseman to be a roamer. 

 

I wasn't big on the York pick when the Flyers initially drafted him. If the Flyers went forward, I wanted Matthew Boldy and the defenseman I actually wanted was Victor Soderstrom, who went to Phoenix. Kids who are 17 and turning 18, and play against adults (and play quite well) will always be my preference. With that being said, York really grew on me because there's a calmness to his game and he simply doesn't get rattled. Those kind of defensemen are invaluable. 

 

As for his offense, he scored 30 points this year with minimal power play time. So, there's room to grow offensively and as he continues to add more strength, various elements of his game will improve, and that includes his shot.

 

The way York plays, style wise, is a little reminiscent of how Eric Desjardins played. Just go out, get business done and get ready for the next game. 

 

Let me be clear - I am NOT comparing York to Desjardins or think that York will be the next Desjardins. I just think he's very similar in terms of style of play.

[jammer2]

56 minutes ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

1) Yes he would be. The skating and the hockey IQ alone is more than enough. 

2) Yes, he could definitely play on Florida or Edmonton's top four. Once again, the skating and the hockey IQ alone is more than enough. 

3) York is an incredibly smart player. He makes good decisions with the puck all the time. He can skate and carry the puck and not handle it like a grenade. He might not have the 'shot' to run the point on a power play, but he's a more than capable puck distributor that could play on a 3 forward/2 defensemen power play and his play alone could allow that one defenseman to be a roamer. 

 

I wasn't big on the York pick when the Flyers initially drafted him. If the Flyers went forward, I wanted Matthew Boldy and the defenseman I actually wanted was Victor Soderstrom, who went to Phoenix. Kids who are 17 and turning 18, and play against adults (and play quite well) will always be my preference. With that being said, York really grew on me because there's a calmness to his game and he simply doesn't get rattled. Those kind of defensemen are invaluable. 

 

As for his offense, he scored 30 points this year with minimal power play time. So, there's room to grow offensively and as he continues to add more strength, various elements of his game will improve, and that includes his shot.

 

The way York plays, style wise, is a little reminiscent of how Eric Desjardins played. Just go out, get business done and get ready for the next game. 

 

Let me be clear - I am NOT comparing York to Desjardins or think that York will be the next Desjardins. I just think he's very similar in terms of style of play.

Fair enough. A tad skeptical, but would not be the first time I've been wrong. 

[jammer2]

1 hour ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

1) Yes he would be. The skating and the hockey IQ alone is more than enough. 

2) Yes, he could definitely play on Florida or Edmonton's top four. Once again, the skating and the hockey IQ alone is more than enough. 

3) York is an incredibly smart player. He makes good decisions with the puck all the time. He can skate and carry the puck and not handle it like a grenade. He might not have the 'shot' to run the point on a power play, but he's a more than capable puck distributor that could play on a 3 forward/2 defensemen power play and his play alone could allow that one defenseman to be a roamer. 

 

I wasn't big on the York pick when the Flyers initially drafted him. If the Flyers went forward, I wanted Matthew Boldy and the defenseman I actually wanted was Victor Soderstrom, who went to Phoenix. Kids who are 17 and turning 18, and play against adults (and play quite well) will always be my preference. With that being said, York really grew on me because there's a calmness to his game and he simply doesn't get rattled. Those kind of defensemen are invaluable. 

 

As for his offense, he scored 30 points this year with minimal power play time. So, there's room to grow offensively and as he continues to add more strength, various elements of his game will improve, and that includes his shot.

 

The way York plays, style wise, is a little reminiscent of how Eric Desjardins played. Just go out, get business done and get ready for the next game. 

 

Let me be clear - I am NOT comparing York to Desjardins or think that York will be the next Desjardins. I just think he's very similar in terms of style of play.

Maybe its not York that I dislike, but what he represents. I dont like how the game has evolved. I know players like York were around when I was younger, but their presence is much more prevalent in today's game. 

 

 I miss Behn Wilson types in the Orange and Black. The snarling, savage, would rather take your head off than look at you. He added offense also, but every single opponent knew where he was at all times. There is something to be said for that subtle skill. 

 

 To me, York represents how Betteman has changed the game, for the worse IMHO. Give me blood and guts over quietly efficient skill. Just my preference. Part of me hopes that we get this Yarumchuck kid from the WHL, just to get a bit of that back. 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

32 minutes ago, jammer2 said:

Maybe its not York that I dislike, but what he represents. I dont like how the game has evolved. I know players like York were around when I was younger, but their presence is much more prevalent in today's game. 

 

 I miss Behn Wilson types in the Orange and Black. The snarling, savage, would rather take your head off than look at you. He added offense also, but every single opponent knew where he was at all times. There is something to be said for that subtle skill. 

 

 To me, York represents how Betteman has changed the game, for the worse IMHO. Give me blood and guts over quietly efficient skill. Just my preference. Part of me hopes that we get this Yarumchuck kid from the WHL, just to get a bit of that back. 

I get it. I miss those days. I was a huge Tocchet fan and always clamour for the days when another Tocchet comes through the system, but the way the game is played would neuter his effectiveness.

[RonJeremy]

30 minutes ago, jammer2 said:

Maybe its not York that I dislike, but what he represents. I dont like how the game has evolved. I know players like York were around when I was younger, but their presence is much more prevalent in today's game. 

 

 I miss Behn Wilson types in the Orange and Black. The snarling, savage, would rather take your head off than look at you. He added offense also, but every single opponent knew where he was at all times. There is something to be said for that subtle skill. 

 

 To me, York represents how Betteman has changed the game, for the worse IMHO. Give me blood and guts over quietly efficient skill. Just my preference. Part of me hopes that we get this Yarumchuck kid from the WHL, just to get a bit of that back. 

I feel the exact same way. Behn Wilson was my favorite Flyer , he scored 50 plus points as a rookie dman and had 200 mins in penalties. He won the majority of his fights and played with hatred in his heart. Even though the skill level of today’s players are much higher, old time hockey was much more exciting. Yakemchuck is exactly the guy I want. A big guy who can score and lay out big hits. That’s exactly the type of excitement this team needs and the fans will love it. I’m tired of the non descript vanilla players we have had for years. I don’t mind a York if he’s teamed with a guy like Yakemchuck. I have preached for years we need a blend of  skill and grit , a good balance . People who think we can win with two small centers like Catton and Helenius are dreaming. You can have one guy like that and then your other center has to be a big , physical guy with skill. I also don’t believe you can have three small dmen like Andrae, York and Drysdale and be successful. I really hope we make some moves at the draft , we have the Fla pick, Laughton, Farabee, TK and Drysdale as trade chips. I’d like to see us get another pick in the top ten. To me, if we draft Yakemchuck and we have Bonk, that makes Drysdale expendable.

[jammer2]

21 minutes ago, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

I get it. I miss those days. I was a huge Tocchet fan and always clamour for the days when another Tocchet comes through the system, but the way the game is played would neuter his effectiveness.

I will NEVER forget the 1st time I was exposed to Tocchett. It was fairly early in the 1981 season, the Sault came into Windsor to play the Spits. Heavy rumors about this 16 year old rookie that was cutting a bloody swath through the OHL. We were beside ourselves with laughter. We knew if Tocchett got cocky he would be dealing with Paul McDermid (yes, Lane McDermids Dad...God I'm old...lol). Less than 10 minutes in Rick had demolished Paul to the point they had to stop the game because the cut on Paul's forehead was bleeding so bad, it was compromising the Ice surface. Our section was relentless on ripping him from that point forward...but this cocky 16 yr old gave it right back to us....lol. 

[radoran]

1 hour ago, jammer2 said:

To me, York represents how Betteman has changed the game, for the worse IMHO.

 

I don't think it's "Bettman" as much as players can't play the same way with the advances in equipment and the overall speed of the game.

 

Add in the knowledge that has been painfully learned about repeated head injuries and "blood and guts" takes a bit of a different colour.

 

Not many of the 1970s team would be playing in today's league with the talent level they had then. The development programs alone are just wildly different - not to say it wouldn't be interesting to see those same guys through the modern programs or that there were no guys from the who could play now even without development programs.

 

And most of the most significant rules changes that make those teams different happened in the 1980s with Gretzky changing the game.

 

I loved the blood and guts of the spit and bailing wire of the Troika Flyers (Zhamnov, Malakhov, and the guy who is 100% no doubt going back to Russia while smoking cigarettes on the bench).

 

You need that element in many ways. That's honestly what's driving Connor McDavid right now.

 

But you also need the skill to back it up.

 

[jammer2]

14 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

I don't think it's "Bettman" as much as players can't play the same way with the advances in equipment and the overall speed of the game.

 

Add in the knowledge that has been painfully learned about repeated head injuries and "blood and guts" takes a bit of a different colour.

 

Not many of the 1970s team would be playing in today's league with the talent level they had then. The development programs alone are just wildly different - not to say it wouldn't be interesting to see those same guys through the modern programs or that there were no guys from the who could play now even without development programs.

 

And most of the most significant rules changes that make those teams different happened in the 1980s with Gretzky changing the game.

 

I loved the blood and guts of the spit and bailing wire of the Troika Flyers (Zhamnov, Malakhov, and the guy who is 100% no doubt going back to Russia while smoking cigarettes on the bench).

 

You need that element in many ways. That's honestly what's driving Connor McDavid right now.

 

But you also need the skill to back it up.

 

Betteman introduced the movement to "enforce" the existing Holding calls. It changed the game dramatically. The Hatcher Brothers, for example, were 50% less effective because of how those rules/calls were enforced. 

 

  Under the old rules, the NHL was similar to the NFL. You could physically impose your will against opponents. Kind of like jamming the ball down opponents throats 10 times in a row. After the first 5 runs...you know what is coming, the only question to be answered was did you have the physicality to stop it. In many ways, the NHL was like that. Now you have would be ballerina wanna bes who cry when you barely touch them. 

[RonJeremy]

1 minute ago, jammer2 said:

Betteman introduced the movement to "enforce" the existing Holding calls. It changed the game dramatically. The Hatcher Brothers, for example, were 50% less effective because of how those rules/calls were enforced. 

 

  Under the old rules, the NHL was similar to the NFL. You could physically impose your will against opponents. Kind of like jamming the ball down opponents throats 10 times in a row. After the first 5 runs...you know what is coming, the only question to be answered was did you have the physicality to stop it. In many ways, the NHL was like that. Now you have would be ballerina wanna bes who cry when you barely touch them. 

The biggest gimmick is the three on three OT, its  so lame and boring and the shootout, I despise it. So many teams like the NYR when they had Lundquist, would try and kill off the  5 min OT and go to the shootout, knowing they would probably win because of Lundquist. Go to a ten min OT and after ten mins,  if no one scores it’s a tie. If one team scores it’s winner take all, no BS  one point . You will see balls out hockey and teams actually trying to win knowing you get no points if you lose in OT.

[jammer2]

1 minute ago, RonJeremy said:

The biggest gimmick is the three on three OT, its  so lame and boring and the shootout, I despise it. So many teams like the NYR when they had Lundquist, would try and kill off the  5 min OT and go to the shootout, knowing they would probably win because of Lundquist. Go to a ten min OT and after ten mins,  if no one scores it’s a tie. If one team scores it’s winner take all, no BS  one point . You will see balls out hockey and teams actually trying to win knowing you get no points if you lose in OT.

Never thought I would miss ties. Remember the old saying, a tie in Hockey was like kissing your Sister? Well pucker up Sis! (Superfan reference for the old timers...lol).

[RonJeremy]

10 minutes ago, jammer2 said:

Betteman introduced the movement to "enforce" the existing Holding calls. It changed the game dramatically. The Hatcher Brothers, for example, were 50% less effective because of how those rules/calls were enforced. 

 

  Under the old rules, the NHL was similar to the NFL. You could physically impose your will against opponents. Kind of like jamming the ball down opponents throats 10 times in a row. After the first 5 runs...you know what is coming, the only question to be answered was did you have the physicality to stop it. In many ways, the NHL was like that. Now you have would be ballerina wanna bes who cry when you barely touch them. 

The NFL is ruined, it’s all about offense, every time there’s a pass,  it’s pass interference on the defense. The defense isn’t allowed to do anything, you get pushed into the QB and your hand brushes his helmet, it’s 15 yards for a blow to the head. In hockey the dman cross checks you into the goalie and you are called for goalie interference, it’s ridiculous.

[jammer2]

1 minute ago, RonJeremy said:

The NFL is ruined, it’s all about offense, every time there’s a pass,  it’s pass interference on the defense. The defense isn’t allowed to do anything, you get pushed into the QB and your hand brushes his helmet, it’s 15 yards for a blow to the head. In hockey the dman cross checks you into the goalie and you are called for goalie interference, it’s ridiculous.

Agree. If they wanna make these ticky tack calls on CBs they should allow Stick'um back!

[mojo1917]

20 minutes ago, RonJeremy said:

The defense isn’t allowed to do anything, you get pushed into the QB and your hand brushes his helmet, it’s 15 yards for a blow to the head.

I think the death of legitimate stars from CTE has forced the NFL to, at least, appear to care about head injuries.

I think physicality and safety can exist to a point. 

The NHL is a high-speed game in a confined area contact is inevitable. Hits on guys with their backs to the opposing players along the boards will happen, things will happen at high speed that weren't intended. 

Some hits shouldn't be a part of the game though and with enforcement the game can be physical and safer.

Many times bad hits go unnoticed and then unpunished, that makes the league look bush.

I hate the fight after a big clean hit. That's ********.

That said, I think the NHL does a poor job of actually protecting it's players. Hits like the elbow to Barkov in the finals and the Bennett hidden punch to Marchand should carry stiffer penalties.

 

[JR Ewing]

When I was a kid, most of the people playing hockey were the sons of tradesmen, farmers, labourers, roughnecks, derrick hands, etc, etc, etc. Plenty of those guys were pretty rough customers and raised sons who weren't far off the mark in that way, too. I personally knew a handful of kids whose fathers told them that if they ducked a fight on the ice, then they could expect one at home. Somebody messes with you? Drop the gloves. The other team runs up the score? Drop the gloves. The other team's star player is really on it? Drop the gloves. Hockey rosters were stuffed to the top with young bullies.

 

The biggest feeder of talent to junior hockey is the Greater Toronto Hockey League, and if you have a son talented enough to play in it, you'll be spending about $45,000 per year, just in fees, for the kid to play. You haven't yet bought equipment or travelled or anything else, and the expense is similar in every elite youth hockey league across the Dominion.

 

Due to that kind of expense, what are the occupations of the players' fathers now? Investment bankers, stock brokers, lawyers, doctors, etc. You still get some kids who are pretty rough around the edges, but there's just bound to be a lot less of them now due to the differences in upbringing between them and players of the past.

 

[jammer2]

6 minutes ago, JR Ewing said:

When I was a kid, most of the people playing hockey were the sons of tradesmen, farmers, labourers, roughnecks, derrick hands, etc, etc, etc. Plenty of those guys were pretty rough customers and raised sons who weren't far off the mark in that way, too. I personally knew a handful of kids whose fathers told them that if they ducked a fight on the ice, then they could expect one at home. Somebody messes with you? Drop the gloves. The other team runs up the score? Drop the gloves. The other team's star player is really on it? Drop the gloves. Hockey rosters were stuffed to the top with young bullies.

 

The biggest feeder of talent to junior hockey is the Greater Toronto Hockey League, and if you have a son talented enough to play in it, you'll be spending about $45,000 per year, just in fees, for the kid to play. You haven't yet bought equipment or travelled or anything else, and the expense is similar in every elite youth hockey league across the Dominion.

 

Due to that kind of expense, what are the occupations of the players' fathers now? Investment bankers, stock brokers, lawyers, doctors, etc. You still get some kids who are pretty rough around the edges, but there's just bound to be a lot less of them now due to the differences in upbringing between them and players of the past.

 

Ding! Ding! Ding! We got a winner!

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

2 hours ago, jammer2 said:

Betteman introduced the movement to "enforce" the existing Holding calls. It changed the game dramatically. The Hatcher Brothers, for example, were 50% less effective because of how those rules/calls were enforced. 

 

  Under the old rules, the NHL was similar to the NFL. You could physically impose your will against opponents. Kind of like jamming the ball down opponents throats 10 times in a row. After the first 5 runs...you know what is coming, the only question to be answered was did you have the physicality to stop it. In many ways, the NHL was like that. Now you have would be ballerina wanna bes who cry when you barely touch them. 

Derian Hatcher was fine until he hurt his knee in Detroit. He was never the same player after blowing out his knee. His skating went downhill real fast. It wasn't long after he finished that he had to get his one knee replaced. It's too bad that he didn't retire after hurting his knee. His legacy was already made. His play in Philadelphia was bad because he really struggled and his skating was so bad. It's tough to see old war horses like that go out in such a meek manner.

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

The Tocchet talk really makes me miss having a pre-eminent power forward that puts fear into the opposition. I understand why they were interested in Tom Wilson, but Wilson doesn't have the skill that Tocchet had as well. 

 

And I never thought I'd say this, but I'm starting to warm up on the idea of Cole Eiserman at 12. One of the youngest players in this draft, has a pro shot already, plays the left wing, is a decent skater and not afraid of the physical game. I know that there were defensive issues and there were issues that he didn't always hustle, but I think that's more of a kid that just needs a bit of structure in terms of coaching. Most of these kids that look like they aren't hustling, sometimes it's that they simply don't know what to do and good coaching can fix that. Good news is that Eiserman is going to Boston University and that's a good hockey program. There's no rush to add him to the lineup and if Michkov doesn't come over until his contact is completed maybe you can convince Eiserman to stay in school until Michkov is secured and they can debut together. That could be fun to watch.

[radoran]

2 hours ago, JR Ewing said:

The biggest feeder of talent to junior hockey is the Greater Toronto Hockey League, and if you have a son talented enough to play in it, you'll be spending about $45,000 per year, just in fees, for the kid to play.

 

This is what I'm talking about.

 

The developmental leagues are completely different.

 

As are the players within them.

 

You don't have parents spending $45K for their kid to get a concussion on a cheap elbow.

 

[flyer4ever]

14 hours ago, radoran said:

 

This is what I'm talking about.

 

The developmental leagues are completely different.

 

As are the players within them.

 

You don't have parents spending $45K for their kid to get a concussion on a cheap elbow.

 

All of these perspectives have more fact than fiction. I also believe hockey is not unique to the rest of the society of humans these days. If you are in hockey you are from money, fact. You are also an entitled spoiled brat. Thats everyone. Betturd, the owners, coaches, GMs, players, agents, parents, broadcasters and fans. We all want our ****, and we want it now. You only have to look no further than the great Flyer fans in this chat room. We all think our POV is best.

To me, what separates the good old days of Tocchet, Wilson, Clarke, etc is they were a team. 24/7, 12 months a year, til death. Todays NHL team is 25 independent contractors. They 'team up' at playoff time, and then the greedy owners' salary cap kicks in and the teams that make the final 4 get stripped down to meet payroll. 

There is no denying the development of young athletes into NHL players, it is superior today. However, the best players 30 years ago would be the best players today. 

[RonJeremy]

19 hours ago, JR Ewing said:

When I was a kid, most of the people playing hockey were the sons of tradesmen, farmers, labourers, roughnecks, derrick hands, etc, etc, etc. Plenty of those guys were pretty rough customers and raised sons who weren't far off the mark in that way, too. I personally knew a handful of kids whose fathers told them that if they ducked a fight on the ice, then they could expect one at home. Somebody messes with you? Drop the gloves. The other team runs up the score? Drop the gloves. The other team's star player is really on it? Drop the gloves. Hockey rosters were stuffed to the top with young bullies.

 

The biggest feeder of talent to junior hockey is the Greater Toronto Hockey League, and if you have a son talented enough to play in it, you'll be spending about $45,000 per year, just in fees, for the kid to play. You haven't yet bought equipment or travelled or anything else, and the expense is similar in every elite youth hockey league across the Dominion.

 

Due to that kind of expense, what are the occupations of the players' fathers now? Investment bankers, stock brokers, lawyers, doctors, etc. You still get some kids who are pretty rough around the edges, but there's just bound to be a lot less of them now due to the differences in upbringing between them and players of the past.

 

Yeah,society in general is a lot different in that respect. There are very few of those tough kids any more, the Tkachuck brothers are classic old school, but not too many players like them are around these days.