HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

There are 15 Americans found in the NHL's top 100 scorers.

Here they are: Chris Drury, Brian Rolston, Chris Higgins, Jason Blake, Brian Gionta, Chris Clark, Matt Carle, Keith Tkachuk, JM Liles, Mike Modano, Bill Guerin, Zach Parise, Tyler Arnason, Erik Cole and Scott Gomez.

Not exactly a list of the leagues most electric players.

Modano is the oldest and Carle is the youngest. Of all the babies born in the USA from 1970 to '84 that would take up hockey, this is what we have in today's NHL.

Why?

Because we weren't learning to skate like the Europeans were. We are all about the body, they skate. The new NHL is made for skaters (which it should be) and hopefully the US will start spitting out some good skaters.

you are correct sir.


Modano, Cole, and Rolston are definitely you classic skaters.

Goals are scored with the hockey stick, not the skate.

Maybe the reason is more broad,.....a lack of fundamentals.

Anything more fundamental than skating?

Skating is the most fundamental,....but there is also stick handling, and shooting. The later two may be more associated with our lack of scoring in the NHL.

The larger reason though, may be that we have so many more options (other professional sports) for our athletes in America. The the best athletes is many other countries are playing hockey.

The fundamentals of hockey are only relative to one's philosophy of the game.

I once listened to Mike Sertich give a good background/history to the game of hockey. He said that hockey in Europe evolved from the fundamentals of soccer, in North America, hockey evolved from bande.

As we know the European game is no doubt different. If Serty's history is correct, it certainly explains the bigger ice surface. With the bigger surface, it lead to an emphasis on skating (to cover the extra 3,000 sq ft) and puck possession and de-emphasized the physcial aspect.

When I think of upper teir European defensemen, names like Zubov, Gonchar, or Vishnevski come to mind. Guys who can lead the rush or playmake from the blueline. When I think of North American defensemen, I think of the big lumbering physical types like Pronger, Hatcher, or the Tin man. Now I realize that a Phil Housley, Bobby Orr, or Kasparitus goes against the grain. But when you look at trends, seems to me N. America just produces a different type of player.

Even though the game in North America is on the small rink, skating and puck possession have certainly translated better to it than the North American style on the big sheet.

The answer to IS's question might be: High School Hockey.

Ok packerboy. You have sparked my interest with that. Explain your point.

I thought you'd never ask.

For many years we have had a system in the MN, which we all love, where we would have kids play up through the 9th grade in their local youth programs and then go to high school. Some times on to college.

We would play 35-40 games at the Peewee level and 45-50 game at the Bantam level. Season starts in Oct, ends in March.

Then "up" to high school for the best players. High school would be 20 games and start in Nov and end in Feb for most. 12 minute periods for a long time followed by 15 until 17 just 2 years ago.

Canadians and Euros werent cutting back when the kids got into their late teens but accelerating their development. Playing way more games and a longer season. They werent hamstrung by the MSHSL.

MN is the backbone of USA hockey, IMO. But what have we done with our players when they hit 15? Place them in the hands of the MSHSL.

Suggest that we take these kids and keep them in the Youth programs until they are ready for college and they will try to smother you with a letter jacket.

So thats the long of my answer : High school hockey, which I love.

All too true PB. Never understood why the youth season outlived the HS one.

Two nights ago I watched Ilya Kovalchuk take over the third period on his way to a hat trick. Three goals in a game does not define a legend, but the skill set he posseses does. Kovalchuk is 6-1 225. He seemingly has few physical weaknesses. He has length, width, strength, speed, hands, and vision. I classify him under the heading of genetic freak.

I watch an American born guy who competes on Sundays, he is 6-4 258. He is also a genetic freak. He goes from sideline to sideline like very few men his size have ever done. If he grew up with skates on his feet and a stick in his hand, he would have the skill set of Kovalchuk and then some. Hockey would never be his destination.

Michael Vick, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Barry Sanders, Brian Urlacher, Magic Johnson, Roger Clemens, and LaBron James are a few of the genetic freaks to be born in America. For several reasons, some of them financial, some of them geographic, hockey will always be the ugly stepsister in the American sports landscape. The current TV deal with Versus tells me so.

Minnesota has a population that is bigger than Finland. Should be enough Americans to go around to make them competitve. Competive yes, but to stand out, no. Our gene pool's Genetic freaks play elsewhere.

[quote="Irishmans Shanty"]All too true PB. Never understood why the youth season outlived the HS one.quote]

for what it is worth, my guess would be because of HS football / CC in the fall and baseball / track in the spring