T Nation

NHL Combine (Bench Press) Numbers

I’m completely shocked at the numbers these guys are putting up. It’s also telling that they only use 150lbs for the testing, where 225lbs is used in the NFL combine. I wonder if the NHL wouldn’t be in such a sorry state if their top prospects were, I don’t know, ACTUAL ATHLETES.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature/?fid=7287&hubname=

“James vanRiemsdyk, although still lacking true definition, does posses a big body frame and ripped up the bench with an 11 rep outing. He and Kyle Turris held the room’s attention to close out the day and seemed to feed off each other as they took on each task.”

" The sleeper of the day might have been Prince George’s Dana Tyrell. The 5-foot-11 and 180-pound fireplug looked very lean and fit and had a very impressive 12 reps on the bench, which was easily one of the top perfomances of the day. He showed strength beyond his size. He also ripped it up on the sprint-bike and did well in agility testing."

a fire plug? strength beyond his size?

12 reps at 150 lbs?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!! i never have liked hockey much but this is hilarious.

they really “ripped it up” has me rolling.

They are high school kids that spend 6 months of the year on the ice playing their sports. So you are looking at about 2 summers of lifting experience for most of them.

Right. So we should expect even worse numbers out of high school NFL prospects that play sports year round?

[quote]nramaker wrote:
I’m completely shocked at the numbers these guys are putting up. It’s also telling that they only use 150lbs for the testing, where 225lbs is used in the NFL combine. I wonder if the NHL wouldn’t be in such a sorry state if their top prospects were, I don’t know, ACTUAL ATHLETES.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature/?fid=7287&hubname=[/quote]

Are you on the verge of becomming a professional athlete like these guys? The NHL being down has NOTHING to do with what their players bench press.

Hockey players focus much more on leg strength, so it’s not surprising that they’re not as strong upper body wise. And most of these kids are 17, 18 years old and have likely only been lifting for a year or two max, with most of that time likely not spent working on building up their max effort bench; rather, working on sport-specific strength.

Having a big bench press does not make you a talented hockey player.

[quote]StevenF wrote:
Having a big bench press does not make you a talented hockey player. [/quote]

yeah but they are still big pussies. and that is funny.

I have read that Mike Peca used 315 and 365 for sets of 10 on the front squat and Gary Roberts does deadlifts in the 500 range during the season. Those are pretty good numbers during the hockey season when they do most of there weight training right after their games.

[quote]texasguy wrote:

yeah but they are still big pussies. and that is funny. [/quote]

Having a big bench press does not make you any less of a pussy.

Most professional combat athletes (boxers, kickboxers, MMA) put up pathetic numbers in the weight room too. Just because I can outbench 'em by 100 pounds doesn’t mean I hold any illusions about being able to kick their asses.

[quote]texasguy wrote:
StevenF wrote:
Having a big bench press does not make you a talented hockey player.

yeah but they are still big pussies. and that is funny. [/quote]

Ignorant fool. I don’t care how “big and strong” you think you are, I hope you’re not stupid enough to fuck with a hockey player.

Well…they’re hockey players… not bodybuilders… they skate around, and never use a movement like the bench press, certainly not like a lineman would.

Everyone has to bench 400 to be an athlete? Sometimes the dumbass bullshit on this site amazes me, and I wonder exactly who posts here.

[quote]nramaker wrote:

It’s also telling that they only use 150lbs for the testing, where 225lbs is used in the NFL combine.

[/quote]

The NFL combine is testing 22 year old men who have 3-4 years in a state of the art division I strength program. The NHL combine is testing 17 year old boys who have no formal strength training experience under a qualified S&C coach.

[quote]Djwlfpack wrote:

Hockey players focus much more on leg strength, so it’s not surprising that they’re not as strong upper body wise.[/quote]

Exactly. Paul Kariya at 5-10 180lbs. has squatted over 400 for 20 reps.

Im kind of shocked. I always figured most pro athletes for any sport were the cream of the crop in terms of genetics. The storied “never lifted a weight in his life but benched 225 for 10 their first time”. I went to school with a few dudes like that.

Although I did see Patrick Elias out to breakfast right after NJ lost the playoffs and my first thought was ‘man this dude looks frail’. His looked about 6’1 175. Not all those guys are bruisers. I would bet alot of the enforcer types are putting up strong numbers tho.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Well…they’re hockey players… not bodybuilders… they skate around, and never use a movement like the bench press, certainly not like a lineman would.

Everyone has to bench 400 to be an athlete? Sometimes the dumbass bullshit on this site amazes me, and I wonder exactly who posts here.
[/quote]

You’ll have to use smaller words if you want people like me to be able to understand your sentences. Visual aids might help as well. I’m just THAT dumb.

People can argue that the tests don’t measure hockey playing ability, but that’s how NHL scouts are chosing to test their prospects. It’s not me that’s making that decision. Likewise, I’ve never seen an NFL lineman do anything productive 40 yards from the line of scrimmage, but NFL scouts measure their 40 yard dash time anyway. It’s a valueable measure of their athletisism.

[quote]nramaker wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:

People can argue that the tests don’t measure hockey playing ability, but that’s how NHL scouts are chosing to test their prospects. It’s not me that’s making that decision.

[/quote]

They place VERY little importance on these numbers (basically the bench press number means nothing). They are judged based on how they do in their respective junior leagues, and how they do in various international competitions. They already know about what order kids will be drafted in long before they all went to this combine.

[quote]Max wrote:
texasguy wrote:
StevenF wrote:
Having a big bench press does not make you a talented hockey player.

yeah but they are still big pussies. and that is funny.

Ignorant fool. I don’t care how “big and strong” you think you are, I hope you’re not stupid enough to fuck with a hockey player.
[/quote]

well i was a state qualifying wrestler two years in a row during high school, i’ve done grappling and have participated in amature mma tournaments with a bit of success. and yes, i would mess with a hocky player and probably whip his ass.

everyone seems to think their favorite sport is the toughest and i’m sorry but hiding behind more pads than a football player, skating in circles with the occasional “body check” (a very low impact collision for the most part, especially with the pads) does not make a guy tough.

That may be true. But my original point, regardless of how poorly I made it, is that I’m surprised to learn that top NHL prospects are FAR from elite physical specimins even for their age group. I’m hardly out on a limb here.

[quote]Steve4192 wrote:
texasguy wrote:

yeah but they are still big pussies. and that is funny.

Having a big bench press does not make you any less of a pussy.

Most professional combat athletes (boxers, kickboxers, MMA) put up pathetic numbers in the weight room too. Just because I can outbench 'em by 100 pounds doesn’t mean I hold any illusions about being able to kick their asses.[/quote]

skill, agility, endurance and a certain mental toughness are all very important for mma. but so is strength. most good mma fighters do put up decent numbers in the weight room.

matt hughes, frank shamrock (not ken though he is strong and was very good before mma was “cool”) vitor belfort in his prime, rampage jackson, randleman, ortiz, pick almost any champion and they will be strong.

take the gracies as an example. they concentrate on skill and put very little emphasis on strength, and they have their asses handed to them now that the sport has blown up and attracts good, in shape and strong athletes.

now, the gracies may be able to kick your ass, yet against equally skilled but stronger opponents they lose.

these hockey guys may have great hockey skills, but they are the cream of the crop of the hocky world and it isn’t too far fetched to believe they would be obsolete if players with real strength who could also match their skill level came along. maybe then body checks would be fun to watch!

i don’t care who you are or what sport you play. if you can only bench 150 lbs ten times and be considered the top at that, the sport has problems. (and people have suggested age and high school. by the time you graduate high school, if you are an athlete, you should be benching more than this.)

hockey has definately shown itself to NOT be a testosterone sport after this tidbit of information.

i’d put it with golf and tennis myself.

[quote]texasguy wrote:
Steve4192 wrote:
texasguy wrote:

yeah but they are still big pussies. and that is funny.

Having a big bench press does not make you any less of a pussy.

Most professional combat athletes (boxers, kickboxers, MMA) put up pathetic numbers in the weight room too. Just because I can outbench 'em by 100 pounds doesn’t mean I hold any illusions about being able to kick their asses.

skill, agility, endurance and a certain mental toughness are all very important for mma. but so is strength. most good mma fighters do put up decent numbers in the weight room.

matt hughes, frank shamrock (not ken though he is strong and was very good before mma was “cool”) vitor belfort in his prime, rampage jackson, randleman, ortiz, pick almost any champion and they will be strong.

take the gracies as an example. they concentrate on skill and put very little emphasis on strength, and they have their asses handed to them now that the sport has blown up and attracts good, in shape and strong athletes.

now, the gracies may be able to kick your ass, yet against equally skilled but stronger opponents they lose.

these hockey guys may have great hockey skills, but they are the cream of the crop of the hocky world and it isn’t too far fetched to believe they would be obsolete if players with real strength who could also match their skill level came along. maybe then body checks would be fun to watch!

i don’t care who you are or what sport you play. if you can only bench 150 lbs ten times and be considered the top at that, the sport has problems. (and people have suggested age and high school. by the time you graduate high school, if you are an athlete, you should be benching more than this.)

hockey has definately shown itself to NOT be a testosterone sport after this tidbit of information.

i’d put it with golf and tennis myself.

[/quote]

You’re an idiot