Talk:Power forward (ice hockey)

	Ice hockey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ice Hockey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of ice hockey on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ice HockeyWikipedia:WikiProject Ice HockeyTemplate:WikiProject Ice HockeyIce Hockey articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

This article needs cleanup

The examples of players is stupid, even if the word Power Forward was used in Hockey at all. Johan Franzen gets removed, but Corey Perry is added? Cal Clutterbuck is added? A guy who is just a grinder, who checks, and fights. Sounds like more of an Enforcer. Bobby Ryan, and Alexander Ovechkin are both 6"2 guys who are skill players. Not defined as power forwards. Brendan Morrow is a 5"11 190lbs guy. Chris Pronger is not a forward at all. This article needs a major clean up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.84.144.114 (talk) 23:38, 25 July 2009 (UTC) Alexander Ovechkin and Bobby Ryan's playing styles are considered to be almost textbook power forward. generally speaking "skill players" (playmakers, danglers, energy players, etc.) in the NHL are 5'10"-6'0" and larger guys (power forwards, enforcers, grinders, etc.) are 6'2"-6'4" (with a couple exceptions). Brendan Morrow (who is 6'0" 209, not 5'11" 190) is considered by some to be a power forward because of his playing style. Also, weight is a considerable factor as well; skill players like Mikhail Grabovski (5'11" 183), Brian Gionta (5'7", 173), Kyle Wellwood (5'10", 181, and he is considered heavy), the Sedin twins (6'2", 188 and 6'1", 187), Steven Stamkos (6'1", 188), and Martin St Louis (5'8", 176) are A LOT lighter than guys like Nikolai Antropov (6'6", 245), Alexei Ponikarovsky (6'4", 226), Bobby Ryan (6'2", 209), Alex Ovechkin (6'2", 233), Joe Thornton (6'4", 230), Johan Franzen (6'3", 222), Corey Perry (6'3", 212), Brendan Morrow (6'0" 209), Eric Staal (6'4", 205), Shane Doan (6'1", 230), and Jarome Iginla (6'1", 207).[reply]

Too many examples?

We had this discussion over at the Enforcer article, but I don't really love the idea of a huge, unruly list of power forwards. I also don't see the point of designating who is "active", since, well, who really cares. If you want to see whether the player is active, you can click the link and read the article. Croctotheface 12:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since the heading is "past and present examples", it makes sense to point out who is active and who is not, which doesn't seem like that big a deal. However, it's tough to determine how many examples should be listed, seeing as how there is no definitive list in which to reference, not to mention the list is far from unanimous.TheKuLeR 07:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just don't see why, of all pieces of data to include, whether the player is currently on a roster is the one to go with. In general, categories are constructed so that they don't make a distinction between active and not active. In other words, Maurice Richard, Cristobal Huet, and Chris Higgins all go in the "Montreal Canadiens Plauyers" category, despite the fact that one is long retired, one is injured, and one is currently playing. I think the logic behind that is sound, as it prevents the need to make somewhat arbitrary determinations of what it means to be active and it prevents the upkeep required to enforce them. Also, for the record, the heading was not always "past and present examples"; it was changed, I believe, to follow the edits that someone made to the section. Croctotheface 12:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Examples section, still

I'm not sure if we should endeavor to make a list like this. It might be more appropriate for a category. I am not fond of the lack of sourcing here, since it causes the section to rely on the opinions of individual editors about what a power forward is and is not. If it remains unsourced, it may be appropriate to delete it. Croctotheface 05:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a week. I'm deleting. Croctotheface 00:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On examples

See this article:

Recent Canadian Press story about Eric Lindros They compare Lindros with Clark Gilles, and Cam Neeley and then say Neeley "invented" the power forward (huhn?). If Neeley was first the first guy who combined strengh/size with skill then what the hell were Bobby Clarke, Gordie Howe, and Mark Messier? I realize that the term powerforward is new (because it was borrowed from basketball) but the idea of combining strengh and skill is as old as the game. For that reason we should ignore half-cocked journalist like this. If we do need any examples (I don't really think we do) we should stick to things that respected hockey historians have to say about it. Kevlar67 07:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, Harry Sinden coined (borrowed) the term "power forward" when describing Neely, but I don't think anyone would seriously describe him as the first power forward -- just the first to have the label. (This message was typed while wearing a Cam Neely jersey, by the way.) Wayne Miller (talk) 22:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alexander Ovechkin

There is no artical outside of wikipedia that notes Alexander Ovechkin as a power forward. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zanutig (talk • contribs) 21:59, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, someone was just being a dick and putting him in because they like him or something. 139.142.154.129 (talk) 18:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you honestly believe that Ovechkin doesn't fall into the category of "power forward," you quite frankly know absolutely nothing about hockey. Ovechkin scored 65 goals last season, he's 6'2", 217 lbs, and ranked #9 in the entire NHL with 220 checks. If he isn't a power forward, then there is no such thing as a power forward. Please, be serious here.

I would, however, take issue with Mark Messier not being on this list. Also, what makes Kris Draper a power forward? He's a 5'10 inch, 188 lb grinder who has has one 20-goal season in his entire career. He has little in common with the other players on this list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.251.205.135 (talk) 22:49, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Draper may be small, but he's an intense defensive shut-down player. Watch him play, and enjoy some of the amazing hits he dishes out every night. While he's not as obviously a power forward as Alexander Ovechkin (probably the most obvious power forward in the recent history of the game), I would still, personally consider him one. But, true, I suppose he isn't usually considered a power forward by most, so you do raise a good point. Certainly though, is it not folly to not have Ovechkin on this list? I'd even call him the archtypical power forward, next to maybe Owen Nolan or something. AlexRochon (talk) 02:12, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The NBA-ization of the NHL

The entire discussion of this non-position is crazy to me. I grew up playing hockey, and a winger is a winger is a winger. There was never couching or line management that ever used the term "power forward" all the years I played and watched the game.

Watch film of the dominant 1970s Montreal Canadiens; as the perfect example of high level hockey, you'll never hear a commentator refer to any player as a power forward. Nor will you hear it on the machine that was the New York Islanders. Nor was it ever mentioned with the 1980s Oilers, nor going back to greats such as Gordie Howe. It's just not a hockey term.

Now, when NBA executives start working at the NHL office, all of a sudden we are using this term? There is a position, a text book position, in basketball called a power forward, which is distinguished from the "small forward" position, and has a specific role to play. Such is not the case in hockey.

Another term that has crept into the hockey lexicon directly from basketball is minutes played. Basketball is entirely concerned with tracking a players minutes. Hockey never was because the games are played very differently. In basketball, a player must literally "check in" at the time table during a stoppage in play when all the time clocks are stopped and the player change can be recorded; in hockey, players jump over the bench midstream with no stoppage in play, because the game is designed to flow, and this flow design does not lend itself to tracking a player's minutes played with accuracy.

I can only imagine that the so-called leading minds in NHL's front office are attempting to make the NHL more American, or at least more aligned in packaging to the NBA. The NBA was also a league at a low point and near going defunct before a renaissance that started with the finals in which Magic Johnson came off the bench as a rookie and his Lakers in a win. It further got a shot in the arm with the coming of Michael Jordan in the 1984 draft and his Nike endorsement that changed the future of sports endorsements and product tie ins to a sport in a way Wheaties never could. Perhaps they think that if they do some of the things in NHL that worked to revive the NBA, the NHL might be more successful in the United States.

I think it's ridiculous. Original Six hockey had more American teams than Canadian. Americans in winter environments like hockey. The problem is trying to shove hockey down the throats of people in tropical climates who have no interest in hockey. But to say that, as a result of the failure to make hockey mainstream, "Americans don't like hockey" is silly. It's just not for everyone, and no amount of fashionable terms borrowed from another game will change that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.255.205.191 (talk) 06:02, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I've never heard the term "power forward" before and if I did I probably ignored it, because it sounds phoney. By the definition of the article it's a player who can play physical and score goals. The article tries to puff it up and make it more complicated, but that's what it means. Problem is, a player who is physical and can score goals is just an all-round player. You don't need a special word for it. "Power forward" is really a term without any use. You'd hear a GM say "this team really needs a sniper" or "this team needs a checking forward" or "we need a good face-off guy". But no GM would ever say "we need a power forward" because OBVIOUSLY you want one because by the article's definition it's the perfect player. Also, the article has players like Howe and Richard on the list. Problem is, that era was very defensive and players were expected to have a physical aspect to their game or they were sent down to the farm team. So, forget Richard and Howe, they were ALL power forwards! BashBrannigan (talk) 13:16, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Candidate for deletion?

This article is almost a candidate for deletion. The complete lack of references makes this appear to be entirely original research. Best as I can tell, editors are simply adding players to the list based upon their own opinions. Every single player on this list should have a reference to what published source referred to them as a power forward. As far as that goes, why is there a list at all? Also where did this definition of power forward come from? It probably is OR or synthesis itself. BashBrannigan (talk) 17:33, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

I cleaned up the article. The talk page had numerous complaints, including my own, but nothing was being done about. So I decided to do something about instead of just complaining. I removed all the unsourced crap and added only material that I could cite. BashBrannigan (talk) 02:27, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]