Around the NHL: 2014-2015

[ubkev]

Active players who scored 20 or more goals in their first ten seasons:

 

Ovechkin

Jagr

Vanek

 

That is all.

Hey look at that, 3 players who I actually enjoy watching.

[Huckleberry]

7 more games for Mceichel :w00t:

[Rasmus_]

7 more games for Mceichel :w00t:

Woot!  Cannot wait!

[Eleven]

Not sure where to stick this.  Many hockey helmets are not safe, it turns out.  Those of you who play might want to consider a different model--and cost does not correlate to quality:

 

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12564082/virginia-tech-study-hockey-helmets-finds-many-unsafe

Edited March 29, 2015 by Eleven

[darksabre]

Not sure where to stick this.  Many hockey helmets are not safe, it turns out.  Those of you who play might want to consider a different model--and cost does not correlate to quality:

 

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12564082/virginia-tech-study-hockey-helmets-finds-many-unsafe

 

This is very interesting. It might even deserve its own thread. 

 

I don't know what that Bauer rep is talking about when he says they don't associate their products with concussion prevention. As someone who was selling this stuff, our marketing people were pretty convinced that what we were selling was concussion prevention. So is that our fault as retailers or is it the manufacturers talking with a forked tongue?

 

I'll be interested to see what the full study says. This is a big deal. 

 

At the same time, I'm not surprised at all. There's no doubt that hockey helmets don't provide protection on the same level as football helmets. If they did, they'd be the same size. The eye test can tell you that much. 

[josie]

Not sure where to stick this.  Many hockey helmets are not safe, it turns out.  Those of you who play might want to consider a different model--and cost does not correlate to quality:

 

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12564082/virginia-tech-study-hockey-helmets-finds-many-unsafe

Wow. I'm sure the CTE people will take some interest in this. Hits in hockey are fast/different when compared to football. A whole different animal. I'm going to stay tuned to this one.

 

Good to see my helmet at least has one star! d4rk would never have let me buy it/wear it if he hadn't believed it was the safest out there. I got a helluva concussion a couple months ago, but I guess everyone just says, "imagine if you hadn't been wearing it or had a cheapo one on". Turns out the cheapo one might've been better according to these studies!  

[darksabre]

Wow. I'm sure the CTE people will take some interest in this. Hits in hockey are fast/different when compared to football. A whole different animal. I'm going to stay tuned to this one.

 

Good to see my helmet at least has one star! d4rk would never have let me buy it/wear it if he hadn't believed it was the safest out there. I got a helluva concussion a couple months ago, but I guess everyone just says, "imagine if you hadn't been wearing it or had a cheapo one on". Turns out the cheapo one might've been better according to these studies!  

 

I'm a little perplexed that the manufacturers seem to think the goal of helmets is to prevent skull fractures. Who the hell gets skull fractures anymore? Didn't forcing players to wear helmets pretty much solve that? 

[IKnowPhysics]

Been rocking a Bauer 5100 for years, thought it was safer when I bought it, glad it showed up with two stars here.

 

The impression that I got when I bought six-ish years ago was that some helmets were designed to diminish one or two beastly impacts and then be tossed away (almost like a bike helmet that cracks up and is then thrown away) and some newer technology helmets were designed to do a better job at repeatedly diminishing more frequent, less severe impacts.

 

But the trouble is that the most important aspect of a helmet is fit, and the different manufacturers of helmets fit drastically different, so it makes it tough to seek out specific safety technologies.

 

It's always worth nothing that expensive helmets don't necessarily protect better (or even fit better), but they sometimes break in easier, are slightly more comfortable, and are sometimes more easily adjusted.

[darksabre]

Been rocking a Bauer 5100 for years, thought it was safer when I bought it, glad it showed up with two stars here.

 

The impression that I got when I bought six-ish years ago was that some helmets were designed to diminish one or two beastly impacts and then be tossed away (almost like a bike helmet that cracks up and is then thrown away) and some newer technology helmets were designed to do a better job at repeatedly diminishing more frequent, less severe impacts.

 

But the trouble is that the most important aspect of a helmet is fit, and the different manufacturers of helmets fit drastically different, so it makes it tough to seek out specific safety technologies.

 

It's always worth nothing that expensive helmets don't necessarily protect better (or even fit better), but they sometimes break in easier, are slightly more comfortable, and are sometimes more easily adjusted.

I've been rocking a 4500 since day one and I'll probably never wear anything else. For me it's not an issue. I don't hit my head.

 

But I worry about my future kids and the woman in my life who plays. They're much more likely to suffer the adverse effects of playing this game. I don't want that. And I don't want manufacturers making protection claims that aren't supported.

 

Fit is crucial. I think that makes a huge difference. But if these helmets don't really minimize risk beyond a certain threshold then why bother? The numbers on the Re-akt series are terrifying. Parents think that it's doing more than protecting from repeated small impacts. But if it's not helping with the big ones then why bother?

[Eleven]

I've been rocking a 4500 since day one and I'll probably never wear anything else. For me it's not an issue. I don't hit my head.

 

But I worry about my future kids and the woman in my life who plays. They're much more likely to suffer the adverse effects of playing this game. I don't want that. And I don't want manufacturers making protection claims that aren't supported.

 

Fit is crucial. I think that makes a huge difference. But if these helmets don't really minimize risk beyond a certain threshold then why bother? The numbers on the Re-akt series are terrifying. Parents think that it's doing more than protecting from repeated small impacts. But if it's not helping with the big ones then why bother?

 

The article is optimistic that manufacturers will make improvements, like football helmet manufacturers did after a similar study.  I hope they do.  Otherwise, the "why bother" is pretty much limited to skull fracture prevention.

[darksabre]

The article is optimistic that manufacturers will make improvements, like football helmet manufacturers did after a similar study.  I hope they do.  Otherwise, the "why bother" is pretty much limited to skull fracture prevention.

 

They're going to face a ton of resistance from the players. That's the problem. Hockey is a very image oriented sport. The players don't want to look stupid, so they opt to wear helmets like mine even though there are lids out there that offer better. 

[Eleven]

They're going to face a ton of resistance from the players. That's the problem. Hockey is a very image oriented sport. The players don't want to look stupid, so they opt to wear helmets like mine even though there are lids out there that offer better. 

 

Football is image-oriented, too.  They'll deal with it.

[darksabre]

Football is image-oriented, too.  They'll deal with it.

 

Football helmets haven't changed drastically though in order to accommodate safey improvements. Hockey helmets, in order to provide real protection, are going to require a complete overhaul. The pros will never have it.  

[Assquatch]

Football helmets haven't changed drastically though in order to accommodate safey improvements. Hockey helmets, in order to provide real protection, are going to require a complete overhaul. The pros will never have it.  

I don't expect it would be any harder than the visors were.

[Eleven]

I don't expect it would be any harder than the visors were.

 

Or helmets to begin with, for those who remember.

[darksabre]

I don't expect it would be any harder than the visors were.

 

Visors aren't a drastic change though. A minor tweak. 

 

Or helmets to begin with, for those who remember.

 

Even this wasn't a huge deal. Outside of some of the crazy Northland domes, most helmets were pretty boring. Or at least unobtrusive. 

[Eleven]

Visors aren't a drastic change though. A minor tweak. 

 

 

Even this wasn't a huge deal. Outside of some of the crazy Northland domes, most helmets were pretty boring. Or at least unobtrusive. 

 

Oh man, I remember the debates on the radio in between periods when the league was forcing this on the players.  Believe me, it was a huge deal!

[josie]

Visors aren't a drastic change though. A minor tweak. 

 

 

Even this wasn't a huge deal. Outside of some of the crazy Northland domes, most helmets were pretty boring. Or at least unobtrusive. 

I wonder what the studies would show about goalie helmets. I mean, it's typically a different kind of blow- a puck hitting you in the head at a potential 108 mph in pro level as opposed to a high speed crash into the boards. The evolution of goalie masks and helmets certainly is a fascinating one, with early pretzel masks and such earning appearance based derision from fan and player alike. 

 

But yeah, hockey is more image oriented than a lot of other team sports out there. Tinted visors, anyone? 

[darksabre]

Oh man, I remember the debates on the radio in between periods when the league was forcing this on the players.  Believe me, it was a huge deal!

 

Mark my words, making helmets that look stupid is going to be met with much more resistance than making helmets mandatory. 

I wonder what the studies would show about goalie helmets. I mean, it's typically a different kind of blow- a puck hitting you in the head at a potential 108 mph in pro level as opposed to a high speed crash into the boards. The evolution of goalie masks and helmets certainly is a fascinating one, with early pretzel masks and such earning appearance based derision from fan and player alike. 

 

But yeah, hockey is more image oriented than a lot of other team sports out there. Tinted visors, anyone? 

 

Goalie masks are some of the most scientific pieces of equipment in the game. The top end ones are engineering to deflect pucks and disperse impacts extremely well. Stiff composite shells and good foams really do a great job. Much better than the plastic player helmets. 

[Eleven]

Mark my words, making helmets that look stupid is going to be met with much more resistance than making helmets mandatory. 

 

Goalie masks are some of the most scientific pieces of equipment in the game. The top end ones are engineering to deflect pucks and disperse impacts extremely well. Stiff composite shells and good foams really do a great job. Much better than the plastic player helmets. 

 

They might be able to pull this off without the helmets looking stupid.

[josie]

They might be able to pull this off without the helmets looking stupid.

There's always gold standards

[darksabre]

They might be able to pull this off without the helmets looking stupid.

 

I doubt it. They'll be football helmets. It's the only way they'll ever meet those VT rankings. 

 

There's always gold standards

 

I'd wear that. 

[Eleven]

I doubt it. They'll be football helmets. It's the only way they'll ever meet those VT rankings. 

 

 

I'd wear that. 

 

Did the shape of football helmets change significantly after those manufacturers started to improve things?

[Taro T]

A big part of the issue is that w/in the NHL and w/in the manufacturing / ratings community (shortened to NHL in the rest of this post)  is that their data indicates that hockey concussions are due to rotational impacts between the brain and the skull, not linear impacts as one would have in football or baseball.  As such, the perception is that the helmet can do very little to reduce concussions - a mouth guard properly fitted and actually worn will likely prevent more concussions than the helmet will.  (Though it is essentially only helpful in preventing concussions from blows directly to the jaw.)

 

The hits that the NHL believe cause the majority of the concussions are of 2 natures: those that come from the whiplash effect of someone's body violently moving prior to the neck snapping the head around and players hitting their heads on the ice / boards.  It would be reasonable to expect to need either a large size of typical materials to adequately slow the rotation of the skull slowly enough that the brain doesn't crash into it, a 'single use' or limited use foam of some sort or an airbag type of technology.  None of which (except going to mega-Gazoo style helmets) currently would likely be economically viable at any but the highest levels.  I'd be very interested to see the research papers / disertations on how the husband and wife propose to solve that issue.  If they've come up with an answer, they will be very wealthy soon.  Items such as the Mark Kelso Great Gazoo helmet have been studied and, from what I've been told, have not been shown to appreciably reduce concussions.  (Haven't seen those studies personally, maybe they were blowing smoke.)

 

As for preventing skull fractures, the current helmets are very good at preventing them and that's (along with cut prevention from sticks) a/the main function.  (Bill Masterson ring a bell for anyone?)  The ability to keep people from having their skulls fracture upon impact with the ice, boards, or glass is not a trivial matter and helmets have saved many lives.  And preventing lacerations (via the helmet itself &/or the cage / shield) is not trivial either.  One gets extremely odd looks when they show up at work or school with multiple stitches in their face &/or a broken nose, missing teeth, etc.  Though hockey players still have the reputation for having no teeth, there are even players that have them all when they start at the NHL level for having worn full cages at the youth levels.  (IIRC, Rob Ray has stated that he didn't lose any teeth during his career.  Might be misremembering that one.)

 

It's a very interesting premise, if they've actually got a workable solution.  I hope they do.  If they do, it truly would be revolutionary.  But what works in football probably won't work in hockey because of the differences in how the brain ends up impacted.  (Both in frequency / severity of the contact and the non-linearity of the motion of the contact.)

[Hoss]

Another huge issue with drastic changes to helmets, and this might've been said already, is the ongoing lawsuits. Drastic changes to the protective wear the league uses is essentially an admittance of guilt.