Help settle dispute on athleticism...

[PugnacAutMortem]

Uh both? Can you clarify which side you're speaking about that doesn't have fat old guys playing? I've played pick up with some pretty old dudes (late 50's- that's pretty old to play on a frozen lake with guys in their early 20's), and I've been to some men's league b-ball games (never played) where there are some old fat guys hustling out on the court- looks like an episode of the Biggest Loser. So what side are you defending?

Lets see your ass go play hockey. That should be good for a laugh.

I guess I wasn't clear enough. You don't see fat guys playing hockey. There's plenty of fat guys playing basketball. Hell, even at a professional level.

And delfuego...not sure what you read or what you assumed about me...but that was an interesting response.

[Delfuego]

I guess I wasn't clear enough. You don't see fat guys playing hockey. There's plenty of fat guys playing basketball. Hell, even at a professional level.

And delfuego...not sure what you read or what you assumed about me...but that was an interesting response.

Sorry, got carried away...

Step into a hockey locker room and you will see lots of fat naked men... You just cant tell because of the loose sweater eh? You can be fat and good at hockey, kinda like judo in that way. You just have to know how to play.

[PugnacAutMortem]

Step into a hockey locker room and you will see lots of fat naked men

Remind me to never EVER step foot in a hockey locker room.

[MarkCO]

FWIW, the old fat guy comments are pretty far off point. Athletic ability has NOTHING to do with how old or fat you are. Physical condition, speed, how long you can go, but actual athletic ability...ZILCH!

[ZERO THEORY]

Basketball, IMO. While putting a shot in the top shelf over a goalie's glove, or in the five hole requires a LOT of precision and coordination, I think the overall intuition with physics required to maneuver around a defender, jump, judge the distance and stroke needed, then release a shot in basketball outshines it in spades. To say nothing of the visual-physical-auditory coordination needed to dribble through a group of defenders while scanning the rest of the floor and evaluating where, when, and how hard to either pass, or where to then move and restart steps 1-4 all within a fraction of a second for the whole time you've got the ball.

I also consider athleticism to be two-fold. Not only the coordination and cognitive skills, but physical capabilities. Namely: speed, strength, and stamina in the respiratory and muscular systems. It goes without saying that basketball players are faster, more agile, can jump higher, and move with much more dexterity. While hockey players are stronger, they're still inferior against the versatility of a basketball player, IMO. Keep in mind that guys like Lebron, Kobe, and D. Rose are regularly on the floor for 3/4 or more of the game. Even Patrick Kane is getting out on line changes every few minutes.

In short, I must give hockey players their due as top athletes, but I think in terms of pure objective athleticism, basketball players are in a completely different echelon.




Also, for what it's worth, neither of them will ever touch a footballer (real football). Messi, Drogba, Ronaldino, and RVP are gods amongst men.

[Ronin13]

Zero Theory-
While I have to say that was a very well thought out and logical argument- I will state this: One an 8mi run at a 6min/mi pace, I would say that for endurance, strength and stamina both a top level hockey player and top level basketball player would be evenly matched. On a cross compatibility test (meaning they each do common exercises the other sport does) the hockey player would be able to dribble, jog, sprint, walk, and pass without issues. However, the basketball player, if we assume he is capable of skating, would probably have problems at the end of what we hockey players call "an unusually long shift." That, my friend, is where I would place the hockey player on a higher level of athletic ability. Remember, both are conditioned similarly, but most often people will use the short-shift cop out, only because they don't understand that one, 20-min period of "short" shifts at a higher level of intensity is much more exhaustive than one half of basketball play time. And I know this because I've done both, and find hockey to be quite noticeably more athletically demanding.

[MarkCO]

Zero Theory-
While I have to say that was a very well thought out and logical argument- I will state this: One an 8mi run at a 6min/mi pace, I would say that for endurance, strength and stamina both a top level hockey player and top level basketball player would be evenly matched. On a cross compatibility test (meaning they each do common exercises the other sport does) the hockey player would be able to dribble, jog, sprint, walk, and pass without issues. However, the basketball player, if we assume he is capable of skating, would probably have problems at the end of what we hockey players call "an unusually long shift." That, my friend, is where I would place the hockey player on a higher level of athletic ability. Remember, both are conditioned similarly, but most often people will use the short-shift cop out, only because they don't understand that one, 20-min period of "short" shifts at a higher level of intensity is much more exhaustive than one half of basketball play time. And I know this because I've done both, and find hockey to be quite noticeably more athletically demanding.

Yeah, but realize that one test that tested athlete's from all sports from a Div 1 school concluded that Baseball was overall the hardest sport. The top athletes from other sports fared miserably at baseball while the baseball players did very well at the other sports. Add to the mix that the best baseball players skip college and go straight to minor league teams not really hitting their prime until 28 while other sports prime out at about 23 to 24. Where's my monkey wrench.

[ZERO THEORY]

However, the basketball player, if we assume he is capable of skating, would probably have problems at the end of what we hockey players call "an unusually long shift." .

You do raise an interesting point here. However, I'd venture to say that the crossover plays both ways. A basketball player might struggle during a long shift, or be rudimentary at skating and stick skills, but the hockey player's in the same boat. He may be able to dribble, pass, and shoot, but only at the fundamental level as well. Hejduk isn't going to be able to drive to the basket on NBA players any better than Chris Paul is going to be able to crash the net against NHL players.

In keeping with my original cognitive and physical combo point from my previous post, look at that D. Rose video. He's making all the calculations I mentioned, getting airborne, then completely changing course and moving the ball in a different direction mid-flight. The amount of agility, speed, and plain ol' movement involved in one shooting play of his reads like a physiological scientist's wet dream. In hockey, a little bit of stickhandling and a feint before a shot is about as multifaceted as it gets during a single scoring attempt.

[Scanker19]

Hockey is for pussies that don't like Sprite.

[spyder]

Are you guys talking about being good at the sport, or, just playing the damn thing? I played hockey only a couple times, and it wasn't that hard... I sucked though, and, didn't do much. I was great at b-ball, and runnin the damn court got tiring fast. In my case, basketball was harder, because I was better, and was able to do more/did more. I went back and forth on the ice, tried to do as much as I could, but wasn't really a threat to anyone of the other team as much as myself. I didn't get tired while playing hockey. So, the question stands for me, are you talking about being equally good at both sports, and which one at that point takes more stamina, or "athleticism"? I say Motocross (done right).