Puck Lists: Ranking the NHL players' proposed rule changes

[StargateSG1]

https://sports.yahoo.com/puck-lists-ranking-nhl-players-proposed-rule-changes-142607484.html

Let's have some fun hockey talk, shall we?

Click to read more...

 

[njx9]

Love the response to Getzlaf's suggestion.

On 12, regular season games aren't, typically, "penalty-filled whistle-fests", so I have no idea why that's suddenly an objection. If something's a penalty, it should be a penalty. If something deserves a suspension, the player should be suspended (no more of this 1 playoff game = 5 regular season games, or whatever, nonsense).

I hate Larkin's suggestion, but I hate the fact that OT is, in essence an entirely new game with only slight resemblance to what happened the previous 60 minutes. I've given up on the idea that ties might come back, though.

6 is stupid, as well - just get rid of coaches' challenges and review from the booth. 30 seconds. There's no reason it should ever take longer in a league that can easily afford to have several people reviewing every play, from multiple angles, at the same time.

2 and 3 are too common sense to ever happen.

 

[PelagicJoe]

I am all for the smaller goalie pads if we aren't making the net bigger. The game was way more exciting when there was more goal scoring in my opinion.

 

[TheOtherOne]

just make the whole game 3 on 3 already

 

[vladdy16]

Make the ice a bit bigger, put the lines back to where they should be, use wood sticks and small goalie gear.

 

[Beltv]

I might be alone here but I think the game is fine the way it is. The only "rule" that should be changed is the players should be allowed to participate in the Olympics.

 

[Winger98]

Make the ice a bit bigger, put the lines back to where they should be, use wood sticks and small goalie gear.

Yeah, I'd like that. I think the key to bigger ice is that it just be a bit bigger. It doesn't have to be European size where guys are swimming in gobs of empty space. Just a bit bigger to give some elbow room.

Have to say that I found it humorous all of the times the article brought up not wanting to slow the game down. I think the NHL is fine slowing it down a bit. A few years ago when they really cut down on obstruction and had guys flying around unimpeded it seemed we saw a lot more injuries, mostly concussions. After that is when we saw interference creep its way back into the game.

 

[vladdy16]

Yeah, I'd like that. I think the key to bigger ice is that it just be a bit bigger. It doesn't have to be European size where guys are swimming in gobs of empty space. Just a bit bigger to give some elbow room.

Have to say that I found it humorous all of the times the article brought up not wanting to slow the game down. I think the NHL is fine slowing it down a bit. A few years ago when they really cut down on obstruction and had guys flying around unimpeded it seemed we saw a lot more injuries, mostly concussions. After that is when we saw interference creep its way back into the game.

Exactly. It's not like hockey is a new sport. If you charted the speed and impacts for the history of the game, the last 10 years are off the charts in a dangerous way.

I like change, and oscillations, trying new things is fine and interesting, but I'm getting a little concerned about how consistently the NHL has kept pushing(13 years) in the same direction of hyper pace, and arbitrarily inflating goal totals.

Chip and chase should be a tactic that 5 underskilled but durable and speedy teams employ as their strategy, not a league wide arms race that results in the Pens and Preds lobbing pucks behind the defense for 60 minutes waiting for a break on net or a pinball power play. Results in so many uneventful games.

If the crack down on faceoff violations is any indication, the NHL has no interest in saving those of us that watch the full 60 minute games, but I'm hoping that at least a new wave of talented defensemen in the future can help regain some of the dimensions that have been lost

Wish Igor Larionov was the head of the competition committe.

 

[njx9]

Chip and chase should be a tactic that 5 underskilled but durable and speedy teams employ as their strategy, not a league wide arms race that results in the Pens and Preds lobbing pucks behind the defense for 60 minutes waiting for a break on net or a pinball power play. Results in so many uneventful games.

I really agree with this, but I have no idea how to get rid of it. Remove the trapezoid? Enforce something about how the puck comes into the zone? I dunno. It's generally less interesting, hockey wise, to me than the really bad trap/grab-and-hold years were, and that's saying something.

 

[Frk It]

Chip and chase should be a tactic that 5 underskilled but durable and speedy teams employ as their strategy, not a league wide arms race that results in the Pens and Preds lobbing pucks behind the defense for 60 minutes waiting for a break on net or a pinball power play. Results in so many uneventful games.

The top teams don't really play like that. Pittsburgh, Chicago, Washington all play a puck possession oriented game.

 

[The Zermanator]

I really agree with this, but I have no idea how to get rid of it. Remove the trapezoid? Enforce something about how the puck comes into the zone? I dunno. It's generally less interesting, hockey wise, to me than the really bad trap/grab-and-hold years were, and that's saying something.

I think that's exactly it. If goalies can chase a dumped puck into the corner to dish it to a teammate, we'd see a lot less dump and chase.

I don't even understand why that stupid rule was made in the first place. Just because some goalies (like Brodeur) were too good at it? And what's wrong with that? It's a skill like any other. That would be like telling Ovechkin and other heavy shooters they have to use sticks that make their shots softer, or skaters like Larkin and AA they have to dull their skates a bit. A goalie being able to play the puck adds a dimension to their game (this would help Mrazek a ton), some goalies are better than others. Just like any other skill in hockey.

Removing the trapezoid would mean:

1. Reduction in the dump and chase tactic.
2. Increase to the flow of the game, encouraging the puck to actually be moved rather than just chased.
3. The goalie can contribute to the breakout, again, increasing the flow of the game.
4. Since the goalie has to move pretty far away from their net, it's a risk. If the timing is miscalculated or the attempt is botched, it can turn into a frenzy with an open net. That's exciting, and more scoring is needed in the league anyway.

Down with the trapezoid!

 

[vladdy16]

I really agree with this, but I have no idea how to get rid of it. Remove the trapezoid? Enforce something about how the puck comes into the zone? I dunno. It's generally less interesting, hockey wise, to me than the really bad trap/grab-and-hold years were, and that's saying something.

A huge thing to me is putting the blue lines back to where they are supposed to be. The ice used to be, your zone, neutral zone, their zone, now it's just our half, their half.

The added room in the o-zone has also encouraged a consolodation of tactics in the o-zone, as a head on point shot(from what used to be an off side position) has emerged as the most reliable source of in zone scoring chances, which has also led to a dramatic emphasis on collapsing defenses and shot blocking.(coincidentally/conveniantly, the head on point shot is most effective in the ever increasing 5 on 4 format of the NHL)

The trapezoid is a borderline insulting rule isn't it? Like isn't it the participants responsibility to weigh the risk and reward of a given action on the ice? An entire dimension of the game legislated away.

The top teams don't really play like that. Pittsburgh, Chicago, Washington all play a puck possession oriented game.

Maybe by todays standards. But really, PIT outshot opponents by 1 SOG per game and were at the bottom of the league in SOG against, CHI got outshot by 1 SOG per game, and the cup favorite Caps managed a 3 SOG per game advantage

Puck possession used to be something that players like Darren McCarty and Marty Lapointe contributed to in neutral zone scrums, something that the russian 5 carried with them over the whole ice sheet, something Gretzky did behind the oppositions goal, something Jiri Hudlers parallel self does as he dishes from the half wall in another universe.

It was something that the St. Louis Blues and Phoenix Coyotes had no hope of relying on if they wanted to compete with the Red Wings or Avs or Stars, so they had to develop their own unique identity, which resulted in game after game of whatever the opposite of a stale mate is.

These days it's scoop the puck up and retreat behind your own goal for 'possession' and then 'stretching the ice' for a low percentage pass, and if you can't retreat, fire a blind volley and hope that it gets a lucky bounce so Tyler Johnson, Brian Rust or Arvidsson can participate in the game for a second.

I think there is a main distinguishment to be made between field sports, and artillery sports. (i.e. Native American braves running through shadows in the woods, vs say, civil war line infantry in a clearing. Lacrosse vs Football)

Hockey used to be firmly placed as a field sport, whereby any uneventfullness was a serene and enjoyable by product of the free agency of the players. Each step the competition committe has taken, has inched ice hockey further and further towards a tactical % formula artillery contest, in which uneventfullness occurs by strict design.

imo

 

[stu the grim reaper]

I am all for the smaller goalie pads if we aren't making the net bigger. The game was way more exciting when there was more goal scoring in my opinion.

goaltending was more exciting too

 

[SpookyTsuki]

Yeah larkins idea is dumb

There's already so many chances with how much time there is. If it goes to shootout it probably was going to anyway with an extra minute

 

[Bench]

Make the ice a bit bigger, put the lines back to where they should be, use wood sticks and small goalie gear.

Is hockey the only major sport where they've allowed a primary playing instrument, the hockey stick, to go almost completely unregulated in terms of composition? Baseball, wisely, never got caught up in a material race opting for wood as the standard.

I don't like the idea of only shrinking goalie pads, because simply having more goals slip through the five-hole or under the arm will not make for a more entertain product. High scoring doesn't automatically make for a better product, particular at the expense of goalies struggling to keep a .900 sv%.

So take something from the shooters (composite sticks) while also taking some from the goalies. I think you need to be timid shaving goalie equipment. I think the biggest issue than equipment is the size and athleticism of the goalies increased way more. Ed Belfour and Patrick Roy used far, far larger equipment than modern goalies are using now. The gloves were bigger on both hands and the pads were wider. Belfour complained hard he couldn't catch the puck with the new gloves when they came at the end of his career. Roy and others used oversized jerseys to create a flying squirrel effect. But they were 5'11" and 6'2" respectively. And I wouldn't call either fitness freaks.

The AVERAGE for NHL goalies today is over 6'2". The average height then was 5'11". And of course it's not just the 3 plus inches of the body, but the wingspan of both the arms and legs.

I guess I'm not sure how great you'll make the game having skinny pads on guys 6'5" being forced to play more aggressively. Are big rebounds, open nets, and bobbled pucks exciting? I guess that depends on what you're looking for. I never found goals to be the inherent goal to exciting hockey.

It's far more about the flow of the play than the net result of scoring for me. Just some musings here. I have no idea how to make hockey better.

 

[chances14]

I never found goals to be the inherent goal to exciting hockey.

and that's the difference between a hardcore and casual fan. Casual fans don't really appreciate the finer points of the game, they just want to see lots of goals and fights

 

[joe89]

Same writer who dismisses bigger ice is all for more 3on3.. Ironic.

If they come to the conclusion that a hybrid sized ice surface would make the games more exciting and skill based I don't think owners would stand in the way for that. In the end better hockey equals more tickets sold. I personally think it should be up to each organization to decide what direction you wanna go, it would spice things up to play on slightly different surfaces from game to game. With minimum and maximum measurements predetermined of course. It's nothing too crazy really, there are football pitches that differ as much as 5% in size even at the highest level.

 

[Frk It]

I do like the idea of a bigger (hybrid) ice surface and I’m all for eliminating the trapezoid.

Is hockey the only major sport where they've allowed a primary playing instrument, the hockey stick, to go almost completely unregulated in terms of composition? Baseball, wisely, never got caught up in a material race opting for wood as the standard.

I don't like the idea of only shrinking goalie pads, because simply having more goals slip through the five-hole or under the arm will not make for a more entertain product. High scoring doesn't automatically make for a better product, particular at the expense of goalies struggling to keep a .900 sv%.

So take something from the shooters (composite sticks) while also taking some from the goalies. I think you need to be timid shaving goalie equipment. I think the biggest issue than equipment is the size and athleticism of the goalies increased way more. Ed Belfour and Patrick Roy used far, far larger equipment than modern goalies are using now. The gloves were bigger on both hands and the pads were wider. Belfour complained hard he couldn't catch the puck with the new gloves when they came at the end of his career. Roy and others used oversized jerseys to create a flying squirrel effect. But they were 5'11" and 6'2" respectively. And I wouldn't call either fitness freaks.

The AVERAGE for NHL goalies today is over 6'2". The average height then was 5'11". And of course it's not just the 3 plus inches of the body, but the wingspan of both the arms and legs.

I guess I'm not sure how great you'll make the game having skinny pads on guys 6'5" being forced to play more aggressively. Are big rebounds, open nets, and bobbled pucks exciting? I guess that depends on what you're looking for. I never found goals to be the inherent goal to exciting hockey.

It's far more about the flow of the play than the net result of scoring for me. Just some musings here. I have no idea how to make hockey better.

I see both sides of it.

Just like some of the rule changes have made it so smaller skaters can succeed in the league, I think if they shaved the pads down it might bring a resurgence of the smaller and athletic goalie, over time. Guys with crazy lateral movement.

I do think a lot of times goalies get lucky and pucks clip part of their pad just by virtue of the size of them. Don’t think shaving them down all the way to how it was in the 80’s would be good, but shaving them down some may make things more exciting?

Not really fair to the current NHL goalies, but might be a good thing for the game in the long run. I do think it might be more appealing for casual fans, obviously diehard fans will probably watch regardless.

 

[JPE123]

I remember Brad Stuart talking about a rule that all penalties must be served in their entirety even if the PP scores. Could add some scoring and put teams PP at a real premium. Downside is I dont think the officiating is good enough for this

 

[vladdy16]

and that's the difference between a hardcore and casual fan. Casual fans don't really appreciate the finer points of the game, they just want to see lots of goals and fights

Yep, I think the NHL's original insistence on inflating goal totals is based on attracting the most casual of the casual fans, those that primarily watch sports highlights in the morning or before bed. It'd be too difficult to get a station to reliably cut together highlights of scoring chances, defensive break ups and momentum swings, but if it's a 5-4 game, there's 9 highlights for sportscenter.

Funny enough, the NHL dropped out of the big 4 picture right around that time anyways. Hopefully they'll see the new opportunity to market to the new generation of couch potatoes that want to be engaged with their programs practically 24/7.

If you marketed the NHL playoffs, and offered full nights of in depth programming and anylysis like old school HNIC, and independent journalism and player insights like the modern UFC, you could create a buzz around 1-0 games easily.