I Thought The NHL Was Going To Make Changes To Increase Scoring

[Alexei Yashvalev]

I don't like the idea of bigger nets because the league already heavily favours tall goalies.

If they change it it won't physically be possible for goalies under 6" to play in the league. You'll see a shift to even larger goalies.

And yeah, the game won't be more exciting just because more bad goals go in. If anything bigger nets might shift teams more towards defensive play and more soccer-like flow.

Soccer has enormous nets and is much more boring and low scoring than hockey.


Really the solution is to call obstruction like it's written in the rulebook.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

http://www.dropyourgloves.com/Stat/LeagueGoals.aspx

I know this is

But looking at the graph its clear that scoring isnt increasing... in a few years we'll be back to the 97-04 DPE.

I dont know if they can make the equipment even smaller, as they already have. I can only see making the nets bigger, say an inch on each side, as the realistic solution.

Not sure if making it illegal to lie down to block shots would make sense.

What say you?

Interesting chart.

That kind of rule change seems a little extreme. The number of shots on goal is about the same as it was 30 years ago.

Why does it need to be higher?

Because it isn't soccer.

Honestly, once they've finished with this goalie equipment thing, just let it be. Goalies have changed their game to adjust to players and brought the scoring down, let the players change their game as well instead of doing it for them. High scoring games are exciting, but they wont be for long if it becomes the norm. Im alright with an average score of 3-2, making 6-5 games all the more memorable.

If people remember that Pittsburgh vs Philly playoff series a few years ago, that was f****** fantastic, but a big part of what made it so entertaining is that it was something we dont usually see. Thats just how I look at it anyways.

Basically, leave the players to learn how to score more themselves instead of doing it for them.

Yes, let it be. At least for a time. But that is IF they get it right with the equipment.

I don't think it is so much the goalies changing their game as it is the goalies changing. They have become huge. And so has their equipment. Not only has their equipment grown in size but it has become a lot lighter. If it was still made of cowhide and horsehair you wouldn't need to legislate smaller pads. The goalies themselves would limit size because of weight.

I don't think there is any potential for players to "learn how to score more" if there continues to be such small areas to shoot at.

Goalies are too big and the nets are too small, I think the net size needs to be increased by some amount.

It literally feels like every goalie is a vezina winning allstar right now, no matter if its a back up or a starter, they all are just so hard to score on.

They seem to be having a hard time reducing the size of the equipment. I'd stay with that as a first choice but if it is ineffective then go for a bigger net. 1 inch higher and a half inch each side would make a noticeable difference I think. A lot of hit posts would be in not out.

 

[TheMule93]

What if the net sized adjusted based on the current score of the game?

Would it increase in size over time until someone scored?

 

[Mbraunm]

I agree that a combination of calling the rule book and downsizing the goalie equipment would do wonders for the excitement of the game. Both of these issues are problematic.

 

[wgknestrick]

How about having the long change for periods 1 and 3? Or hell, even all 3 periods?

How about can't change during you own D zone faceoffs? That will really reward skill.

 

[member 151739]

I'm not seriously suggesting this, but it's something I thought of and I'm curious about what others think. Would anyone support the idea that you must carry the puck past the blue line in the defensive zone? When a team is under pressure, they always clear the puck to center ice or chip it off the boards and risk icing.

Referring to even strength, by the way. A team would be able to ice the puck on the penalty kill.

 

[KCC]

The amount of interference and hooking is ridiculous right now. Just call the game the right now. Yeesh.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Because it isn't soccer.

No, it's not. It's a contact sport. Also, how big are soccer nets?

Would it increase in size over time until someone scored?

Yes.

 

[McPuritania]

True, though the NHL has seemingly done away with open ice hits now anyways, so what does it matter?

That was my point. More room to move, more offensive creativity. The lack of speed "reduces concussions" but the NHL has already made it illegal to aim for the head, so there's literally no retroactive downside to getting rid of obstruction/calling a penalty for it. It would make the game more exciting to watch, instead of teams begin able to score 2 goals and trapping the rest of the game because they flood the neutral zone and obstruct anyone who tries to break it.

Agree with you guys, but they aren't calling obstruction any more, and I can't for the life of me comprehend why other than what I mentioned. Maybe NHL refereeing is just that bad. I mean, it's currently in the worst shape I've ever seen. There is literally no consistency, and game management supersedes the rule book. I don't know, I just wish they'd go back to calling the game like they did after the lock out.

 

[Ezekial]

I'm entertained. I'd like to see more scoring chances, not necessarily goals. I love me a good athletic save and I love me a great play to beat a defender and goalie. I also like a good deflection, a good one off a good pass.

I know one thing, seeing more **** goals won't make this sport more entertaining to me.

 

[Apotheosis]

I'm entertained. I'd like to see more scoring chances, not necessarily goals. I love me a good athletic save and I love me a great play to beat a defender and goalie. I also like a good deflection, a good one off a good pass.

I know one thing, seeing more **** goals won't make this sport more entertaining to me.

That's the thing though. You won't see any garbage goals even if the game was opened up more. Right now, the current NHL product as it stands, is a trapfest. It's a diluted form of the game pre-2006 and during DPE. Lack of calling obstruction+bad refereeing (leading to less penalties) lessens the amount of chances per game, thus, lower scoring. You won't see bad goals if the game is opened up. Just more chances by the players talented enough to exploit open ice. Which = MORE ENTERTAINMENT VALUE.

 

[Mach12]

The truth is, I haven't really noticed this issue this year. Why? I just watch the entertaining teams like the Jets. If there's a Minnesota Wild game, I don't watch. If you just stick to watching the Jets/Oilers/Rangers/Hawks/Jackets/Flyers, it's okay.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

member when you weren't allowed to touch a guy after he chipped it by you.

i member

 

[Machinehead]

member when you weren't allowed to touch a guy after he chipped it by you.

i member

I thought that sucked.

You're even allowed to do that in soccer which is not even a "contact sport" by the conventional definition.

 

[Pyromaniac]

I would like to see them implement a couple rule changes from the IIHF rule book such as a delayed penalty isn't negated once a team scores. Its a small change unlikely to have to cause too much of an imbalance. There was another rule from IIHF that made a lot of sense to me but I can't seem to recall what it was.

I thought that sucked.

You're even allowed to do that in soccer which is not even a "contact sport" by the conventional definition.

Agreed, wasn't a fan of that either. Thankfully I don't think they will ever bring that back either.

 

[johnjm22]

The NHL needs to focus on game flow. Minimize play stoppages.

 

[The Panther]

I strongly disagree with the idea of going back to 2005-06 penalty standards. There were way too many penalties being called then. Now, maybe slightly more could be called now than what is being called, but please not a lot. I personally think it's a good thing that the game is 'cleaner' now and that players know the limits of what is legal and what isn't, and don't cross that line every 5 seconds as in, say, the early 1990s.

Penalties and special-teams in general are always going to be key in hockey, but they shouldn't be 'depended' on to increase excitement and/or scoring. People who say the officiating now is the worst it's ever been obviously didn't watch hockey before about 2000.

For me, what increases excitement is creative play and a mix of strategy/'systems' hockey with risk-taking hockey. I mean, what is more exciting than watching great players take risks on the ice? That's the peak of excitement. If a goalie comes way out of the net to chase down a puck, or if 4 players (including a D) carry the puck way down low to the other team's goal-line, etc. -- that's very exciting. If a player throws a body-check at the other team's top guy, it's also really exciting because it is risky behavior in terms of the violent response you then expect.

Calling a bunch of penalties IS NOT going to make any of these things happen. If anything, it's likely to increase boring hockey. Goal-scoring will slightly increase, of course (which is good), but more penalties likely means more system-strategizing to kill penalties and fewer occurrences of the most-talented players on the ice.

Because of improvements in goaltending equipment, every goalie now plays a no-risk style. They know the most efficient way to keep their million-dollar job is to slide horizontally across the crease, and never leave the net. No risk = boring.

Because of conservative no-risk coaching and the loser-point system, skaters don't want to take too many offensive chances. Defencemen hang back and clog up the middle. No risk = boring.

Because the NHLPA is now way stronger than team-culture, nobody wants to throw risky checks at good players or hit a goalie, etc. No risk = boring.


So, limiting shot-blocking (if that's even possible) and limiting equipment is all well and good and should be considered, but to me the real problem with NHL hockey now is that it's all NO RISK. That's simply boring.

The League "brain"trust should be focused on finding ways to encourage teams to take more risks.

 

[sting101]

This is what needs to happen.

Penalty for leaving feet to block passes or shots in your own zone.
Penalty shot and a 10 minute misconduct for the crease.

Each goalie has their equipment tailored by the league individually to meet a strict protection only criteria. No up sized equipment and cheaters.

3pt regulation win

Be a loud and active fan that demands your team plays up tempo aggressive hockey. The more pressure on management and ownership the more likely they push the Coaches.

My 2c

 

[Seath The Scaleless]

How about can't change during you own D zone faceoffs? That will really reward skill.

The NHLPA may not agree with that alteration lol

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

The Refs are using 'game management' to keep contests artificially close. this is one of the reasons fan haven't revolted. The games are boring, but they're tight.

Someone needs to use some statistical analysis to show that the Refs are actively colluding to affect hockey games. The notion that there's point shaving going on will spur the league into action. (hopefully).

or at least make it plainly clear once and for all; that we're watching a semi-predetermined event.

 

[sandysan]

4-3 is a great score to watch, but it doesnt happen often obviously. I can probably find you a night where every game was 2-1 or less.

I dont think hockey is boring as hell now, but there sure are A LOT of boring periods and sometimes games.

yeah that 5-4 kings habs game was a real peach compared to the game in st louis, or anaheim or san jose. and as a habs fan we WON that game.

a real peach. And it went to the shooutout! What somewhat perplexes me is that many of the people who want to simply artifically increase scoring by increasing the nets, view the shootout as artifice and a crappy way to decide a game.

What matters are chances which, unfortunately, don't show up in the boxscores. High scoring games because the goalies can't stop a beach ball or teams stop playing defense are boring as hell.

was the 10-0 shellacking we got at the hands of the jackets the best game this year ?

 

[MNNumbers]

The problems:

Penalties are not consistent from minute 1 to minute 60
Obstruction is not called, so there is little room to move early in the offensive end
Goalies fill the net....

Others????

Solution:
Take the hard shells off the pads, so the pads are not weapons. Then there is less ferocious hitting. Which leads to....
Now we can call obstruction, because the change in the pads cuts down the concussion risk. Which gives first....
More penalties, but, eventually, more nice plays because the players figure out how not to go to the penalty box.

Then:
Wood sticks. This cuts down the power of shots a little. Which leads to....
Smaller goalie equipment.

Then, finally (the nuclear option):
4 skaters a side. Because the real problem is that the players are all much faster and quicker than they ever have been before, and there isn't enough room on the ice.

 

[lomiller1]

If there's a Minnesota Wild game, I don't watch.

In pure hockey terms the Wild are our most important divisional rival at the moment and are also our closest divisional rival and even with these factors in play there is no way I’d watch our games against them in real time. They basically sit back with 4 guys on their side of center in the neutral zone and protect the tie while they wait for you to get impatient and capitalize off the turnover.

It makes for terrible hockey and I just can’t imagine how painful it is for Wild fans to have to watch night after night. It’s no wonder High School and College hockey are more popular in Minnesota than the NHL is.

 

[BDizzle*]

I think the changes that need to be made is playing on a slightly larger ice. Perhaps a hybrid of NHL and Olympic size skating rinks.

5 on 5 on NHL rinks, with the speed of today's game, seems to suffocate some players. It restricts skill and creativity.

 

[Eddie G]

No, it's not. It's a contact sport. Also, how big are soccer nets?



Yes.

Lmfao. WOW. How big is a soccer ball?

Soccer, a sport in which no outfield player can use his/her hands to field the object in play, which is probably the most natural thing for a human being to do.

Soccer which has 10 players aside as opposed to 5 (not including the goalie).

Comparing soccer to hockey. Smh.