OT: Is scoring in the NHL down again and should something be done about it?

[smithformeragent]

The game has changed so much.

I'm a goalie so I start there.
Not only has the equipment gotten bigger, but the athleticism, technique and positioning have all improved.

Sometimes you watch hilights of games from even the late 80's and early 90's and the goaltending looks like a joke compared to today. The goalies were physically smaller and the pads didn't fill them out. They are largely out of position and do not take away the lower part of the net. They relied on reaction saves with the glove and blocker compared to today's goalies who play the angles and take up a lot of the net and play the percentages.

Add to that the tighter checking and there's just less space out there for creativity and less of a chance when it comes to cashing in.

As for how to fix it?

I'm fine with the game as it is. I love it. I think a 1-0 game can be as exciting as a 7-6 barn burner so long as there are chances and hitting.

 

[ap3lovr]

The game has changed so much.

I'm a goalie so I start there.
Not only has the equipment gotten bigger, but the athleticism, technique and positioning have all improved.

Sometimes you watch hilights of games from even the late 80's and early 90's and the goaltending looks like a joke compared to today. The goalies were physically smaller and the pads didn't fill them out. They are largely out of position and do not take away the lower part of the net. They relied on reaction saves with the glove and blocker compared to today's goalies who play the angles and take up a lot of the net and play the percentages.

Add to that the tighter checking and there's just less space out there for creativity and less of a chance when it comes to cashing in.

As for how to fix it?

I'm fine with the game as it is. I love it. I think a 1-0 game can be as exciting as a 7-6 barn burner so long as there are chances and hitting.

I don't enjoy watching 2 teams grind it out. I enjoy watching 2 teams exchange chances all games. The Leafs under Carlyle were my favorite team to watch night in and night out. They didn't play defense and they constantly cheated on offense and honestly it was a better product for the fans watching those games. Now they are just as boring as every other team to watch this season. I'm starting to treat games as background noise instead of giving them my undying attention. The only saving grace for me this season has been watching the Isles play. They play an exciting brand of hockey.

The left wing lock, and defensive box systems have essentially killed the game from a fan perspective. The reality in the NHL today is a team of Kellys vs a team of Kessels would be a very close game. In a 4on4 version of the game, it wouldn't even be close.

It's your superstars that sell Jerseys and create fanaticism in young children. 4on4 exploits your superstars more than 5on5. It's still a team game, just a much more open and faster team game.

 

[neelynugs]

the problem with teams exchanging chances all night is that coaches are told to win, and barring you having the best offensive players in the league, it usually means playing smart defensively is the key to victory. fans would love it, but coaches will always defer to the "smart" game plan since it's their own ass if it doesn't work.

4 on 4 would also be fantastic. but the NHLPA will never allow it to happen. any loss of jobs is a non-starter with them.

increasing net size is the easiest way to open up scoring. you could also fiddle with the current goal size, just making the posts smaller or shaped in a way to cause more goals (i think they tested a few goals with weird shaped posts in one of the player development camps a few years back).

 

[Strange Universe]

the problem with teams exchanging chances all night is that coaches are told to win, and barring you having the best offensive players in the league, it usually means playing smart defensively is the key to victory. fans would love it, but coaches will always defer to the "smart" game plan since it's their own ass if it doesn't work.

4 on 4 would also be fantastic. but the NHLPA will never allow it to happen. any loss of jobs is a non-starter with them.

increasing net size is the easiest way to open up scoring. you could also fiddle with the current goal size, just making the posts smaller or shaped in a way to cause more goals (i think they tested a few goals with weird shaped posts in one of the player development camps a few years back).

I believe this was tested but I am nit certain of the reports that were amassed from the tests.
I would have to go with nets being slightly larger if the league does want more scoring but the increase of the the goal nets do not need to be too drastic just enough to create a difference where the posts hit could translate to goal going in more often than not and this can be evaluated in need be as time goes on.

 

[Neely08]

Calling all the chicken wings and/or any other form of stick holds in the O zone would increase PP's. If I can see them, the refs can see them, too. Too often let go on scoring chances, especially on trailing players, as defenders are just too adept at keeping it subtle. Like that Detroit series last year. Up until Looch beat Dekeyser's children. Eliminating the subtle picks you see that used to be illegal which are no longer called, well, unless you're playing the habs.

Making goalie pads significantly smaller should do it. Look at goalies in the 80's and look at them now. They could also make pucks lighter and faster. But that would be like letting MLB players use alluminum bats. Chara would should 125mph and decapitate people.

Don't agree w/ making the nets bigger. Not w/ the skill level in the game now. However they could engineer posts so that it's more likely to be a goal if you hit it, as opposed to almost never being a goal when hit dead on. I'd be ok w/ that.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

...

I'm surprised so many are on the size of the goalie equipment but no one on the size of the goaltenders.

In 97-98, there were four goaltenders in the league taller than 6' 3".

This year? There are SEVENTEEN.

Goalies are getting bigger and more difficult to score on.

 

[Neely08]

...

I'm surprised so many are on the size of the goalie equipment but no one on the size of the goaltenders.

In 97-98, there were four goaltenders in the league taller than 6' 3".

This year? There are SEVENTEEN.

Goalies are getting bigger and more difficult to score on.

What can you do a/b the height of the goalies? Other than have them eject out of a modern fighter plane at 500mph. With the exception of Brizgolov, none of em would go for it.

I have no idea how to post gifs. Someone post Roy from 1986 vs a modern goalie of equal height. Saw it somewhere, the difference is astonishing.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

What can you do a/b the height of the goalies? Other than have them eject out of a modern fighter plane at 500mph. With the exception of Brizgolov, none of em would go for it.

I have no idea how to post gifs. Someone post Roy from 1986 vs a modern goalie of equal height. Saw it somwhere, the difference is astonishing.

This is why you make the nets bigger.

 

[Beaviz81]

...

I'm surprised so many are on the size of the goalie equipment but no one on the size of the goaltenders.

In 97-98, there were four goaltenders in the league taller than 6' 3".

This year? There are SEVENTEEN.

Goalies are getting bigger and more difficult to score on.

Well the NHL-player have grown as well. I remember reading in the past. 5'10" were the norm then, now if you are shorter than 6'2" you are considered below ideal size. I mean just look at how small the players of the past were compared to today.

 

[DK46]

As MMB said goalies are bigger now. They are also better all around athletes and play the position much better.

Outside of looking at the size of goalie equipment or making the nets bigger what is left to do?

The only thing I can think of is having a team serve the full length of the penalty regardless if they are scored against or not. This was the rule at one time until it too was changed.

I don't want to see 4 on 4 hockey unless it is regular season OT.

 

[smithformeragent]

I hate the idea of messing with the shape or size of the nets.

 

[FrankBruins]

I think we would have a few 90 pt players this season if not for injuries, probably even one or two 100 pt players. Players across the league are scoring at the exact same pace than last year, excepted for Crosby who slowed down this year.

Crosby, Perry had the mumps.

Seguin was injured for a dozen games while he was almost on pace for 100 pts.

Malkin lost a few games as well and didn't look to be 100%, got injured the other day again.

Kane out for the year.

Okposo, Datsyuk missed a significant amount of games too.

I think Seguin, Crosby and Kane all reach 100 pts if healthy all year, probably Malkin too.

I don't remember who it was but someone on these boards also mentioned that with teams going with four offensively capable lines more and more in the last few years, the grinders and goons are an endangered species, which causes less disparity between a team's first and fourth line, thus enabling fourth lines across the league to compete not only defensively but also offensively against other teams first and second lines.

This would mean that top players get less chances to take advantage of lesser players, and have to work harder for their points.

If this is really what is happening right now, I wouldn't do a thing about it. We've been complaining about a diluted product for decades it seems now. If Bettman saw this, it might be his biggest argument against people saying the next expansion will dilute the talent pool.

 

[Neely08]

This is why you make the nets bigger.

Too drastic.

As far as stats and hockey history, you'd have to put an * on every player who surpasses any kind of record hereafter. Even someone that pots 50 or wins the Rocket Richard, etc. Just don't like it. Not w/o limiting the size of the equipment first.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

Too drastic.

As far as stats and hockey history, you'd have to put an * on every player who surpasses any kind of record hereafter. Even someone that pots 50 or wins the Rocket Richard, etc. Just don't like it. Not w/o limiting the size of the equipment first.

They've already made reductions and limits to the size of the goalie equipment. This is a compromise that they've already settled on.

And I don't know why you would have to put an asterisk on anyone. If goalies were smaller back in the day and the players had more net to shoot at...

 

[Mount Kramer Cameras]

The game has changed so much.

I'm a goalie so I start there.
Not only has the equipment gotten bigger, but the athleticism, technique and positioning have all improved.

Sometimes you watch hilights of games from even the late 80's and early 90's and the goaltending looks like a joke compared to today. The goalies were physically smaller and the pads didn't fill them out. They are largely out of position and do not take away the lower part of the net. They relied on reaction saves with the glove and blocker compared to today's goalies who play the angles and take up a lot of the net and play the percentages.

Add to that the tighter checking and there's just less space out there for creativity and less of a chance when it comes to cashing in.

As for how to fix it?

I'm fine with the game as it is. I love it. I think a 1-0 game can be as exciting as a 7-6 barn burner so long as there are chances and hitting.

Yeah, I agree with all of this. The game is still exciting, so why change anything? Introducing bigger nets to compensate for increased intelligence and athleticism would make a mockery of the game

 

[BRUINS since 1995]

My pov: Parity. From top top bottom, league wise it is tougher to win. Also, each team are building with four lines - and the bottom 6 is way better than it has been in the past. I also add, that technologies, game plans, video and most of all quality of goaltending are also part of the emergence of 100 pts players.

When I was young the goalkeeper was the less athletic and often not the best athlete, which is no more the case. Look at the size, strength, athleticism of these guy in net. Add all these ingredients and I think you have today's result.

My thoughts are: hockey is way better than it was. Lowing scoring with some Tuukka, Prices, Lunqvist, Quick, Rinne and all the other is just as spectacular as 99 or 66. These guys are now modern era stars!

 

[riverhawkey91]

Shot-blocking is epidemic in today's NHL and the biggest reason IMO scoring has gone down year after year.

What can be done about it I have no idea.

Bigger ice surface. More space to work in the offensive zone, way more lanes for shots to get through, allows superstars to be superstars. Nets don't need to be bigger; even the average players in the NHL can score on this size net when they're relatively open, so can't really blame that.

Owners would never go for it though as it would instantaneously decrease revenue with the loss of seating.

 

[aic90]

As I said in another post, international ice rinks would solve the issue for space and better creativity but it would cost too much to do this across the league.

However, if you take the amount of posts that are hit during the year, perhaps these goal posts translate to extra goals because of the difference in height and length out the net if we do make them slightly bigger.

I also believe like I said in my other post that there are too many players in the league that should not be in the NHL league causing poorer play making and poorer creativity and less scoring.
This is not the total story but a piece of it for sure.

It's difficult to prove with stats, but I believe this is a big component: dilution of talent across too many teams. Not that this would ever happen, but if you changed absolutely nothing about the game itself (goalie pads, rules, etc.) but eliminated, say, 9 teams (to go back to a 21-team league) and had a re-entry draft, the quality of "skill" play would significantly improve (along, I bet, with scoring).

 

[burstnbloom]

Scoring isn't really down. Its been exactly the same for the past four years.

14-15 - 2.74 G/G
13-14 - 2.74 G/G
12-13 - 2.72 G/G
11-12 - 2.73 G/G

There were multiple PPG or more players in each of those years. The fact that there aren't this year is likely due to random variance.

 

[ODAAT]

...

Looking at the league's leading scorer list, it's basically point-per-game players at the top of the list again.

Does anyone know if scoring has gone down significantly the last couple of years?

To me, the talent has never been better. The games are fast and the skill is off the charts.

But the big scorers are back to not being really big scorers. Back-up goaltenders are getting a lot of glory. And it seems with most teams employing a collapsing strategy in front of their own nets, that the highlight reel goals are at an all-time minimum. Much of the offense is being created off of rebounds and scrambles in front of the net.

Are we finally at a place where we can seriously begin to discuss larger nets? Should we just leave it alone? Or is there some other way to get some scoring back into our game?

goalie equipment reduction in size IMO is far too much of a factor

other than that, I`d outlaw, yes outlaw the neutral zone trap

 

[smithformeragent]

I went back and watched some hilights of Gretzky this afternoon and it's like watching the one college player who is home on break dominate a men's league.

The goaltending and defense are a total joke. Guys getting beat low glove side by slapshots and not even going down.

It makes me think about the Orr thread we had last week.

 

[NSBruinFan]

Goal post that angle into the net. Would have helped against the Habs last year. Every game their is usually a couple of shots that go post and out.

 

[Save By Thomas]

Leave it alone.

 

[Aeroforce]

...

Looking at the league's leading scorer list, it's basically point-per-game players at the top of the list again.

Does anyone know if scoring has gone down significantly the last couple of years?

To me, the talent has never been better. The games are fast and the skill is off the charts.

But the big scorers are back to not being really big scorers. Back-up goaltenders are getting a lot of glory. And it seems with most teams employing a collapsing strategy in front of their own nets, that the highlight reel goals are at an all-time minimum. Much of the offense is being created off of rebounds and scrambles in front of the net.

Are we finally at a place where we can seriously begin to discuss larger nets? Should we just leave it alone? Or is there some other way to get some scoring back into our game?

I agree with your observations. Last night/yesterday was full of hockey with playoff implications, but it was one of the more boring hockey-watching binges I can recall.

I know, purists say scoring isn't everything, but so many games were not only 1-0 or 0-0 after two periods, the shots on net were dismal.

I'm in complete agreement - the skill level and cerebral aspects of the game are at an all time high. Unfortunately it doesn't translate to more exciting games.

The NHL is entertainment and it is not only competing for our dollars, it's competing for our time; two things we all have limited amounts of.

Increasing net sizes seems to be drastic, but since 4 on 4 is never going to happen, I don't know what else to suggest. The goalie pads are big, but I attribute today's stellar goaltending to better technique, better conditioning, and yes, bigger goalies.

I watched a little of the NFL Pro Bowl and it was interesting watching a seasoned vet like Adam Vinatieri missing field goals with the posts moved closer together.

There would definitely be a learning curve in the NHL with bigger nets. We'd see some great 7-5 and 6-4 games, but I doubt it would be that long before the numbers would be back down.

 

[Strange Universe]

It's difficult to prove with stats, but I believe this is a big component: dilution of talent across too many teams. Not that this would ever happen, but if you changed absolutely nothing about the game itself (goalie pads, rules, etc.) but eliminated, say, 9 teams (to go back to a 21-team league) and had a re-entry draft, the quality of "skill" play would significantly improve (along, I bet, with scoring).

I did not go into details about the dilution of talent but I also feel like you that if we could cut anywhere from 8 to 10 teams that the product would be a better one on ice and quality of skill would be higher along as you said that scoring would also go up as well to a certain extent.
We both know this will never happen since the league is a business and more teams equals more money for everybody.