The Rise and the Fall of the Large Goalie?

McGoMcD

Registered User
Aug 14, 2005
15,688
668
Edmonton, AB
How do you define "large" goalies?

Because of the 82 goalies that played in the NHL last season, only 36 were under 6'2".

There were only 5 goalies under 6 foot.

Goalies will continue to get larger, no question. I think you will just start to see more and more large goaltenders that are also agile with good athleticism ie. Rinne.

We will never see goalies flail about like Ranford again. Goalies nowadays are so polished and mechanical in their movements. You will still see the occasional scramble off a rebound, or after a goal crease crash, but that's about it.

THe only problem is there is a trade off. The longer you limbs the slower your reflexes tend to be. it is basic physics really. Why do you think you never see ping pong players that are over 6 feet? I think on average goalies will get smaller. Of course there will always be exceptions to the rule.
 

member 145483

Guest
THe only problem is there is a trade off. The longer you limbs the slower your reflexes tend to be. it is basic physics really. Why do you think you never see ping pong players that are over 6 feet? I think on average goalies will get smaller. Of course there will always be exceptions to the rule.

Reflexes are more dictated by body proportion then overall height. Tall with long limbs (proportionally) will be about as slow as short with long limbs (proportionally). Both have the same issue, proportionately longer limbs.

You don't see many tall table tennis players (yet), because the vast, vast majority of players come from a region with an average height around 5'-7".

This does beg the question though, how much does body proportion play into goal tending styles?
 

Worraps

Registered User
Oct 23, 2011
4,127
24
Edmonton
I have this idea and it is hard for me to explain why exaclty, but I think the new rules will hurt large goalies.

Basically we all recall the days of Furh, Randford, Moog ect, the small goalie with great reflexes. Over time goalies have gotten bigger, equipment has gotten way bigger.

Any way, two rule changes, small equipment and the smaller nets I think hurt these goalies. Reason 1 is pretty simple, bigger goalie pads, means the more you lose. 2. the smaller nets allow players to do rap around a lot quicker. Goalies will need to be much faster across the net.

I think it hurts the big goalie that just plays angles well but doesn't really have the best reflexes. I for one think it is a good thing. I want to see the return of the small goalie whit great reflexes.

This, sadly relates to the Oilers, if I am right it hurts dubs and Lababera. So sort of hope I am not that right.

The big goaltender isn't going anywhere. It should be obvious as to why.

You'll see a seven foot starter between the pipes before you see someone Mike Vernon's size excel in the NHL again.
 

Bank Shot

Registered User
Jan 18, 2006
11,397
6,998
THe only problem is there is a trade off. The longer you limbs the slower your reflexes tend to be. it is basic physics really. Why do you think you never see ping pong players that are over 6 feet? I think on average goalies will get smaller. Of course there will always be exceptions to the rule.

The tall goalie has to cover a lot less distance to get to the puck all other things being equal.

5'10" versus 6'6". One goalie has 8 inches less travel post to post. I'm not sure quicker reflexes will make that up. It's a lot of distance in a game as fast as hockey.
 

McGoMcD

Registered User
Aug 14, 2005
15,688
668
Edmonton, AB
The tall goalie has to cover a lot less distance to get to the puck all other things being equal.

5'10" versus 6'6". One goalie has 8 inches less travel post to post. I'm not sure quicker reflexes will make that up. It's a lot of distance in a game as fast as hockey.

No one is arguing that size doesn't help a goalie. Just that it will help goalies less in the future. I guess we will find out. I still can't imagine it won't hurt bigger goalies, the question being will it be a noticeable effect or not.
 

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,386
4,591
I think the point here was that equipment lent itself to a style that favored larger goalies all other things being equal... The classic butterfly was something that could be taught... Like the trap... And it would mask weaknesses that *some* larger goalies had (mobility).

One would be crazy to suggest can't still be an advantage, but it isn't such an advantage that it can mask weak agility.

I think we'll see a trend swinging back toward fast, fit and agile rather than large and rhote (sp?)... Think Vernon vs Lalime...

Now if you can get Vernon agility in a larger package... Obviously
 

herashak

Registered User
Mar 24, 2013
5,377
562
THe only problem is there is a trade off. The longer you limbs the slower your reflexes tend to be. it is basic physics really. Why do you think you never see ping pong players that are over 6 feet? I think on average goalies will get smaller. Of course there will always be exceptions to the rule.
Goaltending isnt all reflexes anymore. its all about blocking the puck and controlling the rebounds.
 

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,386
4,591
Btw... This argument is 7 years old... We had it in 2006 and the general conclusion was not as simple as was expected (it was predicted hybrid would flourish vs butterfly)... The real answer was (IMO) fundamentals won (both athletic and technique), those with weaknesses in either were passed by and replaced by less experienced guys with better fundamentals... And old dogs with solid fundamentals prevailed as well, somewhat unexpectedly
 

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,386
4,591
Goaltending isnt all reflexes anymore. its all about blocking the puck and controlling the rebounds.

1994 called, it wants to know if you've found my plaid flannel shirt.

But look at the last 7 vezina winners since the prev lockout. I count 5 arguably 6 hybrid guys and only 1-2 "blocking" style goalies.
 

McGoMcD

Registered User
Aug 14, 2005
15,688
668
Edmonton, AB
Reflexes are more dictated by body proportion then overall height. Tall with long limbs (proportionally) will be about as slow as short with long limbs (proportionally). Both have the same issue, proportionately longer limbs.

You don't see many tall table tennis players (yet), because the vast, vast majority of players come from a region with an average height around 5'-7".

This does beg the question though, how much does body proportion play into goal tending styles?

I was thinking about this for a sec and I actually think you have it backwards. Asians play ping pong because they have great reflexes. It has become their sport because they are good at it. Same with Martial arts. I am pretty sure smaller people tend to have quicker reflexes, every thing considered. Of course that comes with a lot of variance.
 

member 145483

Guest
I was thinking about this for a sec and I actually think you have it backwards. Asians play ping pong because they have great reflexes. It has become their sport because they are good at it. Same with Martial arts. I am pretty sure smaller people tend to have quicker reflexes, every thing considered. Of course that comes with a lot of variance.

The US Air Force did extensive testing on reflexes. See any height restrictions on fighter pilot applications?

There just isn't enough variation in humans to cause any appreciable changes in our overall reflex level. It can be trained to the point where physical limitation becomes the only limitation.

There is no physical limitation difference between two bodies of equal proportion.

A person at 5', with 30% arm length, will have the same muscle to weight to distance proportion as a person at 6', with 30% arm length. Assuming all other aspects equal, of course.

For there to be an appreciable difference in a persons reflexes, due to height, the height difference would have to be in measured in meters of difference...not inches. Our nervous system send signals far to fast for an inch or 2...or 10 to matter.
 

The Nuge

Some say…
Jan 26, 2011
27,377
7,389
British Columbia
Agreed. However its more of a rule of thumb than something set in stone. I want to discuss this more but i'm at work so I don't want to get into it right now.

This thread gave me a really good analysis idea that I want to work on when I get home. Maybe i'll be famous one day like MC79 Hockey :laugh:

Fair enough. It really is hard to use definites when talking about each play.

I look forward to reading it. You just need to change your name cause, at first, I always wonder why there's a NJ fan lurking on our board :laugh:
 

McGoMcD

Registered User
Aug 14, 2005
15,688
668
Edmonton, AB
The US Air Force did extensive testing on reflexes. See any height restrictions on fighter pilot applications?

There just isn't enough variation in humans to cause any appreciable changes in our overall reflex level. It can be trained to the point where physical limitation becomes the only limitation.

There is no physical limitation difference between two bodies of equal proportion.

A person at 5', with 30% arm length, will have the same muscle to weight to distance proportion as a person at 6', with 30% arm length. Assuming all other aspects equal, of course.

For there to be an appreciable difference in a persons reflexes, due to height, the height difference would have to be in measured in meters of difference...not inches. Our nervous system send signals far to fast for an inch or 2...or 10 to matter.

Ya, fair enough, but I think the point still remains. If equipment help large goalies less, then you will see reflexes become more of an advantage. Even if they are evenly distributed across height, that should lead to a tendency towards the average height. Also, I am willing to bet that well proportioned people also tend to be between about 5-10 and 6-2. Just genetics, tall people will tend more likely to be out of proportion.
 

Fixed to Ruin

Come wit it now!
Feb 28, 2007
23,810
25,878
Grande Prairie, AB
Fair enough. It really is hard to use definites when talking about each play.

I look forward to reading it. You just need to change your name cause, at first, I always wonder why there's a NJ fan lurking on our board :laugh:

I know. I'm not creative so i haven't found something that i really like for a user name However i have been wanting to change it.
 

Toydarian

Registered User
Jun 2, 2009
2,732
2
Down goes another big goalie (albeit very athletic and one of the best in the NHL) as Rinne is pulled after allowing 3 goals on 6 shots.
 

Replacement*

Checked out
Apr 15, 2005
48,856
2
Hiking
Great question... You know as I was writing the above, I can't help think that the half-butterfly is really quite influential in the development of the modern pro-fly style. What I mean was that the evolution was kinda like this:

Standup --> classic butterfly --> hybrid --> profly

As opposed to:
Standup --> Hybrid and separately Classic Butterfly --> profly

Why do I say that? If you think about the position of the non-saving leg in a half-butterfly, it is exactly in the same position as it would be in a profly. The knee is straight down... the ankle is allowed to pronate naturally so the heel points to the sky and toes to the ice. The only difference is that the saving leg is outstretched with your knee off the ice.

Now let's say you were down in half butterfly using old gear. To get up, you would dig in the skate edge of your outstretched saving leg and stand up. If another shot quickly came to the opposite side, you'd drop again, this time on the opposite knee and kick out the opposite leg. "Do that five times fast" as they say, and before you know it you are skipping the getting up part and just "butterfly" sliding across the net to make that save in the same way a modern profly-er would.

As for your question... many guys who use the profly also use the half-butterfly. It really just comes down to flexibility. Think about it this way. Two profly-ers are down in a perfectly square butterfly. Knees have even weight on the ice, pads rotated and fully sealed. A shot, perhaps deflected, comes to the left side... The "pure" (more flexible) proflyer will flash his/her left leg out, without breaking the seal of his pad on the ice.

How? Essentially he/she just rotates his leg out at the hip, using his knee as the fulcrum and swats the puck away. While it looks like he just made a "toe" save, he *actually* made the save with the outside of his ankle. (hard to visualize I know, but imagine being a kid, walking beside your brother/sister and smacking their butt with the outside of your ankle... same move).

The other guy... well he just lifts his saving knee off the ice and litterally kicks at the puck with his toe... his pad will instantly rotate back to "square" on his leg and the effect is the same as the pure pro-fly guy, except that there will now be space under his leg on the saving side. The advantage this guy has is that he can reach his leg further than the "pure" guy since he's now stretching from the groin as opposed to reaching the limit of his hip rotation/flexibility. The disadvantage is that he needs to be a lot more careful with his stick positioning to ensure the puck doesn't squeeze under him... but he can also control his rebounds a bit better.

We'd probably say goalie #2 is more "hybrid" in his profly style. I'm less flexible and this is what I tend to do. Really... the only difference (and I had to train myself to do this as an adult when I got my first 'profly' style pads)... is that the old-school half butterfly save, you dropped right into position. The new "profly" adaptation of the same move is to drop into your butterfly and then kick your leg out to "half butterfly" if and only if you need to reach the puck.

With good positioning then, and an absence of deflections, there is no need for the half-butterfly but it certainly is an advantage to have it in your repertoire.

To make things even easier on the hips, you can use a "sliding" toe bridge, replace laces with bungees, or get a "toe-hook" to attach pads to skates. All of which allow you more freedom to rotate your ankle.

Really good posts, thanks, a pleasure to read. Thats as good a rundown as you're likely to find. A wish for more of this on hf. :handclap:

I'm amazed more goalies don't change up their stance more depending on situation. Dubs particularly is so predictable and goes down well in advance thereby telegraphing what he is doing. I see a lot of guys cherry picking him high now because tendency is scouted. Kind of amazed as well that a pro goalie wouldn't have worked on more aspects of his game.

When I played goalie many years ago I had a natural afinity for where the posts were and down to inches if that. I knew exactly where they were when I came out. I wasn't even any good. Dubs missdirects by as much as a couple feet when he positions out of crease. I'm shocked when I see that. Understandable that the action is a lot faster but he seems to really struggle with where he is on the ice. Happened again the other night.
 

Fixed to Ruin

Come wit it now!
Feb 28, 2007
23,810
25,878
Grande Prairie, AB
Ok so i'll explain my thought process of when to use the butterfly, vs hybrid ect.

In my personal experience when I face a point shot (North of the Faceoff dots) all i want to do is absorb the puck in my chest or direct the puck in the corners or over the net. Since the shot is far away i have time to position myself to the shooter and if i do everything right i will most likely have a good outcome.

When i'm facing an odd man rush or a situation where a shooter is going to shoot from a closer distance. (Maybe the half board or just inside the faceoff dots) I am usually moving laterally or accepting the fact that i will most likely give a rebound so i want to be able to push with the upright leg in the opposite direction quickly.

I found the pictures i was looking for:

h042373a.jpg

untitled-146-2.jpg


You get really good coverage with what Marty is doing there. Plus you can stand up and move quickly. In my experience when i start sliding around laterally(after facing a long shot) and i'm not deep in the crease i feel like i'm scrambling. I'd rather just stand up quickly and set myself up for the next shot. Brodeur pretty much does the same thing although he's doing that plus a butterfly plus a bunch more stuff in different situations. That's why he's a HOF and i'm in the beer leagues :laugh:

If a shot comes in dead center than its butterfly 100% of the time because you need maximum coverage since most likely you will have traffic in front of you and you will have limited visibility

When you get a shot in tight i'd rather be in the butterfly as well. Like in this picture:

Corey+Crawford+Colorado+Avalanche+v+Chicago+zdI7BcwEXJWl.jpg


I know it sounds like i'm all over the place with my explanation but i think goalies should be using the strong points of each style to achieve the best outcomes in each situation.

Dubnyk's style is being big with poor technique. That's why he lets in that soft goal every second game.


EDIT:
Found another good picture to summerize:
zones.jpg

Zone 1,3,5 -> Butterfly
Zone 2 & 4 - > Hybrid
 
Last edited:

bucks_oil

Registered User
Aug 25, 2005
8,386
4,591
Fun stuff guys... Thanks for keeping the conversation going replacement... I'll be back to comment on devils4cup's great post (and how it ages him and brodeur) tomorrow
 

herashak

Registered User
Mar 24, 2013
5,377
562
1994 called, it wants to know if you've found my plaid flannel shirt.

But look at the last 7 vezina winners since the prev lockout. I count 5 arguably 6 hybrid guys and only 1-2 "blocking" style goalies.

I dont think you understand what blocking is then. playing the angles, hybrid/butterfly goaltending is all about getting in the best position to block a shot without having to get acrobatic
 

thadd

Oil4Life
Jun 9, 2007
26,717
2,718
Canada
I can see the pads getting a lot smaller because coaches insist in cluing in on how to play better and better defensively and we don't want this to be comparable football/soccer where people can go nuts and cheer over a 1 or 2 goal game.

Right now it is hard for smaller goalies to keep a job in the NHL and can see these rule changes eventually benefiting goalies that are more athletic and have more compact builds.

I've always wondered... what would happen if you put a sumo wrestler in net? :) j/k
 

Alawishis

...so anyway.
Mar 12, 2008
1,200
2
Sherwood Park
I have this idea and it is hard for me to explain why exaclty, but I think the new rules will hurt large goalies.

Basically we all recall the days of Furh, Randford, Moog ect, the small goalie with great reflexes. Over time goalies have gotten bigger, equipment has gotten way bigger.

Any way, two rule changes, small equipment and the smaller nets I think hurt these goalies. Reason 1 is pretty simple, bigger goalie pads, means the more you lose. 2. the smaller nets allow players to do rap around a lot quicker. Goalies will need to be much faster across the net.

I think it hurts the big goalie that just plays angles well but doesn't really have the best reflexes. I for one think it is a good thing. I want to see the return of the small goalie whit great reflexes.

This, sadly relates to the Oilers, if I am right it hurts dubs and Lababera. So sort of hope I am not that right.

CBC I think it was, did a story on the change of rules for pads, and they were saying the change had more of an impact on the smaller goals than the large ones. The point they were making is that the new rule states the top of the leg pads cannot be higher than mid thigh. For smaller goalies this can mean 4 or more combined for the two pads. For larger goalies the size will be hardly significant.

In addition let me state in not familiar with the details of this, just relating what I heard.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad