Also, I feel like the attributes play a bigger role than they really need to. If I poke check a guy and my stick clearly touches the puck, it should have some sort of effect. It doesn't matter if my 'poke checking' stat outweighs his 'puck possession' stat. If I poke check a guy and my stick goes nowhere near his feet, I shouldn't somehow end up getting a penalty for it because my 'discipline' isn't high enough. It's silly.
IMO there are a number of things that don't even really need to be attributes, and maybe some other things that could be.
Some of them obviously make sense, like shot accuracy, passing, agility, etc.... but discipline, for instance, is something that the user playing the game either has or doesn't, is it not? Does each individual player really need a stat for that causes them to get away with things that clearly should be penalties, or causes them to be penalized for absolutely everything. I can see why something like this might have to exist for simulation, but maybe just make it a hidden stat that doesn't have any effect when you're actually playing?
Why not have the stick checking stat dictate the type of stick check you can do, rather than having one stick check animation that either works or doesn't, or only works so often, based on your stat? I believe this is how the shot blocking stat currently works, at least to some extent. A guy who pumps a bunch of his points into stick checking should be able to do certain things that guys who don't bother with it can't do, not simply be able to get away with spamming the poke check button without taking any penalties, or being able to knock the puck away without even actually touching it.
Also, the fact that you have to spam the poke check button is kinda dumb to begin with. Wouldn't it make more sense to make it so that, if the user holds the button down, the player holds his stick out to block a passing/shooting lane?
In general, all the pucks/sticks/etc. going through players' bodies needs to be cleaned up. It just adds to the randomness of the games, and the feeling that you're not really in control of what's going on. I can't even tell you the number of times I go down to block a shot per game and have the puck go right through me.
In general I find that the defensive aspects of hockey are kinda brushed aside in the NHL games. Defensive zone coverage is basically just reduced to 'poke and hope', for the most part. Everything feels so random, and subject mainly to some combination of player attributes + whatever way the game has decided to tilt at that particular time.
But anyway, all that stuff aside, I think one thing worth expanding would be the coaching strategies. Not just the types of forechecks you can run (although that should probably be expanded as well, or at least more clearly defined), but I think it'd be cool if you could give specific instructions to players, like the coaches in Be A Pro do. It'd be especially useful in a playoff series to be able to, say, tell your third line center to shadow a certain player on the other team and try to frustrate him, or to instruct a particular line to dump and chase + cycle to kill off as much time as possible in the offensive zone. I know you can do that on the 'strategy' menu, but again, it's kinda vague, and it'd be a lot better if it were streamlined a little bit and manageable in-game.
Hell, if it were fleshed out enough, you could maybe even justify a whole new 'Be The Coach' game mode out of it, or at least add a new dimension to 'Be A GM'. Employing different strategies, trying to 'figure out' the other team, managing players' minutes to try and keep them happy, assisting the GM in making decisions on free agents and re-signing players, etc. would all be really fun IMO. Also, seeing how coaches tend to have shorter shelf lives than GMs, it'd give you a chance to jump around from team to team more often, with different expectations depending where you go, developing a reputation as a 'player development' coach, or an old-school hard-ass who gets a lot out of veteran guys, a 'run-and-gun' coach vs. more of a defensive specialist, etc. etc.
