PDA

View Full Version : Rumor/Report: NHL Could Consider Larger Nets



Phil in Absentia
11-10-2015, 03:50 PM
The NHL general managers met Tuesday in Toronto and one of the things they discussed is how to increase scoring.

Though it might not be the most popular route to fix the problem, with Calgary Flames president of hockey operations Brian Burke already speaking out against it, one potential solution is making nets larger.

The idea is one that NHL's director of hockey operations Colin Campbell believes the league might eventually have to consider, according to Sportsnet's Chris Johnston.

Through the first 215 games of the 2015-16 season, teams are averaging 2.66 goals per game, the lowest total since the 2003-04 season (2.57 per game).

http://www.thescore.com/news/878174

Pete
11-10-2015, 03:52 PM
Make the goalies smaller.

torontonyr
11-10-2015, 03:52 PM
It is a good thing our budget revolves around a goalie.

Future
11-10-2015, 03:56 PM
what a lame thing to do

Mike
11-10-2015, 04:08 PM
Make the goalies smaller.

The gear? I can't see that happening. These guys today can shoot the puck through someone's chest.

Lt. Dan
11-10-2015, 04:09 PM
What the hell? I guess the NHL wants arcade style scores now?

So stupid.

Pete
11-10-2015, 04:12 PM
The gear? I can't see that happening. These guys today can shoot the puck through someone's chest.

Right, but that doesn't mean should pads need to get higher and pads need to get wider.

ThirtyONE
11-10-2015, 04:40 PM
More goals does not equal a better game... Look at fucking basketball. 100 - 95 and it's the most boring game on the planet.

Mike
11-10-2015, 05:05 PM
Right, but that doesn't mean should pads need to get higher and pads need to get wider.

The chest armour has to have the extra thickness from chest to shoulders. They'll be breaking bones without it. The armor Hank wears sit up higher. Those extra pads that come up over the shoulders don't stop pucks from going in the net. They stop him from breaking his shoulder. The leg pad width can be debated.

Pete
11-10-2015, 05:12 PM
The chest armour has to have the extra thickness from chest to shoulders. They'll be breaking bones without it. The armor Hank wears sit up higher. Those extra pads that come up over the shoulders don't stop pucks from going in the net. They stop him from breaking his shoulder. The leg pad width can be debated.

How does a pad up to your ears not stop a puck from going in the net?

Mike
11-10-2015, 05:15 PM
How does a pad up to your ears not stop a puck from going in the net?

Because it's flimsy, and flexible, not a solid brick. Michael has the same armor. If you hit it with a shot, it's not bouncing off you into the corner.

torontonyr
11-10-2015, 05:57 PM
Hockey's problem:

They think ratings were low in the late 90's / early 2000's because they had bad marketing and loose TV reach internationally.

What they think is the problem:

Scoring.

What they've done in the process:

The game is more neutered, clinical, cerebral and frankly, less exciting, than ever.

Phil in Absentia
11-10-2015, 07:16 PM
Reducing the width of a goalies' leg pads or the height of his blocker will increase scoring percentage chances while not actually increasing injury risk for that player.

Aside from this, I think the NHL ought to listen to the suggestion from the GM or former GM whose name escapes me at the moment that suggested disallowing players from laying on the ice, or even from taking a knee when blocking shots. You want to block a shot? STAND UP.

Vodka Drunkenski
11-10-2015, 07:52 PM
I'm with Pete, make the goalies smaller, padding is way to high and wide.

Pete
11-10-2015, 07:52 PM
Because it's flimsy, and flexible, not a solid brick. Michael has the same armor. If you hit it with a shot, it's not bouncing off you into the corner.
But it's changing the angle of the shot.

Mike
11-10-2015, 07:59 PM
But it's changing the angle of the shot.

If it hits off the top? I can't see that instance increasing goal scoring enough to where it makes a difference to what the league wants to see. I mean, you would have to hit that exact spot, and have it make a difference to where the puck travels. That piece on top is going to lose to a hockey puck traveling at 80 plus mph more often than not. I'll put it this way, it saves more injuries than it does goals.

Pete
11-10-2015, 08:00 PM
If it hits off the top? I can't see that instance increasing goal scoring enough to where it makes a difference to what the league wants to see. I mean, you would have to hit that exact spot, and have it make a difference to where the puck travels. That piece on top is going to lose to a hockey puck traveling at 80 plus mph more often than not. I'll put it this way, it saves more injuries than it does goals.
I'm pretty sure if the NHL put a height restriction on shoulder gear, Bauer would have a solution in 90 days.

Dunny
11-10-2015, 08:03 PM
Make them 12" bigger around. Add some targets for score multipliers. Introduce 3-point line. This isn't hard.

Mike
11-10-2015, 08:09 PM
I'm pretty sure if the NHL put a height restriction on shoulder gear, Bauer would have a solution in 90 days.

Probably, but my point is that it wouldn't make a difference as to where you'll notice it statistically.

Pete
11-10-2015, 08:12 PM
Probably, but my point is that it wouldn't make a difference as to where you'll notice it statistically.
Disagree. When a shooter is shooting he's looking for net to shoot at. He might get too fine and miss if pads are that high. Lower profiles mean more net to shoot at.

Simply put, goalies are huge today. Pants and jerseys are huge. Develop more form fitting gear.

Mike
11-10-2015, 08:24 PM
Disagree. When a shooter is shooting he's looking for net to shoot at. He might get too fine and miss if pads are that high. Lower profiles mean more net to shoot at.

Simply put, goalies are huge today. Pants and jerseys are huge. Develop more form fitting gear.

And that's the least area of impact of the gear. If you put it by the goalie's ear, no one is stopping it. You can shrink the leg pads, but that's about it as far as the eye goes.

Pete
11-10-2015, 08:25 PM
And that's the least area of impact of the gear. If you put it by the goalie's ear, no one is stopping it. You can shrink the leg pads, but that's about it as far as the eye goes.
It's not about impact. It's about sight lines.

Mike
11-10-2015, 08:35 PM
It's not about impact. It's about sight lines.

How much time do you think a shooter has on average to pick a spot? Not enough to where it'll make scoring go up. 75% of goals scored come in the lower half of the net. They always have. So many shots are just thrown to the net now to create goals off of deflections, traffic, and screens. If you're talking breakaways, then yeah, you're probably right, but that's about it.

Pete
11-10-2015, 08:37 PM
How much time do you think a shooter has on average to pick a spot? Not enough to where it'll make scoring go up. 75% of goals scored come in the lower half of the net. They always have. So many shots are just thrown to the net now to create goals off of deflections, traffic, and screens. If you're talking breakaways, then yeah, you're probably right, but that's about it.
Every bit helps. Rather see that then bigger nets.

Mike
11-10-2015, 08:40 PM
Every bit helps. Rather see that then bigger nets.

Definitely don't want to see bigger nets. That will have such an impact on all levels of hockey.

Ranger Lothbrok
11-10-2015, 09:59 PM
Definitely don't want to see bigger nets. That will have such an impact on all levels of hockey.

Seriously. Every single goalie in the league will basically have to learn their positioning all over again, from scratch. When you play often enough, your sense of where the crease and the posts are becomes innate. You'll never see a goalie look to see where his skate's going when he pins it against the post to prevent a wraparound goal. Years and years of practice have made that particular move second nature. It will seriously fuck up angles, positioning, butterfly sliding, etc. to make the nets larger. Even an extra inch of width strikes me as unfair to the league's current goaltenders, who have played their entire lives a certain way. They've put in the legwork and hours upon hours of practice to make all of that second nature.

Niko
11-11-2015, 12:24 AM
http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/HBleNJq8bnoTeujTgU20pA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3NfbGVnbztxPTg1O3c9MzEw/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/Sports/ap/201305121859683498996-p2.jpeg


http://cdni.condenast.co.uk/320x480/g_j/Henrik-Lundqvist-GQ_27Jun13_getty_b_320x480.jpg

Seeing him in a suit and then seeing him in full gear is absurd. It's ridiculous how much size he adds.

Mike
11-11-2015, 07:26 AM
http://l2.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/HBleNJq8bnoTeujTgU20pA--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3NfbGVnbztxPTg1O3c9MzEw/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/Sports/ap/201305121859683498996-p2.jpeg


http://cdni.condenast.co.uk/320x480/g_j/Henrik-Lundqvist-GQ_27Jun13_getty_b_320x480.jpg

Seeing him in a suit and then seeing him in full gear is absurd. It's ridiculous how much size he adds.
Don't just pick on Hank. They all look like that.

Pete
11-11-2015, 07:55 AM
Some more than others. I sat behind the net a few years ago for Rangers / Canucks and Hanks gear was noticeably larger than Luongo.

Future
11-11-2015, 09:21 AM
Some more than others. I sat behind the net a few years ago for Rangers / Canucks and Hanks gear was noticeably larger than Luongo.
Luongo is 2 inches taller and 20 lbs heavier than Hank, of course the pads looks smaller on him.

Regardless, these two guys look about the same to me.
http://668d3eaa831be4d52f0d515f.ingoalmagazine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Roberto_Luongo.jpg

https://snyrangers.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/henrik-lundqvist.jpg

Mike
11-11-2015, 09:25 AM
Luongo is 2 inches taller and 20 lbs heavier than Hank, of course the pads looks smaller on him.

Regardless, these two guys look about the same to me.
http://668d3eaa831be4d52f0d515f.ingoalmagazine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Roberto_Luongo.jpg

https://snyrangers.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/henrik-lundqvist.jpg
Well in all fairness, the pads aren't all the same size, or made in the same style. They'll always go for comfort first.

Pete
11-11-2015, 09:27 AM
Luongo is 2 inches taller and 20 lbs heavier than Hank, of course the pads looks smaller on him.

Regardless, these two guys look about the same to me.
http://668d3eaa831be4d52f0d515f.ingoalmagazine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Roberto_Luongo.jpg

https://snyrangers.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/henrik-lundqvist.jpg


Nah, Hanks glove and chest protector were bigger. His pads were higher.

I'm not going to argue what I saw with my own eyes from behind the glass. You're using internet screen grabs. I was 20 feet away.

Mike
11-11-2015, 09:31 AM
Nah, Hanks glove and chest protector were bigger. His pads were higher.

I'm not going to argue what I saw with my own eyes from behind the glass. You're using internet screen grabs. I was 20 feet away.

Hank's glove used to be bigger in the past, because he used it as another blocker more than he did as a catching device. He used to use the bottom half more to fight off pucks, rather than try to catch them. His glove has improved over the years, but I'm not sure if he uses the same size now, as he did a few years back. I was 6" away from him when Michael went to his camp, and the glove was definitely bigger than normal, but that was 4 years ago.

Pete
11-11-2015, 09:35 AM
Hank's glove used to be bigger in the past, because he used it as another blocker more than he did as a catching device. He used to use the bottom half more to fight off pucks, rather than try to catch them. His glove has improved over the years, but I'm not sure if he uses the same size now, as he did a few years back. I was 6" away from him when Michael went to his camp, and the glove was definitely bigger than normal, but that was 4 years ago.
Right. Wasn't just the glove though. Shoulders were smaller and pads didn't come up as high.

Mike
11-11-2015, 09:48 AM
Right. Wasn't just the glove though. Shoulders were smaller and pads didn't come up as high.

Imo, I don't think he used that armor to aide him in stopping pucks. I think it's just wearing what he likes, and what is most comfortable to him. I mean, if it happens to give him a slight edge, so be it.

Pete
11-11-2015, 09:51 AM
Imo, I don't think he used that armor to aide him in stopping pucks. I think it's just wearing what he likes, and what is most comfortable to him. I mean, if it happens to give him a slight edge, so be it.

IMO, doesn't matter. We can argue if if gives the goalie an edge all day long.

If Luongo can wear pads that are rounded that you can't even really notice, then why can't every goalie? Shit, look at Brodeur's gear compared to everyone else's. You don't need to look like Optimus Prime to be a good goalie.

Future
11-11-2015, 09:59 AM
Not for nothing, but they shrunk leg pads and Hank is playing as well as he ever has. It's not as if he's making 10 shoulder saves a game.

Pete
11-11-2015, 10:09 AM
Again, as I've said a couple times now...Shooters shoot for openings, if more of the net is covered, that's less for the shooter to see, therefore advantage goalie. It doesn't matter if it can stop the puck (although I'd argue it can change the angle of a shot, so if a goalie is out far enough, it can cause a shot to miss the net even if it doesn't stop the puck in it's tracks.

http://s27.postimg.org/emyqmdldf/Screen_Shot_2015_11_11_at_10_09_06_AM.png

Future
11-11-2015, 10:13 AM
I think you're seriously overestimating how much of a difference an inch over the shoulder would make.

Pete
11-11-2015, 10:21 AM
I think you're seriously overestimating how much of a difference an inch over the shoulder would make.
It's much more than an inch, but we can agree to disagree.

Mike
11-11-2015, 10:48 AM
Goalies now are also a lot taller than they used to be. Over the last 10 years they've been getting bigger and bigger. Brodeur was a creature of habit, old school, he was never going to change his gear, or style of play.

phillyb™
11-11-2015, 12:23 PM
http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/brian-burke-weighs-in-on-bigger-nets-calls-it-extreme-measure/


Pittsburgh Penguins superstar Sidney Crosby weighed in on the issue last week, saying the NHL should look at again shrinking goalie equipment in order to increase scoring. Crosby’s teammate, goaltender Marc-Andre Fleury, agreed there were ways to shrink the size of equipment even more. Now you can add another vote to shrinking equipment, as Calgary Flames president of hockey operations Brian Burke said he’d rather see goaltending equipment downsized than the nets increase in size.

“(Bigger nets), to me, is such an extreme measure to increase scoring that it would have to be the third or fourth of several steps, in my opinion,” Burke told Sportsnet. “Goaltender equipment may be looked at first. I don’t think we need a high scoring number in the game to generate interest. I think we need scoring chances.”

Ranger Lothbrok
11-11-2015, 01:39 PM
JS Giguere might've been the most hilarious example of oversized pads I've ever seen. Him vs. the Devils in the 2003 Finals was hysterical. I swear there was one time he was in his set stance and it looked to me like the shoulder padding was even with the top of his mask.

Morphinity
11-11-2015, 01:48 PM
I mean that's mainly because of his hunched over stance:

http://www.goaliesarchive.com/ducks/goalie/record3.jpg

Very old-timey:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/79/17/9d/79179d28eb6867549b09ed1dff5602bb.jpg

Phil in Absentia
11-11-2015, 01:55 PM
Yeah, Felix Potvin got the same shit.

I have no doubt their pads could be shrunk, but if you crouch, it exaggerates the effect.

Future
11-11-2015, 02:22 PM
JS Giguere might've been the most hilarious example of oversized pads I've ever seen. Him vs. the Devils in the 2003 Finals was hysterical. I swear there was one time he was in his set stance and it looked to me like the shoulder padding was even with the top of his mask.
Ironically, he was one of the people who voted for the leg pad reduction.

Future
11-11-2015, 02:23 PM
I don't get why the NHL wants more scoring anyways. Is it really going to be a better league if Ovechkin scores 62 instead of 55 goals? The league is outstanding right now....fast, competitive...why tinker with game play?

They'd be smarter to reduce the number of teams so that there are less shitty players in the league. I know that won't happen, but watering down goals isn't a good strategy for anything.

Dunny
11-11-2015, 02:45 PM
Outstanding? It's more boring than soccer.

McDougalfaschnitzer
11-11-2015, 06:52 PM
My Argument won't change on this. You can size pants down for goalies, and reign in the chest protectors a bit (keeping protection in tact for both), but it won't make a lot of difference. Quality chances equal goals so increase the likelihood of them happening and you will get more goals.

McDougalfaschnitzer
11-15-2015, 01:05 PM
Problem solved:

http://elbownews.com/news/2015/11/15/goaltenders-to-wear-oilers-jerseys-next-season-in-effort-to-solve-nhls-scoring-woes

AmericanJesus
11-15-2015, 02:55 PM
Take the refs off the ice and let them blow whistles while watching video feeds. Two less people on the ice means more room on it. And they will probably do better on the calls.

Pete
11-15-2015, 02:57 PM
Why does no one talk about removing offside?

Mike
11-15-2015, 09:00 PM
Why does no one talk about removing offside?

I'd stop watching hockey if they removed offside. How much more gimmicky can they get? If they're trying to get scoring up to attract a new audience, it's not going to work. The NHL will never pass up the other sports. It is what it is.

Pete
11-15-2015, 09:02 PM
I think it would be amazing. The idea shouldn't be to increase goal totals, it should be to increase chances.

No better way to do it, if you're not gonna make the Rink bigger.

It's no more gimmicky than anything else that's been discussed. In fact, it's not even a gimmick, by the definition of a gimmick.

Mike
11-15-2015, 09:11 PM
I think it would be amazing. The idea shouldn't be to increase goal totals, it should be to increase chances.

No better way to do it, if you're not gonna make the Rink bigger.

It's no more gimmicky than anything else that's been discussed. In fact, it's not even a gimmick, by the definition of a gimmick.

You really have no compassion for coaches, or everyone that plays the game right now. lol

Pete
11-15-2015, 09:14 PM
You really have no compassion for coaches, or everyone that plays the game right now. lol
Coaches? No. No sympathy for them.

Everyone who plays the game? Not sure how you figure that. Forwards would be all for it.

If it's a choice between that and bigger nets, I'd take the offsides out 100 out of 100 times.

I'm sure there was a similar reaction to removing the 2 line pass. Now no one even notices.

Mike
11-15-2015, 09:19 PM
Coaches? No. No sympathy for them.

Everyone who plays the game? Not sure how you figure that. Forwards would be all for it.

If it's a choice between that and bigger nets, I'd take the offsides out 100 out of 100 times.

I'm sure there was a similar reaction to removing the 2 line pass. Now no one even notices.

Only the Devils and Stars were upset about that. I think removing the red line was probably the best thing they ever did to improve the game. My feeling on the trapezoid is 50/50, maybe that's because it's only a NHL rule, and when I watch other levels it makes it odd.

I'm not sure all forwards would be all for it. Most wouldn't like it.

Pete
11-15-2015, 09:20 PM
Only the Devils and Stars were upset about that. I think removing the red line was probably the best thing they ever did to improve the game. My feeling on the trapezoid is 50/50, maybe that's because it's only a NHL rule, and when I watch other levels it makes it odd.
The trapezoid is counter intuitive. I think if you want to keep goalies from playing the puck, make em fair game.

Mike
11-15-2015, 09:23 PM
The trapezoid is counter intuitive. I think if you want to keep goalies from playing the puck, make em fair game.

I feel like more often than not, it prevents a chance more than it does increase zone time. The goalies could catch teams changing a lot. That would create more excitement than a team getting trapped in their zone, winning a 50/50 puck, and chipping off the glass.

phillyb™
11-15-2015, 09:26 PM
i posted in here, right?
i could have sworn i posted in this thread.
was my post deleted?

Pete
11-15-2015, 09:33 PM
I feel like more often than not, it prevents a chance more than it does increase zone time. The goalies could catch teams changing a lot. That would create more excitement than a team getting trapped in their zone, winning a 50/50 puck, and chipping off the glass.
I'm not even sure it changed much of anything.

McDougalfaschnitzer
11-15-2015, 10:05 PM
I'm not even sure it changed much of anything.

I feel like they should reverse the trapezoid. It will make dumping and chasing more effective, and will force goalies to make a bigger risk if they want to play the puck by skating to the corner.

Pete
11-15-2015, 10:06 PM
I feel like they should reverse the trapezoid. It will make dumping and chasing more effective, and will force goalies to make a bigger risk if they want to play the puck by skating to the corner.
Agreed completely.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

AmericanJesus
11-16-2015, 08:29 AM
I feel like they should reverse the trapezoid. It will make dumping and chasing more effective, and will force goalies to make a bigger risk if they want to play the puck by skating to the corner.

Yeah, this is a good idea. Make goalies

How about if the goalie freezes the puck outside of the crease with their glove along the ice or by diving on top of the puck, it should be a delay of game just like for any other player. If they catch it or it gets "caught up in their equipment" that's fine. So last night for instance, where there's a shot from the point and Raanta reaches out through a maze of legs to cover the puck (which was still loose really), that would be a delay of game penalty.

I think this would keep plays alive more in the dangerous scoring areas.

GordonGecko
11-16-2015, 10:49 AM
I think the NHL ought to listen to the suggestion from the GM or former GM whose name escapes me at the moment that suggested disallowing players from laying on the ice, or even from taking a knee when blocking shots. You want to block a shot? STAND UP.

Torts' head just exploded

Mike
11-16-2015, 02:03 PM
Yeah, this is a good idea. Make goalies

How about if the goalie freezes the puck outside of the crease with their glove along the ice or by diving on top of the puck, it should be a delay of game just like for any other player. If they catch it or it gets "caught up in their equipment" that's fine. So last night for instance, where there's a shot from the point and Raanta reaches out through a maze of legs to cover the puck (which was still loose really), that would be a delay of game penalty.

I think this would keep plays alive more in the dangerous scoring areas.

They'll be 400 penalties a game. That's not the same as painting lines on the ice where you can't touch the puck, and usually having time to think about it for 2 seconds. Goalie can reach it, he's covering it. You can restrict that to the paint.