Goalie Equipment

[That Aud Smell]

linkelstilsken

 

besides: "who says that the size of goalie equipment needed to be reduced in any significant way?"

(i mean, christ, he looks like a god*amn billboard for the team!)

[Two or less]

Yeah, it's one of my biggest pet peeves.

[LabattBlue]

There is no protection/safety issue with the goalie glove. The catching part of it could be easily reduced by 50%. Tell the goalies they have a choice...either reduce the goalie equipment or the nets are going to be bigger.

 

Just another example of the mickey mouse NHL. <_<

[Bmwolf21]

The photos of Dryden and DiPietro paint quite the picture of the evolution of goalie equipment, don't they?

[mphs mike]

The photos of Dryden and DiPietro paint quite the picture of the evolution of goalie equipment, don't they?

 

It speaks volumes AND I'd still take Ken any day!

[ROC Sabres]

It speaks volumes AND I'd still take Ken any day!

I really hope he just got fatter cuz that equipment looks huge.

[Taro T]

The modern equipment and playing techniques has all but eliminated reactive goaltending. Yes, goalies do still react to shots, primarily when the offensive players force him out of position; but the strategy is to get into a butterfly before the shot flies, leaving very little open space to shoot at; and staying deep in the crease to minimize the severity of movements the goalie needs to make to get across the crease in case of a faked shot/ pass or rebound. There are few, if any, "stand up" goaltenders remaining in the league.

 

Because of the added stress placed on a goalie's joints, I doubt we see leg pads narrower than 12" any time in the near future, if ever, w/ the current 6'x4' nets. 10" wide pads would yield far more knee injuries to butterfly goalies.

 

I see no safety reasons for trappers and blockers to be as large as they are, and technology is available to make shoulder pads much more form fitting while still providing the goalie protection. While I would prefer to see these be smaller, I don't think that will result in as many goals as people might think they would. You are likely only opening up 5% or less of the net by reducing equipment size. I definitely don't think that alone w/ bring back the Lafleur/ Martin/ Sanderson blast from the wing blowing by the goalie.

 

Of course, even if the equipment were reduced in size, you would still see goalies employing techniques to block as much net as possible using as little reaction as possible, because w/ modern skates and sticks the forwards and pucks come at the goalie far too fast to perform classic "Grant Fuhr glove saves". You need to minimize your movement in order to have time to make the save.

 

I don't think you can really make changes to the equipment or net to bring back the reactive goaltender without turning the game into lax. The puck just moves too fast to have it happen. However, I read a suggestion a while back which could increase goal scoring w/out dramatically changing the way the game is played: don't allow the goalie to freeze the puck unless he and the puck are in the crease. That would create more rebound scoring opportunities. It also would probably increase the amount of physical play as d-men and forwards bang around trying to control the loose puck.

[darksabre]

Make the puck heavier.

[inkman]

Make the puck heavier.

 

...and bigger.

[That Aud Smell]

I don't think you can really make changes to the equipment or net to bring back the reactive goaltender without turning the game into lax.

great post, taro - your insights (especially the one above) are very much appreciated, as always.

 

...and bigger.

and, inkie, you never fail to entertain.

 

:thumbsup: to both

[nobody]

The goalies in indoor lacrosse have even more padding than hockey goalies.

[Taro T]

The goalies in indoor lacrosse have even more padding than hockey goalies.

I don't understand your point. They do have bulkier padding on their upper body, but their leg pads are smaller than hockey goalie leg pads.

 

The good goalies in lax stop 2/3rds of the shots. It is rare for a goalie to stop a shot off a rush. NHL goalies routinely stop 90+% of the shots against and rarely get beat on the shot from the top of the faceoff circle on the rush. If the NHL nets were made bigger so that goalies no longer routinely stop that shot, scores are going to be 14-12 routinely as they will have very little chance stopping the shots that have gotten worked down into the slot.

 

The game would be changed significantly. Whether one would believe the change is for the better or not is debatable, that the game would be changed, not so much.

[Team Strike Force]

I don't understand your point. They do have bulkier padding on their upper body, but their leg pads are smaller than hockey goalie leg pads.

 

The good goalies in lax stop 2/3rds of the shots. It is rare for a goalie to stop a shot off a rush. NHL goalies routinely stop 90+% of the shots against and rarely get beat on the shot from the top of the faceoff circle on the rush. If the NHL nets were made bigger so that goalies no longer routinely stop that shot, scores are going to be 14-12 routinely as they will have very little chance stopping the shots that have gotten worked down into the slot.

 

The game would be changed significantly. Whether one would believe the change is for the better or not is debatable, that the game would be changed, not so much.

 

I don't think the solution is to reduce the size of the goalie equipment. To do that would leave them vulnerable to slap shots that have increased in speed by about 25% due to new stick technology. You'd have to make the skaters give up using rocket launchers for sticks if the goalies reduce their pad size.

 

I like increasing the size of the net.

[Bmwolf21]

I like increasing the size of the net.

"I've got just the idea!" -- Larry Quinn.

[nobody]

"I've got just the idea!" -- Larry Quinn.

 

 

I actually kinda like the net Quinn created. :unsure:

[inkman]

I actually kinda like the net Quinn created. :unsure:

 

It's official then, nobody likes Larry Quinn. :thumbsup:

[LabattBlue]

It's official then, nobody likes Larry Quinn. :thumbsup:

:lol: :lol:

[nobody]

It's official then, nobody likes Larry Quinn. :thumbsup:

 

;)