Andrew Amerk Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 The refs could have called a penalty for it. 63.1 Delaying the Game – A player or a team may be penalized when, in the opinion of the Referee, is delaying the game in any manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Necessity is the mother of invention. Well, thats what my avatar likes to say. ;) Mona Zappa is famous for her inscrutable smile. It transcends time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 easiest way to start to eliminate the trap, win in ot or regulation get 2 points, win in shootout get 1pt, lose get NOTHING... that should motivate teams because there is no loser points. This would be a start but more would need to follow if you really wanted to eliminate the trap completely. edit: I would extend that OT period from 5 to 7 minutes, would give teams just a little more time to settle in and get something going. Keep it 4 v 4 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 easiest way to start to eliminate the trap, win in ot or regulation get 2 points, win in shootout get 1pt, lose get NOTHING... that should motivate teams because there is no loser points. Yup. OT shouldn't count for anything if you lose. Rewarding losing is a bad standard to set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 I watched a good chunk of the game last night. I would like to see all thirty something remaining Tampa home games follow the same general pattern. I hate the flyers, but applaud them for their work last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Personally, I'd have my wingers sit at the sides of Tampa's blue line, keep my center back with the dmen, then have the defenseman with the biggest slapshot just fire it high through the middle of the neutral zone (remember, my wingers are off to the sides.) If it gets through, then your winger are behind their "3", so they will have an out numbered situation in Tampa's zone. If it doesn't, then worst case is you've got three back to prevent much of chance the other way, but the best case is you've just knocked one more of their players out of the game and can probably get the rebound back to shoot again. Hit enough of them and I bet the neutral zone starts to unclog. "Fish in a barrel." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Personally, I'd have my wingers sit at the sides of Tampa's blue line, keep my center back with the dmen, then have the defenseman with the biggest slapshot just fire it high through the middle of the neutral zone (remember, my wingers are off to the sides.) If it gets through, then your winger are behind their "3", so they will have an out numbered situation in Tampa's zone. If it doesn't, then worst case is you've got three back to prevent much of chance the other way, but the best case is you've just knocked one more of their players out of the game and can probably get the rebound back to shoot again. Hit enough of them and I bet the neutral zone starts to unclog. I like this thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 I like this thinking. A new use for the Ehrhoff Cannon (which is really good at hitting opposing players). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Personally, I'd have my wingers sit at the sides of Tampa's blue line, keep my center back with the dmen, then have the defenseman with the biggest slapshot just fire it high through the middle of the neutral zone (remember, my wingers are off to the sides.) If it gets through, then your winger are behind their "3", so they will have an out numbered situation in Tampa's zone. If it doesn't, then worst case is you've got three back to prevent much of chance the other way, but the best case is you've just knocked one more of their players out of the game and can probably get the rebound back to shoot again. Hit enough of them and I bet the neutral zone starts to unclog. "Fish in a barrel." IIRC This is what Boston did to them in the playoffs last year. I remember Chara frequently firing the puck down into the corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 Personally, I'd have my wingers sit at the sides of Tampa's blue line, keep my center back with the dmen, then have the defenseman with the biggest slapshot just fire it high through the middle of the neutral zone (remember, my wingers are off to the sides.) If it gets through, then your winger are behind their "3", so they will have an out numbered situation in Tampa's zone. If it doesn't, then worst case is you've got three back to prevent much of chance the other way, but the best case is you've just knocked one more of their players out of the game and can probably get the rebound back to shoot again. Hit enough of them and I bet the neutral zone starts to unclog. "Fish in a barrel." Good stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 easiest way to start to eliminate the trap, win in ot or regulation get 2 points, win in shootout get 1pt, lose get NOTHING... that should motivate teams because there is no loser points. This would be a start but more would need to follow if you really wanted to eliminate the trap completely. edit: I would extend that OT period from 5 to 7 minutes, would give teams just a little more time to settle in and get something going. Keep it 4 v 4 though. No no no. Too many changes. Just add a shot clock like basketball. Fixed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 No no no. Too many changes. Just add a shot clock like basketball. Fixed. How does a shot clock fix a defensive allignment? If anything, a shot clock would further encourage the trap. Nothing like a defense hanging back and waiting for a timer to sound off and then getting a faceoff in the other teams zone. What team on defense wouldn't like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 How does a shot clock fix a defensive allignment? If anything, a shot clock would further encourage the trap. Nothing like a defense hanging back and waiting for a timer to sound off and then getting a faceoff in the other teams zone. What team on defense wouldn't like that? How about a 10 second violation? If there are no forecheckers, you have 10 seconds to get into the neutral zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 How about a 10 second violation? If there are no forecheckers, you have 10 seconds to get into the neutral zone. Same problem. I still think Carp has the best solution. I don't want to see defensive schemes legislated out of the game, but I want to see creative ways around them. Let St. Louis take an Ehrhoff slapper to the gut and see how long Boucher sticks with his cute little system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 I have no problem with Tampa's 1-3-1 and there certainly doesn't have to be a rule against it. As Eleven said, I don't think they need to outlaw things like that -- coaches just need to come up with a way to beat it. And they are. IMO I saw nothing wrong with what Philly was doing and I can't believe they would blow it dead for that. It's Tampa's home ice and they were forcing them to forecheck. The problem with the 1-3-1 isn't that it's "unfair" or anything, it's just kind of looked down upon as a weak man's tactic (for lack of a better word). Kind of like how players apparently think wearing a visor is a sign of weakness, so is using the 1-3-1 "trap." I could just about guarantee you that Philly wouldn't do that in their own barn. Their fans are paying (much) higher prices to watch them play, and they wouldn't want to disappoint and be booed all game. But on the road, in Tampa? Nothing wrong with it in my opinion. It was unique. It was funny. And, granted the situations are VASTLY diffeent, but how could it NOT remind you of this? Anyway, a shot clock? A ten second violation? Nooo thanks. I thought the problem was the 1-3-1, not how Philly responded to it. A shot clock or 10 second violation doesn't help beat the trap, it encourages it. Just let them play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesportsbuff Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 How about a 10 second violation? If there are no forecheckers, you have 10 seconds to get into the neutral zone. That still does the same thing as a shot clock... the point is to discourage the 1-3-1, not penalize the team waiting for them to forecheck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 So apparently Mike Millbury walked off the set during the 2nd intermission last night because of this. I'm sure I'm not the first, but I would like to thank Boucher and Laviolete for their incredible gift to hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 I could hug the guy. (which is saying a lot). Teams trapping with no pressure on the puck at home during 0-0 ties in the first is killing hockey. Those 30-40 second stretches have shown just what it is. I hope every team that goes to tampa does it. No no no. Too many changes. Just add a shot clock like basketball. Fixed. How does a shot clock fix a defensive allignment? If anything, a shot clock would further encourage the trap. Nothing like a defense hanging back and waiting for a timer to sound off and then getting a faceoff in the other teams zone. What team on defense wouldn't like that? How about a 10 second violation? If there are no forecheckers, you have 10 seconds to get into the neutral zone. That still does the same thing as a shot clock... the point is to discourage the 1-3-1, not penalize the team waiting for them to forecheck. Good call. Personally, I'd have my wingers sit at the sides of Tampa's blue line, keep my center back with the dmen, then have the defenseman with the biggest slapshot just fire it high through the middle of the neutral zone (remember, my wingers are off to the sides.) If it gets through, then your winger are behind their "3", so they will have an out numbered situation in Tampa's zone. If it doesn't, then worst case is you've got three back to prevent much of chance the other way, but the best case is you've just knocked one more of their players out of the game and can probably get the rebound back to shoot again. Hit enough of them and I bet the neutral zone starts to unclog. "Fish in a barrel." But wouldn't this just result in a lot of icing calls? Which brings me to my proposed fix: if the defending team doesn't have at least one guy actively forechecking (and preferably 2) while the team with the puck is setting up in its defensive zone, the team with the puck is not subject to icing or offsides on that possession. This would permit the defending team to still keep 4 (preferably 3) skaters back to defend, but would open up the neutral zone for the attacking team if it is able to elude the forecheck. It would be a change, to be sure, but still a lot closer to real hockey than something like a shot clock. So apparently Mike Millbury walked off the set during the 2nd intermission last night because of this. I'm sure I'm not the first, but I would like to thank Boucher and Laviolete for their incredible gift to hockey. nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 I have no problem with Tampa's 1-3-1 and there certainly doesn't have to be a rule against it. As Eleven said, I don't think they need to outlaw things like that -- coaches just need to come up with a way to beat it. And they are. IMO I saw nothing wrong with what Philly was doing and I can't believe they would blow it dead for that. It's Tampa's home ice and they were forcing them to forecheck. The problem with the 1-3-1 isn't that it's "unfair" or anything, it's just kind of looked down upon as a weak man's tactic (for lack of a better word). Kind of like how players apparently think wearing a visor is a sign of weakness, so is using the 1-3-1 "trap." I disagree, the problem with the 0-1-3-1 is that it is boring. Now one wants to watch it. This is exactly why they eliminated the two-line pass rule and upped obstruction enforcement. The game was better in the 70s and 80s when it was more exciting. That still does the same thing as a shot clock... the point is to discourage the 1-3-1, not penalize the team waiting for them to forecheck. Ok, how about a requirement to have at least one man in the zone that the puck is in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 So apparently Mike Millbury walked off the set during the 2nd intermission last night because of this. I'm sure I'm not the first, but I would like to thank Boucher and Laviolete for their incredible gift to hockey. This thing just keeps on giving! :w00t: Too bad it was the Flyers who pulled this stunt... I hate giving any sort of props to philly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 So apparently Mike Millbury walked off the set during the 2nd intermission last night because of this. I'm sure I'm not the first, but I would like to thank Boucher and Laviolete for their incredible gift to hockey. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 My suggestion was a joke. But nice discussion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 My suggestion was a joke. But nice discussion! I think I may be the only one who picked up on the sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spndnchz Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 I think I may be the only one who picked up on the sarcasm. You know me so well :blush: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted November 10, 2011 Report Share Posted November 10, 2011 I think I may be the only one who picked up on the sarcasm. I thought it was pretty funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.