shrader Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 It will cut down on SHGs, too. I like everything about the way it is. SHGs are pretty rare, there were around 6.7 scored per team last year. So if by some chance you're right, that's not very many goals that would be lost. I'm not so sure you're right though. How many SHGs are a result of dumping the puck? I'd guess that most are a result of an intercepted pass across the blue line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 I think that would be a good move if they really want to add some offense. One rule change I really want to see: when a penalty shot is awarded the team should also get the two minute PP if the penalty shooter doesn't score. The fact that they don't is stupid. Intentionally bringing a guy down on a breakaway should result in a worse penalty than a regular one, but some might say it's better to just bring him down then let your unprepared goalie face the breakaway. That, and if the delayed penalty (for a normal minor) results in a goal the penalty is still enforced. I like those ideas a LOT more than eliminating icing. The other one I've advocated (only slightly jokingly) for is allowing teams to decline the penalty but be given the win of the next 3 faceoffs. The teams would line up like for a normal faceoff, but the puck starts on the stick of the D-man closest to the boards. That would be a lot more beneficial to a team like the Sabres that can neither win a faceoff nor score a pp goal than 2 minutes would be. Ugh, no; I love how a brilliant point man can make all the difference by keeping it in. And that will be reduced as it is likely more beneficial to have a faceoff w/ fresh skaters going against gassed ones than to still have the puck in the zone. Short arm syndrome could become rampant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 The NCAA did try it a few years back (I forget if it was the entire NCAA or just Hockey East). They result they found was that PK teams put the puck out of play into the benches at a much higher rate. That'll be the one major concern with that rule. I'd counter that by only allowing a team to change after a natural stoppage of play like a goal or a puck covered by the goalie. You put the puck out of play, you don't get to change. You go offside, no change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 I think if a team scores a SHG the penalty should be over. You give up a SHG you lose your powerplay... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 I think if a team scores a SHG the penalty should be over. You give up a SHG you lose your powerplay... Maybe this rule mixed with taking away penalty-free icing would make for a more interesting approach to penalty kill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 I think calling icings during a penalty kill is a bad idea. While it may lead to more goals being scored I think it's also going to lead to a ton more play stoppages. One of the best things about hockey (besides the fights and the hits) is that the flow of the game is so fast paced. Adding in more and more potential play stoppages is just going to lead to longer games and more commercials. If you've got a 1 goal game with a penalty taken in the last few minutes I venture to guess that games like that will start to drag out the way football and basketball games do now where the final minute can take half an hour or at least it feels that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 It'd be cool if instead of calling icing, they eliminated the offsides for the PP team. Not sure what the result would look like, but I imagine it would really open things up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 A number of these proposals are interesting, but I'd like to see some offensive-minded reforms for 5x5 play, as opposed to reforms designed to facilitate PP scoring. I really think the biggest problem with the game today is that most offensive possessions result in scrums in front of the net, with 4 or 5 defenders trying to block shots. I'm not sure what the solution is, but I'd like to see some creative thinking and experimentation. Separately: can any regular watcher of the Amerks provide an update on Larsson? I'm starting to think that Darcy traded Pommer for no good reason and came away with 3 prospects, 2 of whom are already washouts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 Crap. The league is like the government. We need less of it. Don't want to keep adding new rules to it.There are several rules they could take out that would help the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 Crap. The league is like the government. We need less of it. Don't want to keep adding new rules to it.There are several rules they could take out that would help the game. I don't think anybody is suggesting new rules... Just adjustments to the ones that are already there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 A number of these proposals are interesting, but I'd like to see some offensive-minded reforms for 5x5 play, as opposed to reforms designed to facilitate PP scoring. I really think the biggest problem with the game today is that most offensive possessions result in scrums in front of the net, with 4 or 5 defenders trying to block shots. I'm not sure what the solution is, but I'd like to see some creative thinking and experimentation. Separately: can any regular watcher of the Amerks provide an update on Larsson? I'm starting to think that Darcy traded Pommer for no good reason and came away with 3 prospects, 2 of whom are already washouts. You mean like a 3 second in the paint rule in basketball, only for defense, maybe? Or an area where there can be no more than two defenders or something. It's interesting, but I think it would have to be just too complex to be effective. I kinda like the having to get to the Blue line on a PP for it to not be icing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 Crap. The league is like the government. We need less of it. Don't want to keep adding new rules to it.There are several rules they could take out that would help the game. Interested to hear which ones. Never liked the trapezoid rule. Goalies should be able to play any puck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LastPommerFan Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 A number of these proposals are interesting, but I'd like to see some offensive-minded reforms for 5x5 play, as opposed to reforms designed to facilitate PP scoring. I really think the biggest problem with the game today is that most offensive possessions result in scrums in front of the net, with 4 or 5 defenders trying to block shots. I'm not sure what the solution is, but I'd like to see some creative thinking and experimentation. I think eliminating offsides, or creating an "offset-offsides" (puck crosses center ice, you may enter the zone immediately) would do the most to open up the game. Separately: can any regular watcher of the Amerks provide an update on Larsson? I'm starting to think that Darcy traded Pommer for no good reason and came away with 3 prospects, 2 of whom are already washouts. :mellow: :angry: :( :cry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 Separately: can any regular watcher of the Amerks provide an update on Larsson? I'm starting to think that Darcy traded Pommer for no good reason and came away with 3 prospects, 2 of whom are already washouts. I've had the same thought since late last season. I am well convinced that we got nothing even close to equal value back for Pommer. I feared this would be the case when word got out that we weren't getting their #1 or even #2 prospect in their system. And it is one more reason why I've been shouting NO MORE PROSPECTS when we are trading decent NHL'ers. That trade has turned out to be a bust as far as I am concerned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X. Benedict Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 I've had the same thought since late last season. I am well convinced that we got nothing even close to equal value back for Pommer. I feared this would be the case when word got out that we weren't getting their #1 or even #2 prospect in their system. And it is one more reason why I've been shouting NO MORE PROSPECTS when we are trading decent NHL'ers. That trade has turned out to be a bust as far as I am concerned. I really think Zadorov has a long career ahead of him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 I really think Zadorov has a long career ahead of him. He better because Hackett probably won't be Sabres property in the next year or two, and Larsson looks like nothing more than a 3rd/4th line tweener. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 A number of these proposals are interesting, but I'd like to see some offensive-minded reforms for 5x5 play, as opposed to reforms designed to facilitate PP scoring. I really think the biggest problem with the game today is that most offensive possessions result in scrums in front of the net, with 4 or 5 defenders trying to block shots. I'm not sure what the solution is, but I'd like to see some creative thinking and experimentation. Separately: can any regular watcher of the Amerks provide an update on Larsson? I'm starting to think that Darcy traded Pommer for no good reason and came away with 3 prospects, 2 of whom are already washouts. Yes, yes, and yes. Everybody seems to fixate on goals scored, and reforming special teams will go some way to increasing scoring...but I've always felt that's addressing the symptom rather than the problem, and won't really lend itself to a more entertaining product since the majority of the game will be unaffected. 5v5 should be much more free-flowing and skillful than it is...open the game up, and the scoring will come AND be more entertaining to watch all at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 23, 2014 Report Share Posted October 23, 2014 I've had the same thought since late last season. I am well convinced that we got nothing even close to equal value back for Pommer. I feared this would be the case when word got out that we weren't getting their #1 or even #2 prospect in their system. And it is one more reason why I've been shouting NO MORE PROSPECTS when we are trading decent NHL'ers. That trade has turned out to be a bust as far as I am concerned. I understand what you are saying but in reality the pick was always the best of the 3 traded commodities. Larsson will never match Pommers offense and Hackett did look like a great prospect at the time of the trade. If Zadorov hits, it's a win, if not, we'll they could have lost him for nothing. I suppose that's is why you trade for all 3. One of them is bound to hit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 24, 2014 Report Share Posted October 24, 2014 (edited) Merks up 2-1. Grigs from armia on 2nd goal Edited October 25, 2014 by inkman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crusader1969 Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 Caught the 3rd period of tonights game. Nice shot by Armia. Is Luke Adam on PP1 and Grigs on PP2? or maybe its just the way it worked out on the power play in the 3rd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcsaberks Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 Solid 4-1 win for Amerks tonight. Grigs, Armia both with a goal & assist. Grigs #1 star. His goal was a true skill goal, sick shot from the slot, so fast. Larsson looked good w/ maintaining possession and winning battles. Sundher looked quick and good energy too. Luke Adam still appears to be Luke Adam :beer: . Pysyk looked very good, probably the best player on the ice. Calm, smooth, no problem man. Seems like Bagnall is carrying a ton on his shoulders w/ the C AND the enforcer role. Respect. McCabe looked pretty good. Makarov was solid too. Then there's Ron Rolston sitting in our relatively empty section with his laptop fired up (along with about 5 other scouts all spread out), I said hello, he seems like a good dude, he said empathetically "yeah...it's gonna be a while" in response to my frustration with 1 goal in 4 games. Fun night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 What's Rolston now anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 What's Rolston now anyway? Yotes scout Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 I think if the kids can play around 20 games after new year for the sabres, i think this turnaround might be quicker than most think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inkman Posted October 25, 2014 Report Share Posted October 25, 2014 I think if the kids can play around 20 games after new year for the sabres, i think this turnaround might be quicker than most think. Even the best projects who tear up the A usually struggle at first in the bigs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.