What would you do to increase offense?

[Kruppstahl]

No goalie masks.. Old school. That should solve everything.

You got that right! 

 

When Wayne Gretzky played, his "shoulder pads" were like padded cotton undergarments almost comparable to a woman's bra, with thin little plastic easter egg cups on the shoulders and lots of guys didn't wear helmets.  

 

Now they wear NFL style body armor, helmets, visors, and the goalies fill 67.476% of the net.  

 

Get rid of all of it!

 

Where the hell has the NHL been over the last, 0h, 30 years...as equipment manufacturers have literally altered the nature of the game?

 

The NHL has been, is, and always will be, a very poorly run organization.

 

It's just how it works.

New rule!  Helmets optional, visors not allowed, and the only helmet choice available for those who chose to wear a helmet is the classic Wayne Gretzky, Jari Kurri, Marty McSorley Jofa.

 

That thing was like a thin piece of "Tupper Ware" with a few suggestions of minimal pads on the interior.  I mean it didn't offer any protection at all.  I think that was the point.  It was the helmet to comply with the helmet rule for guys who didn't want to wear a helmet.

 

Perfect.

 

:w00t:

Edited May 15, 2015 by Kruppstahl

[PASabreFan]

Put hair around it.

[darksabre]

I wasn't very clear. I meant that even though they called it during the regular season those years, they stopped during the playoffs.

 

I disagree. Go back and watch highlights from those playoffs. Nobody was touching anybody. 

 

[SwampD]

I disagree. Go back and watch highlights from those playoffs. Nobody was touching anybody. 

 

Not really sure what that proves. What about all the other rushes in that game that didn't lead to a goal?

 

Also, neither of those teams won the Stanley Cup that year. The bigger, more physical team won.

[darksabre]

Not really sure what that proves. What about all the other rushes in that game that didn't lead to a goal?

 

Also, neither of those teams won the Stanley Cup that year. The bigger, more physical team won.

I know you want to revise history to make a point but the whistles were out in '06. Defenders didn't dare impede anyone. Even in the playoffs. Everyone treaded lightly that year and then everything came apart in 06-07. Why do you think they Sabres tailed off? The team that performed in 05-06 couldn't match the physicality that the NHL let creep back in the next year. Then they became soft as butter once everything returned to status quo.

[PASabreFan]

I know you want to revise history to make a point but the whistles were out in '06. Defenders didn't dare impede anyone. Even in the playoffs. Everyone treaded lightly that year and then everything came apart in 06-07. Why do you think they Sabres tailed off? The team that performed in 05-06 couldn't match the physicality that the NHL let creep back in the next year. Then they became soft as butter once everything returned to status quo.

You've clearly never committed Wondricide.

[thewookie1]

Don't increase net sizes

Remove the trapezoid

Shrink goalie pads

Actually call holding and hooking again

Get rid of the instigator penalty and that jersey tuck rule

Legit Boarding calls get a double minor

[PASabreFan]

Isn't there a more direct way to do this, if the "league" wants it? Owners (governors) get in a room and agree to direct their GMs to buiild more offensive teams and hire more offensive-minded coaches, or hire new GMs to do it, if the dinosaurs balk. Macro change vs. micro change.

 

Does the "problem" of scoring in the NHL result in the need for that meeting? Nah. Everything's too golden right now for anyone to be worried about whether their customers are satisfied. They neglect the game at their peril. I can tell you I can't get a young relative, boy or girl, to watch a hockey game with me. "Oh my God, it's so boring." It's how I feel about basketball, and they'll watch basketball.

Edited May 16, 2015 by PASabreFan

[SwampD]

I know you want to revise history to make a point but the whistles were out in '06. Defenders didn't dare impede anyone. Even in the playoffs. Everyone treaded lightly that year and then everything came apart in 06-07. Why do you think they Sabres tailed off? The team that performed in 05-06 couldn't match the physicality that the NHL let creep back in the next year. Then they became soft as butter once everything returned to status quo.

You can remember it any way you want, but I'm not the one rewriting history. I remember saying it then that they called the games differently in the playoffs those years. They may have called more than they do now but it wasn't even close to how they called it in the regular season. It's one of the reasons that I wasn't all that shocked by the outcomes or upset when we lost Drury and Briere. I really wasn't. Because of their size and style of play, I never thought they would be the cornerstones that led a team to a SC.

 

(I also don't think that if we played Edmonton it would have been the gimme that everyone here likes to believe so they can sleep at night)

Edited May 16, 2015 by SumpfV

[TrueBlueGED]

I don't care about scoring going up. I just want scoring chances to go up.

The goalies could keep their pads if we went to four on four.

This is essentially where I'm at. I want more scoring, but I think if the game is opened up then the scoring will come. I'm on board with defensive alignment penalties (especially with how teams are allowed to defend the blue line) and enforcing the rules that exist. I also think shot blocking restrictions could help get more pucks to the net and more offensive action in the zone. 4v4 would be awesome, but I can't imagine it's in the realm of possibility.

 

That said, I'm finally prepared to throw in the towel on net size. While I agree in principle that the equipment is larger than necessary for protection, proposing that as a solution ignores that goaltenders themselves are simply much larger than they used to be--shrinking equipment is only going to do so much when the average goaltender is 3 inches taller than it used to be. Regardless of what happens with the equipment, it's time to make the nets bigger to compensate for the larger goaltenders.

 

At the end of the day, none of this matters. I'm becoming more and more convinced that the 05-06 NHL was nothing more than a marketing ploy to bring people back and league has every intention of returning to dead puck hockey. Just as with the points system, it's designed to keep things close and keep fans of bad teams interested because they can grind and puck luck themselves to a competitive level. It's what the NHL wants.

[Hoss]

Another small tweak I would like: when a team possesses the puck while the opposition has a delayed penalty their icing should be nullified. It would opens things up a bit. These plays normally only last a few seconds and scoring on them is rare, but it would make it a true no-lose situation for them (unless they pass it into their own net). That would make those few moments in the game a bit more exciting.

[skaught]

Get rid of icing and offsides and goto an indoor soccer 3 line rule (can't pass across 3 lines). It would open up the ice more. Players could get behind the defense for a "long ball" strategy.

 

Realistically I'd say reduce the goalie pads, especially chest/shoulder. They look obese with the pads on. Without them they're skinny as a twig. Most of the pads are protecting air.

Edited May 16, 2015 by skaught

[JJFIVEOH]

Get rid of icing and offsides and goto an indoor soccer 3 line rule (can't pass across 3 lines). It would open up the ice more. Players could get behind the defense for a "long ball" strategy.

 

Realistically I'd say reduce the goalie pads, especially chest/shoulder. They look obese with the pads on. Without them they're skinny as a twig. Most of the pads are protecting air.

I agree on the icing and offsides. Goalies could keep their pads and their strategies, and it would allow for the talented forwards to play their game. 

[nfreeman]

One of the suggestions in this thread I like most is Kruppestall's about having the goalie pads be ultra-streamlined and form fitting. I wonder whether some kind of form-fitting Kevlar body armor would work in terms of providing enough protection. If so, I think that would go a long way toward having more net to shoot at.

You can remember it any way you want, but I'm not the one rewriting history. I remember saying it then that they called the games differently in the playoffs those years. They may have called more than they do now but it wasn't even close to how they called it in the regular season. It's one of the reasons that I wasn't all that shocked by the outcomes or upset when we lost Drury and Briere. I really wasn't. Because of their size and style of play, I never thought they would be the cornerstones that led a team to a SC.

 

(I also don't think that if we played Edmonton it would have been the gimme that everyone here likes to believe so they can sleep at night)

Any data to support this? Any explanation for the fact that before the Sabres tied game 5 vs the Rangers in 2007, they were gifted a very iffy tripping call? Or just an inner suspicion that those nefarious refs are up to their old tricks?

[SwampD]

One of the suggestions in this thread I like most is Kruppestall's about having the goalie pads be ultra-streamlined and form fitting. I wonder whether some kind of form-fitting Kevlar body armor would work in terms of providing enough protection. If so, I think that would go a long way toward having more net to shoot at.

 

Any data to support this? Any explanation for the fact that before the Sabres tied game 5 vs the Rangers in 2007, they were gifted a very iffy tripping call? Or just an inner suspicion that those nefarious refs are up to their old tricks?

The way they have called tripping penalties has never changed.

[Eleven]

FFS call the game the way it should be called.  This stuff about goalie pads and net sizes and all that is nuts.

[WildCard]

FFS call the game the way it should be called.  This stuff about goalie pads and net sizes and all that is nuts.

Yep

[nfreeman]

Look how much bulkier Miller's arms, upper chest, shoulders, midsection, and pants are compared to Craig's, not to mention the pad width and length. The other pads by themselves make a very skinny man look like a marshmallow in comparison. Craig was 6' 190lbs in 1980. Miller's listed at 6'2" 168 and if you remember he'd talk often about how hard it was for him to keep weight on and that he'd often drop a lot during the year compared to his listed weight. Miller looks huge compared to Craig though Craig out weighs him by at least 20 pounds on a 2 inch shorter frame.

Good post.

[bob_sauve28]

Make the puck smaller

[Eleven]

Ok, you all have me convinced on the goalie pads.  I still think the principal problem is not calling penalties, but limiting the size of pads appears to be a good idea, too.

[blugold43]

The problem is that the bigger surface had no positive impact on offense during the most recent Olympics -- in fact it was just the opposite.  The defenses (at least for Canada and USA) were too good -- it was too hard for the offense to gain the offensive zone and create scoring chances.

yeah exactly.  i always thought the size of the rink was the problem...but the olympics suggest that wasn't the case.

 

make the goal bigger, make the goalie pads smaller and call holding/obstruction.  

[Kruppstahl]

Isn't there a more direct way to do this, if the "league" wants it? Owners (governors) get in a room and agree to direct their GMs to buiild more offensive teams and hire more offensive-minded coaches, or hire new GMs to do it, if the dinosaurs balk. Macro change vs. micro change.

 

Does the "problem" of scoring in the NHL result in the need for that meeting? Nah. Everything's too golden right now for anyone to be worried about whether their customers are satisfied. They neglect the game at their peril. I can tell you I can't get a young relative, boy or girl, to watch a hockey game with me. "Oh my God, it's so boring." It's how I feel about basketball, and they'll watch basketball.

My 2 nephews are now 15 and 12, living in city of Buffalo, born and bred there.

 

Their interest in the Sabres is below zero.

 

The younger's sports hero is currently Ibrahimovic from Paris St. Germaine.  The older is, God forbid, a Bayern München fan.

 

I guess it's not the 1970s anymore.  I'm not sure I knew what soccer was at their ages and I was obsessed with the NHL, the Sabres, and the Bills too.

yeah exactly.  i always thought the size of the rink was the problem...but the olympics suggest that wasn't the case.

 

make the goal bigger, make the goalie pads smaller and call holding/obstruction.  

Yes but are elite "all star" teams that play for the best nations on earth in an international tournament the proper yardstick to measure by?

 

The NHL is horribly talent-diluted and long since over-expanded.  Guaranteed contracts have destroyed individual player motivation on most nights.  

 

A big ice surface between two mediocrities (that's most teams in the NHL) on a random Friday night in December with one team playing 3 games in 4 nights and the other coming off a big west coast trip, etc., is more "reality" for your average NHL game.

Not an international tournament composed of the best 40 players in the game.  Or close to that at least.

 

I'm not sure the impact of more ice is fully understood yet.

[SwampD]

If the defenders can hold up the forwards entering the zone, the why hasn't anyone come up with a system where there are blockers? Puck carrier crosses the blue line, drops the puck and takes out the defender, trailing guy picks it up and keeps possession. Play continues,… or something.

 

Right now, forwards only try to go around the D. What if they started engaging them, steering them somewhere that creates space for the trailing puck carrier? If it's not interference for the D then it should not be interference for the O.

[Kruppstahl]

Very small changes to the underlying rules governing a sport can have huge impacts on the game.

As an example and a little thought experiment, what if the base pads in baseball were moved from 90' to 93'.

 

The geometry of a baseball diamond is actually remarkably well thought out as is.  A guy hits a ground ball so hard, it has to go so far, a player has to field the ball, and then throw it to 1st base.  The hitter/runner has to drop his bat and start running from a dead stop.  He can only run so fast within certain tolerances.

 

This somehow forms an equation which often creates very close plays at 1st base.  As a rule, 90 feet is about right.  It's not so close than any sort of infield ground ball is a hit, yet it is not so far away that it is very difficult or impossible to get an infield single.

 

If that base moves out to 93 feet, it means 1 or 2 extra strides to the base for the batter and that could possibly result in a reduction of singles by 60% or something.  A huge number.  All from a very minor alteration to the game.  Much fewer singles means much fewer base runners more outs against the batting team.  The next thing you know, the scores of most games are 2-1 and everyone wonder why scoring is down.  

 

My point is this: over time, a subtle modification has actually occurred in hockey similar to adjusting the distance to first base.  The goalies have have gotten physically much bigger across the board, and their equipment is now huge.  That slight adjustment to the game needs to be corrected and it has had a fairly large impact on the game.  A goalie can form a wall in front of the net that was not envisioned 75 years ago.  

 

To counter this, offensive players started to realize you can't try to beat the goalie honestly.  The wall will stop the shot.  So you have to beat him the only way you can most of the time and that is with a sudden re-direction of the puck that human reflexes can't keep up with.  In order to do this you need to "generate traffic" in front of the net so there is something there to re-direct the puck. The fact that the goalie can't see the shot very well or at all only helps further, and still his wall of equipment stops most shots of that type. 

 

This phenomenon has led to a certain offensive strategy that is what we call "NHL hockey" these days.  Get the puck to the point, get traffic in front, screen the goalie, hope for "puck luck" or a nice re-direction.

 

That is a BORING approach to hockey.  Get rid of the wall of padding and you may start to see a modification to how offenses approach the game. 

 

As an example, with small, skimpy equipment, offensively skilled players might realize that if they drive hard to the net with the puck and cross in front laterally, they can make the goalie have to move.  When he does that, he will open up a ton of holes b/c his is not inherently blocking 60% of the net mouth.

 

That could become the new go to method for scoring a goal, and that would completely alter how the game is played.  

 

These are just theories mind you.  

 

Here is an idea, NHL.  How about making goalie equipment as SMALL as possible to still be safe, and then make all the goalies where that stuff in the pre-season?  Let's see if it impacts the game at all, and if so, how.

Edited May 17, 2015 by Kruppstahl

[Weave]

Ok, you all have me convinced on the goalie pads.  I still think the principal problem is not calling penalties, but limiting the size of pads appears to be a good idea, too.

 

I doubt we'll ever see a meaningful reduction in pad size.  I think that increasing the net 4-6" in width has a much more reasonable chance of happening and has a similar result.

 

I'm still more interested in seeing the flow of the game from pre-NJD SC winners returned than I am 7 goal games.