Scoring/Increasing Scoring--goalie equipment and nets

[goon attack]

decrease the goalie pads... YES!

I say increase the height of the goal by one inch.

Not sure how this will "ruin the game"... I want to see more scoring.

Also to curt's point... yeah, get rid of the hard plastic pads on the skaters. That crap is ridiculous.

I am totally on board with reducing the goalie pads first to see what effect that has on the game. To be honest, I can hardly tell one goalie from the next in this league.

Tarasenko should be netting 80 like Hull did. But we think he's great if he nets 40.

[cprice12]

The game is good as is. In my opinion a 2 - 1 game is just as interesting as a 6 - 5 game if played the right way. I love a good save just as much as a sick goal.When they placed rules against clutching and grabbing / interference they did away with the New Jersey Devils type of boring games from the 90's. I'm totally against changing the net size.

Yep. This whole shit begs the question.

Somebody, anybody tell me WHY 5.32 goals per game is a problem.

I'm waiting. I've been waiting. Somebody actually make this argument. Thanks.

except for maybe shrinking of the goalie equipment some. (but they did this already a number of years ago, just apparently not enough).

Enough for what? Anything other than the NHL's desire to market the game to non-hockey fans?

Why do you want more scoring?

I don't really want more scoring..but I wouldn't hate a couple more goals a game, it would certainly make the end of tight games more exciting...but nah, I'm pretty happy with the amount of scoring we have now. But the league does want more scoring, and the goalie pad size regulations they put in place a number of years ago apparently weren't strict enough because they are talking about doing it again. That was my point.

[glen a richter]

To be honest, I can hardly tell one goalie from the next in this league.

Exactly my point. There's hardly any distinction between so-so, good and great. Make the goalie rely on skill more than equipment and you'll see a clear divide between the good, the bad and the ugly.

[cprice12]

To be honest, I can hardly tell one goalie from the next in this league.

Exactly my point. There's hardly any distinction between so-so, good and great. Make the goalie rely on skill more than equipment and you'll see a clear divide between the good, the bad and the ugly.

You can't argue with that.

[ecbm]

I've never approached hockey (or any sport) like this: if I don't see at least 6 goals, I'm not entertained. I really don't get it. And "ruin the game" is too pejorative. I'd describe it as slowly turning the game into a different game-like what's happened to football, which I don't watch anymore because I don't recognize it.

Again, goalie pad size is a discussion I'd be willing to have. But goalies need to have input into that. They may only be one of 6 but I'm sure you all know how fun it is to play without goalies.

To be honest, I can hardly tell one goalie from the next in this league.

Exactly my point. There's hardly any distinction between so-so, good and great. Make the goalie rely on skill more than equipment and you'll see a clear divide between the good, the bad and the ugly.

Meh. Rhetoric. I can't hardly tell the difference between one second-line winger and another. So what handicap do we hit them with to, you know, tell who's really good?

Pretty absurd, right?

[goon attack]

increased scoring would lead to more of the following exciting events in hockey:

1. hat tricks
2. players approaching league and franchise scoring records
3. celebrations after goals, including towel guy
4. more animosity, hence more violence, which is what most fans want anyway. If teams know they can get back into games more easily from scoring more easily, they won't be petrified to take penalties like they are now. This can only increase the sweet violence that was common in the 70s and 80s
5. more media attention from all of the above

this sport is great, but it's not nearly as dynamic as it was. You see half ass attempts to revive the past, "Rivalry Night" or whatever on Wednesdays? on NBC...
If they want the rivalries to get heated again, they need to do more home and homes, and get the hatred simmering again.

The game is still kick ass, but it used to be MUCH more kick ass because of the electricity created by the hatred of the opposition. That's pretty much gone.

"Ohhhh, Seabrook laid out Backes!".... that shit used to happen almost every freakin' game. now it's once a year and we go scrambling for the scraps off the NHL's Longshanks' table.



Fukk it... make this game more violent, higher scoring, and it'll be MUCH more entertaining.

Fukk 2-1 games... unless there's tons of brawlage

[ecbm]

increased scoring would lead to more of the following exciting events in hockey:

And it would all be manufactured nonsense. How about the media just report that these things happen, whether they do or not. Same thing, right?

[flyingnote38]

We live in an age of advanced technology. You are telling me no one can make smaller goalie pads that offer the same amount of protection?*

*This question was not directed to any one of you directly...just throwing it out there.

Let me clarify. When they say goalie equipment, they don't just mean the pads. Making the (leg) pads smaller is not going to have a big effect. The HNIC discussion focused more on the body padding. Kypreos(I think) suggested the first step is making the goalies wear the same size jersey as the position players and requiring them to fit their padding underneath that.

Take a look at a current goalie and compare it to a pix of a goalie from the late 60's (Giacomen, Plante, Hall, Cheever, Sawchuk, etc). The comment about looking like Michelin men is spot on.

Again I'm not suggesting any particular solution. As for whether or not the decrease in scoring is a problem, presumably the NHL has some clue about what drives their revenues.

[theohall]

Heard a great discussion from a former goalie about this and the problem with modifying equipment.

Last year a goalie equipment company made a chest protector that was lighter weight, provided more protection, and was essentially better in all regards than the current chest protectors. Only one issue - it looked smaller when worn compared to current equipment. Result - no one bought it, so they stopped making it.

In order to make smaller equipment, it requires re-tooling machines in plants which is a major capital expense. Companies aren't going to do this if the only sales are to the 60ish NHL goaltenders. They have to be able to sell the equipment to all goalies in order to actually be a profitable company and not go out of business, and goaltenders aren't buying equipment that even looks smaller. The NHL is going to have to provide the capital or these companies aren't going to bother.

It's going to take quite a bit more than just saying "make it smaller" as everyone thinks can just happen essentially next season.

[goon attack]

increased scoring would lead to more of the following exciting events in hockey:

And it would all be manufactured nonsense. How about the media just report that these things happen, whether they do or not. Same thing, right?

I don't even know what this means.

If the media reported I watched Salma Hayek and Penelope Cruz make out, I actually saw it happen?



obligatory:

[Misc. Blues]

I was doing some thinking about this and thought about some things that nobody seems to be talking about or taking into account.

If goalies get smaller equipment and more goals start going in the net then what happens? How will teams compete? Great goalies will still be good and average goalies won't survive. Poor teams will never have a glimmer of hope unless they somehow get an elite goaltender. Elites will move to better richer teams as soon as they become UFA's. The sport will suffer if great teams are afforded this advantage.

Experts seem to think this will make better scoring but in the long run it won't. Here's why it won't work. Coaches "don't want to lose" and will start playing tighter defensive systems which means in the long run less scoring (or scoring that we have now). People want scoring from the 80's but the players now are bigger, faster, stronger and are in way better shape. As some have said players used to drink beer in the locker rooms between periods. Players back then didn't workout like they do now. Players are just better now. The game is better now because of it.

I honestly don't want to see double digit games. Winning 12-10 isn't going to make me feel better that my team gave up 10 goals. That will be ten times I'm going to feel sick to my stomach. I like winning 1-0 way more than the feeling of another team scoring on my team. More scoring will not make the game better.

Goaltenders used to be shorter, not physically fit and slower. Grant Fuhr was only 5'11" 184 lbs. Curtis Joseph 5'11" 188 lbs. Allen is 6'2" 195 lbs and Elliot 6"2" 209 lbs. Carey Price 6'3" 216 lbs. Ben Bishop 6'7" 216 lbs.

[goon attack]

I'm not sure anyone is advocating for 10-12 games, but a few more goals per game would be nice.

Then again, I'm trying to get excited by this game like I was in the 80s. If there were more fights and animosity between teams, I'd be fine with the lower scoring.

I'll take the 2-1 games with more fights, roughing, scrums, gloves in the face etc... the game has lost a TON of its theatrical cachet.

The players are largely indistinguishable now because everyone is in a helmet and shield. Even that little change took a lot of personality out of the game.

Players used to look more physically different from the neck down also. Now they are all armored up with the same crap. Less personality.

Teams used to HATE each other to the point of things boiling over into a brawl. I bet one of the most exciting games for most Blues fans in recent memory was the Blues-Sharks tilt a few years back when Roman Polak "opened the door"... That seems like a once in ten years moment of glory. It used to happen all the time in the regular season no less... as well as in the playoffs. ALL. THE. TIME.

Even if it wasn't the Blues, you can bet on any given night there was usually a game featuring a lot of animosity.

It's just freakin' largely gone.

So... maybe my take here is just misdirected longing for more violence in the form of wanting more scoring. But I also think that a few minor changes to slightly increase scoring would be a good thing. I don't believe anyone is advocating making 10-12 games the norm here.

[glen a richter]

Flyingnote is right about the NHL knowing what drives profit. I, personally, would love a return to traditional divisions and conferences and get rid of some of the deadweight "way south of the M-D line" teams. But Bettman and company, for all the things they do that are boneheaded to us, are ultimately in it for profit. If more scoring = more ticket revenues = more merch sales = a more financially sound league, they'll do it. It's the same reason we have that wild card play in game in baseball now. A theatrical, inherently stupid on the surface one game event devised strictly to make even more money. It's the same reason the NFL does everything it does--more money.

[ecbm]

The only goalie equipment the size of which makes any difference are the leg pads, trapper and-maybe to a small extent-the blocker. In 30 years of playing goalie, I can't think of one instance where the difference between a goal and a save was clearly the maybe a couple inches of chest pad beyond the edge of my frame. And just as with the pants, for any extra surface area you get there you pay with range of motion anyway.

The thing about making goal equipment fit under a regular jersey...just asinine. How about we make all players skate around with equipment that would prevent them from being injured if they take a 100+mph shot to their grape or belly. It's a different position.

I don't even know what this means.

If you want hockey to be a higher scoring game and you're not too concerned about how that's accomplished and the only source of information on it tells you the game is higher-scoring: what difference does it make if it's not true? Hockey is perceived as more high-scoring and thus more entertaining. Goal reached.

If you want the games you watch to be higher-scoring, you may be expecting too much. Me, I just like hockey. I don't have too many expectations for it other than it needs to be hockey. I accept that some games I watch will have more goals, some fewer; some will be more exciting, some less. For me, that doesn't bring about agita and a never-ending desire to analyze and change the sport.

[glen a richter]

Question 1: Would slightly higher scoring totally ruin the game for you?

Question 2: If slightly higher scoring made more people come out and watch the games (intelligent, informed fans like us or nonsense fans who need a cheat sheet on the rules while they sit there, it doesn't matter--everyone pays the same ticket price) thus ensuring the long term financial stability of the league and each individual team such that the likelihood of future lockouts or strikes were dramatically dimished, would the higher scoring still ruin the game for you?

I didn't appreciate three lockouts (during my time as a fan, I understand there was also a strike in 92, I became a fan in 93). I don't appreciate that MLB, which suffered one of the most crippling work stoppages in pro sports history is actually the model of labor and financial peace among all sports ever since 1994. If the fans don't know jack about hockey, I don't particularly mind if their money is helping keep the league financially stable.

[theohall]

Question: Higher scoring (8+ goals per game) didn't make the league more financially stable, so why would it make the league more financially stable now?

As others have pointed out, higher scoring will lead to teams developing more trap-like defensive systems as happened in the 90s which will lead to less scoring.

Quit f'ing with it. The game seems great to me as is.

[glen a richter]

Question: Higher scoring (8+ goals per game) didn't make the league more financially stable, so why would it make the league more financially stable now?

As others have pointed out, higher scoring will lead to teams developing more trap-like defensive systems as happened in the 90s which will lead to less scoring.

Quit f'ing with it. The game seems great to me as is.

Because Joe Fan today is different from Joe Fan of the past. Baseball used to be the national pastime because people had patience to sit and watch a game loaded with strategy but largely devoid of action. After the baseball strike, what brought people back into the stadiums? McGwire, Sosa and Bonds. I'm not justifying what they did, I am suggesting that fans wanted home runs more than pitcher duels. We live in an era where the majority of fans want constant back and forth action and higher scoring. You think baseball would be doing as well right now without the increase in home runs and scoring, overall? If these hitters hadn't juiced, stadiums would still be half empty and it wouldn't be because the tickets are too expensive, it would be because no one cared.

For you and me and ECBM and most people, we're hardened fans, we don't care about the score of the game, we care about the game. For most people who are buying tickets, they want goals. It may not have been that way in other generations, but it is now.

[ecbm]

For most people who are buying tickets, they want goals.

I really don't think this is true. Hasn't hockey been doing better in terms of gates, media relevance and ratings year-on-year lately? That is, as the rate of goal scoring has been going down? Interpreted most charitably, this is marketing people trying to get out in front of something they think may become a problem in the future. Interpreted less charitably, it's marketing people doing a thing they do a lot: trying to manipulate you.

The same people don't want to move teams out of Arizona or Florida and they want to plant a team in Vegas for-as far as I can tell-two reasons: novelty and a cash grab for the owners. Yet they don't seem to be that enthused about a team in Quebec. Bottom line: I don't trust them with our game.

Quit f'ing with it. The game seems great to me as is.

Amen.

[goon attack]

For most people who are buying tickets, they want goals.

And violence. A little more of both, please.

This ain't rocket surgery.

[cprice12]

For most people who are buying tickets, they want goals.

And violence. A little more of both, please.

This ain't rocket surgery.

It's odd.
Fans do want the violence. Any idiot can see that.
But the league wants to reduce violence to draw in more fans...that like violence.