NHL Scoring Problem

[darksabre]

You proposed AN adjustment (supporting enforcement of something already on the books doesn't constitute an adjustment IMHO ;)) which we are in agreement on. But there are several more things that could be done to make the game better.

Goalie equipment, in my opinion, being the lowest hanging fruit. And the least productive.

 

I suppose I should separate my position into two key parts.

 

1. I support minor changes even though I suspect they won't make much difference.

 

2. I'm opposed to major changes because I think it will make the game worse. 

Edited February 25, 2016 by d4rksabre

[JJFIVEOH]

If we're going to make rules based on giving goaltenders a better quality of life after hockey, and less while playing, let's just outlaw hitting and get Nerf to make pucks so that all players can get the same treatment.

[SwampD]

Goalie equipment, in my opinion, being the lowest hanging fruit. And the least productive.

Is this fandom's version of "not in my backyard"?

[darksabre]

Is this fandom's version of "not in my backyard"?

Not really. I just think there are two paths forward that we can take with goalie equipment and neither of them will provide what we're looking for. 

[JJFIVEOH]

Wouldn't smaller equipment, making them lighter, help to reduce injuries?

[darksabre]

Wouldn't smaller equipment, making them lighter, help to reduce injuries?

 

Goalie equipment is already pretty light. If you reduce the size you have to use heavier materials to provide the same protection. It'll decrease mobility and weight probably ends up being a wash. 

[SwampD]

Not really. I just think there are two paths forward that we can take with goalie equipment and neither of them will provide what we're looking for.

 

Okay, one last question, does current goalie equipment play any part in the derth of scoring today?

 

If you answer no, then fine. I would agree with you that we don't need to change anything. If you say yes, even a little, well, that's different.

 

Editited to fix bad wording. That's better.

Edited February 25, 2016 by SwampD

[darksabre]

Okay, one last question, does current goalie equipment play any part in the derth of scoring today?

 

If you answer no, then fine. I would agree with you that we don't need to change anything. If you say yes, even a little, well, that's different.

 

Editited to fix bad wording. That's better.

In my opinion, no it doesn't. Players have increasingly raised their abilities to meet the increase in competitiveness that the butterfly style standardized for goalies. The technique of modern goalies is much more important than their equipment size. The butterfly is just incredibly efficient, and coaching for goalies is the best it's ever been. We're developing goalies better than ever, and they've caught up with their goal scoring peers. 

 

Unless you ban the butterfly or drastically alter the equipment I don't believe minor tweaks will help with the perception that goals aren't being scored often enough. 

[BetweenThePipes00]

I can't possibly multi-quote everything I'd like to comment on ... d4rk's opinions on the subject are interesting because they seem to come from a goalie's perspective ... but then I have played goalie too and I don't necessarily agree, so who knows ... just some thoughts/questions:

 

- The increased injury thing: d4rk and pi both seem very sure they are right on this. I'd like to see more evidence than "Nope, you're wrong." There are always injury risks, but I am not sure this idea that goalies will need to make "more athletic moves"= more injuries is accurate.

- I understand the idea of "closing gaps" to protect vulnerable areas but you know as well as I do the gear does much more than that. you mentioned the inside of the elbow ... on my gear the inside of the elbow has this giant creased square piece of "padding" that is a good inch or more wider on either side of the arm than it needs to be. It makes it almost impossible for a shot to get between my arm and my body. There's absolutely no reason for it to be that wide other than to stop pucks. it could be more rounded and 2-3" more narrow and provide the same protection.

- Your argument that the game is better when all the goalies are similar and there are no great ones like Brodeur or Hasek makes zero sense to me. In that case, why not just do away with the position entirely and strap those shooting trainers up there? You said the game isn't about the goalies, it's about the skaters, so why not? Just let them pick the corners and save all that injury risk for the goalies. Would you ever suggest replacing pitchers with pitching machines in baseball? Of course not, because pitching is a skill and if you have the best ones, yes, you have a better chance to win. Same thing with goalies. Having a great player at ANY position should give you an advantage. The Sabres never won with Hasek, so obviously this advantage is not unfair to the opposition.

 

Yes, it IS low-hanging fruit. Yes, a few more "lame" goals will be scored if the gear is smaller. No, it doesn't really make the WAY the game is played any different. I agree with you in that I wish the game was played differently and there was a way to create more scoring chances. Honestly, the game is hyper-coached to such a great extent I am not sure it can ever get to where it's any more wide open. 

But here's the thing ... and however we get there, THIS is why we NEED to get there, somehow, someway ... I really believe that the biggest reason we think the game is more boring and less fun now is because when it gets to be 2-0 or 3-1, the game is over. It's OVER. You're sitting there watching a perfectly good 1-0 game in the second period and there are good chances and great saves and then a puck goes in off someone's rear end and it's 2-0 and it's a KILLER because you know your team is probably DONE. Sure, maybe once a month they rally and win a game they trailed by 2 goals if they are really good ... but you know it's over. More often than not, it's soccer. And that is not a compliment in this case.

Maybe this is a product of having grown up in the 70s and 80s, but it was just more fun to watch hockey knowing a 4-1 lead didn't mean your team had it in the bag, and a 4-1 hole didn't meant they could never come back.

Goals are fun. Not because they are all amazing displays of skill and sniped into a spot barely bigger than the puck, but because they change the dynamic of the game. Momentum shifts, the crowd gets back into it, the crowd STAYS into it even if the home team falls behind ...

No I don't want more injuries, but this league doesn't care about skaters with way less head protection getting their brains scrambled if the guy made the fatal mistake of "having his head down," so forgive me if I play a little fast and loose withe knees and elbows of my fellow goaltenders.
We need MORE GOALS. D4rk, even if EVERYTHING you are saying is 100 percent correct, and it may very well be ... I don't care. I want more goals. 

[darksabre]

I can't possibly multi-quote everything I'd like to comment on ... d4rk's opinions on the subject are interesting because they seem to come from a goalie's perspective ... but then I have played goalie too and I don't necessarily agree, so who knows ... just some thoughts/questions:

 

- The increased injury thing: d4rk and pi both seem very sure they are right on this. I'd like to see more evidence than "Nope, you're wrong." There are always injury risks, but I am not sure this idea that goalies will need to make "more athletic moves"= more injuries is accurate.

- I understand the idea of "closing gaps" to protect vulnerable areas but you know as well as I do the gear does much more than that. you mentioned the inside of the elbow ... on my gear the inside of the elbow has this giant creased square piece of "padding" that is a good inch or more wider on either side of the arm than it needs to be. It makes it almost impossible for a shot to get between my arm and my body. There's absolutely no reason for it to be that wide other than to stop pucks. it could be more rounded and 2-3" more narrow and provide the same protection.

- Your argument that the game is better when all the goalies are similar and there are no great ones like Brodeur or Hasek makes zero sense to me. In that case, why not just do away with the position entirely and strap those shooting trainers up there? You said the game isn't about the goalies, it's about the skaters, so why not? Just let them pick the corners and save all that injury risk for the goalies. Would you ever suggest replacing pitchers with pitching machines in baseball? Of course not, because pitching is a skill and if you have the best ones, yes, you have a better chance to win. Same thing with goalies. Having a great player at ANY position should give you an advantage. The Sabres never won with Hasek, so obviously this advantage is not unfair to the opposition.

 

Yes, it IS low-hanging fruit. Yes, a few more "lame" goals will be scored if the gear is smaller. No, it doesn't really make the WAY the game is played any different. I agree with you in that I wish the game was played differently and there was a way to create more scoring chances. Honestly, the game is hyper-coached to such a great extent I am not sure it can ever get to where it's any more wide open. 

But here's the thing ... and however we get there, THIS is why we NEED to get there, somehow, someway ... I really believe that the biggest reason we think the game is more boring and less fun now is because when it gets to be 2-0 or 3-1, the game is over. It's OVER. You're sitting there watching a perfectly good 1-0 game in the second period and there are good chances and great saves and then a puck goes in off someone's rear end and it's 2-0 and it's a KILLER because you know your team is probably DONE. Sure, maybe once a month they rally and win a game they trailed by 2 goals if they are really good ... but you know it's over. More often than not, it's soccer. And that is not a compliment in this case.

Maybe this is a product of having grown up in the 70s and 80s, but it was just more fun to watch hockey knowing a 4-1 lead didn't mean your team had it in the bag, and a 4-1 hole didn't meant they could never come back.

Goals are fun. Not because they are all amazing displays of skill and sniped into a spot barely bigger than the puck, but because they change the dynamic of the game. Momentum shifts, the crowd gets back into it, the crowd STAYS into it even if the home team falls behind ...

No I don't want more injuries, but this league doesn't care about skaters with way less head protection getting their brains scrambled if the guy made the fatal mistake of "having his head down," so forgive me if I play a little fast and loose withe knees and elbows of my fellow goaltenders.

We need MORE GOALS. D4rk, even if EVERYTHING you are saying is 100 percent correct, and it may very well be ... I don't care. I want more goals. 

Do you believe that simply increasing goal scoring makes the game better?

[BetweenThePipes00]

Do you believe that simply increasing goal scoring makes the game better?

Yes, and I think I just explained why, probably in far too much detail for many to tolerate. But I'll try again because I am just that long-winded. 

We keep saying "better" without really defining it. If "better" means more open ice and more scoring chances ... that ship has sailed, my friend. The video scouting, the systems, the fact that the (good) coaches hold everyone accountable to play well in their own end, the fact that these days the defensemen are the BEST skaters, not the worst ... short of going 4-on-4, the game is not opening up.

So how do we keep the fans interested in one of 82 games in February that really doesn't change much in the standings when their team can win 8 of 9 and gain like 1 point on a playoff spot? How do we keep the players busting their tails when they are down by 2 with 10 minutes left and have to play the next day in a different city and they are in a contract year and maybe it would be better just to mail this one in and be fresh for tomorrow ...

We make it so that it's actually realistic to think they can win a game even though they are down 2 with 10 minutes left. That they can score that garbage time goal that helps them get to 20 on the season. 

We make it easier to score. Would the GAME better? In some ways, yes, I believe it would. Maybe not in the most ideal ways, but it would be better.

Edited February 25, 2016 by BetweenThePipes00

[SwampD]

In my opinion, no it doesn't. Players have increasingly raised their abilities to meet the increase in competitiveness that the butterfly style standardized for goalies. The technique of modern goalies is much more important than their equipment size. The butterfly is just incredibly efficient, and coaching for goalies is the best it's ever been. We're developing goalies better than ever, and they've caught up with their goal scoring peers. 

Unless you ban the butterfly or drastically alter the equipment I don't believe minor tweaks will help with the perception that goals aren't being scored often enough.

 

I just disagree. It would not take drastic alterations that would change how the game is played. That sounds like the same hyperbole that makes people think that gay marriage opens the door marrying a goat.

 

You went from "it's about safety" to "well, that's just the way it is and I want it so shut up" in two short pages.

[mjd1001]

I'm OK with a few more 'lame goals'.  I just want more goals..period. As long as we get some 'skill goals' mixed in with those extra 'lame goals' bring it on.

 

I'd rather watch a 'clumsly' 6-5 game than a well-played 2-1 game. Does that make me a casual fan...not a hard-core...appreciates the game fan? Probably. But that is what I like to watch.

[BetweenThePipes00]

I'm OK with a few more 'lame goals'.  I just want more goals..period. As long as we get some 'skill goals' mixed in with those extra 'lame goals' bring it on.

 

I'd rather watch a 'clumsly' 6-5 game than a well-played 2-1 game. Does that make me a casual fan...not a hard-core...appreciates the game fan? Probably. But that is what I like to watch.

Don't sell yourself short, that's how everyone starts. No hard-core fan on here started out hating a clumsy 6-5 game. Those games were exciting, they help suck you in and make you appreciate when two really good teams play a 2-1 classic.

Everyone wants to be a an NHL coach and hate any goal that results from a defensive breakdown or a leaky goalie, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why. 

[darksabre]

Yes, and I think I just explained why, probably in far too much detail for many to tolerate. But I'll try again because I am just that long-winded. 

We keep saying "better" without really defining it. If "better" means more open ice and more scoring chances ... that ship has sailed, my friend. The video scouting, the systems, the fact that the (good) coaches hold everyone accountable to play well in their own end, the fact that these days the defensemen are the BEST skaters, not the worst ... short of going 4-on-4, the game is not opening up.

So how do we keep the fans interested in one of 82 games in February that really doesn't change much in the standings when their team can win 8 of 9 and gain like 1 point on a playoff spot? How do we keep the players busting their tails when they are down by 2 with 10 minutes left and have to play the next day in a different city and they are in a contract year and maybe it would be better just to mail this one in and be fresh for tomorrow ...

We make it so that it's actually realistic to think they can win a game even though they are down 2 with 10 minutes left. That they can score that garbage time goal that helps them get to 20 on the season. 

We make it easier to score. Would the GAME better? In some ways, yes, I believe it would. Maybe not in the most ideal ways, but it would be better.

See this is where we disagree. I don't think increasing scoring for the hell of it actually makes the game better. We'll just get used to how much teams score and then be bored again. If regular season games are too boring then make the season shorter. The NHL already tweaked the standings system to keep teams in the playoff hunt longer. That likely does more for the regular season product than any change to goalie equipment or scoring will. People want their teams to win, and when their teams win they go to games. More scoring doesn't make people buy tickets to teams that score less-more. 

I just disagree. It would not take drastic alterations that would change how the game is played. That sounds like the same hyperbole that makes people think that gay marriage opens the door marrying a goat.

 

You went from "it's about safety" to "well, that's just the way it is and I want it so shut up" in two short pages.

Again, either you want to increase scoring or you don't. Tweaking goalie gear, in my opinion, wont do that. You have to drastically alter it, and the style of play goalies use. Anything less is a waste of time. 

[SwampD]

See this is where we disagree. I don't think increasing scoring for the hell of it actually makes the game better. We'll just get used to how much teams score and then be bored again. If regular season games are too boring then make the season shorter. The NHL already tweaked the standings system to keep teams in the playoff hunt longer. That likely does more for the regular season product than any change to goalie equipment or scoring will. People want their teams to win, and when their teams win they go to games. More scoring doesn't make people buy tickets to teams that score less-more. 

 

Again, either you want to increase scoring or you don't. Tweaking goalie gear, in my opinion, wont do that. You have to drastically alter it, and the style of play goalies use. Anything less is a waste of time.

 

Again, hyperbole.

 

A goal every three games because pads and glove are I tiny bit smaller, another goal more because the pipes are a quarter inch more narrow (hoss' idea), doesn't change the game at all.

 

More goals would be better and yes I want them, and this is a complete 180 for me on this topic (I changed my tune after that great Detroit game).

 

I also think it's funny that you keep saying it would change the game too much, yet that is exactly what you want to happen on the skaters side.

[darksabre]

Again, hyperbole.

 

A goal every three games because pads and glove are I tiny bit smaller, another goal more because the pipes are a quarter inch more narrow (hoss' idea), doesn't change the game at all.

 

More goals would be better and yes I want them, and this is a complete 180 for me on this topic (I changed my tune after that great Detroit game).

 

I also think it's funny that you keep saying it would change the game too much, yet that is exactly what you want to happen on the skaters side.

Of course it's hyperbole. So is the other side of the argument. 

 

Calling interference changes the game too much? Punishing players for predatory hits changes the game too much? Penalizing defensemen for mugging forwards in the slot changes the game too much? 

 

We want to increase scoring so lets not focus on the people who do the scoring? Or on the rule book that refs don't follow? 

 

Amazing. 

Remember the dead puck era? 

 

It wasn't the fault of goalie equipment. 

[Weave]

Again, hyperbole.

 

A goal every three games because pads and glove are I tiny bit smaller, another goal more because the pipes are a quarter inch more narrow (hoss' idea), doesn't change the game at all.

 

More goals would be better and yes I want them, and this is a complete 180 for me on this topic (I changed my tune after that great Detroit game).

 

I also think it's funny that you keep saying it would change the game too much, yet that is exactly what you want to happen on the skaters side.

 

I think those changes absolutely would change the game.  In all kinds of good ways.  As mentioned above, a game that suddenly goes 2-0 is a done game.  If those goals start coming easier, you'll see more of those 2-0 games become 2-2 games, and then Alamo mode goes away.  Teams will have to actually play longer into the game.

 

Give me that all day long.

 

Remember the dead puck era? 

 

It wasn't the fault of goalie equipment. 

 

In part it was.  That was the timeframe when goalie equipment got large.

[JJFIVEOH]

Scoring more may or may not make the game 'better'. What will make the game better is to create more skilled scoring which would come by opening up the net. As it is now, teams crash the net, or screen the goaltender and hope to create scoring by getting lucky bounces. How many games have we all seen where the best team that night DIDN'T win because the opposing team got some lucky bounces? I'm sick of watching games of chance, I want to watch games of skill.

 

Teams try to score with scrums in front of the net because the chances of scoring with set up plays, and skilled passing, have become more difficult over the years. Make it so that skilled plays become the higher scoring chances and we won't see as many lucky bounces turn into goals. Each team's large players should be the ones throwing the hits, not parking themselves in front of the net being the ones to score the goals. That should be left up to the skilled forwards that have been working all their lives to perfect their skill.

 

And yes, scoring will help to make the game better. Napoleon is doing his best to eliminate hitting and fighting, so there really isn't much left that's exciting to watch any more.

[darksabre]

I think those changes absolutely would change the game.  In all kinds of good ways.  As mentioned above, a game that suddenly goes 2-0 is a done game.  If those goals start coming easier, you'll see more of those 2-0 games become 2-2 games, and then Alamo mode goes away.  Teams will have to actually play longer into the game.

 

Give me that all day long.

What hockey are you even watching? Are we talking about a different league? 2 goal leads disappear nightly in the NHL. 

[BetweenThePipes00]

See this is where we disagree. I don't think increasing scoring for the hell of it actually makes the game better. 

Again, you never define "better." If you are talking about how the game is played, then I agree, it won't change that. But it's not just "for the hell of it" either. I think there's something to what I am saying, obviously.

 

We'll just get used to how much teams score and then be bored again. If regular season games are too boring then make the season shorter. The NHL already tweaked the standings system to keep teams in the playoff hunt longer. That likely does more for the regular season product than any change to goalie equipment or scoring will. People want their teams to win, and when their teams win they go to games. More scoring doesn't make people buy tickets to teams that score less-more. 

 

 

 

Be real. You know they are not changing the length of the season for $$$ reasons, and the standings are a separate issue (3-2-1 might actually help because you can actually make up ground faster with a streak).

But yes, people want their teams to win. More goals means more of a chance to win if they fall behind. And to say more scoring doesn't make people buy tickets for bad teams is proved untrue just looking at the NBA. People show up to see the Warriors in every city. When I was a kid it was exciting when the Oilers came to the Aud. Let the stars be stars and people show up. As it is now there is no expectation that McDavid or Crosby or whoever will even score a POINT when they come to town, let alone do something memorable.

 

Again, either you want to increase scoring or you don't. Tweaking goalie gear, in my opinion, wont do that. You have to drastically alter it, and the style of play goalies use. Anything less is a waste of time. 

Yes. I want to increase scoring. If tweaking it won't do it, then drastically alter it. It's 2015. I believe they can be protected just fine. It's not impossible, it's just inconvenient.

[JJFIVEOH]

6-5 games don't have to be clumsy. They just seem that way now because today's NHL is played to end up 2-1. In order for a game to be 6-5 there have to be a ton of mistakes. Put more skill back in the game and maybe 6-5 IS a well played, defensive game.

 

Well, let's be realistic, That's quite a jump. I'll settle for 4-3 or 5-3 being the norm instead of 2-1.

[Weave]

What hockey are you even watching? Are we talking about a different league? 2 goal leads disappear nightly in the NHL. 

 

The game stats suggest otherwise.  Look at the winning percentages for teams that lead after 1 period of play.  

 

You know what else changes about the game?  The stupid bounce shots off the boards and all of the redirect plays start to go away.  Why?  Because snipers actually have a chance at finding a hole.  Perimeter play and slot play becomes more effective.  

[SwampD]

Of course it's hyperbole. So is the other side of the argument. 

Calling interference changes the game too much? Punishing players for predatory hits changes the game too much? Penalizing defensemen for mugging forwards in the slot changes the game too much? 

We want to increase scoring so lets not focus on the people who do the scoring? Or on the rule book that refs don't follow? 

 

Amazing. Remember the dead puck era? 

It wasn't the fault of goalie equipment.

 

Those things are subjective. Half,... actually about 90%, of all the bitching I've heard about interference this year, I didn't even think was interference, just people whining and really annoying.

 

I'm with True. A ten inch pad can't change because it's the playoffs.

[nfreeman]

I don't see how anyone can claim that giving NHL shooters more net to shoot at (which is the inevitable result of shrinking the goalie pads) will not increase scoring.