The NHL and the EBUG rule.

[LTS]

Curious.. who signs up to be the disaster goalie?  What's the salary on that?  Does it count towards the cap?

Add one more body to transport to every away game.  One more hotel room, food, insurance, salary.  Do the owners want that?

 

[Doohicksie]

12 hours ago, pi2000 said:

Seriously tho, i like the disaster goalie option.

I could see Risto being a decent disaster goalie.   Or if your going to give Reinhart $7mil then make him play goalie if needed.

Would rather see a known player have to play out of position than some dude I've never heard of.

This is what I think it should be:  A position player from the roster is the emergency goalie.  For those who say, "You can't do that!"  Consider football.... in the old days the disaster QB was someone off the roster, usually a skill player like RB or WR.  In baseball, although there are plenty of pitchers on a roster every team every year uses a position player on the mound at least once or twice. 

You have a team, made up of players.  Use one of your players.

Edit:  Or leave the existing rule alone.  There's nothing that says a visiting team needs to use an EBUG that the home team provides.  There's a goalie coach, there are other options.

9 hours ago, LTS said:

Add one more body to transport to every away game.  One more hotel room, food, insurance, salary.  Do the owners want that?

I think they would prefer

One less bell to answer
One less egg to fry
One less man to pick up after

Edited March 2, 2020 by Doohickie

[shrader]

1 minute ago, Doohickie said:

This is what I think it should be:  A position player from the roster is the emergency goalie.  For those who say, "You can't do that!"  Consider football.... in the old days the disaster QB was someone off the roster, usually a skill player like RB or WR.  In baseball, although there are plenty of pitchers on a roster every team every year uses a position player on the mound at least once or twice. 

You have a team, made up of players.  Use one of your players.

None of those other sports require the player to wear a unique set of pads to play the position.  Goalie equipment is not one size fits all.

[Doohicksie]

1 minute ago, shrader said:

None of those other sports require the player to wear a unique set of pads to play the position.  Goalie equipment is not one size fits all.

Fair enough.  So provide a set of pads for the EBUG.  As an option.  Or use a goalie coach or something.  I think changing the rule is not necessary.

[shrader]

8 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Fair enough.  So provide a set of pads for the EBUG.  As an option.  Or use a goalie coach or something.  I think changing the rule is not necessary.

Yeah, there's no reason to change it since it's so rare.  I can understand the concern about a local guy getting thrown in net against his hometown team, but you just need to run that risk.  I get the feeling that the NHL might ultimately consider placing some league hired guy in every town, but eventually shoot it down due to it being a pointless expense.

And as for the goalie coach, I thought about that one, but there's bound to be a few out there who are 50+ years old or who have serious health issues.

[MattPie]

19 hours ago, sodbuster said:

I don't think you can really do that. No professional is going to sign up to sit around. If the third goalie is good enough, they're going to go somewhere they can get more playing time. If they're young, the team is going to send them down to get more experience.

NFL quarterbacks are a totally different situation. If you want to play, you have to get in line. There's no developmental league, so holding a clipboard is how you develop.

It's not going to be your #3 on the depth chart, of course. Many (most?) teams don't dress their #2 as the backup, so this emergency guy is probably #5 on the depth chart. I think there are a bunch of guys (especially older guys) that are never getting out of the ECHL that'd take that gig. That being said, I have no issue with the EBUG rule as it stands; it happens so rarely and it's kinda fun. I have little worry that one regular season game is going to turn the tide of a season for a team; if it truly does there were 81 other opportunities that make it otherwise.

26 minutes ago, shrader said:

Yeah, there's no reason to change it since it's so rare.  I can understand the concern about a local guy getting thrown in net against his hometown team, but you just need to run that risk.  I get the feeling that the NHL might ultimately consider placing some league hired guy in every town, but eventually shoot it down due to it being a pointless expense.

And as for the goalie coach, I thought about that one, but there's bound to be a few out there who are 50+ years old or who have serious health issues.

Yeah, I suppose the guy could throw the game. I'd think anyone who was on the list would be competitive enough that they'd want to look good given their one shot at 15 minutes of fame that they'd play their best. That's a tough one; look terrible at playing goal vs. possibly being a hometown hero if you stunk up the ice so bad as to let your home team win.

For that matter, do we know if the Leafs are Ayers' team? He might be a Habs fan, lol.

[shrader]

4 minutes ago, MattPie said:

For that matter, do we know if the Leafs are Ayers' team? He might be a Habs fan, lol.

Blue gear and a giant blue maple leaf on the side of his mask?  I think it's a safe bet.

[MattPie]

1 minute ago, shrader said:

Blue gear and a giant blue maple leaf on the side of his mask?  I think it's a safe bet.

Heh, duh. I even saw a picture of him playing at some point.

[shrader]

10 minutes ago, Let's Go B-Lo said:

Which would be relevant except he beat the leafs

Did you miss the part where he mentioned who owns the Marlies?

[msw2112]

I agree with those above who think that it is unnecessary to make any changes to this.  It has only happened twice over a period of many years and tens of thousands of games.  For the sake of argument however, here are some thoughts on how a new system could be implemented:

1.  Allow teams to carry a 3rd goalie for playoff games only; OR

2.  Allow teams to activate one of the guys on the roster, with the team, but inactive for the game (the healthy scratches in the pressbox) in-game if another player gets injured.  It's up to the team what positions they want those players to be.  If a 3rd goalie is one of the guys who is with the team and inactive for the game, they could bring him (or her) down.  If they choose not to have a goalie as one of the available players, they can still use the insurance salesman who played some net in college, like what is provided for today.  This wouldn't be a goalie-only rule, but would give teams some flexibility for injury coverage.  The team would only be able to use the move once per game and the injured player (obviously) would not be able to return to the game.  Given the rarity of the situation where both dressed goalies go down, I think teams would opt not to have the 3rd goalie be one of the "injury-substitution-available" players, except maybe for the playoffs, where the risk of it not being a goalie is much higher. 

Edited March 2, 2020 by msw2112

[inkman]

20 hours ago, Rico7 said:

NFL teams have disaster QBs on the roster.   Make each team have a disaster goalie

The Sabres only dress disaster goalies 

[inkman]

Just make the other team pull their goalie.  It just winds up being a turkey shoot with a shitload of icing mixed in. 

[MattPie]

2 hours ago, msw2112 said:

I agree with those above who think that it is unnecessary to make any changes to this.  It has only happened twice over a period of many years and tens of thousands of games.  For the sake of argument however, here are some thoughts on how a new system could be implemented:

1.  Allow teams to carry a 3rd goalie for playoff games only; OR

2.  Allow teams to activate one of the guys on the roster, with the team, but inactive for the game (the healthy scratches in the pressbox) in-game if another player gets injured.  It's up to the team what positions they want those players to be.  If a 3rd goalie is one of the guys who is with the team and inactive for the game, they could bring him (or her) down.  If they choose not to have a goalie as one of the available players, they can still use the insurance salesman who played some net in college, like what is provided for today.  This wouldn't be a goalie-only rule, but would give teams some flexibility for injury coverage.  The team would only be able to use the move once per game and the injured player (obviously) would not be able to return to the game.  Given the rarity of the situation where both dressed goalies go down, I think teams would opt not to have the 3rd goalie be one of the "injury-substitution-available" players, except maybe for the playoffs, where the risk of it not being a goalie is much higher. 

1: teams already can (and do) carry a 3rd goalie for the playoffs. I suppose you could expand the rule that in the last N games of the season the team can also have a 3rd goalie on the roster. Frankly, if a team misses the playoffs by a game and they lost in February or early March using their opponents EPUG, cry me a river.

[Kruppstahl]

I'm amazed the emergency goalie has had to go into action only twice in 60,000 games!? 

OK, I've been watching hockey since the '70s and I honestly don't recall ever seeing it myself, so you now it's a weird, rare thing.  But that rare?  

I agree to just leave it as it is and enjoy the publicity this recent event generated. 

 

 

[MattPie]

2 minutes ago, Kruppstahl said:

I'm amazed the emergency goalie has had to go into action only twice in 60,000 games!? 

OK, I've been watching hockey since the '70s and I honestly don't recall ever seeing it myself, so you now it's a weird, rare thing.  But that rare?  

I agree to just leave it as it is and enjoy the publicity this recent event generated. 

 

 

Saw on the twitter that they decided to leave it alone.

[Thorner]

It's utterly bush league that a top 4 sport in NA can have a guy like that come into a real game with real money and real points on the line, no matter how infrequent. More people in the States are laughing AT it, then with it. 

They didn't change it cause Carolina won and I think that's a mistake but oh well. Apparently it's a really good story. 

[triumph_communes]

4 minutes ago, Thorny said:

It's utterly bush league that a top 4 sport in NA can have a guy like that come into a real game with real money and real points on the line, no matter how infrequent. More people in the States are laughing AT it, then with it. 

They didn't change it cause Carolina won and I think that's a mistake but oh well. Apparently it's a really good story. 

Any publicity is good publicity.  Yeah, these goalies have won the two games they’ve played, but only teams with hot goalies have ever won a cup:  see every damn season. 

[Thorner]

9 minutes ago, triumph_communes said:

Any publicity is good publicity.  Yeah, these goalies have won the two games they’ve played, but only teams with hot goalies have ever won a cup:  see every damn season. 

Just my 2 cents. It's the only league where something like that would happen.

[dudacek]

9 minutes ago, Thorny said:

Just my 2 cents. It's the only league where something like that would happen.

What would happen in the NFL if both (all 3?) QBs got injured?

It’s really the only sport with as specialized a position as a goalie.

[Thorner]

45 minutes ago, dudacek said:

What would happen in the NFL if both (all 3?) QBs got injured?

It’s really the only sport with as specialized a position as a goalie.

A receiver, RB, someone else, would play QB. Or they’d just run the ball. 

Other sports do have goalies. 

[dudacek]

10 minutes ago, Thorny said:

A receiver, RB, someone else, would play QB. Or they’d just run the ball. 

Other sports do have goalies. 

So basically, the NHL would have looked less like a garage league if Gardiner or Slavin strapped on the pads? Not sure I agree.

As far as soccer or water polo, and such, I don't think playing goal there is as much of a stretch for a non-goalie as it is in hockey.

QB is the only good analogy I see because it's so specialized.

[Thorner]

@dudacekNo, I'm saying it wouldn't be a farce in the NFL like it would be in the NHL, so the NHL needs a system in place to ensure something better than both that and what we saw. 

I don't like any system that allows for a non professional athlete to play in a meaningful game that affects the league at large. If you want to die on that hill of that being ok, go for it, I don't care.

It's my 2 cents. 

Edited March 3, 2020 by Thorny

[Weave]

I don't see how the NHL could use a skater for EBU.  The time it takes a player to dress in goalie gear would result in too much delay in the game.  The skates are so different that any non-goalie would be really bad in any plays that required post to post movement.   Is a team selecting one skater to have this role season long?  How many sets of gear would the team need to have on hand?  Noone is going to allow themselves to stand in front of an NHL shot for 30 shots a game with ill fitting equipment.

Any solution is going to be sub optimal. And extremely rarely used.

Edited March 3, 2020 by Weave

[triumph_communes]

37 minutes ago, Thorny said:

A receiver, RB, someone else, would play QB. Or they’d just run the ball. 

Other sports do have goalies. 

This stuff happens in soccer where regular players play goalie. And they suck. 
 

In football if a WR is playing QB, even if he played it in high school, it’s a total mockery. 

[MattPie]

4 hours ago, Weave said:

I don't see how the NHL could use a skater for EBU.  The time it takes a player to dress in goalie gear would result in too much delay in the game.  The skates are so different that any non-goalie would be really bad in any plays that required post to post movement.   Is a team selecting one skater to have this role season long?  How many sets of gear would the team need to have on hand?  Noone is going to allow themselves to stand in front of an NHL shot for 30 shots a game with ill fitting equipment.

Any solution is going to be sub optimal. And extremely rarely used.

 

4 hours ago, triumph_communes said:

This stuff happens in soccer where regular players play goalie. And they suck. 
 

In football if a WR is playing QB, even if he played it in high school, it’s a total mockery. 

I think this is the real point. The Marlies Zamboni driver and that guy in Chicago are very likely better goaltenders than any skater on either team. If you're talking the quality of the game, this is the best way to maintain it. Would the league be better off seeing some D wobble around in net and let in 5+ goals? In football, there's a valid game plan that involves 0 pass attempts. In hockey, there's no way the goalie isn't going to face shots. Might as well put the best player available out.