The summer doldrums of hockey. Propose an NHL rule change.

[Billssabres33]

I have a problem with the schedule. It’s hard to develop a rivalry with a divisional opponent when you only play them 4 times in an 82 game season.  Why can’t the rotate the western conference opponents very  year?  Would save on travel costs and beef up the intensity in divisional games. 

[Doohicksie]

On 8/1/2023 at 6:13 PM, Taro T said:

Really like @Brawndo's idea of a SHG ending a PP.  Kind of neat twist and would be a definite momentum changer.

"SHG:  The ULTIMATE penalty killer!"

On 8/1/2023 at 6:13 PM, Taro T said:

Give a team an option when the opponent takes a minor penalty: either get the 2 minute PP OR for the next 3 offensive zone faceoffs get possession of the puck at the far point.  (Everybody (all 10 skaters) lined up in a faceoff formation but the puck is at the far point and play starts on the ref's signal.)  Would give teams with lousy PP's a much better chance of getting a killer scoring chance as the quick pass to the other point sets up a shot from just outside the house. 

Basically, a like free kick in soccer.

[Doohicksie]

16 hours ago, shrader said:

I always worry about something like this screwing with the how the puck rebounds off the post.

Cameras are very small these days; could probably install one using a 1/8" hole or smaller.

[shrader]

10 hours ago, skaught said:

They had chips in the pucks (and on all the players) last season and it seemed to work fine.

I'm talking specifically about the cameras.  If you take a hollow post and now suddenly have something inside of it, you may wind up with a so called dead zone for bounces.

42 minutes ago, Doohickie said:

Cameras are very small these days; could probably install one using a 1/8" hole or smaller.

I feel like this is one of those ideas that they have to have messed around with by now.  Beyond the strange bounces, I also wonder how useful it would be given that the goalie could wind up blocking the view a good number of times.  But even if that's only a 50/50 thing, it wouldn't hurt to have as many angles as possible, hoping that at least one is helpful.

[Kristian]

On 7/31/2023 at 9:55 PM, mjd1001 said:

White jerseys at home.

If you only have 3 guys on the ice and take a penalty, you play with 2.  If its 3 on 3 in overtime and you take a penalty, you play 3 on 2. Take another penalty its 3 on 1. Don't like it? dont' take the penalty.

NHL referee : Hold my beer.

[SwampD]

The only changes I would like to see are getting rid of the instigator rule and getting rid of the trapezoid.

I kinda like where hockey is right now. 

 

I just don't understand why people get so angry about the points system. The only thing changing it would do is swap a few teams in the 7 to 11 seeds.

 

And under no circumstances do I want to see the puck being played off of the netting. This isn't arena football?!

[Weave]

21 minutes ago, SwampD said:

I kinda like where hockey is right now. 

This.

With the exception that the league has to do something about the game of keep away during overtime.

[SwampD]

7 minutes ago, Weave said:

This.

With the exception that the league has to do something about the game of keep away during overtime.

I admit to really liking that, as well. Probably because the Sabres have actually been pretty good at it (most likely out of necessity given who our goalies have been.😂)

[shrader]

2 hours ago, SwampD said:

I admit to really liking that, as well. Probably because the Sabres have actually been pretty good at it (most likely out of necessity given who our goalies have been.😂)

I love the 3 on 3. I’d go to continuous OT if I could. More realistically, it should be 10 minutes instead of 5. 

[Taro T]

12 hours ago, Doohickie said:

"SHG:  The ULTIMATE penalty killer!"

Basically, a like free kick in soccer.

More specifically like a lax restart, but basically, yeah.

[Stoner]

15 hours ago, SwampD said:

I admit to really liking that, as well. Probably because the Sabres have actually been pretty good at it (most likely out of necessity given who our goalies have been.😂)

And ole PA is the contrarian.

[SwampD]

12 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

And ole PA is the contrarian.

People fear the “different”. I embrace it.

[Stoner]

A basketball style bonus-like system. Certain infractions are always penalties, but more minor fouls are not (think of incidental stick contact by a defensive player from behind). When those minor things reach a certain point, though, two minute penalties kick in.

[LabattBlue]

Not a rule change, but there has to be a better solution technology wise than having those two giant square boxes at the bottom of the back of the net.  It is hard enough to see the puck going into the net, why make it harder?  
 

Embarrassing.  C’mon it is 2023.  The NFL can put cameras in the goal line pylons, but the NHL can’t figure this out?

Edited August 5, 2023 by LabattBlue

[MISabresFan]

If this change was already proposed, then my apologies.  I would like to see more interference penalties called to speed up the game even more.  Look at the dump-in-s, half the time, the defenseman cuts off the forward chasing the puck.  That should be interference.  

[Doohicksie]

Institute a chaser in the shootout.  Once the shooter touches the puck at center ice, a player from the defending team can cross the blue line behind the shooter and do whatever he can to legally defend against the shooter.  If the chaser commits an infraction a shootout goal is awarded.  Just like shooters cannot repeat, neither can chasers.

[GASabresIUFAN]

I’d like PPs that are interrupted by a period to start the next period in the o zone

[mjd1001]

On 8/1/2023 at 6:33 AM, Kristian said:

Lose the instigator penalty.

Way too many douchebags getting away with cheapshots, because people are punished for stepping in.

Also, it’s never called right anyway.

I'd just rather have them call the cheapshots AND if they missed issue heavy fines for them after the game. That would put an end to it.

You don't see that much of it in the NFL, why?  The NFL doesn't put up with it and there are fines when it happens.

[mjd1001]

2 hours ago, Doohickie said:

Institute a chaser in the shootout.  Once the shooter touches the puck at center ice, a player from the defending team can cross the blue line behind the shooter and do whatever he can to legally defend against the shooter.  If the chaser commits an infraction a shootout goal is awarded.  Just like shooters cannot repeat, neither can chasers.

I like this.  I don't need it but I like it.  Nothing to me looks more un-natural and not like hockey than when a guy comes in on the shootout and just slows it down REALLY slow.

Of course, what happens when its possibly a deciding shootout goal and you have a possible penalty (hooking, tripping) when the chaser takes down the shooter.  What do you do when you get a penalty on a shootout, and what if it is a close/judgement call?

[Dr. Who]

29 minutes ago, mjd1001 said:

I like this.  I don't need it but I like it.  Nothing to me looks more un-natural and not like hockey than when a guy comes in on the shootout and just slows it down REALLY slow.

Of course, what happens when its possibly a deciding shootout goal and you have a possible penalty (hooking, tripping) when the chaser takes down the shooter.  What do you do when you get a penalty on a shootout, and what if it is a close/judgement call?

If it is a penalty, according to the proposal, a goal is awarded. Don't know about judgement calls, but that is the trouble spot in the idea. Right now, it's either a goal or not. I think the idea here is terrific and it closes down the excessive slow play (though I don't mind that when it benefits the Sabres, I'm fickle that way), but now you introduce a gray area and I don't generally want to let a ref's interpretation intrude if you can avoid it.

[Doohicksie]

2 hours ago, mjd1001 said:

I like this.  I don't need it but I like it.  Nothing to me looks more un-natural and not like hockey than when a guy comes in on the shootout and just slows it down REALLY slow.

Of course, what happens when its possibly a deciding shootout goal and you have a possible penalty (hooking, tripping) when the chaser takes down the shooter.  What do you do when you get a penalty on a shootout, and what if it is a close/judgement call?

The goal is awarded.  Period.  It would be like the new MLB rules about the pitch clock:  If a batter isn't in the box in time, it's a strike against him.  If the pitcher doesn't start his delivery in time, it's a ball.  It's resulted in a winning run walking home in a couple of cases.

[Porous Five Hole]

This may have been said upthread, but I’m in favor of abolishing the shootout if it is replaced with next goal wins 3 on 3. No time limit.  

[shrader]

20 hours ago, Doohickie said:

Institute a chaser in the shootout.  Once the shooter touches the puck at center ice, a player from the defending team can cross the blue line behind the shooter and do whatever he can to legally defend against the shooter.  If the chaser commits an infraction a shootout goal is awarded.  Just like shooters cannot repeat, neither can chasers.

I’d just use a polar bear. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

On 7/31/2023 at 1:17 PM, Eleven said:

 

3-1-0 with no OT or shootout.

 

Works in football the world over.

Edited September 24, 2023 by Sabres Fan in NS
more goodly ..

[JohnC]

Ban fighting altogether. Anyone who starts a fight should be thrown out of the game and automatically be given a 25 game suspension. The instigator should also be criminally charged for assault and immediately sent to the central jail cell for processing. If you like fighting I recommend that you go to an MMA, wrestling or boxing event. Hooliganism should not be tolerated at an NHL hockey game.