HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Was hockey better in the 80s?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-14-2012, 08:13 AM
  #51
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,845
vCash: 500
I feel the game and the individual players had more colour and personality in the 80s/early 90s. Back then, you couldn't confuse Chelios with Coffey, or Messier with Lemieux, or Clark with Neely. Nowadays, is there really much difference between Richards and Crosby and Toews? Obviously, skill-wise there is, but on a good night for Toews or Richards, there really isn't. Plus, everyone is ensconsed in the same generic helmet and giant visor.

Same with teams. The Oilers used to be The Oilers. The Blackhawks were The Blackhawks. Everyone plays the same now.

And I may be in the minority but I don't feel that speed = more exciting or better hockey. I feel hockey now is human pinball with guys going so fast that if they happened to brush each other, its like a high-speed car crash with everyone getting concussed.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2012, 09:44 AM
  #52
SealsFan
Registered User
 
SealsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 801
vCash: 500
I also liked hockey better before this whole shootout/overtime loss nonsense. The standings are confusing to look at now, it's harder to get a read on a team now as opposed to when the standings were merely won/lost/tied.

Looking at the 2011-2012 standings, 17 out of 30 teams have 90 points or better?! Remember when a 90-point season meant you were in the upper tier of the league?

I also don't like the parity of the league in the 30-team era. I liked it better when there were great teams, average teams and downright awful teams. Looking at the 2011-2012 season, the greatest goals for/goals allowed differential was only 67 goals?!?! And the worst was 60 goals?!?! It's like the league is a whole bunch of mediocre teams now and the only reason for going to a game is to see a marquee star.

Yeah, this is sort of off-topic to the theme of the thread but I had to rant!

SealsFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2012, 02:10 PM
  #53
isles52480
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Coast Tour
Posts: 868
vCash: 500
It certainly was from an Islanders fan perspective.

isles52480 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2012, 04:39 PM
  #54
LeBlondeDemon10
Registered User
 
LeBlondeDemon10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
I also liked hockey better before this whole shootout/overtime loss nonsense. The standings are confusing to look at now, it's harder to get a read on a team now as opposed to when the standings were merely won/lost/tied.
As someone pointed out earlier, I think this is the main reason teams play not to lose, rather than to win. The NHL has sacrificed playing to win for a skills competition.

LeBlondeDemon10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2012, 08:51 PM
  #55
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 430
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
I feel the game and the individual players had more colour and personality in the 80s/early 90s. Back then, you couldn't confuse Chelios with Coffey, or Messier with Lemieux, or Clark with Neely. Nowadays, is there really much difference between Richards and Crosby and Toews? Obviously, skill-wise there is, but on a good night for Toews or Richards, there really isn't. Plus, everyone is ensconsed in the same generic helmet and giant visor.

Same with teams. The Oilers used to be The Oilers. The Blackhawks were The Blackhawks. Everyone plays the same now.

And I may be in the minority but I don't feel that speed = more exciting or better hockey. I feel hockey now is human pinball with guys going so fast that if they happened to brush each other, its like a high-speed car crash with everyone getting concussed.
the best players in the 80s and most of the 90s, were the best players by far.

todays game, on any given night, about 10 guys could be the "best player"

there is parody in teams, and parody in players. look how close the scoring races were this past season

jack mullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2012, 09:54 PM
  #56
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack mullet View Post
the best players in the 80s and most of the 90s, were the best players by far.

todays game, on any given night, about 10 guys could be the "best player"

there is parody in teams, and parody in players. look how close the scoring races were this past season
Thats part of it but not everything. Players are cookie-cutter now. Everyones disciplined. Everyone plays some defense. Everyone is commited to the team system. Theres little individuality or flair.

I miss the days of a Wendel Clark scoring a goal and then beating up an enforcer. Or a Fleury scoring, agitating, then losing his mind and getting a game misconduct over nothing. Or a Bure playing a beautiful, individualistic game. Or a Shanahan or a Neely scoring 50 and getting 200 PIMs and being celebrated for it, not chastised for hurting the team.

Sigh... I feel old.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2012, 11:08 PM
  #57
redbull
Expect more
 
redbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,421
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
Thats part of it but not everything. Players are cookie-cutter now. Everyones disciplined. Everyone plays some defense. Everyone is commited to the team system. Theres little individuality or flair.

I miss the days of a Wendel Clark scoring a goal and then beating up an enforcer. Or a Fleury scoring, agitating, then losing his mind and getting a game misconduct over nothing. Or a Bure playing a beautiful, individualistic game. Or a Shanahan or a Neely scoring 50 and getting 200 PIMs and being celebrated for it, not chastised for hurting the team.

Sigh... I feel old.
excellent post - also, feeling old now. thanks.

I'd say the 80s game was far more entertaining, across the board.

Too much of today's game is about wasting time by dump-chase-cycle, skate hard and come off, rinse & repeat.

Creativity is coached out of players who play to the system.

There aren't many players who are so skilled that they are given free reign on the ice. The 80s seemed to have more of them.

And the points in earlier posts are well made. The gigantic goalie equipment combined with the propensity for ties leads to boring, risk-averse hockey. Back to my point about wasting time in the first 60min.


Quote:
Originally Posted by isles52480 View Post
It certainly was from an Islanders fan perspective.
well put. very well put!

redbull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 10:21 AM
  #58
Blues88
Registered User
 
Blues88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogopogo View Post
Haha.

The science is this: have huge equipment then, fall to your knees and cover the bottom of the net with your freakishly big pads and stretch your torso out to cover as much of the top as you can. Let the puck hit you and cover it.

Brilliant science. It is all crap without the freakishly big equipment. Remember a thing called the 5-hole? Doesn't exist anymore with the ridiculous pads.
Goaltending as it exists today can be boiled down to the "butterfly" style. As with any other position, kids are "taught" how to play this style from the get go and as a result, many goalies stop the puck in a similar way.

The main thing is this: Butterfly goaltending is more efficient than a stand up/hybrid style because it's focused on the goalie having to play sound positionally, cut down on high percentage scoring areas, and exploit angles. It's also perhaps the only "style" of goaltending that can be taught (pros and cons abound) because a coach can instruct a goalie on how to best defend against each type of shot. You'd have considerably less success telling a kid to stay on their feet at all costs or to "just go in there and play like Hasek". The goaltending position stagnated (especially in the 80's) and coaches were forced to re-examine how the position was taught and developed.

Team philosophy has shifted to what I consider to be "prevent offense", where the mission is to get the puck in deep and grind down both defenseman. Trapping is back en vogue, and even then, teams who roll a 2-1-2 still don't send both guys in HARD like the Kings did in the post season this year. They still try to "manage" the other team in the neutral zone and create a turn over. The biggest thing is not a drop off in skill. Lundqvist, Quick, Rinne, Luongo....these are super skilled butterfly goalies with great anticipation and great gloves. Their lateral movement is some of the best in the business. But at no other point in time has shot blocking been such a priority league wide. When you have forwards who pressure the D at the point and will lay down to prevent the bomb from coming through, why not stand your ground? And vice versa, if your defense is collapsing on the puck carrier and there's a good chance he'll only have an option to shoot low and through a screen, why not drop down and cover the most vulnerable part of the net?

Time and space and seams in the D and holes in the goaltender....all that has dried up exponentially.

It's easy to get caught up in the dizzying goalie stats of the past years and attribute it all to bigger equipment, but there is an infinitely greater amount of shared sacrifice going on in hockey now. 4 lines are utilized and line matching is at an all time high (it seems like). Players are willing to get in front of shots and back check as hard as possible and grind the game out. Even with all this collapsing style of play, goaltenders are still *routinely* getting embarrassed by the best players in the game and will always have trouble stopping a puck they can't see. Team defense will inflate every goaltending statistic, but it's still apparent who the top goalies are and how their skill sets them apart. Equipment plays a significant role in mobility, but goaltending is much less personal flair and much more scientific in its implementation.

Blues88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 10:39 AM
  #59
Blues88
Registered User
 
Blues88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Science big time yes, skill no.

It's easier to play goal now than it ever was in the 80's.
It's more about letting the %'s stop the puck than using skill to do it.
It doesn't take skill to drop into a butterfly, just practice.
Don't confuse skill with talent and anticipation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
I was wearing that equipment in the mid 80's while playing Junior B/C and in Senior A in the late 80's.
When I got my first set of synthetic equipment in the early 90's, it was a vast and incredible difference. It changed my entire style overnight, from standup to hybrid.
I could open my legs more because i could shut the 5-hole so much faster and more completely. I could cheat blocker side on lefties because my glove hand, which was already my biggest weapon, was suddenly 1/3 of the weight and even faster. I could go down and recover in half the time and 1/4 of the energy.
Sliding across the ice didn't become an adventure depending on how much water/how wet my pads held/were.
Seriosuly, just too many things to list.
I respect what you're saying and the experiences you've had, and I can certainly see where the advances in equipment would exponentially benefit goaltenders. But very few goalies have played the game flopping around and making an effort to cover the low part of the net with their bodies before the late 80's-early 90's. From what I've watched, goaltenders (rightfully so) were very aggressive and played at the top of their crease, often coming out to challenge shooters and cut down the angle. And their ability to move laterally may have been hindered by the equipment they wore, but many times they were ineffective at matching the oppositions speed to mount an effective challenge. So many goals were scored by stutter stepping to the side because the goalie was caught too far out and couldn't adjust to the speed. Certain goaltenders may have developed incredible glove hands, but many players (Gretzky many times over) simply shot the puck low. I'd agree equipment advances allowed the position to more effectively evolve but the evolution was spurned by it being a weak position with a few notable (and extremely notable) exceptions.

Solidifying a system where in goaltenders can exploit all their advantages (of which are few) seems to be the best possible route for any team or player to take. You can't really draft a player hoping he's the next Roy or Brodeur, because these guys are singular talents. I get that teaching the game has meant removing some of the creativity, but now more than ever, a goaltenders job is to simply stop the puck. The team will be doing everything possible to prevent the shot from even getting to them. With the game in its present state, I feel like the goaltending position is the last one a team would like to take a risk on. In a tight scoring era where players (nearly every player) can put the puck anywhere they want from the blueline in, teams that have weak goaltending better have a great defense or a great offense. 09-10 was all about being able to make it to the cup with an average goaltender (dumb) but the years since then have shown, at least to me, that the opposite is true. Say what you will about the smythe, but that's 2 goaltending winners in a row, one of which wouldn't have been in the post season if he didn't COMPLETELY carry his team there.

Blues88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 10:57 AM
  #60
Actp
CN6 but Accentuate p
 
Actp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Earth
Country: United States
Posts: 4,276
vCash: 500
I actually like hockey better now. All the indictments against it are true, from sameness and parity among players to the shootout. However, witht the exception of the shootout ,and what it has wrought, I like the attention to detail and increased speed of the game today.

Actp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 11:10 AM
  #61
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,742
vCash: 500
I've been watching for 40 years and it's probably the most entertaining hockey I've ever watched. Didn't matter if your team sucked (which the Leafs did), it was always entertaining. Fantastic flow, animosity galore...very fun. It wasn't the scores that mattered, it was the nature of the game. In those days I would watch every single game of the playoffs and be just as involved as if it was my own team.

Hockey has been real hard to watch the past 20 years (roughly).

eyeball11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 12:17 PM
  #62
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,027
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to SaintPatrick33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blues88 View Post
Goaltending as it exists today can be boiled down to the "butterfly" style. As with any other position, kids are "taught" how to play this style from the get go and as a result, many goalies stop the puck in a similar way.

The main thing is this: Butterfly goaltending is more efficient than a stand up/hybrid style because it's focused on the goalie having to play sound positionally, cut down on high percentage scoring areas, and exploit angles. It's also perhaps the only "style" of goaltending that can be taught (pros and cons abound) because a coach can instruct a goalie on how to best defend against each type of shot. You'd have considerably less success telling a kid to stay on their feet at all costs or to "just go in there and play like Hasek". The goaltending position stagnated (especially in the 80's) and coaches were forced to re-examine how the position was taught and developed.

Team philosophy has shifted to what I consider to be "prevent offense", where the mission is to get the puck in deep and grind down both defenseman. Trapping is back en vogue, and even then, teams who roll a 2-1-2 still don't send both guys in HARD like the Kings did in the post season this year. They still try to "manage" the other team in the neutral zone and create a turn over. The biggest thing is not a drop off in skill. Lundqvist, Quick, Rinne, Luongo....these are super skilled butterfly goalies with great anticipation and great gloves. Their lateral movement is some of the best in the business. But at no other point in time has shot blocking been such a priority league wide. When you have forwards who pressure the D at the point and will lay down to prevent the bomb from coming through, why not stand your ground? And vice versa, if your defense is collapsing on the puck carrier and there's a good chance he'll only have an option to shoot low and through a screen, why not drop down and cover the most vulnerable part of the net?

Time and space and seams in the D and holes in the goaltender....all that has dried up exponentially.

It's easy to get caught up in the dizzying goalie stats of the past years and attribute it all to bigger equipment, but there is an infinitely greater amount of shared sacrifice going on in hockey now. 4 lines are utilized and line matching is at an all time high (it seems like). Players are willing to get in front of shots and back check as hard as possible and grind the game out. Even with all this collapsing style of play, goaltenders are still *routinely* getting embarrassed by the best players in the game and will always have trouble stopping a puck they can't see. Team defense will inflate every goaltending statistic, but it's still apparent who the top goalies are and how their skill sets them apart. Equipment plays a significant role in mobility, but goaltending is much less personal flair and much more scientific in its implementation.
No one is saying the scoring drought is solely because of goalie equipment. What IS being said is it's a big part of it, along with "systems" where teams lay back in a shell, and a significant drop in penalty calls. ALL of those things play a part in killing of scoring across the board. Fixing just one of those things isn't sufficient: All three need to be fixed in order to bring scoring back.

Along with scoring what would be brought back is TALENT determining who wins the Cup from year to year rather than who has the hottest goaltender going into the playoffs.

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 12:46 PM
  #63
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
I've been watching for 40 years and it's probably the most entertaining hockey I've ever watched. Didn't matter if your team sucked (which the Leafs did), it was always entertaining. Fantastic flow, animosity galore...very fun. It wasn't the scores that mattered, it was the nature of the game. In those days I would watch every single game of the playoffs and be just as involved as if it was my own team.

Hockey has been real hard to watch the past 20 years (roughly).
Not sure if you're saying it's better now or 40 years ago?

Lacaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 12:50 PM
  #64
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
No one is saying the scoring drought is solely because of goalie equipment. What IS being said is it's a big part of it, along with "systems" where teams lay back in a shell, and a significant drop in penalty calls. ALL of those things play a part in killing of scoring across the board. Fixing just one of those things isn't sufficient: All three need to be fixed in order to bring scoring back.

Along with scoring what would be brought back is TALENT determining who wins the Cup from year to year rather than who has the hottest goaltender going into the playoffs.
Exactly.

Equipment in general is really hurting the game... and the players. There's multiple reasons though.

1. Goalie Equipment size.
2. Player Equipment size and effectiveness.
- The players block shots like goalies used to save them.
- The players hit other players with their plastic armor and knock their heads silly.
- The players gain a sense of security from their equipment that takes a sense of precautionary fear fromt he way they play the game.
3. Systems have proven to make up for talent disparity among teams. Trap, lock, whatever you may call it.

Lacaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 01:14 PM
  #65
Blues88
Registered User
 
Blues88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
No one is saying the scoring drought is solely because of goalie equipment. What IS being said is it's a big part of it, along with "systems" where teams lay back in a shell, and a significant drop in penalty calls. ALL of those things play a part in killing of scoring across the board. Fixing just one of those things isn't sufficient: All three need to be fixed in order to bring scoring back.

Along with scoring what would be brought back is TALENT determining who wins the Cup from year to year rather than who has the hottest goaltender going into the playoffs.
I get that but I take issue with the notion that goalies are unskilled lugs who would scarcely be able to play if they didn't have a plethora of equipment turning them from house leaguers into pros. I'm being hyperbolic of course, but so was the post I responded to (I hope).

You can still score against the trap. The DPE was trap happy but they never called obstruction. Fast teams can beat the trap and put the trapping team at a severe disadvantage. The NHL should enforce obstruction more heavily because "interference" is given way too much leeway. But blocking shots and line matching aren't going away. I don't like watching a team trap, but I also don't think teams should neglect defense in order to score. Parity in the league means every team's structure is different, so a team like the one I support won't be able to score 3-3.5 gpg in a given season because the top end offensive talent isn't there. There's also the fact that teams that are accused of sitting on the leads and winning games rarely do so when it counts, which leads me to believe some people misrepresent the current state of NHL hockey.

I guess I'm in the minority who thinks that the post season play we saw from the Kings represents some of the very best, most well rounded hockey possible. No one went all Lemiuex on everybody but they had balanced scoring through 4 lines, a star goaltender, a star defenseman, and two centers (one a star) who played at an extremely high level. They killed teams by running a very aggressive forecheck and anything that squeaked through the neutral zone was punished physically.

I agree that riding a hot goaltender into the playoffs occurs with some frequency, but the teams that make it without much offensive flair (if they do make it) all have strong defensive corps and forwards who excel on both sides of the puck. Again, you have back to back smythe winning goalies who deserved it, but the award could have went to a handful of deserving players in those runs. 2009-2010 was 2 full seasons ago. The only "boring" defensive team that did anything was the Canadiens who simply played to the strengths of their personnel. Certainly the Flyers and the Hawks exposed two 'average' goaltenders for what they were-average.

I guess my ultimate point is that while goaltending equipment size is a factor (and player equipment size in general), it should be well below obstruction not being called, shot blocking, and defensive systems on the list of things 'bogging down the game' to some people. I just can't buy that goalies aren't skilled. Doesn't compute.

Blues88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 01:39 PM
  #66
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,027
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to SaintPatrick33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blues88 View Post
I get that but I take issue with the notion that goalies are unskilled lugs who would scarcely be able to play if they didn't have a plethora of equipment turning them from house leaguers into pros. I'm being hyperbolic of course, but so was the post I responded to (I hope).
No one is saying that they're unskilled lugs. However I see it said all the time that '80s goaltenders were all crap.....which is just as erroneous as calling today's goalies unskilled lugs. What IS being said is that today's goalies wouldn't be posting inflated save percentages if they weren't allowed to use equipment that blocks out the sun. Grant Fuhr was a highly skilled goaltendeder who, using the smaller equipment in the 1980s, was posting save percentages around .880 in his prime in the '80s (and as a washed-up part-timer a decade later he's posting save percentages over .900 using the monster equipment). The best goalies are still going to be highly skilled regardless of the scoring environment, they just won't have save percentages as gaudy as they do now.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Blues88 View Post
You can still score against the trap. The DPE was trap happy but they never called obstruction. Fast teams can beat the trap and put the trapping team at a severe disadvantage. The NHL should enforce obstruction more heavily because "interference" is given way too much leeway. But blocking shots and line matching aren't going away. I don't like watching a team trap, but I also don't think teams should neglect defense in order to score. Parity in the league means every team's structure is different, so a team like the one I support won't be able to score 3-3.5 gpg in a given season because the top end offensive talent isn't there. There's also the fact that teams that are accused of sitting on the leads and winning games rarely do so when it counts, which leads me to believe some people misrepresent the current state of NHL hockey.
Yes you can, the problem is teams take the easy way out and play a trapping team by.....using the trap themselves.

Obstruction goes right to the third point I made about not calling penalties as often as they did in the '80s. Penalty minutes per team per game in 1983-84? 18.5. Penalty minutes per team per game in 2011-12? 11.1. That's a HUGE difference.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Blues88 View Post
I guess I'm in the minority who thinks that the post season play we saw from the Kings represents some of the very best, most well rounded hockey possible. No one went all Lemiuex on everybody but they had balanced scoring through 4 lines, a star goaltender, a star defenseman, and two centers (one a star) who played at an extremely high level. They killed teams by running a very aggressive forecheck and anything that squeaked through the neutral zone was punished physically.
I loved the King's forecheck. Bottom line, though, was the Kings didn't put much effort into trying to score and relied on their hot goaltender to shut down the other team while they waited patiently for a screw-up to pounce on to get their goals.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Blues88 View Post
I agree that riding a hot goaltender into the playoffs occurs with some frequency, but the teams that make it without much offensive flair (if they do make it) all have strong defensive corps and forwards who excel on both sides of the puck. Again, you have back to back smythe winning goalies who deserved it, but the award could have went to a handful of deserving players in those runs. 2009-2010 was 2 full seasons ago. The only "boring" defensive team that did anything was the Canadiens who simply played to the strengths of their personnel. Certainly the Flyers and the Hawks exposed two 'average' goaltenders for what they were-average.
2009-10 was a fluky year though. The exception not the rule. And while Niemi wasn't spectacular for the Blackhawks he didn't really show any weaknesses in the post-season either. Even an average goaltender can get hot in the post-season even if "hot" for him means not having any really "bad" showings.

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 03:13 PM
  #67
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,628
vCash: 500
Yeah that Tampa/Philly performance was more or less a mockery. If anyone wants to know why the Lightning finished so low in the regular season last year than this is the main reason. You've got Stamkos, St. Louis and Lecavalier and you don't even bother forechecking? It made no sense.

I think another thing you have to notice is that teams seemed to make more of an attempt to score. They weren't scared as much in the 1980s or earlier. Watch the 1976 Canada Cup. Yes, that team was stacked to the tee. But at the same time they never dumped the puck in when they had it and why would they? Maybe a team so great was a bad example but you tried to score all the time and worried about defense when you didn't have the puck.

Big Phil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 03:35 PM
  #68
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,027
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to SaintPatrick33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
Yeah that Tampa/Philly performance was more or less a mockery. If anyone wants to know why the Lightning finished so low in the regular season last year than this is the main reason. You've got Stamkos, St. Louis and Lecavalier and you don't even bother forechecking? It made no sense.

I think another thing you have to notice is that teams seemed to make more of an attempt to score. They weren't scared as much in the 1980s or earlier. Watch the 1976 Canada Cup. Yes, that team was stacked to the tee. But at the same time they never dumped the puck in when they had it and why would they? Maybe a team so great was a bad example but you tried to score all the time and worried about defense when you didn't have the puck.
I've watched more than few Habs games from the '70s dynasty and I thought it was damn good hockey and extremely entertaining

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 05:07 PM
  #69
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,742
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacaar View Post
Not sure if you're saying it's better now or 40 years ago?
The 80's was the best I've seen in 40 years (for entertainment).

eyeball11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-15-2012, 05:11 PM
  #70
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blues88 View Post
I get that but I take issue with the notion that goalies are unskilled lugs who would scarcely be able to play if they didn't have a plethora of equipment turning them from house leaguers into pros. I'm being hyperbolic of course, but so was the post I responded to (I hope).

You can still score against the trap. The DPE was trap happy but they never called obstruction. Fast teams can beat the trap and put the trapping team at a severe disadvantage. The NHL should enforce obstruction more heavily because "interference" is given way too much leeway. But blocking shots and line matching aren't going away. I don't like watching a team trap, but I also don't think teams should neglect defense in order to score. Parity in the league means every team's structure is different, so a team like the one I support won't be able to score 3-3.5 gpg in a given season because the top end offensive talent isn't there. There's also the fact that teams that are accused of sitting on the leads and winning games rarely do so when it counts, which leads me to believe some people misrepresent the current state of NHL hockey.

I guess I'm in the minority who thinks that the post season play we saw from the Kings represents some of the very best, most well rounded hockey possible. No one went all Lemiuex on everybody but they had balanced scoring through 4 lines, a star goaltender, a star defenseman, and two centers (one a star) who played at an extremely high level. They killed teams by running a very aggressive forecheck and anything that squeaked through the neutral zone was punished physically.

I agree that riding a hot goaltender into the playoffs occurs with some frequency, but the teams that make it without much offensive flair (if they do make it) all have strong defensive corps and forwards who excel on both sides of the puck. Again, you have back to back smythe winning goalies who deserved it, but the award could have went to a handful of deserving players in those runs. 2009-2010 was 2 full seasons ago. The only "boring" defensive team that did anything was the Canadiens who simply played to the strengths of their personnel. Certainly the Flyers and the Hawks exposed two 'average' goaltenders for what they were-average.

I guess my ultimate point is that while goaltending equipment size is a factor (and player equipment size in general), it should be well below obstruction not being called, shot blocking, and defensive systems on the list of things 'bogging down the game' to some people. I just can't buy that goalies aren't skilled. Doesn't compute.
I have two major issues with Goaltending today.

1. It's not exciting to watch anymore.
2. There's not much for consistency among the start goaltenders. What I mean by this is one year Steve Mason is owning the league then crapping the bed. And every year there's two or three more to add to that list. What this tells me is they're really just a product of the teams they play for more than individualistic talent. Jonathan Quick I don't believe for a second is that good of a goalie playing for my Oilers. The kings played some great hockey. So good I believe you could have hucked in 20 other NHL goalies in there and won the cup.

Lacaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2012, 12:09 AM
  #71
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blues88 View Post
Equipment plays a significant role in mobility, but goaltending is much less personal flair and much more scientific in its implementation.
Without the larger equipment, the "science" doesn't work. Give goalies 80s sized equipment and suddenly the science doesn't appear very smart.

Ogopogo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2012, 12:12 AM
  #72
Blues88
Registered User
 
Blues88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
All valid points St. Patrick.

Admittedly I grow tired of trap hockey, but I became a hockey fan right before the first lockout so seeing teams sit on leads is something I'm accustomed to.

I've never really heard anyone put it like this, but the game from yesteryear (even the 80's) till now, is just more serious. That may be relative (surely it is right?), but it seems like from children to professionals, the game is taught and performed, not necessarily "played" as much as it once was. The NHL, after all, is a business, and with the near limitless global talent constantly vying for under 1000 positions, it was bound to happen. I hope that doesn't sound like a diminishing statement about other leagues, but the NHL is the highest paid, most sought after league in the world. Players go and have gone to EXTREME lengths to get "here".

I will always love the game, whatever form it takes. It may have had a hey day many times over to many different people, but I constantly watch because I feel like every "next season" will be the best I've yet seen. I've rarely been disappointed.

Blues88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2012, 12:28 AM
  #73
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,027
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to SaintPatrick33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blues88 View Post
All valid points St. Patrick.

Admittedly I grow tired of trap hockey, but I became a hockey fan right before the first lockout so seeing teams sit on leads is something I'm accustomed to.

I've never really heard anyone put it like this, but the game from yesteryear (even the 80's) till now, is just more serious. That may be relative (surely it is right?), but it seems like from children to professionals, the game is taught and performed, not necessarily "played" as much as it once was. The NHL, after all, is a business, and with the near limitless global talent constantly vying for under 1000 positions, it was bound to happen. I hope that doesn't sound like a diminishing statement about other leagues, but the NHL is the highest paid, most sought after league in the world. Players go and have gone to EXTREME lengths to get "here".

I will always love the game, whatever form it takes. It may have had a hey day many times over to many different people, but I constantly watch because I feel like every "next season" will be the best I've yet seen. I've rarely been disappointed.
Well, I've always said bad hockey is still better than any other sport. Great hockey is better than sex. Now I've watched hockey since the early to mid 1980s but in recent years I've also made it a point to watch as much hockey as I can from earlier eras so I can judge for myself which form of NHL hockey I like the best. The '80s are still tops for me but the '70s I've found to be just good. It really wasn't until the mid 1990s that it started to take on a form that I didn't like so much. I've also discovered that hockey in the '50s and '60s I wouldn't like as much either since the scoring levels where very much again to what we call the "dead puck era" (though for different reason).

So guess what it really boils down to is watching a lot of hockey from different eras and seeing for yourself what form you like the best. My own nature is geared to like offense.

SaintPatrick33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2012, 12:40 AM
  #74
Blues88
Registered User
 
Blues88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 1,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogopogo View Post
Without the larger equipment, the "science" doesn't work. Give goalies 80s sized equipment and suddenly the science doesn't appear very smart.
I just don't see how you can make that claim. Sv% would drop, but there are 2-3 more important factors that directly influence the statistic (already listed).

Training, teaching, and conditioning for the position is at an all time high. I don't think its crazy to think the average goalie today has a greater ability (no, not just standing there) to stop the puck than the average goalie in the 80's or 70's. Obviously the greats like Patrick Roy would, and did dominate any era they played/would have played in.

What would be more efficient or "scientific" about staying on your feet as a goalie in today's NHL? There's a reason only, at the very most, 2 active goaltenders use a hybrid style, and calling Tim Thomas a "hybrid" goalie is stretching the term to its limits.

Blues88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2012, 08:42 AM
  #75
Bexlyspeed
Registered User
 
Bexlyspeed's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Astoria, Queens, N.Y
Country: United States
Posts: 984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
I've been watching for 40 years and it's probably the most entertaining hockey I've ever watched. Didn't matter if your team sucked (which the Leafs did), it was always entertaining. Fantastic flow, animosity galore...very fun. It wasn't the scores that mattered, it was the nature of the game. In those days I would watch every single game of the playoffs and be just as involved as if it was my own team.

Hockey has been real hard to watch the past 20 years (roughly).
you took the words right out of my mouth.

there was a lot more real drama in the game then, now it all seems manufactured.

Bexlyspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:36 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.