HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Less padding = more production

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-10-2013, 05:36 PM
  #26
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank4Hart View Post
But that doesn't take away the fact that 1. goalies have gotten much better technique wise 2. teams have evolved to play an extremely defensive system.
Nobody argued otherwise.

IMO equipment, systems and technique each contribute approximately a third to improved goaltending performance.

  Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 05:39 PM
  #27
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 17,055
vCash: 500
I agree.

They want to get concussions out of the NFL take the helmets off. Nobody is going to use their actual skull to take people down.

arsmaster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 05:43 PM
  #28
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,371
vCash: 500
I personally think its less about adjusting goalie equipment and more about creating more scoring chances. More offense will come if they decide to call the game properly, like they did initially after the last lockout. I'd also like to see them get rid of the blue lines and make it more like roller hockey.

Canucker is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 05:48 PM
  #29
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank4Hart View Post
Jose Theodore had the best season of his career, putting up .931 save percentage wearing these!
He's also wearing a huge chest protector and a huge glove and blocker.

Also, if you bothered to read the article, you'd know that the NHLPA nixed a bunch of the goalie reduction that the NHL wanted and instead made a very marginal change. Save percentages went up because the game started deteriorating again. Two separate issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
I personally think its less about adjusting goalie equipment and more about creating more scoring chances.
Reducing equipment does increase scoring chances. You used to able to fly down the wing and snipe, that used to be a scoring chance. Right now, there is zero net available when you're going down the wing, it's not a scoring chance.

Scurr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 05:53 PM
  #30
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
He's also wearing a huge chest protector and a huge glove and blocker.

Also, if you bothered to read the article, you'd know that the NHLPA nixed a bunch of the goalie reduction that the NHL wanted and instead made a very marginal change. Save percentages went up because the game started deteriorating again. Two separate issues.



Reducing equipment does increase scoring chances. You used to able to fly down the wing and snipe, that used to be a scoring chance. Right now, there is zero net available when you're going down the wing, it's not a scoring chance.
Thats not true...


Canucker is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:13 PM
  #31
LadyJet26
GO JETS GO!!!
 
LadyJet26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,029
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
He's also wearing a huge chest protector and a huge glove and blocker.

Also, if you bothered to read the article, you'd know that the NHLPA nixed a bunch of the goalie reduction that the NHL wanted and instead made a very marginal change. Save percentages went up because the game started deteriorating again. Two separate issues.



Reducing equipment does increase scoring chances. You used to able to fly down the wing and snipe, that used to be a scoring chance. Right now, there is zero net available when you're going down the wing, it's not a scoring chance.
That's a bunch of BS. There are still great scoring chances. Just because it's not the type you like. Wahhhhh. Get over it.

LadyJet26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:13 PM
  #32
Wizeman*
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LiveeviL View Post
Can you back the bolded part up? I am pretty sure that training, equipment and overall conditioning matters. It does in every other professional sport and hockey is no exception.
No problem. The NHL players have become bigger and stronger . The problem is not snap shots or wristers or back handers. None of those shots justify's bigger equipment.

Its the slap shot. And Bobby hulls slap shot, just like Al McInnis' and Al Iafrate's are are 99% as hard as big Z's slappers in the skills competition.

As for the other guy with the wooden sticks, the curve has been on them for over 50 years.

Wizeman* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:16 PM
  #33
KidCanuck*
HORS∃Y
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 442
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnyvale420 View Post
Sure, right after players switch back to wooden sticks
As long as they go back to straight sticks and get rid of the curves.

KidCanuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:21 PM
  #34
KidCanuck*
HORS∃Y
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Earth
Posts: 442
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I agree.

They want to get concussions out of the NFL take the helmets off. Nobody is going to use their actual skull to take people down.
It's true, there are far less injuries in rugby and they have no pads or helmets. So get rid of visors. I'm happy to see stick on the hands being called more, as far as I am concerned if a player is holding the stick of another player it should not matter, the stick should not be there to begin with, the puck is on the ice.

KidCanuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:28 PM
  #35
Wizeman*
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
That's a bunch of BS. There are still great scoring chances. Just because it's not the type you like. Wahhhhh. Get over it.
No there isnt. They simply re defined what a 'scoring chance' is. Its subjective .

What it should reasonably mean is that there is an honest chance of at least 20% chance there could be a goal (accepted high end shooting percentage) .

So a break away would be considered this.

But a properly defended and angled 2 on 1 is no longer going to go in the goal 1/5th of the time the way it would have 20 years ago.

The fact is, the goaltending save percentage and GAA has become a total joke. Even worse than in the dead puck era.

I remember reading where Bernie Parent won the Vezina (the jennings today) in 1974 with a GAA of 2.04 and thought it incredible someone could be that good for 74 games or whatever.

Now, that kind of GAA doesnt even get him a sniff at the Vezina. And certainly anything below a .920 save percentage isnt even considered top tier anymore.

The play moves faster, and there are more 'attempts' at the goal. But actual bonifide scoring chances? I see LESS .

Wizeman* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:31 PM
  #36
NugentHopkinsfan
Registered User
 
NugentHopkinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,087
vCash: 500
I would LOVE to see the league reduce goalie equipment, make wooden sticks mandatory and have the plays go back to the small shoulder and elbow pads. I think the entire game would be better and injuries would go way down.

NugentHopkinsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:37 PM
  #37
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,978
vCash: 500
Set limits, make net slightly bigger. Done.

LickTheEnvelope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:41 PM
  #38
Reverend Mayhem
CRJ + RNH = Sex
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,271
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
I'm sure we've all seen that picture of Roberto pre-lockout with pads that looked like you could use as a sleeping bag.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank4Hart View Post
Jose Theodore had the best season of his career, putting up .931 save percentage wearing these!
Yeah, that's the picture I was referring to. Clearly you are much better at internet than I.

Also everything you said is 100% gospel IMO. Jose's pads in that picture are similar in size to those used in the later 80s/early 90s, a period where putting up a .910+ SV% would make you an elite goaltender and multiple Vezina winner. The lack of scoring chances and scoring would be a result of the defensive evolution of the game and the emergence of the butterfly goaltending style (which is much superior to it's predecessor stand-up style) more than anything. I'd maybe even put forth the argument that goaltenders become much better athletes than in year's past.

Anyone that can overlook that and blame on equipment size should re-evaluate their argument and logical reasoning, to be quite frank.

Reverend Mayhem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:45 PM
  #39
Wizeman*
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank4Hart View Post
Ugh. Not this again.

To all you people complaining about size of goalie gear. Come to my place borrow my set, go in net at UBC for one game, and then talk

First of all. Its not all about the speed of the shot, its the speed of the shot + the release. While the speed of the shot hasn't gotten faster, the release of the shot has, exponentially. So at the end of the day the amount of time it takes for a puck to reach the goalie from when the shooter winds up has been dramatically reduced.

Secondly, the size of gloves and blocker haven't changed one bit since the day of the 80s.





Thirdly, the length of the leg pads have gone up because the goalies themselves have gotten taller and bulkier. The pads are still sized by the goalie's ankle to knee measurement, hasn't changed in decades

The size of goalie equipment has already been reduced once post lockout. Giguere and Snow used to have those monster sized pillows. But guess what, with the size goalie gear getting decreased across the board, the save percentage in the league has actually gone UP! Whatever the goalie benefits from his large sized gear, he ends up losing out on mobility. Look at goalies like Tim Thomas and Miikka Kiprusoff, they had some of the smallest gear in the league and they are some of the best, on the other side of the spectrum you have Jonas Gustavsson and Anders Nilsson, the latter you probably have never even heard of!

The reason the scoring has gone down and save percentage has to do with 2 major reasons.
1. goalies technique getting way better, look at the techniques from the old days, goals were going in from the red line unscreened.
2. teams are clamping up defensively, look at the Rangers sending out their entire team to block shots. Hell, they even have extra padding in their gloves last season and this year so they don't hurt their fingers. Maybe they should go back to the old crappy cooper padding as well???

I am not saying goalie equipment has nothign to do with it. But it's role in the reduced scoring is wayyyyy down the list compared to the 2 reasons I just stated
First off, your old glove is from the 90s, not the 80s. Secondly, that 'new' glove is not even remotely close to being as large as an actual NHL goalies glove.

Tell you what . Go put up photos from the 80s, of NHL goalies and then today. Its not even a comparison. Again, Ken Dryden is 6ft 4 and he looks minuscule in terms of how much net he covers.

Now the goalies wear NHL style FOOTBALL shoulder pads to block out even more of the net........I mean protect the goalie honest ................

I would still like an explanation as to how making pure rectangular leg pads so they sit square on the ice and block off pucks from going underneath somehow PROTECTS the goalie?

Wrong. It protects the GOAL.

The body armour the goalies now is as big as a SPACE SUIT and the goalies -who are also bigger and stronger- look like they are swimming inside it.

Wizeman* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 06:57 PM
  #40
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizeman View Post
The play moves faster, and there are more 'attempts' at the goal. But actual bonifide scoring chances? I see LESS .
I agree with this assessment.

For reference to a different comment, here's a pic of how the aforementioned six-foot-four Dryden filled a net with his era's equipment...



I think Stamkos could find a place here and there to aim for...

  Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 07:10 PM
  #41
LadyJet26
GO JETS GO!!!
 
LadyJet26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,029
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizeman View Post
No there isnt. They simply re defined what a 'scoring chance' is. Its subjective .

What it should reasonably mean is that there is an honest chance of at least 20% chance there could be a goal (accepted high end shooting percentage) .

So a break away would be considered this.

But a properly defended and angled 2 on 1 is no longer going to go in the goal 1/5th of the time the way it would have 20 years ago.

The fact is, the goaltending save percentage and GAA has become a total joke. Even worse than in the dead puck era.

I remember reading where Bernie Parent won the Vezina (the jennings today) in 1974 with a GAA of 2.04 and thought it incredible someone could be that good for 74 games or whatever.

Now, that kind of GAA doesnt even get him a sniff at the Vezina. And certainly anything below a .920 save percentage isnt even considered top tier anymore.

The play moves faster, and there are more 'attempts' at the goal. But actual bonifide scoring chances? I see LESS .
Goalies have gotten better. You can't compare stand up goalies to the goalies of today. It just doesn't work.

LadyJet26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 07:11 PM
  #42
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 18,184
vCash: 50
1. Tight jerseys make equipment look smaller.

2. Butterfly + poor equipment + no masks = bad. The goalies aren't giving up their gear. Suicide with the way modern goalies play and the speed the puck moves. The gear is bloated, but you'd have more chance getting the posts widen by 1 inch in every direction to create the same effect as making the goalie smaller by 1 inch in every direction.



Maybe if we get rid of masks we'll see more standup and smaller chest/shoulder gear. Nobody wants to block a 100mph slapshot with their unprotected neck/face

me2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 07:14 PM
  #43
Hank4Hart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wizeman View Post
First off, your old glove is from the 90s, not the 80s. Secondly, that 'new' glove is not even remotely close to being as large as an actual NHL goalies glove.
haha. what a load of crap. clearly you don't know a thing about goalie equipment so let me teach you a little bit about the gear

The old model is a Cooper GM6, this particular one is made in the 80s, this is the senior model which was designed exactly same as the GM12, which was the pro model then with thicker padding. The GM12 was made way back beginning at the early 70s and evolved during the 80s with the introduction of a few tweaks here and there. In fact, in the last few years of his career, Ken Dryden wore the GM12


The new glove is a current NHL spec glove post lockout. Its the TPS summit 7 series, if you take a measuring tape to measure, its is exactly 45" perimeter for the pocket, which is the maximum allowed by NHL rules today. Also, the cuff is 4 inchs wide and 8 inches long, also NHL max spec.

This exact glove was used in the NHL in the 2-3 seasons post lockout. See Dwyane Roloson in the SCF

Oh, will you look at that? Same glove, same blocker


Also, anyone arguing that the chest protector is over protective should look at this article.

http://ingoalmag.com/news/bigger-gea...e-steve-mason/

Now. If you wanna say that better technology should be invented so that a smaller chest protector can be made while being just as protective. I have no problem with that. But as of today's goaltending equipment technology, any slight reduction (as seen by Mason's case) will result in bruises all over.

Hank4Hart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 07:17 PM
  #44
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,978
vCash: 500
Well I was a goalie for 10 years... i'm well aware of the pain of getting hit in those unprotected areas. OW.

LickTheEnvelope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 07:25 PM
  #45
Hank4Hart
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
I agree with this assessment.

For reference to a different comment, here's a pic of how the aforementioned six-foot-four Dryden filled a net with his era's equipment...



I think Stamkos could find a place here and there to aim for...
Heres the thing... If you look at that picture, in today's goaltending world there's actually a lot of things wrong with that stance.

1. Dryden's blocker is too long in that picture, it overlaps with his pad, you won't see that with today's NHL goalie. Today's NHL goalie will have the arms tucked in, and the blocker over top of the pad showing zero overlap.

2. Dryden is bent forward way too much, if you look at any NHL goalie's stance today, they'd be standing a lot more upright, and therefore, take up more net by default.

3. Dryden is also standing wayyyy to deep in the crease by today's NHL standards. The thing is, back in the old days, the goalies mobility was no wear near today's level. In today's NHL the goalies probably have the best edgework of the entire team. With improved skating they can challenge the shooter and still recover to make a secondary save. If you move Dryden's position forward a few inches he will suddenly look a lot bigger.

4. I am actually surprised by the size of Dryden's pads in this picture. If you look at where it stands relative to his legs, it goes right about to the crotch area. So I don't even have to argue about that.

I know you are gonna argue that the chest protector and pants were a lot smaller. I agree with you there, today's chest protector and pants have ballooned in sizing. I will have to refer you to read the Steve Mason article I just posted in my last post for that.

If there is better technology so that the chest protector and pant sizing can be reduced without compromising safety, I am sure the goalies would be all for it. Problem is that that is not available right now.

Hank4Hart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 07:46 PM
  #46
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,175
vCash: 500
Yeah, I don't think a picture of a goalie with his feet on the goal line is really an accurate representative of a relative size of goalie gear to the net. In fact any pictures can be kind of deceiving because of perspective and distortion. Look at these two pictures:






Different lens focal lengths and perspectives can make determining relative measurements from a photo a pretty inexact science. Obviously that's an extreme example because they're not both straight on shots, but if Brodeur has his heels on the goal line and was hunched over like Dryden in that Team Canada picture there'd be a ton of net open.

opendoor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 08:20 PM
  #47
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
That's a bunch of BS. There are still great scoring chances. Just because it's not the type you like. Wahhhhh. Get over it.
Hockey isn't as good as it could be. While the NFL and UFC are gearing their product to make it as exciting as possible, the NHL is dumbed down on every level. Watching a goalie squat in the net and let the puck hit him isn't exciting. You don't know what you're missing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Different lens focal lengths and perspectives can make determining relative measurements from a photo a pretty inexact science. Obviously that's an extreme example because they're not both straight on shots, but if Brodeur has his heels on the goal line and was hunched over like Dryden in that Team Canada picture there'd be a ton of net open.
There is a huge difference in the size of the chest protector and gloves in those pictures. Are you really trying to argue goalies aren't bigger?

Scurr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 08:27 PM
  #48
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,725
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank4Hart View Post
Now. If you wanna say that better technology should be invented so that a smaller chest protector can be made while being just as protective. I have no problem with that. But as of today's goaltending equipment technology, any slight reduction (as seen by Mason's case) will result in bruises all over.
A goalie with a 28-32 inch waist can wrap themselves in 3 inches of protection without ending up being 50+ inches around. There is no reason to "protect" 6 inches above the collar bone either.

If you don't want bruises then don't play sports. There are guys willing to get in front of those same shots with far less padding. Suck it up princess.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Anyone that can overlook that and blame on equipment size should re-evaluate their argument and logical reasoning, to be quite frank.
You're only looking at one piece of his equipment. He's still covers 20%+ more net than he should.

Scurr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 08:44 PM
  #49
Wizeman*
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
He's also wearing a huge chest protector and a huge glove and blocker.

Also, if you bothered to read the article, you'd know that the NHLPA nixed a bunch of the goalie reduction that the NHL wanted and instead made a very marginal change. Save percentages went up because the game started deteriorating again. Two separate issues.



Reducing equipment does increase scoring chances. You used to able to fly down the wing and snipe, that used to be a scoring chance. Right now, there is zero net available when you're going down the wing, it's not a scoring chance.
Its simple.

I do agree that the sticks should be wooden. When the game was developed it was LONG past the time when Iron and steel were available . They could have made iron sticks a long time ago but they chose to make them out of wood instead.

I think its how the game is played. They play on ice , with single blade skates, and with sticks. They should be wood.

I would also make the goalie equipment specifically to protect the goalie, not the goal. I think they have done a wonderful job with the masks and throat protectors.

They are cheating with the most of the other equipment.

Wizeman* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-10-2013, 08:51 PM
  #50
Wizeman*
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
Yeah, I don't think a picture of a goalie with his feet on the goal line is really an accurate representative of a relative size of goalie gear to the net. In fact any pictures can be kind of deceiving because of perspective and distortion. Look at these two pictures:






Different lens focal lengths and perspectives can make determining relative measurements from a photo a pretty inexact science. Obviously that's an extreme example because they're not both straight on shots, but if Brodeur has his heels on the goal line and was hunched over like Dryden in that Team Canada picture there'd be a ton of net open.
Do you know how full of crap your photos are. You purposefully 'picked' the photos to enhance dryden and find one where todays goalie looks small.

You type Ken Dryden into the search bar and thats the ONLY photo you can come up with ? Brodeurs photo is the ONLY one for todays goalies obvious cheating?

Let me help you out. See how much net the 6 ft 4 dryden takes up!!!!!!
Attached Images
File Type: jpg dryden.jpg‎ (70.1 KB, 6 views)

Wizeman* 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 02:04 PM.

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.