HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Two out of three years Art Ross goes to a player with less than 100 points

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-20-2017, 06:48 PM
  #101
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 95,172
vCash: 50
Only way someone hits 100 this year is if Crosby or McDavid have a 5 point game. If Crosby did that he would then need 15 points from 10 games which is doable.

Shrimper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 06:54 PM
  #102
Crabapple
Registered User
 
Crabapple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,930
vCash: 398
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchBrawl View Post
Never thought I'd say that as a traditionalist, but I'm starting to think making the net bigger is a start.Shots la Guy Lafleur should be able to go in from time to time.
Same, I was as big a purist as their is, but somethings gotta give. I think bigger nets are an easy 1st step.

Crabapple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 06:58 PM
  #103
Caeldan
Moderator
Whippet Whisperer
 
Caeldan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,560
vCash: 100
I know, why don't we just make a height limit on goalies. No player taller than 5'10 can play net!

Caeldan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 07:05 PM
  #104
DearDiary
Cutest Poster 2016
 
DearDiary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Love View Post
The solution to this has been beaten to death:

CALL THE GAME LIKE IT IS WRITTEN IN THE RULE BOOK.

It changes everything. People say "Well that's just more PPs!" Well no, it's not. At first it is, until the players learn how to play properly. Then it is not necessarily more PPs but a more open, free flowing game void of constant, uncalled interference.

Making the goalie pads smaller is also necessary, but that isn't something that changes the flow of the game when you're watching. It's just unnecessary to have equipment that is for puck stopping rather than protecting the keeper.
I've said this so many times. Powerplays will skyrocket at 1st, but the objective should be for players to learn to stop taking penalties. When you have 4th liners start drawing 4 penalties a game, they'll eventually learn the hard way to stop grabbing and hooking

DearDiary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 07:21 PM
  #105
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 19,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchBrawl View Post
Never thought I'd say that as a traditionalist, but I'm starting to think making the net bigger is a start.Shots la Guy Lafleur should be able to go in from time to time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crabapple View Post
Same, I was as big a purist as their is, but somethings gotta give. I think bigger nets are an easy 1st step.


It takes time to come around! Bigger nets is the best option.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 07:23 PM
  #106
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 19,108
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by authentic View Post
Very doubtful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJJones View Post
I don't at all.

Remove Kipper from the equation and the Flames right now mop the floor with the 04 Flames.

We got outplayed on almost every playoff game that year. Obviously Iggy was an absolute animal that could win any game today on his own but the depth is a blowout.
Well yea, the 04 flames have Kipper. The flames current netminders are not match, which would keep it close. Maybe you guys are right, but blowout it would not be.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 07:50 PM
  #107
qwerty
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,124
vCash: 500
Defensive play is at an all time high. It's the complete evolution of the game. Players are all expected to go down and block shots and back check which was not the case in previous eras.

Couple that with the soaring average height and size of defensemen and goaltenders and we're lucky to even have players who can reach point per game totals.

The dimensions of the playing surface and the nets are the same as before, but defensemen skate so quickly and have such long reaches compared to previous generations that they can close on opposing forwards in no time.

The biggest problem I see is how over-coached the game is. The rules have not changed over time to accommodate all the changes; so now we're witnessing the evolution of dump and chase defensive hockey. Mistakes are coached out of the current game and if you want to have a job at the NHL level, you can't make risky offensive plays at the cost of being scratched or benched.

I honestly don't think changing the size of pads or nets will change the fundamental issues with the game right now. The game needs drastic changes to combat the current defensive evolution of the game.

qwerty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 08:17 PM
  #108
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 5,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MDCSL View Post
Completely agree, they need to drastically reduce the size of goalie equipment. But then they also need to get serious about protecting the goalies' crease and keep players out of there
Is there some rash of goalie injuries caused by crease crashing that I'm not aware of? It happens so rarely anymore, it hardly seems worth significant rule/enforcement changes. (And adding more chintzy interference calls that nullify goals isn't going to please anyone either.)

Sadekuuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 08:24 PM
  #109
flashy
NHL is rigged
 
flashy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,965
vCash: 360
Way to many hurr durr watching something else comments on here.

How about tell the OP why the status quo is better then what he is arguing for.

flashy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 08:48 PM
  #110
Bandit
Registered User
 
Bandit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 12,582
vCash: 500
Don't be so sure. McDavid still has 8 periods of hockey left against the Kings. He only needs 18 more points...

__________________
Nobody cares about your fantasy team.
Bandit is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 09:57 PM
  #111
The Panther
Registered User
 
The Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Country: Japan
Posts: 5,477
vCash: 500
Every time I see the (by now predictable) "Just-call-it-like-the-rule-book-and-everything-will-be-fine!" points, I have to wonder the age of the poster suggesting it.

That is nonsense in my opinion, for several reasons:

1) Refereeing is the best it's ever been right now, in NHL history
2) Hockey is played way, way cleaner now than it was at any time from about 1970 to 2004 -- so, there should be way less penalties called now. I don't want the refs inventing calls.
3) Nobody wants to see hockey with 10 power-plays for each team, per game. That should not be deciding the best teams and the scoring champions. (2005-06 was not particularly better hockey than now -- it was just out-of-control power-plays because NHL players were adjusting to the refs actually calling infractions.)
4) Scoring was way higher at periods in the past when 90% of obstruction was not called.

I think penalties will fluctuate at different periods, which is fine. But the larger scoring challenges (the OP mentions them) are not related to that.

Unfortunately, we can't 'regress' equipment back to 1990-era standards. There's no going back to heavy goalie pads. One thing I think the League really blew was getting away from wooden sticks. Wooden sticks would be better, in my opinion.

But anyway, since equipment and systems dominate now, and since players and (esp.) goalies are all bigger and are never going to get smaller (and the rink is the same as in World War II), it does make sense to either slightly enlarge the nets, or significantly reduce goaltender equipment size. The latter would be much easier for the NHL to implement.

The Panther is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 11:24 PM
  #112
stealth1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Niagara, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 611
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Panther View Post
Every time I see the (by now predictable) "Just-call-it-like-the-rule-book-and-everything-will-be-fine!" points, I have to wonder the age of the poster suggesting it.

That is nonsense in my opinion, for several reasons:

1) Refereeing is the best it's ever been right now, in NHL history
2) Hockey is played way, way cleaner now than it was at any time from about 1970 to 2004 -- so, there should be way less penalties called now. I don't want the refs inventing calls.
3) Nobody wants to see hockey with 10 power-plays for each team, per game. That should not be deciding the best teams and the scoring champions. (2005-06 was not particularly better hockey than now -- it was just out-of-control power-plays because NHL players were adjusting to the refs actually calling infractions.)
4) Scoring was way higher at periods in the past when 90% of obstruction was not called.

I think penalties will fluctuate at different periods, which is fine. But the larger scoring challenges (the OP mentions them) are not related to that.

Unfortunately, we can't 'regress' equipment back to 1990-era standards. There's no going back to heavy goalie pads. One thing I think the League really blew was getting away from wooden sticks. Wooden sticks would be better, in my opinion.

But anyway, since equipment and systems dominate now, and since players and (esp.) goalies are all bigger and are never going to get smaller (and the rink is the same as in World War II), it does make sense to either slightly enlarge the nets, or significantly reduce goaltender equipment size. The latter would be much easier for the NHL to implement.
AS much as there were a lot of power plays in 2005-06, the speed and flow of the game IMO was at its best. Players are no bigger now, then they were then. Teams that were built with speed and skill were the top teams in the league. I want to see back and forth chances like you only see in OT now. Watching dump and chase, and 5 skaters act as goalies on the ice makes for a boring game to watch. Comebacks are very rare now and it used to happen a lot in 2005-06. Now if a team is up 2 goals going into the third period odds are they win.

stealth1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 11:26 PM
  #113
KEEROLE Vatanen
Based
 
KEEROLE Vatanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 35,924
vCash: 500
Offense sells. The NHL needs to get with the times.

When scoring in the NBA got bad in the NBA they made rule changes to open up the game

KEEROLE Vatanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 11:45 PM
  #114
authentic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 7,315
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stealth1 View Post
AS much as there were a lot of power plays in 2005-06, the speed and flow of the game IMO was at its best. Players are no bigger now, then they were then. Teams that were built with speed and skill were the top teams in the league. I want to see back and forth chances like you only see in OT now. Watching dump and chase, and 5 skaters act as goalies on the ice makes for a boring game to watch. Comebacks are very rare now and it used to happen a lot in 2005-06. Now if a team is up 2 goals going into the third period odds are they win.
True, although there were many powerplays still a vast majority of the games were even strength, and it was much more entertaining hockey. To be honest those first few seasons right after the lockout were the best ever for speed, skill, big hits and back and forth action. It was not boring hockey at all.

authentic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-20-2017, 11:47 PM
  #115
authentic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 7,315
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Panther View Post
Every time I see the (by now predictable) "Just-call-it-like-the-rule-book-and-everything-will-be-fine!" points, I have to wonder the age of the poster suggesting it.

That is nonsense in my opinion, for several reasons:

1) Refereeing is the best it's ever been right now, in NHL history
2) Hockey is played way, way cleaner now than it was at any time from about 1970 to 2004 -- so, there should be way less penalties called now. I don't want the refs inventing calls.
3) Nobody wants to see hockey with 10 power-plays for each team, per game. That should not be deciding the best teams and the scoring champions. (2005-06 was not particularly better hockey than now -- it was just out-of-control power-plays because NHL players were adjusting to the refs actually calling infractions.)
4) Scoring was way higher at periods in the past when 90% of obstruction was not called.

I think penalties will fluctuate at different periods, which is fine. But the larger scoring challenges (the OP mentions them) are not related to that.

Unfortunately, we can't 'regress' equipment back to 1990-era standards. There's no going back to heavy goalie pads. One thing I think the League really blew was getting away from wooden sticks. Wooden sticks would be better, in my opinion.

But anyway, since equipment and systems dominate now, and since players and (esp.) goalies are all bigger and are never going to get smaller (and the rink is the same as in World War II), it does make sense to either slightly enlarge the nets, or significantly reduce goaltender equipment size. The latter would be much easier for the NHL to implement.
Better for what exactly?

authentic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 12:42 AM
  #116
The Panther
Registered User
 
The Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Country: Japan
Posts: 5,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by authentic View Post
True, although there were many powerplays still a vast majority of the games were even strength, and it was much more entertaining hockey. To be honest those first few seasons right after the lockout were the best ever for speed, skill, big hits and back and forth action. It was not boring hockey at all.
It was better than now, I admit. But how quickly did it descend into dead-puck extremes again? After about 2 or maybe 3 years.

League-average Power-play opportunities / average Team goals

2004 - 348 / 211
2005 - (cancelled season)
2006 - 498 / 253
2007 - 398 / 242
2008 - 351 / 228
2009 - 341 / 239
2010 - 304 / 233
2011 - 291 / 229
2012 - 271 / 224
2013 - (short season)
2014 - 269 / 225
2015 - 251 / 224
2016 - 255 / 222

So, I dunno. 2006 is obviously an outlier-season, because it was after the cancelled year, so the NHL was desperate to have gimmicks to get fans back (hence the shoot-out and the increased power-plays). But look at, say, 2008 -- there were exactly 100 more power-plays per team than in 2015, and yet there's a negligible difference in offense. It's really the same scoring amount despite 100 less power-plays.

So, yeah, if referees now "invent" 100 more calls per team, we might get 20 more goals per team, which is 10 more points for McDavid and Crosby (so they'll get 98 and 100 points instead of 88 and 90, or whatever).

But I tell you, in recent games I've watched, the teams played clean. In tonight's Edmonton / L.A. game, there were three or four minor penalties called (not counting the Maroon/Iginla fight, which is rare enough), and certainly no more were deserved. I don't want the referees inventing calls. The game has gone wimpy enough as it is!

Other things have to be done. The refereeing is fine now, and is not a problem.

The Panther is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 12:50 AM
  #117
The Panther
Registered User
 
The Panther's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Country: Japan
Posts: 5,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by authentic View Post
Better for what exactly?
I think wooden sticks = hockey. It's a purity thing, if you like.

But as to your question:

- Wooden sticks are way cheaper, and keep hockey from being a way-out-of-financial-reach sport for kids and working-class families. (I live in Tokyo. Couple years ago, I met a Chinese-Scottish guy who lives in Hong Kong and works at a hockey-stick factory. His company supplies NHL teams and minor-league teams with sticks. I'm thinking, "50 years ago, farm-boys in Saskatchewan picked up hand-me-down wooden sticks, which were just like the sticks the pros used. Now a Chinese factory in Hong Kong produces $400 composite sticks for pro and semi-pro players. What the hell happened?")

- Wooden sticks allow better stick-handling and accurate shooting, in my observation (some of today's players might disagree, of course). The 'whippy' sticks of today make it easier for players to get off faster shots from greater distances. I think this is bad. It would be better to keep the traditional sticks, which would force players to penetrate the zone more and actually attempt 'real' shots in close.

- There was no particular reason in the first place to get away from wooden sticks. If it ain't broke, don't allow "fixing" of it.

The Panther is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 12:58 AM
  #118
MarkusNaslund19
Registered User
 
MarkusNaslund19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country:
Posts: 1,476
vCash: 500
I grew up watching hockey in the 90's. 1995 was the beginning of the downturn. And there have been flares of great hockey for a few years here and there, but it always works its way back to the lowest common denominator.

They have managed to legislate all of the fun out of the game.

There's no scoring, so individual scoring races are boring. Has there been any year before the last three where people cared less about who was going to win the Art Ross? Watching the Art Ross winner get 91 points is boring and depressing.

There's no aggression because they fear lawsuits, so emotion has been legislated out of the game. Rivalries are completely dead. And if you think they're still around, it's because you're too young to remember real rivalries.

Pride has left the game. The make-up of the league is such that tanking is a feasible strategy. When the Pens did it for Lemieux, and the Sens did it for Daigle it was mocked roundly. Now it's seen as one of the best ways to build a team.

This takes us back to rivalries. Not long ago, beating your rival meant something. If the Canucks were 40 points out of the playoffs, but managed to beat Calgary and it made Calgary's playoff matchup more difficult, that was something to celebrate because **** Calgary (as an example, I'm a Canuck's fan).

But now, people ***** and moan about every win that a team gets if they aren't the President's trophy winner because 'muh prospects'.

Blocking shots takes no courage anymore because the equipment is such that players rarely get hurt doing it. So players just lay there and block space. They know the puck has to work itself back towards the middle of the ice again at some point. So they can just lie there and wait for it to hit them. Riveting television.
___

The big thing is mentality, however. With so many dollars up for grabs, teams (read: coaches) play not to lose. They don't play to win. And that's because there is no incentive to do anything but make it to the shootout and hope it breaks your way.

But I have a solution that I haven't heard talked about. What if, instead of getting a point for losing in OT/Shootout, teams were awarded a point for every time they scored 5+ (non empty net) goals in a game? Then the coaching mentality would have to change. There would be incentive to push and attack.

MarkusNaslund19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 03:25 AM
  #119
#66
Registered User
 
#66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 11,583
vCash: 500
You really have to wonder about the state of hockey when a 60 goal scorer will get about 35 this year and be considered a better player.

Its BS. Coaching had killed the NHL to the point that great players are running plays more than using their instincts and we get 20 mins a night from Sid Ovy and Kaner rather than the close to 30 min nights from Wayne and Mario.

I have to pay a premium to see ten mins more of Tanner Glass???

The NHL needs to rethink itself and not change the game. Theres nothing wrong with hockey... Theres something definately wrong with the NHL.

#66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 05:15 AM
  #120
sunnyvale420
Doug The Thug Glatt
 
sunnyvale420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,876
vCash: 500
- Leave the nets alone.
- Make the crease size the old rectangle/square to open up more net keeping goalies deeper.
- Give the goalies 1" wider pads and blockers.
- Take 4-6" away from the top of the leg pads and mandate knee protection.
- Be stricter with obscenely large chest protectors.
- Players go back to using wooden sticks.

sunnyvale420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 06:10 AM
  #121
Casanova
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 706
vCash: 728
1. Lets the PP go on even if the attacking team scores. This is a minor change that would still give a pretty large positive effect.
2. Call all the interference, this would be a huge boost.
3. Reduce the size of the goaltenders a little, don't even need to be that much.

If this aint enough, I would start with something to prevent the players from laying down on the ice. Not sure exactly how the rule should be, but something like "You're not allowed to obstruct a play with laying on the ice". This would make a lot of 2-on-1 or 3-on-2 more dangerous.

Casanova is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 09:35 AM
  #122
Richard
Registered User
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,194
vCash: 145
You have to increase the nets. That is all. You open up more scoring area and therefore you must defend more ice and that equals more space for the offense.

Richard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 09:42 AM
  #123
Faax
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 994
vCash: 500
nets need to be made bigger, end of story. I don't care what the purists think, the fact that goaltenders are now practically all 6'6"+ giants wearing equally giant gear has made for ridiculous SV% (practically every goalie who has played a significant amount of games is over .900, that's obscene)

So yea, make the nets bigger until .900 is the mark of an elite goalie again

Faax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 09:49 AM
  #124
Lari
Registered User
 
Lari's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 1,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunnyvale420 View Post
- Make the crease size the old rectangle/square to open up more net keeping goalies deeper.
Maybe I don't quite understand. Why would a goalie stay deeper? Is there anything keeping them from exiting the crease?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casanova View Post
3. Reduce the size of the goaltenders a little, don't even need to be that much.

Lari is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-21-2017, 09:50 AM
  #125
Richard
Registered User
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,194
vCash: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faax View Post
nets need to be made bigger, end of story. I don't care what the purists think, the fact that goaltenders are now practically all 6'6"+ giants wearing equally giant gear has made for ridiculous SV% (practically every goalie who has played a significant amount of games is over .900, that's obscene)

So yea, make the nets bigger until .900 is the mark of an elite goalie again
Amen.

Forget messing with the equipment. That ship has sailed. Especially with all the new sticks and such.

6x5 net and we are done.

Richard 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 02:19 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.