HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

11/13/09 - Should the GMs have removed the trapezoid rule? Friday the 13th, look out!

View Poll Results: Should the GMs have removed the trapezoid rule?
Yes 34 61.82%
No 15 27.27%
Maybe 2 3.64%
I don't know understand the issue 2 3.64%
other, please explain 2 3.64%
Voters: 55. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-13-2009, 03:33 PM
  #26
copperandblue897
Registered User
 
copperandblue897's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBelle View Post
Gee, my finger really isn't on the pulse of the HF Oil population these days is it? That might have been the better topic for the poll of the day... sigh... I will just go back to my corner with my feelings of mediocrity.
Haha. No, I was not trying to insult! Just read the Edmonton Journal article and made a comment!

On the poll, yes get rid of the trapezoid it makes no sense to have it still. For every goalie that is good at playing the puck there are bad ones. I think the defenseman are set up to get nailed when the puck rings around and forecheckers are bearing down on them. The goalie playing the puck could help eliminate this.

copperandblue897 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 03:39 PM
  #27
copperandblue897
Registered User
 
copperandblue897's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Well but the other side of it is playing the game with some awareness and I'm amazed at the amount of time Reddox is perpendicular to, and facing the boards. The guy has been drilled silly into the boards now two times in a couple games and is a headshot waiting to happen.

The Motto:

Don't be in that position.
But how do you stop this from happening? Matthieu Roy was a excellent example of this. How many times did he set himself up to get owned. And when players turn at the last second, the player hitting takes a penalty without the intention.

This debate has been around forever I know. But there has to be some accountability when it comes to players putting themselves in those positions. Did Mcarther intend to hit Reddox and hurt him? No. Did he end up having a ugly hit because of Reddox putting himself in that position, yes. The question is where to draw the line? Where do you put the onus on the players to stop doing this.

When I played hockey it was always in the back of my mind...where everyone is around me. Who has potential to hit me, and where is he coming from. I know this is different because its the NHL. But look, if you are aware of your surroundings, then you know what to expect don't turn.

copperandblue897 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 03:41 PM
  #28
MeestaDeteta
Registered User
 
MeestaDeteta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Saskazoo
Posts: 7,415
vCash: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by uncle evan View Post
i vote other, remove the trapezoid and make the goalies free game if they leave the blue ice.
This.

MeestaDeteta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 03:44 PM
  #29
copperandblue897
Registered User
 
copperandblue897's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 795
vCash: 500
Goalies free game, don't hate it. But this would turn into a gong show I think. I like the thought of it. But if players started lining up goalies, *****would hit the fan. Especially when your goalie is the most important player on the team for the most part.

copperandblue897 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 04:21 PM
  #30
Everest
Registered User
 
Everest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 10,392
vCash: 500
Nothing looks stupider than the entire game going into glide-mode while the goalie cuts off the forecheck to sweep the puck away. I think the trapezoid rule is fine as it is...the reason defencemen are open targets on puck retrievals is because they CHOOSE to go into the corner after the puck.

Why should we have to change the rules so they don't get hit?

They have a choice:

Get crushed or let the big winger have the rite of way on the forecheck.

Everest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 04:29 PM
  #31
The Head Crusher
Moderator
 
The Head Crusher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,878
vCash: 18821
Send a message via MSN to The Head Crusher
Ye and no. I thin the trapezoid should say, but the goalies should be able to handle the puck outside of it, but once the leave the crease/trapezoid they become fair game to be hit like any other player.

Its not gonna happen i know, but I would love to see that.

__________________
The Head Crusher is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 05:03 PM
  #32
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,240
vCash: 8345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest View Post
Nothing looks stupider than the entire game going into glide-mode while the goalie cuts off the forecheck to sweep the puck away. I think the trapezoid rule is fine as it is...the reason defencemen are open targets on puck retrievals is because they CHOOSE to go into the corner after the puck.

Why should we have to change the rules so they don't get hit?

They have a choice:

Get crushed or let the big winger have the rite of way on the forecheck.
No coach is going to be ok with that. Millions of dollars are on the line here. If they dont go into corners to retrieve the dump the team will find someone to replace them who will.

I am the Liquor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 05:05 PM
  #33
Dorian2
The bag don't lie.
 
Dorian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,441
vCash: 50
Just wondering...have there been any stats regarding the end board hits causing injury before and after the trapezoid rule. That would be interesting to see!

Dorian2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 05:18 PM
  #34
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,240
vCash: 8345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorian2 View Post
Just wondering...have there been any stats regarding the end board hits causing injury before and after the trapezoid rule. That would be interesting to see!
Before and after the obstruction crackdown would be more telling.

I am the Liquor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 05:25 PM
  #35
Everest
Registered User
 
Everest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 10,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
No coach is going to be ok with that. Millions of dollars are on the line here. If they dont go into corners to retrieve the dump the team will find someone to replace them who will.
If Milan Lucic has a full head of steam going in on Michael Del Zotto & Del Zotto pulls off & lets Lucic take the puck ahead of him you think Del Zotto is going to be in the dog house?

I garuntee you there ARE instances where common sense & self preservation trump everything else.

Everest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 05:35 PM
  #36
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,240
vCash: 8345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest View Post
If Milan Lucic has a full head of steam going in on Michael Del Zotto & Del Zotto pulls off & lets Lucic take the puck ahead of him you think Del Zotto is going to be in the dog house?

I garuntee you there ARE instances where common sense & self preservation trump everything else.
Maybe in 5% of the cases like the one you describe, but if it leads to Lucic getting the puck uncontested and throwing it into the slot for Savard to put in the back of the net to send the Bruins into the conference final, then it isnt ok.

I am the Liquor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 05:51 PM
  #37
Patch101
Registered User
 
Patch101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Kamloops
Posts: 1,550
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Patch101 Send a message via AIM to Patch101 Send a message via Yahoo to Patch101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest View Post
Nothing looks stupider than the entire game going into glide-mode while the goalie cuts off the forecheck to sweep the puck away. I think the trapezoid rule is fine as it is...the reason defencemen are open targets on puck retrievals is because they CHOOSE to go into the corner after the puck.

Why should we have to change the rules so they don't get hit?

They have a choice:

Get crushed or let the big winger have the rite of way on the forecheck.
THIS, I like the rule!!

Patch101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 05:59 PM
  #38
Everest
Registered User
 
Everest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 10,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
Maybe in 5% of the cases like the one you describe, but if it leads to Lucic getting the puck uncontested and throwing it into the slot for Savard to put in the back of the net to send the Bruins into the conference final, then it isnt ok.
The point is...give the players the option to either back off or be hit. If Del Zotto is able to pick the proper time(s) to pay the price and when not to...good on him. Thats all part of being a pro. Sometimes your the windshield. Sometimes your the bug.

Everest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 06:03 PM
  #39
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 34,240
vCash: 8345
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest View Post
The point is...give the players the option to either back off or be hit. If Del Zotto is able to pick the proper time(s) to pay the price and when not to...good on him. Thats all part of being a pro. Sometimes your the windshield. Sometimes your the bug.
They do this already to a degree, but they are still expected to come away with the puck. If you get beat to loose pucks on a consistent basis or lose puck battles, you find yourself out of a job.

I am the Liquor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 06:11 PM
  #40
OneSharpMarble
Registered User
 
OneSharpMarble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
Maybe in 5% of the cases like the one you describe, but if it leads to Lucic getting the puck uncontested and throwing it into the slot for Savard to put in the back of the net to send the Bruins into the conference final, then it isnt ok.
Not to mention the player gets labeled as "unphysical" and "shys away from contact".

OneSharpMarble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 06:16 PM
  #41
Everest
Registered User
 
Everest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 10,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
They do this already to a degree, but they are still expected to come away with the puck. If you get beat to loose pucks on a consistent basis or lose puck battles, you find yourself out of a job.
Thats one way of looking at it.

The other side of the issue is if you can beat D-men to loose pucks or punish them in the corners...you can EARN yourself a job.

I will say this though...NHL refs' should be able to discretionally decipher between a 'shoot in' and a 'chip'.

Basically...if the puck is 'chipped' within a stick length of the defender...he should be allowed to play the man....essentially finishing a check where he's stood up and done everything right positionally.

If the puck is fired deep...the winger should be allowed free range of motion to SKATE.

Everest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 06:43 PM
  #42
MePutPuckInNet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue897 View Post
Goalies free game, don't hate it. But this would turn into a gong show I think. I like the thought of it. But if players started lining up goalies, *****would hit the fan. Especially when your goalie is the most important player on the team for the most part.
Probably right. But, they have more padding on than anyone else on the team, too. And, they may be goalies, but if they're outside the paint, they shouldn't be protected from taking a hit, they're supposed to be hockey players afterall.

MePutPuckInNet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 06:57 PM
  #43
Baby Nilsson
Registered User
 
Baby Nilsson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest View Post
Thats one way of looking at it.

The other side of the issue is if you can beat D-men to loose pucks or punish them in the corners...you can EARN yourself a job.

I will say this though...NHL refs' should be able to discretionally decipher between a 'shoot in' and a 'chip'.

Basically...if the puck is 'chipped' within a stick length of the defender...he should be allowed to play the man....essentially finishing a check where he's stood up and done everything right positionally.

If the puck is fired deep...the winger should be allowed free range of motion to SKATE.
I don't play defence so I don't know.. but how easy is it for the defenceman to discern if it is just a small chip or a shoot in/dump in, without looking back?

Baby Nilsson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2009, 10:11 PM
  #44
Everest
Registered User
 
Everest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 10,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baby Nilsson View Post
I don't play defence so I don't know.. but how easy is it for the defenceman to discern if it is just a small chip or a shoot in/dump in, without looking back?

Thats part of what the refs claimed the 'grey area' was back when they stopped calling interference.

There is SOME times when it is difficult to tell the difference...but any puck played into the near side corner where the player who advanced the puck is the one intending to put first pressure on it is waaay different than a hard shoot-in intended for a far side forecheck to work on.

Cross corner dump-in's are a different deal altogether...but defenders have the added option of switching sides to retreat on those anyways.

Everest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2009, 03:33 PM
  #45
Baby Nilsson
Registered User
 
Baby Nilsson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Everest View Post
Thats part of what the refs claimed the 'grey area' was back when they stopped calling interference.

There is SOME times when it is difficult to tell the difference...but any puck played into the near side corner where the player who advanced the puck is the one intending to put first pressure on it is waaay different than a hard shoot-in intended for a far side forecheck to work

Cross corner dump-in's are a different deal altogether...but defenders have the added option of switching sides to retreat on those anyways.
i see.. thanks

defensemen with less footspeed could definetely benefit from a rule like that *cough* strudwick
Posted via Mobile Device

Baby Nilsson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-14-2009, 08:10 PM
  #46
oil slick
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 7,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBelle View Post
Business is (Generally) Good: Forbes Looks at the NHL
http://my.thescore.com/hockeyordie/a...t-the-nhl.aspx
Quote:
The Maple Leafs earned more money than the league's bottom 28 teams combined ($73.3 million).
That's quite extraordinary
Quote:
Of the 15 franchises in the bottom half of the team valuations chart, only the Edmonton Oilers ran an operating profit last year ($9.4 million). Given the strength of the market and itís continued profitability ... I think owner Daryl Katz is going to see a huge spike in the teamís value if he gets his wish of a new arena.

oil slick 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 05:59 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.