Fix what's obviously broken, NHL needs more goals

[2macinnis2]

So I figured I'd wait to offseason to launch a thread on 'what's the worst thing in the NHL today and if you were the boss how would you fix it?'

Well offseason Day #1 and TSN has beaten me to the punch, and NAILED it:

http://www.tsn.ca/just-make-those-nh...igger-1.309995

I'd rank things I'd change as:

1. Make the nets bigger, improve scoring.
2. Reconfigure how points are awarded in reg season games to make every game worth the same (not 2 and 3 pt games).
3. More transparent evaluation of officials (this is true of pretty much all pro sports).

Goal scoring though is the biggest problem. I don't know how anyone watched hockey in the 80s could be ok with 2 very average goalies in this Finals (how much would Bishop or Crawford be worth in trade?) hold two incredibly skilled offensive teams to under 3 goals routinely. Save percentages are WAY too high, too many great scoring chances are stopped simply by good positioning and massive goalies/pads that block nearly every shooting angle.

Making nets larger forces larger goalies to react, not just block. It will make the weaker goalies leakier on saves they can currently make by simply being in a solid butterfly. It will increase the value of the goalie position, an athletic phenom like Kipper will be a big advantage over a shooter-tutor like Crawford. I agree with the author on how ideologically to re-size nets but I would make them 1" larger in all 3 dimensions.

2-1 and 1-0 is not hockey. It's soccer. And forcing goalies to change equipment is sort of unfair given how hard shots are now with better sticks, it may not even be truly safe.

I would love for a day we're looking to Johnny or Monahan to score 50 (hell why not 60?). That's a lot of fun to watch. I'm tired of 30 goals being a benchmark.

I had no horse in this Finals, but it was fairly enjoyable to watch the action. Would have been way more enjoyable (and marketable) if there were 6-8 goals per game, as there SHOULD have been.

[2macinnis2]

Sorry mods my title is a little misleading. By 'we' I don't mean the Flames. It probably should have read 'the league needs more goals.'

[Igster]

Originally Posted by 2macinnis2

2-1 and 1-0 is not hockey. It's soccer.

Disagree completely.

I've seen some amazing 1-0 and 2-1 games. Good hockey, is good hockey, regardless of the amount of goals.

[2macinnis2]

Sorry my title is misleading. Should read 'the league needs more goals,' I didn't mean the Flames need more scoring!

[CroFlames]

I can't stand the more goals argument. Go watch basketball if all you watch the sport for is the actual act of the puck/ball going into the net/hoop.

The best part about hockey is how incredibly hard it is to score goals, and watching guys sacrifice the body to both score and to prevent goals.

The only thing hockey needs to do is:
1. Make the regular season win-loss-tie, or at least introduce the 3pt system if you keep the current format.
2. Get rid of the dumbass trapezoid. It probably prevents more goals than it promotes. Goalies screw up all the time behind the net handling the puck, why keep them from doing so?
3. Pipe dream, but get rid of TV timeouts.

[heep223]

It would be really terrible if they made the nets bigger. Would change the entire game. Please no

[2macinnis2]

Originally Posted by Igster

Disagree completely.

I've seen some amazing 1-0 and 2-1 games. Good hockey, is good hockey, regardless of the amount of goals.

We can agree to disagree but 1-0 on average (especially in November) is total crap. I would be annoyed if I went to a 1-0 game, especially if I didn't have a rooting interest.

[Jacks]

Leave the nets the same size and reduce the size of goalie equipment instead.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

I thought it was awesome hockey this year. Plenty of third period comebacks for the Flames, and the playoffs overall this year were really entertaining.

Should soccer make the goals bigger to increase scoring?

[2macinnis2]

For those who say it's not hockey, look at Gretzky's numbers. Orr's. Was that not hockey?

Those numbers could never be replicated today.

Is the abominable snowman in net hockey? Tell that to Darren Pang or heck even Grant Fuhr.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

3. Pipe dream, but get rid of TV timeouts.

Haha, the only way to get rid of TV time outs would be to get rid of televised games. I know you prefaced it with being a pipe dream, but that's the craziest rule change wish I've ever heard.

[GranteedEV]

Goalscoring is down because defenses and goaltending are so good. If you want to improve the quality of the product, artificially boosting the amount of bad angle softies that trickle through instead of hitting the post isn't the solution. A bigger net doesn't mean more scoring chances.

1) Do something about offsides. I get that it's a rule to stop cherrypicking but it ends up just punishing teams for one player being a quarter of a half-step ahead of the play and letting defenses get set up again.

2) Do something about interference away from the puck. If it were called like it was in 2007 then you get more power plays, which means more actual opportunity to generate scoring chances.

For those who say it's not hockey, look at Gretzky's numbers. Orr's. Was that not hockey?

It was a primitive hockey before butterfly goaltending and defensive systems. It was a worse product on the ice with a better looking final score. And that doesn't mean those weren't great players. But would you rather see Crosby play in the NHL or Crosby return to Junior to feast on kids?

Those numbers could never be replicated today.

And no one in the NBA will ever approach Wilt Chamberlain's numbers. Yet the solution in that sport isn't to implement a 10 second shot clock to inflate numbers. All sports evolve. Jordan's career high of 69 points isn't even close to Wilt's 100, and Lebron's triple double numbers pale in comparision to Oscar Robertson, but that doesn't stop people from appreciating what these players do in their own era. Trying to compare apples-to-apples across era is a waste of energy.

Is the abominable snowman in net hockey?

It is very literally natural selection causing the evolution in hockey.

[2macinnis2]

http://www.sportingcharts.com/nhl/st...rcentage/2014/

That's an interesting chart as well. A breakaway is the about the most prime scoring chance a player can get. If you sort for about 20 shootout attempts against, look how many goalies are above 70% save pct (look at Enroth!)

So much of hockey strategy is geared towards creating odd-man opportunities and premium scoring opportunities. If goalies are stopping this many of the prime opportunities, how is there not something wrong? And how can one argue that 'this is hockey?'

[DomeFoam]

They were 1 goal games because its the SCF, they're the winners of their conferences because they play excellent defence and even small mistakes can prove costly. It isn't crazy to see .930 sv % in the playoffs because goalies must add another dimension to their game and rise to the occasion that is playoffs. Every goal in this series was massive, and when Keith scored last night to make it 1-0 you knew Tampa was already in trouble if just by 1 goal because they're so hard to come by. I find it more exciting when a team must scratch and claw for their goals.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by flameswin

Haha, the only way to get rid of TV time outs would be to get rid of televised games. I know you prefaced it with being a pipe dream, but that's the craziest rule change wish I've ever heard.

You don't wish that? Part of what makes OT hockey awesome is no TV timeouts.

Potentially you could make the intermission 4 or 5 minutes longer to make up for lost air time. Again I know it's not happening, but a guy can wish.

[Phaneufenstein]

League average is about 2.5 goals per game per team
Would that not mean that most games end with about 5 goals?
That's further supported by what league coaches say: "it's a 3-2 league".
I think that's enough scoring.
Playoffs are going to be tighter defensively, but there's certain charm in those close low scoring games too

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by heep223

It would be really terrible if they made the nets bigger. Would change the entire game. Please no

Moreso than bigger goalies and equipments have? Goalies occupy much more of the net than they use to.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Moreso than bigger goalies and equipments have? Goalies occupy much more of the net than they use to.

Yes. It would change the angles of attack.

Make the goalie gear smaller if that's a concern.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Moreso than bigger goalies and equipments have? Goalies occupy much more of the net than they use to.

I don't have evidence to back this up, but I'd argue the equipment isn't that much bigger. It is bigger, but I'm not sure that is what contributes the most.

It's mostly the goalies who are bigger themselves, have developed better techniques (butterfly), and are far more athletic than the Grant Fuhr's and Mike Vernon's of yesteryear.

Other than my list in post #4, I think the NHL is just fine in terms of goal scored per game.

[OILFAN #81]

Making the nets bigger would be the worst in my opinion. The goalies are better today then they were in the 70's and 80's and the way teams play defense is better now too. In the 80's there wasn't anywhere near the defensive pressure or checking against the forwards as there is today. Has nothing to do with the nets. Game 6 last night was 2-0 but there were so many chances!! Chances are exciting hockey, not just goals. I get just excited when a goalie makes a great save then when a goal happens.