Glenn Hall: Make goalie equipment smaller

[Envitro]

Originally Posted by Stillman16

The flaw I see with this, is the bigger the goalie, the bigger (more net coverage) equipment he gets to wear...still unfair!

I think they should adapt a max area (inches squared) any goalie is allowed to cover, then let them tweak their gear to suit. With computers, policing this shouldn't be too hard....

That statement makes no sense... So Ben Bishop should be forced to wear the same sized equipment as, say.... Darren Pang?? Just look at the chest and arm protector. Bishop is severely exposed just due to size alone.

[Coach]

Funnily enough, his legs are not.

[Bandwagon Surfer]

Personally I think all these calls to decrease the size of equipment in order to increase scoring is missing the point. The point is to have a more enjoyable and entertaining product to watch. Yes many times goals are exciting, but only focusing on the number of goals is misleading in the same way only looking at corsi can miss a lot of what happens in a game.

Will decreasing equipment size (or increasing net size) increase goals? Probably. Will it make the game more entertaining? I doubt it. I think it will only increase the number of garbage goals, further rewarding teams who play boring systems and less skilled players who bang the puck around, instead of helping the skilled players make fast and exciting plays.

I would say that the solution lies in the direction of making the reffing better. The skilled players in the game take so much abuse with no consequence. We let teams employ strategies to beat skilled players down to the level of plugs so they can be beaten with boring systems. With just the slashing, how many skilled players end up playing with bruised and broken hands. We can see this abuse taking its toll in the skilled player's career arcs, fizzling out early, prematurely becoming a shadow of former skill and speed.

[Hockey Fan #751]

It's funny to me how goaltenders have this massive bulky equipment and yet players block shots more often now than they ever did.

Guys like Glenn Hall played with no mask and minimal equipment but players rarely blocked shots back then.

[Envitro]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Funnily enough, his legs are not.

Right... That's assuming that he plays standup style the entire time. As soon as he goes in the butterfly his knees and thighs are completely exposed by about 6-8 inches. Those pads are ridiculously undersized for that style of play.

Maybe we can go back to standup goalies, wooden sticks, heavy skates, cooperall pants, and a broadcast schedule of 10 games / year.

[Envitro]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon Surfer

Personally I think all these calls to decrease the size of equipment in order to increase scoring is missing the point. The point is to have a more enjoyable and entertaining product to watch. Yes many times goals are exciting, but only focusing on the number of goals is misleading in the same way only looking at corsi can miss a lot of what happens in a game.

Will decreasing equipment size (or increasing net size) increase goals? Probably. Will it make the game more entertaining? I doubt it. I think it will only increase the number of garbage goals, further rewarding teams who play boring systems and less skilled players who bang the puck around, instead of helping the skilled players make fast and exciting plays.

I would say that the solution lies in the direction of making the reffing better. The skilled players in the game take so much abuse with no consequence. We let teams employ strategies to beat skilled players down to the level of plugs so they can be beaten with boring systems. With just the slashing, how many skilled players end up playing with bruised and broken hands. We can see this abuse taking its toll in the skilled player's career arcs, fizzling out early, prematurely becoming a shadow of former skill and speed.

Couldn't agree more!
And as I've said before, sure there can be tweaks to goalie equipment, then enforce the rules and make sure that guys aren't wearing stuff that's two sizes too big for their frame. But really, what are we trying to do to the game here? Make it more exciting or have more goals for the sake of more goals?

[bax]

Originally Posted by Envitro

Couldn't agree more!
And as I've said before, sure there can be tweaks to goalie equipment, then enforce the rules and make sure that guys aren't wearing stuff that's two sizes too big for their frame. But really, what are we trying to do to the game here? Make it more exciting or have more goals for the sake of more goals?

I think it's more than just more goals. There's a certain excitement to seeing a goalie sprawl out to make a spectacular save. Those are few and far between these days as the position has evolved into more size and positional based saves than athletic saves

[Envitro]

There are tonnes of those plays every single night. As soon as the play goes cross-crease there's a big chance you'll see some athletic move by the goalie.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I agree with you 100% that the blocking style of goaltending is horrible and should be gone from the game. IMHO I think that that's happening anyway all on it's own. The goalies now are some of the best and most agile athletes in the game, and that's because they can't just have good technical fundamentals, but they have to read and react to every play as it happens.

[Stillman16]

Originally Posted by Envitro

That statement makes no sense... So Ben Bishop should be forced to wear the same sized equipment as, say.... Darren Pang?? Just look at the chest and arm protector. Bishop is severely exposed just due to size alone.

And how many goalies are the size of Darren Pang in the NHL today?

Obviously the area of coverage would be determined that allowed the goalie enough protection, while keeping enough of the net available for goals...ie no sumo goalies!

Of course, the area would only be a maximum, if a smaller goalie chose to wear the max equipment he could, he would be wearing a lot more weight proportionally too...

Maybe another solution would be minimum weight allotments for each piece of equipment. The main reason the equipment was smaller in the past, was that the equipment was too heavy if any bigger. High tech materials have made the equipment super light and allows the goalies to move quickly even under the burden of bulky equipment...

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Envitro

Right... That's assuming that he plays standup style the entire time. As soon as he goes in the butterfly his knees and thighs are completely exposed by about 6-8 inches. Those pads are ridiculously undersized for that style of play.

Maybe we can go back to standup goalies, wooden sticks, heavy skates, cooperall pants, and a broadcast schedule of 10 games / year.

You can't tell me that small pad underneath can't be added to protect the knee and thigh while not cover every inch of the 5-hole if they butterfly.

I do think you'll see a retread back to a more stand up style, and that's a good thing IMO. Butterfly is terrible on the goalies knees and hips.

[Envitro]

Yeah, it's not great for the knees and hips, but neither is taking a puck on the knee cap.
There's a reason why those pads are as reinforced as they are.

I think the thigh rise on the pads should be limited to a certain number of inches above the normal A2K (ankle to knee) measurement, but other than that and limiting sizing we shouldn't be really messing with the goalie equipment too much.

EDIT:Also, just as a side note. The pads that Bishop is wearing in that picture are 1" extra inch wider (each pad) than Bishop's actual pads that Pang is wearing. This was modified during the last time they did a major rejig of goalie equipment standards (2005 season I believe)??

What is the crux of this argument that we're having?
Is there somehow a feeling out there that the goalies are all cheaters and are screwing the players out of goals? Are the goalies responsible for the the falling revenue numbers? What problem are we trying to solve here?

I don't understand the major issue that needs to be addressed here.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Envitro

I don't understand the major issue that needs to be addressed here.

For me, its that there are obvious parts of the equipment that extent far beyond protecting the player.

Again, the material in a bullet-proof vest isn;t close to as thick as those pads, why to they need to be so big?



Look at his right leg. That extra 8 inches is doing sweet dick all to protect his knee/thigh. It is purely there to block the 5-hole in the butterfly.

The glove cuff does not need to be a 6 inch flat piece of material, it can be contoured to the wrist.

The blocker doesn't need to be 3x the size of a normal glove.

These things are just straight up excessive. For me, it's not about more goals or anything, just about keeping the field fair. And forcing goalies to be more athletic players, than just taking up the net. The technology has come far enough that the material just doesn't need to be as bulky to prevent injury. Look at players, asked to block shots a regular basis, wearing half the gear. Are there injuries? Yes, but usually only in exposed areas (that again, don't need 2 inch thick pads going a few inches out on either side of the leg to be protected).

[Envitro]

OK

So the blocker hasn't really changed that much in size over the past 50 years, maybe 10% in overall blocking area. Sure, it could maybe be slimmed down a tad. That's not that big of a deal. But making it the size of a normal glove??? The C&A has no protection past a certain point so how do you protect the goalies wrist and 2" of forearm?? I'm not sure if you've ever worn this gear but it all kind of fits together nicely and provides some overlapping protection areas.

The catcher and the "cheater" cuff as they sometimes call it is another candidate, sure. But one quick question, how many saves do you actually see per game hitting the "cheater" as opposed to going straight into the glove? There is an element of protection in that cuff but it could be changed if we really wanted to.

As for shot-blocking, that's kind of a ridiculous argument. A player might block a shot with his shin pads once or twice in a game. Sometimes they get hit high, but that's not as often as you'd think. Goalies face 30-40 shots every game. Then ask some pros who've had broken shin pads from blocking a shot if they felt anything.

Just to clarify one point, the kevlar in the C&A provides protection from piercing and penetration, it doesn't actually absorb any significant energy from the force of the puck. The High Density Foam that is in the leg pads is also in the chest protectors along with plastics to give it some rigidity.

What does the thickness of the pads have to do with the argument?

I am starting to believe that that stupid Corey Hirsch video has influenced people's opinions way more than I could I have imagined.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Envitro

OK

So the blocker hasn't really changed that much in size over the past 50 years, maybe 10% in overall blocking area. Sure, it could maybe be slimmed down a tad. That's not that big of a deal. But making it the size of a normal glove??? The C&A has no protection past a certain point so how do you protect the goalies wrist and 2" of forearm?? I'm not sure if you've ever worn this gear but it all kind of fits together nicely and provides some overlapping protection areas.

I've worn the gear yes, and yes it all overlaps nicely, but that's why I think the whole kit can be re-done to reduce the size without giving up protection, purely because of how the technology has progress. The protection on the arms can change to be a harder, more-contoured material that does a better job of staying in place, is thinner and can cover pretty much the whole body so there doesn't necessarily need to be as much of an overlap.

Something like this, with some obvious modifications:



The blocker size hasn't changed much, you're right. But the reason is for what you're saying, to cover those gaps on the wrists and protect the fingers, and if the wrists can be better covered by the torso piece, the blocker doesn't need to be so big.

The catcher and the "cheater" cuff as they sometimes call it is another candidate, sure. But one quick question, how many saves do you actually see per game hitting the "cheater" as opposed to going straight into the glove? There is an element of protection in that cuff but it could be changed if we really wanted to.

If even one goal is stopped by that cheater, its too much. The equipment shouldn't be making the saves.

As for shot-blocking, that's kind of a ridiculous argument. A player might block a shot with his shin pads once or twice in a game. Sometimes they get hit high, but that's not as often as you'd think. Goalies face 30-40 shots every game. Then ask some pros who've had broken shin pads from blocking a shot if they felt anything.

I'm not saying the goalies should be wearing player shin-pads, just that the goalie pads don't need to really be much bigger than them. You can keep the thickness of the pad, why do they have to be 10 inches wide when their legs are only like 5 max?

Just to clarify one point, the kevlar in the C&A provides protection from piercing and penetration, it doesn't actually absorb any significant energy from the force of the puck. The High Density Foam that is in the leg pads is also in the chest protectors along with plastics to give it some rigidity.

I'm not arguing for much change to the C&A really. I do think the arms can be more contoured while being better protected, but yeah the parts protecting vitals can be as thick as they want (not as wide as they want).

I am starting to believe that that stupid Corey Hirsch video has influenced people's opinions way more than I could I have imagined

Never seen the video, I've held these opinions for a long time.

[GioforPM]

[Envitro]

Yeah agreed with that picture. Lundqvist's gear has bothered me for a while. There's no reason that have the shoulder flaps stick up that much, it's ridiculous and dumb.

And MattyC, I agree with some of what you say, I just think that marginal changes should be made and nothing overly drastic.
I think that goalies today are about 10,000% better at their position due to pure athleticism, training, and size than goalies in the 70's and 80's, even the 90's too.

[GGG]

Kelly Hrudy had an excellent piece on HNIC where they used a 3D goalie model and trimmed down each piece of equipment while still providing protection.

Then they showed the two models and how much more space the shooters had to shoot at.

Based on that I think scoring off the rush would significantly increase as the shooters have 100% more open space then they do now.

It was really effective coming from him as he addressed all of the protection issues.

[Envitro]

Do you know when this was on HNIC? I'd love to see it.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Envitro

Yeah agreed with that picture. Lundqvist's gear has bothered me for a while. There's no reason that have the shoulder flaps stick up that much, it's ridiculous and dumb.

And MattyC, I agree with some of what you say, I just think that marginal changes should be made and nothing overly drastic.
I think that goalies today are about 10,000% better at their position due to pure athleticism, training, and size than goalies in the 70's and 80's, even the 90's too.

Oh I totally agree. That's why I think these types of changes won't do much to increase scoring (which I personally don't see as a problem) but will weed out the big guys who are just blocking shots by taking up so much net, and aren't actually relying on the athleticism and talent you speak of. I think the fact that goalies like Quick and Schnieder and Dubnyk (who is big, but an athletic guy) are the drivers of this change shows that they are not too worried about it affecting their ability to make saves. Whereas I would imagine a guy like Smith or even Bishop (don't see him play much) might be in tough.

Basically it will really separate the elite goalies IMO.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by GGG

Kelly Hrudy had an excellent piece on HNIC where they used a 3D goalie model and trimmed down each piece of equipment while still providing protection.

Then they showed the two models and how much more space the shooters had to shoot at.

Based on that I think scoring off the rush would significantly increase as the shooters have 100% more open space then they do now.

It was really effective coming from him as he addressed all of the protection issues.

Originally Posted by Envitro

Do you know when this was on HNIC? I'd love to see it.

This?


http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/g...ent-to-shrink/