Fix what's obviously broken, NHL needs more goals

[2macinnis2]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Again, I am sorry, but how does increasing players that are in the league to punch people in the head increase the skill level and thereby increase the scoring chances.

I'm more concerned about how few goals the top skill players are scoring than how many goals the 4th line can chip in on 6-8 minutes a game.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

I watched hockey in the 80's and it was fun because there were a lot of mistakes. But don't confuse that with 'good' hockey, it was actually pretty bad. Team defense was almost non-existent and the goalies were not great and had minimal padding. And the hooking, holding and interference was out of control. I don't mind trying to come up with ways to make the game better but I also don't think we should be pining for the way the game was played in the 80's.

This is a great point. Quite often, bad overall play can seem exciting simply because parallel ineptitude allows unforeseen things to happen.

Best case in point is the Final Four tournament. Those games are exciting simply because the players are amateurs and make very poor choices and lose sight of fundamentals. That's why 20+ point leads midway through the second half aren't safe in that tournament. In the NBA, they're much safer because the opposing players are fundamentally better and mature players.

[FlamesAddiction]

The thing I like about the NHL that you never know what kind of a game it will be. You can get a 6-5 game just as easily at a 2-1 or 1-0 game.

One rule I don't like though that might increase scoring somewhat if it was changed is how a penalized team can just keep icing the puck without worrying about it. Sometimes it actually becomes an advantage for the penalized team if they are holding a lead late in the game.

I wouldn't want to see a stoppage every time there is an icing though either as it would ruin the pace of the game. Maybe a situation where any time a penalized team ices the puck, 10 seconds are added on to the penalty. It would buy them a reprieve from the pressure, but it would not be able to be used to just kill the clock. It would also add a new level of skill requirement for PKers.

[2macinnis2]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

I never said otherwise, was just commenting on how bad team defense was in the 80's. It wasn't great hockey. Entertaining, absolutely. But bad defense led to inflated scoring. Along with average goaltenders wearing much smaller pads than today.



I think you're selling Crawford a bit short here, he's not garbage he's pretty good. Tampa had no problems scoring all season long on goalies with similar padding. And I also disagree that a Hawks defense with players like Keith and Seabrook among others wasn't/isn't good. They probably have the best top 3 or 4 in the league.

I agree about the padding though, it's a little much. If they are going to tinker with anything it should start there.

Those players on the Hawks D are undeniably awesome. But their D is bad after the top 3 and you could see at time TB was getting to them for it. These had to be some tired guys. And for times in that series, TB was absolutely serving them their lunch (like the end of game 4). Keith and Seabrook and Hjalmarson are great but they are human, and playing that many minutes definitely showed as the opposition got a lot of great looks.

[Flash Walken]

Enforce the current rules.

Suspend high profile players the same as low profile players.

Disregard the current score or game tempo when calling stick infractions.

Watch the goals pile up.

[Mark]

I think you gain an appreciation for the evolution of goaltending after watching 80's highlights. I'd be losing my mind if so many (what we would classify today as) pathetic shots were goals each game. Compared to today, it's like the goalies didn't even try. Give me a hard fought game with fewer hard fought goals over a high scoring affair with questionable goaltending.

[mustache ride]

If you want to increase scoring, then the easiest way is for the league to call games according to the rules and not some hybrid code that changes from game to game. No more "even up" penalties and no more "putting the whistle away." Obstruction is obstruction, tripping is tripping Ect...

[2macinnis2]

Originally Posted by mustache ride

If you want to increase scoring, then the easiest way is for the league to call games according to the rules and not some hybrid code that changes from game to game. No more "even up" penalties and no more "putting the whistle away." Obstruction is obstruction, tripping is tripping Ect...

I wouldn't disagree with that but it would require a pretty massive culture change.

[Erick Estrada]

I'm of the opinion that the game could use some tweaks and despite the myths fans don't go to sports to see great defense. They come to see scoring wether it's basketball, soccer, baseball, or hockey. You win games by scoring more than opposition and scoring is what fans come to see. When there's no scoring there's really not a lot to talk about nor is there much in highlights. It is what it is but a good poke check isn't going to make the nightly highlight reel whereas a goal or big save will.

First of all goaltenders are simply better now than ever as even very average goaltenders sport .900 save percentages. I believe that reducing equipment size slightly while very slightly increasing the net size would make a big difference in goals for as you typically get at least one or two posts per game and converting those to goals instantly adds the goals the league feels it needs to keep fans entertained.

Second of all while the Flames were very good at it I believe shot blocking has gotten out of control as you now have multiple players playing goaltender and there are so many games where I have watched in frustration that it's nearly impossible for teams to simply get pucks to the net and if you can't get pucks on net you can't score regardless of the size of the net. I wouldn't mind experimentation with penalties being called is a player slides on his side to block a shot as I don't believe a defensemen should ever be able to take away the bottom of the net with his body.

[powderjunkie]

I'm all for smaller goalie equipment, or slightly larger nets. Most goals these days come from deflections (be it intentional, defencemen's stick, or just bouncing off bodies in front) or through screens. I'd love to see snipers get rewarded a little more often. A slapshot on the rush used to be an exciting play...now it's a last resort.

[mustache ride]

Originally Posted by 2macinnis2

I wouldn't disagree with that but it would require a pretty massive culture change.

It's really the only change that would be effective though longterm. Increase the net size, smaller pads, move the blue lines or any other change you can think of just allows teams to create new systems to defend against it. Unless you are commited to basically reinventing the game, the scores will always trend down as teams are allowed to push to rules to their advantage due to lack of enforcement.

[Flames in 07]

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.

I agree completely with the OP. sure there are some good 2-1 games but there are tons and tons of lame 2-1 games.

In the playoffs its so hard to score, that half the goals are flukes that take two lucky bounces between the blue line and the goal line.

Bigger nets and/or smaller pads will create more room for skillful goals, right now its soccer on ice. The athletes are amazing, they are tough as hell, the playoffs were very competitive, and its still hard to attract new interest, because all new people see is soccer on ice.

On thing to remember is that the focus of the NHL should be at least as much if not, more about attracting new audiences. Regular posters thoughts on a board in a Canadian NHL city are not a good litmus test for them. Everyone on CP can appreciate a good 2-1 game. But you can't rope in new people with the way the product is evolving.

[codynw]

When a player takes a penalty, call it. No matter what the score is or who had the last penalty.

That will increase scoring in two ways. More powerplays, and less interference at even strength so the players can actually do stuff.

[kmart]

Call a spade a spade. Call a penalty a penalty. Stop the refs from managing a game and let them start enforcing all rules.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by kmart

Call a spade a spade. Call a penalty a penalty. Stop the refs from managing a game and let them start enforcing all rules.

How refreshing it would be if what was a penalty during game one of the season was still a penalty during the Stanley Cup finals.

[N-E-B]

The only changes I would like to see in the NHL are:

1. Get rid of the points system and go to a straight win-loss system like MLB where the standings are sorted by "games back" rather than points. Part of the excitement of a 15-inning ball game is that it's all or nothing. If you win, you win and if you lose, you lose. Same thing should apply in hockey. Who cares that you played an extra 5 minutes or went to a shootout? You still lost the game and that's all that should matter. A win is a win and a loss is a loss.

2. Just go to no-touch icing already. There's too much grey area with hybrid icing. This would also speed the game up.

3. Eliminate the Edmonton Oilers ability to win draft lotteries.

I don't think goal scoring is an issue. I like that goalies can make saves.

[badger89]

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.

Agreed. But what makes a 1-0 game exciting is scoring chances which are stopped. If there are limited scoring chances then a 1-0 game is boring (i.e. soccer).

I'm for enlarging the goal if needed, but would start by reducing the size of goalie pads to a reasonable amount.

[Bandwagon Surfer]

Improving the game is a great off season topic, but this these discussions always seem to put the cart before the horse by assuming the problem and desired outcome are known. As we can see by the responses in this thread, there is not a concencus on what this.

If we really want to get somewhere I think a series of discussions would be needed to dig into the problem. Like:
1) What do you enjoy about the game? Why is that? And why is that? And why is that?
3) What do you not enjoy about the game? Why is that? And why is that? And why is that?
3) Establish criteria to evaluate solutions based on the findings from #1 and #2.
4) Brainstorm possible solutions.
5) Using the criteria established in #3 rate the different solutions.
6) Repeat #4 and #5, refining and pivoting until a solution(s) are a clear winner.

I don't know about you, but I could amuse myself with that until hockey comes back.

I would hope the NHL follows a similar process, but using only data for #1 and #2. Opinions, intuition, and emotions are how bad decisions are made.

[Cheese]

good article on Goalie equipment.
http://sportsthenandnow.com/2013/10/...-restrictions/

[2macinnis2]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I'm of the opinion that the game could use some tweaks and despite the myths fans don't go to sports to see great defense. They come to see scoring wether it's basketball, soccer, baseball, or hockey. You win games by scoring more than opposition and scoring is what fans come to see. When there's no scoring there's really not a lot to talk about nor is there much in highlights. It is what it is but a good poke check isn't going to make the nightly highlight reel whereas a goal or big save will.

First of all goaltenders are simply better now than ever as even very average goaltenders sport .900 save percentages. I believe that reducing equipment size slightly while very slightly increasing the net size would make a big difference in goals for as you typically get at least one or two posts per game and converting those to goals instantly adds the goals the league feels it needs to keep fans entertained.

Second of all while the Flames were very good at it I believe shot blocking has gotten out of control as you now have multiple players playing goaltender and there are so many games where I have watched in frustration that it's nearly impossible for teams to simply get pucks to the net and if you can't get pucks on net you can't score regardless of the size of the net. I wouldn't mind experimentation with penalties being called is a player slides on his side to block a shot as I don't believe a defensemen should ever be able to take away the bottom of the net with his body.

Shot blocking is a problem. Again a function of bigger and lighter pads (and players). There isn't a huge price to pay for shot blocking as injuries sustained through its practice are pretty rare. Also, its very hard to strategize offense against a team that's good at it. That said, if shooting percentage goes up even by a little, does a focus shift defensively a bit towards taking shots away entirely, rather than trying to block them? I guess a blocked shot isn't a SOG either, so you could look at that both ways.