[News] GMs agree to recommend 3v3 OT & coaches' challenge for goalie interference

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Well we know Chicago is screwed, Philly is hurting, Boston too. After that, I dunno

Blues have 9F 4D, total is about $57.5M. With the remaining ~14m, they need 3 forwards and 3D, PLUS find room to sign Vladimir Tarasenko and Jake Allen who is a RFA. Michalek and Jackman are also UFA, and you'd think they'd try to keep at least Jackman which will likely cost 4M or more.

The Rangers are over 65M and have only 7 forwards under contract (6 D though). So they need five more for ~6-7M, and included in that are new contracts for Derek Stepan and Carl Hagelin.

That's quick math, hoping I added right.

[RM14]

I think in the event a player misses a penatly shot. The offending team should then still have a 2 minute penalty.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by RM14

I think in the event a player misses a penatly shot. The offending team should then still have a 2 minute penalty.

Why?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by RM14

I think in the event a player misses a penatly shot. The offending team should then still have a 2 minute penalty.

I think that's right. The PS for taking away the breakaway. The 2 minutes for the infraction itself.

What's the latest ratio on PS scored/missed?

[AC]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I think that's right. The PS for taking away the breakaway. The 2 minutes for the infraction itself.

What's the latest ratio on PS scored/missed?

Or they could let the team decide penalty shot or PP. Not both IMO.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Why?

I think a penalty shot + 2 minutes is a good fit. The tripped player should get a clear re-do of the breakaway. The offending player should get 2 minutes for taking the penalty.

Bothers me especially on a Penalty Kill when a player on the power play takes a penalty resulting in a penalty shot. Goalie makes a save, and the team is then still on the power play.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

I'm shocked it's not dropping. I guess the Rogers money is offsetting the drop in the Canadian dollar? Any other significant new revenue streams?

The NHLPA has an "accellerator" built into the CBA where they can raise the cap/midpoint/floor by 5% from what the league calculates it should be if they so choose. The theory is that it allows the union to account for expected new revenue streams in the forthcoming season. The risk is that if revenues are flat, that 5% is simply returned to the owners via escrow. On Fan960 yesterday, there was talk that in this CBA, the owners can apply this 5% as well. They speculated that whether or not to do so might lead to a bit of a fight between the owners and union, since the players despise escrow.

However, the dropping dollar could also simply be offset by rising ticket prices and the like.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Seems to me the only time you'd choose PP is when you're up a goal late.

Originally Posted by RM14

I think a penalty shot + 2 minutes is a good fit. The tripped player should get a clear re-do of the breakaway. The offending player should get 2 minutes for taking the penalty.

When you impede a guy on a breakaway, you've taken away a breakaway. The penalty shot gives them the chance back, but without back pressure. In other words it puts the attacking team in a better position than they were if not for the penalty. You're already giving them more than they lost, why add a power play to it?

[RM14]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Seems to me the only time you'd choose PP is when you're up a goal late.

Or if Paul Byron is the shooter

[DoubleF]

I've always wondered if they could install a chip in the middle of the puck and have scanners track the puck. Use technology in the goal area as a last resort if video review fails or is inconclusive.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Also, there will discussion about NFL-style setup where in last minute, everything gets reviewed.

Don't like this one. What does everything mean?

I would also like to see the challenge able to be used for missed dives.

[sureLoss]

Looks like coach's challenge will also apply to puck over the glass delay of game penalties

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie
Coach's challenge can also be used to take down puck over glass penalty. Ruled on by Hockey Ops in TOR. Same rules, lose T/O if unsuccessful

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I've always wondered if they could install a chip in the middle of the puck and have scanners track the puck. Use technology in the goal area as a last resort if video review fails or is inconclusive.

They absolutely should and at some point will do that.

[sureLoss]

Good Point:

Nick Cotsonika @cotsonika
One problem with coach's challenge for goalie interference: If I know my opponent has called his timeout, I'll be more aggressive in crease.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Seems to me the only time you'd choose PP is when you're up a goal late.

When you impede a guy on a breakaway, you've taken away a breakaway. The penalty shot gives them the chance back, but without back pressure. In other words it puts the attacking team in a better position than they were if not for the penalty. You're already giving them more than they lost, why add a power play to it?

Because there was still an infraction on the play that usually ends up in a 2 minute Powerplay. The Penalty shot just replaces the chance you should have had on the breakaway.

You should get the shot and it should be handled like a delayed penalty call. You score and then you don't get the PP, Goalie makes the save and you still have 2 minutes to score.

That would be the most consistent way of handling it IMO.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Don't like this one. What does everything mean?

I would also like to see the challenge able to be used for missed dives.

Means any close "might be goals/no goals" get reviewed, and maybe puck over glass. Don't see it showing the game down much as it's not like those happen every game, never mind multiple times in the last couple minutes

[Coach]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

I've always wondered if they could install a chip in the middle of the puck and have scanners track the puck. Use technology in the goal area as a last resort if video review fails or is inconclusive.

Ive brought this up before as well. I was told it's much more complicated tahn it seems because the puck is a disk, not a sphere. And depending whether the puck is on edge or lying flat, the distance to cross the line isn't the same.

But I agree, if they could figure out a way to do it, it would be great. And you could have each team's in-house celebration set to go off automatically.

[Jason14h]

I've always wondered if they could install a chip in the middle of the puck and have scanners track the puck. Use technology in the goal area as a last resort if video review fails or is inconclusive.

They absolutely should and at some point will do that.

The cost is too high for pucks into stands and breaking devices. This technology already exists.

The reality is there is maybe 1 meaningful goal a year where this is an issue.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Means any close "might be goals/no goals" get reviewed, and maybe puck over glass. Don't see it showing the game down much as it's not like those happen every game, never mind multiple times in the last couple minutes

What about close offsides (there's usually at least a couple in the playoffs that get missed on stretch passes and turn to goals)? Or close icings (famously discretionary on behalf of the linesmen when players are within a few feet of the line. But if I was a coach in the dying minutes of a close game, you bet I'd be screaming for a faceoff in the o-zone for a close icing)?

[Split98]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

I've always wondered if they could install a chip in the middle of the puck and have scanners track the puck. Use technology in the goal area as a last resort if video review fails or is inconclusive.

I've been pining for this for years now. RFID tech is more than capable

In addition, Fraunhofer has developed a system employing a passive RF tag consisting solely of an antenna that has also been selected by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) as one of two finalists for a goal-line technology to detect when a team scores. With this technology, the RF tag is installed inside the ball, and antennas are mounted alongside the goal area. The antennas transmit a 120 kHz signal that creates a magnetic field. When the ball crosses through the magnetic field, its tag distorts that field. A receiver detects those changes and sends a message to the GoalRef software that a ball has crossed the goal line.

http://www.rfidjournal.com/articles/view?9315

Been used in demos for soccer and rugby since at least 2012.

By bye goal judges, players covering the puck and delayed plays waiting for a whistle to see if it crossed the line.