Dryden: Goalies are too big

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

You get shot in the wrist with a puck at 80mph and tell me if you think you’re wearing too much protection.

Except the cheater doesn’t even cover your wrist. It extends out from it. It’s made to gather in a puck which otherwise wouldn’t have even hit the wrist.

[SebC]

Two things to consider:

- Soccer nets are huge. End zones are even bigger. That doesn't create scoring against strong defensive coverage. If you really want to increase scoring, make a rule that a maximum of three skaters from the defending team are allowed inside their own blue line. Of course, conservative coaches would hang their defensemen back instead of going for the 5v3 in the zone, but at least they'd have the option when behind in score.

- Didn't the stats nerds already show that high danger scoring chances are scored on at a much higher rate than low danger? Sure, a deflection is high danger, but so is a pass into the slot. Bigger nets would make shot quality less important, and I suspect would do more to increase fluke goals than pretty goals. On a great pass the shooters already have tons of space to shoot at.

[Madrox]

Originally Posted by SebC

- Soccer nets are huge. End zones are even bigger.

And soccer balls are also far smaller relative to the goals than a hockey puck. You can fit roughly 10 times as many pucks in a goal as you can soccer balls in a net.

Originally Posted by SebC

If you really want to increase scoring, make a rule that a maximum of three skaters from the defending team are allowed inside their own blue line. Of course, conservative coaches would hang their defensemen back instead of going for the 5v3 in the zone, but at least they'd have the option when behind in score.

Constant 5 on 3's? Why would that make any sense? I don't even understand the point you're going for here.

Originally Posted by SebC

Didn't the stats nerds already show that high danger scoring chances are scored on at a much higher rate than low danger? Sure, a deflection is high danger, but so is a pass into the slot. Bigger nets would make shot quality less important, and I suspect would do more to increase fluke goals than pretty goals. On a great pass the shooters already have tons of space to shoot at.

Why would fluke goals increase more? Good shooters would also have more room to shoot at, and theoretically goalies would have a harder time making saves across more space even if they knew where guys were going to shoot. It's definitely possible that guys who could pick the corners could take better advantage of a bigger net.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by greyshep

Uhh, how wide are your wrists??

The cheater doesn't protect any anatomy unless your built like Thanos.

Have you played the position?

Like, it’s obvious to anyone watching that these shoulder pads that come up an extra 6” are absurd. The pads are over the top.

But the wrist protector?

It’s difficult enough to catch pucks cleanly when normal people shoot them; you’re trying to catch a frozen rubber disc. It does weird things..

When pros are ripping them, with all the deflections and traffic, to say nothing of the Collisions and slashes you endure, yeah, your gloves need to be a little over-armoured.

But, it’s always possible I’m wrong and position-biased - do you have any examples of the glove cheater preventing what would have otherwise been an obvious goal?

[Coach]

For Bullets:



For Bombs:



For Pucks:

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Coach

For Bullets:



For Bombs:



For Pucks:

In lieu of everything else I was going to say, the first two are designed to prevent certain death once, and the other is meant to prevent certain injury indefinitely.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Except the cheater doesn’t even cover your wrist. It extends out from it. It’s made to gather in a puck which otherwise wouldn’t have even hit the wrist.

Perfect example just a minute ago, Fleury's save off of MacKinnon, the puck deflected off the tip of the cheater into his mask and harmlessly dropped down, easy goal if he didn't have a 10 inch wide wrist

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Perfect example just a minute ago, Fleury's save off of MacKinnon, the puck deflected off the tip of the cheater into his mask and harmlessly dropped down, easy goal if he didn't have a 10 inch wide wrist

And if he didn’t have the cheater, MacKinnon would’ve broken his wrist.

Seriously, go put a glove and chest pad on and see where the disconnect occurs at the wrist. See how little protection is there.

Look at what happens when you get into position - crouched and ready - see if any holes on the protection open up.

If the forwards wanna go back to using 5 lb pieces of firewood, then the goalies can consider shrinking the cheater.

But I’m not in favour of unilateral disarmament.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Madrox

And soccer balls are also far smaller relative to the goals than a hockey puck. You can fit roughly 10 times as many pucks in a goal as you can soccer balls in a net.

Irrelevant. SV% of soccer goaltenders is still far lower than in hockey. Yet it remains a lower scoring sport.

Originally Posted by Madrox

Constant 5 on 3's? Why would that make any sense? I don't even understand the point you're going for here.

The point is that defensive systems have a huge role in preventing goals - and particularly in preventing pretty goals. So if that's what we're trying to change, that's where we need to make changes. I'm not saying I'd actually like to see such a change.

Originally Posted by Madrox

Why would fluke goals increase more? Good shooters would also have more room to shoot at, and theoretically goalies would have a harder time making saves across more space even if they knew where guys were going to shoot. It's definitely possible that guys who could pick the corners could take better advantage of a bigger net.

Think of all the deflections that go wide of the net. Now make the net bigger. With a bigger net, and lower save percentages across the board, shot quantity becomes more important and shot quality becomes less. Fundamentally, there will be less increase in high quality goals because high quality shots are difficult to generate. Low quality shots are easier to generate, so if I'm a coach, the adjustment I'd be making is to encourage my team to just shoot it, especially if there's a screen. How many empty-netters are highlight worthy? Making saves harder would push the game in that direction.

They key point is that it is defenses, not goalies, that prevent highlight-reel plays. If the defense gets beaten you're either getting a highlight goal or a highlight save. So if you want more highlights, you've got to come up with a way to restrict defences. My 5v3 suggestion was an extreme example to demonstrate the point.

[GreenLantern2814]

How about about this to increase scoring?

On the power play, once a team has gained the opposing blue line, the defense must advance the puck past the red line to force the offense to clear. They’re icing the puck anyway, and I can’t stand watching PKs just line up Red Rover style along the blue.

Another small adjustment that could be done without offending too many people - switch the long change to the 1st and 3rd periods.

[greyshep]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

And if he didn’t have the cheater, MacKinnon would’ve broken his wrist.

Seriously, go put a glove and chest pad on and see where the disconnect occurs at the wrist. See how little protection is there.

Look at what happens when you get into position - crouched and ready - see if any holes on the protection open up.

If the forwards wanna go back to using 5 lb pieces of firewood, then the goalies can consider shrinking the cheater.

But I’m not in favour of unilateral disarmament.

Sorry but what are you on? If the cheater isnt there, the shot beats him and its a goal. Please explain how a cheater protects a goalies wrist??

I have played goal myself and can still admit that extra coverage has nothing to do with body protection. You cant tell me they couldnt wrap the cuff in a more robust material if you are worried about twisting your wrist and not being square to the shot. Besides, even with the cheater if you rotate your glove hand down, it exposes the cuff as it is.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by greyshep

Sorry but what are you on? If the cheater isnt there, the shot beats him and its a goal. Please explain how a cheater protects a goalies wrist??

I have played goal myself and can still admit that extra coverage has nothing to do with body protection. You cant tell me they couldnt wrap the cuff in a more robust material if you are worried about twisting your wrist and not being square to the shot. Besides, even with the cheater if you rotate your glove hand down, it exposes the cuff as it is.

Weed, mostly. And water.

You could wrap it in more robust material. It wouldn’t be vastly smaller.

The glove has to be able to accommodate the chest pad. And if it doesn’t, then it’s a safety risk to the goalie.

Again, the entirety of the chest pad could be redesigned and made smaller. The Frieza Force shoulder pads can probably be mended. The pads can be shrunk. Make them 8 or 9” wide, that solves most of your problem right there.

Don’t make getting shot in the hand more dangerous. It’s the wrong solution.

[GioforPM]

It’s called a cheater for a reason. It’s liked when Guiguerre’s chest and shoulder pads used to extend way up above his shoulders when he crouched.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It’s called a cheater for a reason. It’s liked when Guiguerre’s chest and shoulder pads used to extend way up above his shoulders when he crouched.

Except that this protects the wrist and not the air above him.

It’s not the same as those boards Roy used to have covering his 5-hole. Those were actually cheaters. The pads that wrap around your knee is there for a reason, and if you play without them, it’s very likely you’ll injure yourself. Source: injured myself playing without proper knee protection.

The flap at the top of the trapper is small enough.

Have you ever once watched a puck hit a goalie in the glove and gone “that’s some bull####”?

I don’t think it’s common.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

How about about this to increase scoring?

On the power play, once a team has gained the opposing blue line, the defense must advance the puck past the red line to force the offense to clear. They’re icing the puck anyway, and I can’t stand watching PKs just line up Red Rover style along the blue.

Another small adjustment that could be done without offending too many people - switch the long change to the 1st and 3rd periods.

just eliminate their ability to ice it - why give the penalized team an advantage?

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

And if he didn’t have the cheater, MacKinnon would’ve broken his wrist.

Wrong, there was no part of Fleury's wrist near where that puck hit the cheater, It would have been a goal on what I'll call the 6 hole (between the glove and the helmet)

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

just eliminate their ability to ice it - why give the penalized team an advantage?

Because they’ll still ice it and then power plays will take 15 minutes of real time.

[ricardodw]

Originally Posted by troutman

Ken was big.

So pretty much they need to put an asterisk next to Ken Dryden HHOF entry... indicating freak of nature size.



They need to stop counting the Canadiens 5 Stanley Cups that they won mainly because he was bigger than basically anyone else on the ice.

Billy Smith 5-10 175
Grant Fuhr 5-10 184


I think that Dryden should watch some of his old games. The players were smaller and slower and shot the puck significantly slower with less accuracy.

The skill level has gone up exponentially. Go back and compare the number of tape to tape passes from Dryden's "golden" era to what you see every game from all teams.

[Joborule]

Is the goal to increase the amount of goals, or to increase excitement due to the increase chance of goals occurring?

Tweaks to power play I don't feel will do much to increase the excitement of hockey if the focus is just on increase goals itself, because the play outside of power plays will still remain the same. To focus should be on implementing changes that can encourage offensive players to take more shots at the net, or be creative on the ice. Or a better way for me to say it is to make hockey much more fast paced since it's suited to be that type of game.

When was the last time we've seen players on the rush score a slap shot goal from above the hashmarks? The only times you see any type of slap shot goal these days are on one timers, and those are typically on the PPs. It would be nice to see the slap shot become much more commonplace again during even strength play. It's like the equivalent of dunking in basketball. They look cool in the highlights.

You figure that technology has advanced enough for goalie equipment that the size can be furthered reduced to try to get them back closer to the size of 80s goalies so more of the net is available to shoot at; while not compromising their safety.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Dion

Ken relied on his althleticism to make his saves and not so much his equipment.

Right. So, not so different at all from the top goalies in today's game.