Nhl Reform Thread

[Imran Siddiqui]

oh please Imran... no fighting? so you want to see people hacking and slashing and getting injured? have you ever played the game? I mean... organized ice hockey? fighting and enforcers are like nuclear arsenals... they keep the order with the threat of Mutually Assured Destruction.

Because that happens all the time in college hockey and in the Olympics?

I think anyone who wants to throw fighting out of hockey just is not being realistic. Fighting is one main things that attract people to hockey

More people stay away from hockey because of the fighting, especially in the US. They don't want their kids to see fighting being cheered, and they deplore it themselves.

[optimus2861]

Originally posted by Sava
As with goalie interference... I'm talking about when a goalie goes out along the boards to play the puck.

Doesn't matter. The goalie should not, ever, be "fair game" for guys to run over. It's a total non-starter, no GM or owner in his right mind would even consider it, for exactly the reasons I've stated earlier. I think the "problem" of strong puck-handling goaltenders is largely overstated; it becomes a matter of planning your shoot-ins smarter to account for the goalie's abilities (ie hard shoot-ins around the glass or off the end boards such that they don't drift behind the net where the goalie can suck them up).

If you really think it's that much of a problem, you'll have to come up with another solution. I've read one suggestion about painting an "extended crease", where if the goalie went outside it the whistle would be blown and, depending on the circumstances, a penalty could even be assessed. I'm not sure I like that one, but at least it's something that could feasibly be implemented. Not so the "fair game" idea.

[Ben Kenobi]

Clearly all you need to succeed any more, is a great goaltender, and a bunch of plumbers who can clog up the neutral zone all night.

Sounds like a problem with obstruction. Interesting that calling obstruction is not one of Sava's suggestions for the reform of the NHL.

Look at the first part of the year. If the refs call obstruction, this type of defense will be less successful.

BTW- look at the scores of the Minnesota-Vancouver games. Minnesota can score. Just not against Giguere.

[optimus2861]

^ Canucks defence self-destructed in that series .

The average goals-per-game in the post-season is 4.75 It's almost unbelievable how much the goal-scoring has just evaporated. Only one series in the last two rounds averaged more than 5 goals per game (the Minnesota-Vancouver tilt at 6.14). Ottawa & New Jersey are real bad when it comes to this; all of their series were 4.5 or under.

God, what I wouldn't give for a good ol' 6-5 barn-burner for a change from all this low-scoring stuff...

[RedFred]

Re: Nhl Reform Thread

1. Get rid of the two line pass

No. There are better options for more offence & less clutch and grab:

A) keep the rules as is but consistently enforce interference rules.

B) Either eliminate the centre line (not the same as eliminating two line pass rule) or move to European sized rinks.

2. Restrict goalie pad sizes

I kind of like this one. There is no reason they can't play the game with more reasonable sized equipment.

3. Get rid of the instigator penalty

As an old timer who has seen helmuts move from being a rarity to manditory I believe this is behind a lot of the stick work that goes on now. Not the instigator rule. If the league is serious about curtailing fighting this is a reasonable rule. In the old days every team carried at least one goon which did nothing for the game. These days it seems like most of the fights are between the few remaining goons amongst themselves. Which does nothing positive for the game IMHO.

4. Stop calling goalie interference outside the crease

As I understand it, any goalie who skates outside the crease is treated like any other player. If I am wrong on this please let me know. It seems reasonable that interference penalties could still be assessed just like they could for interfering with any other skater.

5. Contract the league to 24 or 28 teams

This is a tough one. I'd like to see higher quality, but in the old days too many teams made it to the playoffs. Now most teams have to work hard through the regular season to make the playoffs. 16 teams going to the second season is a good number to work with. None of this first round bye or wildcard nonsense. So if you want to reduce the number of teams would you also be prepared to reduce the teams in the playoffs to eight? Could be really hard to talk the owners into that one.

6. Remove the restrictions on stick curves

I disagree. Your points are valid, but... there are too many players in the league as it is who have weak stickhandling skills and are not consistant with crisp backhand passes or backhand shots.

7. More divisional games

Pros and cons. I happen to enjoy seeing some Eastern teams and as it is we only get to see someone like Mario once every two years provided he doesn't take the game off. Scheduling is a real balancing act and I can't fault the NHL too much on the job they are doing.

More ideas:

8. Salary cap and revenue sharing. As already mentioned.

9. Bettter ice. Most hockey rinks are booked far more for non-hockey events. In a super busy place like MSG they often have several different events in the same day. As a result the ice in the league has gone downhill. Back in the old days the rink formerly known as Northlands had the best ice in the NHL. Partly because they had expert staff but partly because there wasn't as much other traffic in the building.

Surely in this day and age they can preserve good ice during other events. We have the technology.

10. Get a knowledgable hockey guy who is also a good financial guy to run the NHL. Bettman is a numbers guy but he has no clue about hockey.

11. Each game should be worth two points. Not sometimes two sometimes three. If this means no points for an OTL or no regular season OT, so be it.

12. Referee reform. Hockey is extremely fast and hard to referee. They may be on the right track with the two referee system, but there are still far too many inconsistant and downright bad calls. Improved training for referees might help. As might an overhead camera guy who could alert a referee to infractions as soon as they happen via a headset to the referee. I don't know. That might not be the solution. But they have to somehow improve the current system.

13. Less canned music, less blatantly homer goal announcer, less telling the fans what to do on the score clock. Cheering and ovations are more fun when the fans decide on their own to do it.

14. I guess this is partly covered off in 8, but get control of the costs. Every team should be making money and fans shouldn't have to shell out $80 to see a game.

15. What with free agency and all the teams' makeup can change too much from season to season. If there was a way of encouraging more internal development and less trades I would be all for it.

[FrustratedPoet]

Re: Re: Nhl Reform Thread

Originally posted by RedFred
13. Less canned music, less blatantly homer goal announcer, less telling the fans what to do on the score clock. Cheering and ovations are more fun when the fans decide on their own to do it.

They don't really give instructions to the fans on the score clock do they? Like "Cheer now" or "This bits exciting, make ooh and ahh sounds"? If so, that's the lamest thing I've ever heard.

Oh, and Hockey definitely needs to lose the stupid music they play whenever the game stops for a couple of seconds.

/edited for some terrible grammar.

[alva]

Re: Re: Re: Nhl Reform Thread

quote:
Originally posted by RedFred
13. Less canned music, less blatantly homer goal announcer, less telling the fans what to do on the score clock. Cheering and ovations are more fun when the fans decide on their own to do it.

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet


They don't really give instructions to the fans on the score clock to they. Like "Cheer now!" or "This bits exciting, make ooh and ahh sounds!"? If so, that's the lamest thing I've ever heard.

Oh, and Hockey definitely needs to lose the stupid music they play whenever the game stops for a couple of seconds.

I can understand this being done for americans but you canadians surely dissipoint me if this is the case

[Sava]

Imran, optimus, redfred: Most of my improvements are not new ideas. In fact, they are more about restoring hockey to what it was before the crappy Bettman-rule-changes of the 1990's.

Because that happens all the time in college hockey and in the Olympics?

It's a completely different game. The NHL season is 82 games long. In college hockey, facemasks are mandatory. So players grow up not being more accountable for their sticks. The Olympics is played on an International sized rink. And due to the lack of games, the refereeing is is consistent throughout the tournament. Imran, you can't compare the NHL to the college or any other game. I'm a bit frustrated in discussing this with you because IIRC, you don't have any organized hockey playing experience. This is significant if you are talking about such rule changes.

RedFred: I agree with your take on OT. I think there should be a 5 minute OT, then a shootout. And no points for an OT loss. Ties are bad for the fans, bad for the teams, and extended overtimes have the potential to last a long time.

As for the costs issue... well it's capitalism, and that's a different topic altogether.

[Imran Siddiqui]

you don't have any organized hockey playing experience. This is significant if you are talking about such rule changes.

You don't have to have experience playing the game to decide rule changes . Most people that watch the game have no experience playing it. If you only make those that have played responsible for rule changes, you lock out a lot of the fan base.

Oh, and btw, the no fighting rule is something, not of my own, but rather something that Wayne Gretzky proposed in his autobiography. I think he's played some hockey .

[RedFred]

Re: Re: Re: Nhl Reform Thread

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
They don't really give instructions to the fans on the score clock do they? Like "Cheer now" or "This bits exciting, make ooh and ahh sounds"? If so, that's the lamest thing I've ever heard.

Yes, that is exactly what they do. For example on the Canuck's scoreboard they often have a big 'CLAP' sign. They also have a 'Fanometer' which is a measure of the loudness of the cheering so when fans see it they try to max it out. They also spell out stuff like GO, CANUCKS, GO in order to get a chant going.

Equally lame is the prerecorded "GGGGGOOOOOOAAAAAAAALLLLL" yell after a home team goal. This isn't latin soccer. In the old days they used to play back Jim Robson's radio call of the goal which was a lot better. Either that or just let the fans cheer.

Speaking of radio announcers, this would be a point in Sava's favour on reducing the number of teams. I don't know how those announcers do it with so many different players, especially when an Eastern team comes out that we only see every other year.

Re: the costs issue... It is more than capitalism Sava, the current system makes it extremely unlikely that any save five or six high salary teams ever make it to the finals. (Yes, I know, this year is very unusual with so many big salary teams bowing out early) Even back in the 1980s there was a sense that any team who coached and drafted well could make a Stanley Cup run.

On stickwork... maybe the solution is cages for all skaters like in women's hockey. It only takes one or two pucks or sticks in the eye per year to knock out great players. For example Ohlund has been good, but never the same since his injury.

[Tingkai]

Well I watched game 6 between the Sens and the Devils and it was a great game even if it was 2-1. Both teams played extremely well. There were some great hits, close calls, and high emotion.

With games like that, I don't see any pressing need to make major rule changes.

[Sava]

Oh, and btw, the no fighting rule is something, not of my own, but rather something that Wayne Gretzky proposed in his autobiography. I think he's played some hockey

Considering he survived because of guys like Marty McSorley...

Anyways, I had to resurrect this threat because of an article in my local paper. The article mentioned how increasing the rink size to international could help the excitement of the game. I agree with his argument. I watched Game 2 of the Finals, and it was boring. The game is turning into soccer on ice. There isn't finesse, there isn't good passing. It's terrible to watch. Two stupid "system" teams are in the Finals, chipping away at the puck, mudding up the zone, and somebody gets a garbage rebound goal. Hopefully, the capitalist system will work and the lack of fan interest will force the game to change.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/printedition/cs-0305300257may30,0,2397268.story

Bigger ice = bigger thrills
BY PHILIP HERSH

May 30, 2003

Permit those of us who know and love elite international hockey to contribute a knowing and rueful smirk to the recent discussions about how to increase scoring in the National Hockey League.

The answer, you see, was so simple it is ridiculous.

(Notice the past tense, "was," in the previous sentence. That is the rueful part.)

Call more obstruction penalties? It made little difference this year, as statistics show.

Widen the nets? As the French-Canadians who are tending them for Anaheim and New Jersey in the Stanley Cup finals would say, "Quelle btise!"

(Which translates to, "You're kidding, right?")

The easiest solution is to play the game on the international-size ice surface, which is 17 percent wider (100 feet) than the NHL rink (85 feet).

The NHL had a chance to do it when most teams moved into new buildings over the last decade. Its owners apparently were loath to give up prime seats to an expanded ice surface or shuck the Neanderthal attitude that fans come to hockey for the fights.

This big-ice idea absolutely infuriates those who think the sport will become figure skating on the larger surface--and without a Tonya Harding to inject some rough stuff into the picture.

Where that argument falls apart is its failure to consider just how big and fast hockey players have become over the last generation or so. This and future generations would get up close and personal even if they were playing on a rink the size of a soccer field.

The legendary soccer player Franz Beckenbauer of Germany once told me the difference between his era (the 1970s) and the present was this: When he got the ball, he had time and space to work out a play. Now, he said, there would be a bigger, faster opponent in his face immediately. That is even more true of hockey.

Anaheim's smallest defenseman is Niclas Havelid, at 5 feet 11 inches and 197 pounds. Nine of Anaheim's 17 forwards are at least 6 feet and 200 pounds. Only five of the 22 skaters on the Devils' roster are shorter than 6 feet, only nine weigh less than 200 pounds.

Now let's look at the 1970-71 Boston Bruins, one of the highest-scoring teams in NHL history, league points leader during the regular season. Its typically sized player was Bobby Orr, the greatest defenseman in history (for my money, the greatest player in history, period.) He was 5-11, 180. Of the 26 skaters on the Bruins' roster that year, 18 weighed 196 pounds or less (eight were 180 to 165.)

To the increased size and skating speed add the increased skill at using the neutral-zone trap--now a neutral-zone chokehold--since Roger Nielson's Florida Panthers perfected it on the way to the Cup finals under Nielson's successor, Doug MacLean, in 1996. The result often is painful to watch: teams dumping the puck into the offensive zone even when they have a two-man power-play advantage.

Dump-and-chase hockey and even stricter-than-usual attention to defense in the playoffs mean few shots and even fewer real scoring chances. New Jersey outshot Anaheim 30-16 in Game 1 and 25-16 in Game 2 of the finals. The Devils are taking 26 shots per game and giving up 25 in the playoffs.

So what has this done to scoring?

Ten years ago, 15 of the NHL's 24 teams averaged at least 3.5 goals per game.

In 1970-71, the Boston Bruins averaged 5.11 goals per game.

This season, the highest-scoring team, Detroit, averaged 3.28 goals per game. Only five of the league's 30 teams averaged three or more goals per game.

There have been low-scoring periods in the past, but this era is the worst since expansion, the slap shot and the curved stick increased offensive hockey. That change now has been more than offset by the size of players and the size of goalies' pads, not to mention the generally greater agility of the men behind the masks.

Now let's look at the 2002 Olympics, where two teams of NHL All-Stars met in the final, which Canada won 5-2 over the United States while outshooting Team USA 39-33.

The United States had 49 shots and Russia 30 in one semifinal. The Czech Republic outshot Russia 41-27 while losing 1-0 in the quarterfinals. Russia and Belarus combined for 68 shots in the other semifinal.

"You find yourself skating so much more than in an NHL game," said St. Louis (now Minnesota) forward Scott Young in Newsday. "But it's great."

"It's a blast," the Red Wings' Brett Hull told the Detroit Free Press.

"I love it," said Brian Rolston of Boston. "You get a lot of time with the puck, and so many things just open up."

NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman tried to explain away the more exciting play as a factor of having the world's best players in one tournament. Truth be told, the difference was the bigger rink and the lack of the two-line offside rule in international hockey. With no red line, there are more long breakout passes and more odd-man rushes, including breakaways. With a wider surface, teams actually carry or pass the puck into the offensive zone. With more NHL players than ever who learned to play on the wide surface in Europe, the skills to exploit it are there.

Other than a goalie, who doesn't love an odd-man rush?

Only those with narrow minds.

[Imran Siddiqui]

somebody gets a garbage rebound goal.

Actually in game 2, two of the goals were NOT rebound goals... and the one that was (Elias) was one of the prettiest goals in the playoffs.

[RedFred]

I am glad Sava agrees with my 1B rule change.

Another way of making the game better for Canadian fans is to retire Bob Cole and Harry Neale.

The game is just to fast for Bob. He seems to call about one in three players who touch the puck these days. And he makes a lot of mistakes. I never understood why anyone likes this guy.

Harry Neale has been a very interesting and insightful commentator. Good idea to have a former coach and GM in the booth. But his reaction time is slowing down. He should retire while he is ahead.

[Richelieu]

I never ever thought i'd say this but: bring Quebec City back in the league. After a salary cap rule.