The NHL is never going to increase the size of the nets...they enjoy something that Basketball and Baseball don't...competitive games. If you wanna shrink goalie equipment, fine...then you need to re-introduce the solid pipes holding the nets in place...if these forwards want to drive to the net full tilt and the goalie has reduced protection, then the players need to know that when you hit the net with your body, it will hurt...
You know that won't happen, and should not.
I know it won't happen. The same as they will only tinker with goalie equipment...and there is no way I want the nets increased 12-18 inches as you want...that'll never happen. You do not like the competitive NHL playoffs. Hows that NBA garbage working, the best I can tell after game 1...the Celtics were only ever close at opening tip-off, what a wonderful game 6 in Philly...must have been so exciting. I'll take competitive be NHL playoffs over what the NBA produce...
There is a reason they have a rules committee...they have studies the net, over and over...they have not changed it.
Were you not advocating for bigger ice? And you want more scoring? Bigger ice means less scoring and boring European style. I just got done watching Canada v Finland in an exciting 2-1 game, actually, it was a boring game as most international hockey is...
Scoring is down partly from the equipment, but mostly because teams play in the system...systems that coach like. But then again, maybe not, the scoring started to drop as teams added cookie cutter arenas, scoring could be down because there are just not enough quality players to fill 31/32 NHL rosters. 30 years ago, most teams 4th line players now would never be NHL, they'd be in the AHL.
There could be any multitude of reasons why scoring is down.
It's easy for us to sit at home and say make the goalies go back to the early nineties equipment size...but then a bunch of other rules need to be changed back to the day as well...hockey is the fastest game played, goalies need to be protected from these collisions as well.
I don't understand why a larger net would make the game less competitive. Increased scoring isn't going to help one team over another, other than the existing advantage of a larger goaltender. I'm certainly not passionate about larger nets, my point was that if safety is a concern about reducing equipment size, you could offset it by proportionally adjusting the goal.
The safety issues for the goalies are getting run into by forwards charging hard to the net, which is a factor as to why goalies like the bigger equipment. The increase net size will benefit the teams with the more skilled shooters, that is similarly what the shootout is not a great idea...but the players and many fans seem to enjoy the shootout, so it stays...
I do not want the net sizes touched until Ovechkin retires...he does not need help passing Gretzky's goal scoring record...
So get more skilled players. I don't really understand the issue other than tradition, which is fine. When the NFL changed its PI rules, it changed what teams drafted both in receivers and cornerbacks. It's not like it created some unfair advantage for a team, division or conference. Teams adjust. Same when the NBA reestablished zone defense. Like I said, I'm not particularly an advocate, but I would like the per game, per team scoring to be closer to 3.5 or higher per game. It rarely breaks 3.
Said by every GM who ever ran a sports team...lol. I am not so sure you can compare the NFL to the NHL in terms of finding skilled players. Like I said part of the problem with goal scoring being down is likely to many teams, 30 years ago many of the 4th line players never got out of the AHL or even left Europe, then there is the NHL salary cap which is quite different than the NFL's...the Cap hinders how many skilled players a team can have, and of course the higher the skill the more that player eats up the cap, and unlike NFL, NHL contracts are guaranteed...
The NHL is never going to increase the size of the nets...they enjoy something that Basketball and Baseball don't...competitive games. If you wanna shrink goalie equipment, fine...then you need to re-introduce the solid pipes holding the nets in place...if these forwards want to drive to the net full tilt and the goalie has reduced protection, then the players need to know that when you hit the net with your body, it will hurt...
You know that won't happen, and should not.
I know it won't happen. The same as they will only tinker with goalie equipment...and there is no way I want the nets increased 12-18 inches as you want...that'll never happen. You do not like the competitive NHL playoffs. Hows that NBA garbage working, the best I can tell after game 1...the Celtics were only ever close at opening tip-off, what a wonderful game 6 in Philly...must have been so exciting. I'll take competitive be NHL playoffs over what the NBA produce...
There is a reason they have a rules committee...they have studies the net, over and over...they have not changed it.
Were you not advocating for bigger ice? And you want more scoring? Bigger ice means less scoring and boring European style. I just got done watching Canada v Finland in an exciting 2-1 game, actually, it was a boring game as most international hockey is...
Scoring is down partly from the equipment, but mostly because teams play in the system...systems that coach like. But then again, maybe not, the scoring started to drop as teams added cookie cutter arenas, scoring could be down because there are just not enough quality players to fill 31/32 NHL rosters. 30 years ago, most teams 4th line players now would never be NHL, they'd be in the AHL.
There could be any multitude of reasons why scoring is down.
It's easy for us to sit at home and say make the goalies go back to the early nineties equipment size...but then a bunch of other rules need to be changed back to the day as well...hockey is the fastest game played, goalies need to be protected from these collisions as well.
I don't understand why a larger net would make the game less competitive. Increased scoring isn't going to help one team over another, other than the existing advantage of a larger goaltender. I'm certainly not passionate about larger nets, my point was that if safety is a concern about reducing equipment size, you could offset it by proportionally adjusting the goal.
The safety issues for the goalies are getting run into by forwards charging hard to the net, which is a factor as to why goalies like the bigger equipment. The increase net size will benefit the teams with the more skilled shooters, that is similarly what the shootout is not a great idea...but the players and many fans seem to enjoy the shootout, so it stays...
I do not want the net sizes touched until Ovechkin retires...he does not need help passing Gretzky's goal scoring record...
So get more skilled players. I don't really understand the issue other than tradition, which is fine. When the NFL changed its PI rules, it changed what teams drafted both in receivers and cornerbacks. It's not like it created some unfair advantage for a team, division or conference. Teams adjust. Same when the NBA reestablished zone defense. Like I said, I'm not particularly an advocate, but I would like the per game, per team scoring to be closer to 3.5 or higher per game. It rarely breaks 3.
Said by every GM who ever ran a sports team...lol. I am not so sure you can compare the NFL to the NHL in terms of finding skilled players. Like I said part of the problem with goal scoring being down is likely to many teams, 30 years ago many of the 4th line players never got out of the AHL or even left Europe, then there is the NHL salary cap which is quite different than the NFL's...the Cap hinders how many skilled players a team can have, and of course the higher the skill the more that player eats up the cap, and unlike NFL, NHL contracts are guaranteed...
Agreed that expansion likely dilutes the talent, although the game is more international than ever so that's probably an offset at some level.
A good example of a potentially problematic contract is Carey Price...Montreal still owes him 7 years of the 8 years 84 million contract he signed...for a goalie that has been injured a bit the last 2-3 years...this looks like it could be a bad contract and hinder Montreal down the road. Now the CBA is coming up for renewal so I am sure the owners will get to buyout some bad contracts after the new deal is done...
Expansion hasnt diluted talent. Thats a myth. The amount of people participating and developing in hockey, plus europeans is a much larger pool than previous eras. Players are also overall better trained, more efficient/studied, nutrition is at a different, stronger, faster etc than previously.
The problem is players across the board are too efficient, and coached to prevent goals. Collapsing in the d zone to completely limit scoring opportunities. That, and goalies are like spreadsheets. Not so much reactive skill anymore, but knowing analytical data on where to be and how to cut down chances/angle, and make themselves bigger in every situation
The NHL is never going to increase the size of the nets...they enjoy something that Basketball and Baseball don't...competitive games. If you wanna shrink goalie equipment, fine...then you need to re-introduce the solid pipes holding the nets in place...if these forwards want to drive to the net full tilt and the goalie has reduced protection, then the players need to know that when you hit the net with your body, it will hurt...
You know that won't happen, and should not.
I know it won't happen. The same as they will only tinker with goalie equipment...and there is no way I want the nets increased 12-18 inches as you want...that'll never happen. You do not like the competitive NHL playoffs. Hows that NBA garbage working, the best I can tell after game 1...the Celtics were only ever close at opening tip-off, what a wonderful game 6 in Philly...must have been so exciting. I'll take competitive be NHL playoffs over what the NBA produce...
There is a reason they have a rules committee...they have studies the net, over and over...they have not changed it.
Were you not advocating for bigger ice? And you want more scoring? Bigger ice means less scoring and boring European style. I just got done watching Canada v Finland in an exciting 2-1 game, actually, it was a boring game as most international hockey is...
Scoring is down partly from the equipment, but mostly because teams play in the system...systems that coach like. But then again, maybe not, the scoring started to drop as teams added cookie cutter arenas, scoring could be down because there are just not enough quality players to fill 31/32 NHL rosters. 30 years ago, most teams 4th line players now would never be NHL, they'd be in the AHL.
There could be any multitude of reasons why scoring is down.
It's easy for us to sit at home and say make the goalies go back to the early nineties equipment size...but then a bunch of other rules need to be changed back to the day as well...hockey is the fastest game played, goalies need to be protected from these collisions as well.
I don't understand why a larger net would make the game less competitive. Increased scoring isn't going to help one team over another, other than the existing advantage of a larger goaltender. I'm certainly not passionate about larger nets, my point was that if safety is a concern about reducing equipment size, you could offset it by proportionally adjusting the goal.
The safety issues for the goalies are getting run into by forwards charging hard to the net, which is a factor as to why goalies like the bigger equipment. The increase net size will benefit the teams with the more skilled shooters, that is similarly what the shootout is not a great idea...but the players and many fans seem to enjoy the shootout, so it stays...
I do not want the net sizes touched until Ovechkin retires...he does not need help passing Gretzky's goal scoring record...
So get more skilled players. I don't really understand the issue other than tradition, which is fine. When the NFL changed its PI rules, it changed what teams drafted both in receivers and cornerbacks. It's not like it created some unfair advantage for a team, division or conference. Teams adjust. Same when the NBA reestablished zone defense. Like I said, I'm not particularly an advocate, but I would like the per game, per team scoring to be closer to 3.5 or higher per game. It rarely breaks 3.
Said by every GM who ever ran a sports team...lol. I am not so sure you can compare the NFL to the NHL in terms of finding skilled players. Like I said part of the problem with goal scoring being down is likely to many teams, 30 years ago many of the 4th line players never got out of the AHL or even left Europe, then there is the NHL salary cap which is quite different than the NFL's...the Cap hinders how many skilled players a team can have, and of course the higher the skill the more that player eats up the cap, and unlike NFL, NHL contracts are guaranteed...
Agreed that expansion likely dilutes the talent, although the game is more international than ever so that's probably an offset at some level.
The NHL overestimated the available talent overseas...that was the basis for this aggressive expansion they have been undertaking...hopefully Seattle is the last team they add...the only way I want Quebec to get a team is to buy an eventual US team that is bound to fail and move it to Quebec.
As far as I'm concerned most of these 4th line players belong in the AHL, and some Europeans should have stayed in Europe...and 30 years ago, they would have...
I do agree to a point about too many markets, such as "forcing it" in sunrise, florida or Carolina the 19 years out of 20 they aren't cup contenders. They do want a full coverage footprint on the united states though to maximize television contract revenue. I would bet the next (if any) relocated team goes to Houston and not Quebec City. I would like to see Quebec City, but i don't think it happens.
I also dont believe the nhl will dare be the first league to breach the 32 team mark.
I like the idea of benches across from one another. Visiting team would need to cross the ice for the lockerroom in most buildings but i dont see that as a major issue. Benches were across in some older ohl buildings i remember.
I want boston. If they win, i take 4th in a pool for $140.
That's a good reason. St. Louis is my 1st choice, then San Jose. San Jose is going to be a tough out. They are playing really fast and they activate their D in offensive zone throughout the game...Burns always seems to be going to the goal...
Definitely wouldnt want the bruins. Actually i hate carolina and their fake fans worse.
I would want st louis to win. 1967 entry into the league. No cups, but always very competitive but can rarely/never get out of the campbell/western conference.
Then san jose for similar reasons. Would like to see thornton, pavelski, and karlsson win a cup.
Well, the 4 teams left...only Boston and Carolina have won the cup...but the 4 teams left do not have a history of winning championships...
How long has Boston been in the league, 90 years and six championships...Never understood how in the original 6 eras how Montreal, Toronto and Detroit dominated while Boston, Chicago and Rangers did hardly anything...and Chicago and the Rangers are back to sucking.
The NHL is never going to increase the size of the nets...they enjoy something that Basketball and Baseball don't...competitive games. If you wanna shrink goalie equipment, fine...then you need to re-introduce the solid pipes holding the nets in place...if these forwards want to drive to the net full tilt and the goalie has reduced protection, then the players need to know that when you hit the net with your body, it will hurt...
You know that won't happen, and should not.
I know it won't happen. The same as they will only tinker with goalie equipment...and there is no way I want the nets increased 12-18 inches as you want...that'll never happen. You do not like the competitive NHL playoffs. Hows that NBA garbage working, the best I can tell after game 1...the Celtics were only ever close at opening tip-off, what a wonderful game 6 in Philly...must have been so exciting. I'll take competitive be NHL playoffs over what the NBA produce...
There is a reason they have a rules committee...they have studies the net, over and over...they have not changed it.
Were you not advocating for bigger ice? And you want more scoring? Bigger ice means less scoring and boring European style. I just got done watching Canada v Finland in an exciting 2-1 game, actually, it was a boring game as most international hockey is...
Scoring is down partly from the equipment, but mostly because teams play in the system...systems that coach like. But then again, maybe not, the scoring started to drop as teams added cookie cutter arenas, scoring could be down because there are just not enough quality players to fill 31/32 NHL rosters. 30 years ago, most teams 4th line players now would never be NHL, they'd be in the AHL.
There could be any multitude of reasons why scoring is down.
It's easy for us to sit at home and say make the goalies go back to the early nineties equipment size...but then a bunch of other rules need to be changed back to the day as well...hockey is the fastest game played, goalies need to be protected from these collisions as well.
I don't understand why a larger net would make the game less competitive. Increased scoring isn't going to help one team over another, other than the existing advantage of a larger goaltender. I'm certainly not passionate about larger nets, my point was that if safety is a concern about reducing equipment size, you could offset it by proportionally adjusting the goal.
The safety issues for the goalies are getting run into by forwards charging hard to the net, which is a factor as to why goalies like the bigger equipment. The increase net size will benefit the teams with the more skilled shooters, that is similarly what the shootout is not a great idea...but the players and many fans seem to enjoy the shootout, so it stays...
I do not want the net sizes touched until Ovechkin retires...he does not need help passing Gretzky's goal scoring record...
So get more skilled players. I don't really understand the issue other than tradition, which is fine. When the NFL changed its PI rules, it changed what teams drafted both in receivers and cornerbacks. It's not like it created some unfair advantage for a team, division or conference. Teams adjust. Same when the NBA reestablished zone defense. Like I said, I'm not particularly an advocate, but I would like the per game, per team scoring to be closer to 3.5 or higher per game. It rarely breaks 3.
Said by every GM who ever ran a sports team...lol. I am not so sure you can compare the NFL to the NHL in terms of finding skilled players. Like I said part of the problem with goal scoring being down is likely to many teams, 30 years ago many of the 4th line players never got out of the AHL or even left Europe, then there is the NHL salary cap which is quite different than the NFL's...the Cap hinders how many skilled players a team can have, and of course the higher the skill the more that player eats up the cap, and unlike NFL, NHL contracts are guaranteed...
Agreed that expansion likely dilutes the talent, although the game is more international than ever so that's probably an offset at some level.
Here are a couple of good articles that have goal scoring up and trending in that direction... let's see how this plays out maybe...
The interesting thing brought up there was changes to some calls on obstruction. You could tinker with that some more, with slashing and basically calling the game tighter all around. That will lead to more freedom on the offense and powerplays. It's essentially what the NFL did on the PI and what the NBA has done post-80's, when they got tired of the sport being a violent mess. The problem will be the stops in play and loss of flow. That's really the big criticism of the NFL, penalties on too many plays. Scoring did end over 6 this year, but just, just barely. It could easily revert back to the norm next year.
People laud the 05-06 bump in scoring due to calling obstruction, but studies show that most of the excess goals came due to powerplays.
As russell mentioned, ideally, id like to get around 7-7.5 goals per game. Not lacrosse numbers.
I thought of an idea which will never happen (but brainstorming). What if the defending team only allowed 5 players in the defensive zone (including the goalie). That way, a defender couldnt breach the zone, creating an odd man opportunity. It would leave a player open for a breakaway unless the offensive team covers him, which leaves 4v4 in the zone. If you use, say ovechkin often for this role, the player could also theoretically conserve his energy, leading to longer shifts and more offensive time.
The NHL is never going to increase the size of the nets...they enjoy something that Basketball and Baseball don't...competitive games. If you wanna shrink goalie equipment, fine...then you need to re-introduce the solid pipes holding the nets in place...if these forwards want to drive to the net full tilt and the goalie has reduced protection, then the players need to know that when you hit the net with your body, it will hurt...
You know that won't happen, and should not.
I know it won't happen. The same as they will only tinker with goalie equipment...and there is no way I want the nets increased 12-18 inches as you want...that'll never happen. You do not like the competitive NHL playoffs. Hows that NBA garbage working, the best I can tell after game 1...the Celtics were only ever close at opening tip-off, what a wonderful game 6 in Philly...must have been so exciting. I'll take competitive be NHL playoffs over what the NBA produce...
There is a reason they have a rules committee...they have studies the net, over and over...they have not changed it.
Were you not advocating for bigger ice? And you want more scoring? Bigger ice means less scoring and boring European style. I just got done watching Canada v Finland in an exciting 2-1 game, actually, it was a boring game as most international hockey is...
Scoring is down partly from the equipment, but mostly because teams play in the system...systems that coach like. But then again, maybe not, the scoring started to drop as teams added cookie cutter arenas, scoring could be down because there are just not enough quality players to fill 31/32 NHL rosters. 30 years ago, most teams 4th line players now would never be NHL, they'd be in the AHL.
There could be any multitude of reasons why scoring is down.
It's easy for us to sit at home and say make the goalies go back to the early nineties equipment size...but then a bunch of other rules need to be changed back to the day as well...hockey is the fastest game played, goalies need to be protected from these collisions as well.
I don't understand why a larger net would make the game less competitive. Increased scoring isn't going to help one team over another, other than the existing advantage of a larger goaltender. I'm certainly not passionate about larger nets, my point was that if safety is a concern about reducing equipment size, you could offset it by proportionally adjusting the goal.
The safety issues for the goalies are getting run into by forwards charging hard to the net, which is a factor as to why goalies like the bigger equipment. The increase net size will benefit the teams with the more skilled shooters, that is similarly what the shootout is not a great idea...but the players and many fans seem to enjoy the shootout, so it stays...
I do not want the net sizes touched until Ovechkin retires...he does not need help passing Gretzky's goal scoring record...
So get more skilled players. I don't really understand the issue other than tradition, which is fine. When the NFL changed its PI rules, it changed what teams drafted both in receivers and cornerbacks. It's not like it created some unfair advantage for a team, division or conference. Teams adjust. Same when the NBA reestablished zone defense. Like I said, I'm not particularly an advocate, but I would like the per game, per team scoring to be closer to 3.5 or higher per game. It rarely breaks 3.
Said by every GM who ever ran a sports team...lol. I am not so sure you can compare the NFL to the NHL in terms of finding skilled players. Like I said part of the problem with goal scoring being down is likely to many teams, 30 years ago many of the 4th line players never got out of the AHL or even left Europe, then there is the NHL salary cap which is quite different than the NFL's...the Cap hinders how many skilled players a team can have, and of course the higher the skill the more that player eats up the cap, and unlike NFL, NHL contracts are guaranteed...
Agreed that expansion likely dilutes the talent, although the game is more international than ever so that's probably an offset at some level.
Here are a couple of good articles that have goal scoring up and trending in that direction... let's see how this plays out maybe...
The interesting thing brought up there was changes to some calls on obstruction. You could tinker with that some more, with slashing and basically calling the game tighter all around. That will lead to more freedom on the offense and powerplays. It's essentially what the NFL did on the PI and what the NBA has done post-80's, when they got tired of the sport being a violent mess. The problem will be the stops in play and loss of flow. That's really the big criticism of the NFL, penalties on too many plays. Scoring did end over 6 this year, but just, just barely. It could easily revert back to the norm next year.
I agree it could easily revert back...It's up to the rules committee to keep tinkering to keep the scoring up, and I think they will...I just do no want scoring to get out of hand where teams are winning 10-3...I like the competitive nature that the NHL has, even the SJ v St. Louis game, SJ was up 5-2 and St' Louis made it 5-3 and had some very good chances to make it 5-4...and I think if they got 5-4 quickly after making it 5-3 they may have tied the game...
I do not know enough about the NBA to know why lacks competitiveness...especially all these blowouts. what happened to Boston after game 1? Toronto in Game 6...it's ridiculous and to a very casual fan, the NBA will never attack me as a fan.
The NFL most definitely needs to speed up the game... too many TV commercials, video review and non-sense. But I am one who believes the NFL glory years will soon be behind them...Roger Goodale and greedy owners/players are going to bring that sport down.
I dont think playoffs are an issue at all. The problem is the 82 game slog and a november 12th match up between arizona and ottawa.
The nba is skewed because the value of star players as opposed to the team. They dont roll 18 players and a goalie. You have wmds like curry and durant... thats 40% of your lineup most of the game, and in basketball, its much harder to bottle up stars than the nhl. Im not a big basketball guy but it can be very entertaining to see some of the stars dazzle. Imo, in 25 years, the nba will be king.
I dont think playoffs are an issue at all. The problem is the 82 game slog and a november 12th match up between arizona and ottawa.
The nba is skewed because the value of star players as opposed to the team. They dont roll 18 players and a goalie. You have wmds like curry and durant... thats 40% of your lineup most of the game, and in basketball, its much harder to bottle up stars than the nhl. Im not a big basketball guy but it can be very entertaining to see some of the stars dazzle. Imo, in 25 years, the nba will be king.
I agree that NBA will be king, although I don't necessarily blame Roger for the NFL issues. It's the violence and the injuries that will have parents move away from pee wee football and beyond. It's already happening. My son played baseball and wrestled. I did not want him to play football. I didn't forbid it, but I did not want it to happen. The flow of an NBA game and a series is so odd, and MayDay is right, it's so centered on individual star power. So when you have two fairly even teams, there can be huge swings. It is bizarre. Two game 7's today, so that's nice.
The Celtics have two main problems: 1. Kyrie isn't a leader and 2. Hayward's career is over after that injury. He is not the same. So they need to go back to the drawing board. They thought they had the team to compete,
I dont think playoffs are an issue at all. The problem is the 82 game slog and a november 12th match up between arizona and ottawa.
The nba is skewed because the value of star players as opposed to the team. They dont roll 18 players and a goalie. You have wmds like curry and durant... thats 40% of your lineup most of the game, and in basketball, its much harder to bottle up stars than the nhl. Im not a big basketball guy but it can be very entertaining to see some of the stars dazzle. Imo, in 25 years, the nba will be king.
the NHL game is better today that it has been in a long long time. do you guys not remember the awful 90s where it was impossible to score because of the defenses and allowing interference on every play? Offenses are fine in today's NHL. Just becomes harder to score in the playoffs because all 5 defenders will try to block every shot in the zone. that's the biggest issue in playoff hockey. getting shots through to the net.
I'm not sure NBA will every truly take over either. there are just not enough teams that win on a year to year basis.something like the number 1 seeds have won over 70% of the NBA titles. and the 1 and 2 seeds something like 85%. I think only 2 teams ever outside a 3 seed have won an NBA title. the chalk plays in the NBA and it's pretty boring unless you are one of those teams.
the NHL game is better today that it has been in a long long time. do you guys not remember the awful 90s where it was impossible to score because of the defenses and allowing interference on every play? Offenses are fine in today's NHL. Just becomes harder to score in the playoffs because all 5 defenders will try to block every shot in the zone. that's the biggest issue in playoff hockey. getting shots through to the net.
I'm not sure NBA will every truly take over either. there are just not enough teams that win on a year to year basis.something like the number 1 seeds have won over 70% of the NBA titles. and the 1 and 2 seeds something like 85%. I think only 2 teams ever outside a 3 seed have won an NBA title. the chalk plays in the NBA and it's pretty boring unless you are one of those teams.
The '90s were awful. I believe that is when the left wing lock and neutral zone trap systems were introduced. I quit watching hockey in the '90s...I think the game is faster than ever, allowing for the small forwards to excel.
the NHL game is better today that it has been in a long long time. do you guys not remember the awful 90s where it was impossible to score because of the defenses and allowing interference on every play? Offenses are fine in today's NHL. Just becomes harder to score in the playoffs because all 5 defenders will try to block every shot in the zone. that's the biggest issue in playoff hockey. getting shots through to the net.
I'm not sure NBA will every truly take over either. there are just not enough teams that win on a year to year basis.something like the number 1 seeds have won over 70% of the NBA titles. and the 1 and 2 seeds something like 85%. I think only 2 teams ever outside a 3 seed have won an NBA title. the chalk plays in the NBA and it's pretty boring unless you are one of those teams.
The '90s were awful. I believe that is when the left wing lock and neutral zone trap systems were introduced. I quit watching hockey in the '90s...I think the game is faster than ever, allowing for the small forwards to excel.
Yup and as a Flyers fan I am still bitter about it. If Lindros played under today's rules he'd be even more unstoppable than Ovechkin.
the NHL game is better today that it has been in a long long time. do you guys not remember the awful 90s where it was impossible to score because of the defenses and allowing interference on every play? Offenses are fine in today's NHL. Just becomes harder to score in the playoffs because all 5 defenders will try to block every shot in the zone. that's the biggest issue in playoff hockey. getting shots through to the net.
I'm not sure NBA will every truly take over either. there are just not enough teams that win on a year to year basis.something like the number 1 seeds have won over 70% of the NBA titles. and the 1 and 2 seeds something like 85%. I think only 2 teams ever outside a 3 seed have won an NBA title. the chalk plays in the NBA and it's pretty boring unless you are one of those teams.
The '90s were awful. I believe that is when the left wing lock and neutral zone trap systems were introduced. I quit watching hockey in the '90s...I think the game is faster than ever, allowing for the small forwards to excel.
And the two line pass. Im not sure I mentioned earlier but the NHL is unique in that it officiates differently in the playoffs. No other league does that. I think that stymies scoring
the NHL game is better today that it has been in a long long time. do you guys not remember the awful 90s where it was impossible to score because of the defenses and allowing interference on every play? Offenses are fine in today's NHL. Just becomes harder to score in the playoffs because all 5 defenders will try to block every shot in the zone. that's the biggest issue in playoff hockey. getting shots through to the net.
I'm not sure NBA will every truly take over either. there are just not enough teams that win on a year to year basis.something like the number 1 seeds have won over 70% of the NBA titles. and the 1 and 2 seeds something like 85%. I think only 2 teams ever outside a 3 seed have won an NBA title. the chalk plays in the NBA and it's pretty boring unless you are one of those teams.
The '90s were awful. I believe that is when the left wing lock and neutral zone trap systems were introduced. I quit watching hockey in the '90s...I think the game is faster than ever, allowing for the small forwards to excel.
And the two line pass. Im not sure I mentioned earlier but the NHL is unique in that it officiates differently in the playoffs. No other league does that. I think that stymies scoring
That has been a long time criticism of the NHL. Another criticism is that they officiate playoff games differently throughout the game...it take a real obvious infraction to get a penalty in OT. What else stymies playoff scoring is that the only the top 16 teams are left...
A good example, Carolina...they took out 2 of the better teams in the 1st 2 rounds...and I believe Boston has scored 11 goals in 2 games on them. No offence to the Carolina coach, but I would have stuck with goalie that got me past the Isle.
The 2 line pass has been controversial...I believe Bowman has not been a big fan of it either. Me no opinion either way, why? I have seen many analyst and coaches who all have different opinions on the 2 line pass...I believe originally the NHL thought that the 2 line pass would allow teams more opportunity to beat the trap.
The change's I want...eliminate that dumb shootout. In OT play 3 on 3 until a goal is scored, award 3 points for a win and 2 for an OT loss and 0 of you lose...
Too many teams in the last 5 minutes play for the single point, which is why the last 5 minutes of a tied playoff game is so much more exciting, teams are trying to win in regulation.
Comments
The problem is players across the board are too efficient, and coached to prevent goals. Collapsing in the d zone to completely limit scoring opportunities. That, and goalies are like spreadsheets. Not so much reactive skill anymore, but knowing analytical data on where to be and how to cut down chances/angle, and make themselves bigger in every situation
https://www.thepointhockey.com/why-is-goal-scoring-up-so-much-weve-got-the-answer/
Scoring is up in the NHL and everyone — even goalies — seems happy about it
https://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/tim-wharnsby-nhl-scoring-increase-1.4972079
Here are a couple of good articles that have goal scoring up and trending in that direction... let's see how this plays out maybe...
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1178376-how-overexpansion-has-ruined-the-nhl
The NHL overestimated the available talent overseas...that was the basis for this aggressive expansion they have been undertaking...hopefully Seattle is the last team they add...the only way I want Quebec to get a team is to buy an eventual US team that is bound to fail and move it to Quebec.
As far as I'm concerned most of these 4th line players belong in the AHL, and some Europeans should have stayed in Europe...and 30 years ago, they would have...
The reality is, the game has gotten too fast and skilled to allow for goons.
4th liners in 2019 would scorch a 4th line when there were 21 teams.
https://thehockeynews.com/news/article/nhl-players-keep-getting-faster-stronger-and-more-skilled-how-far-can-hockey-evolution-go
I do agree to a point about too many markets, such as "forcing it" in sunrise, florida or Carolina the 19 years out of 20 they aren't cup contenders. They do want a full coverage footprint on the united states though to maximize television contract revenue. I would bet the next (if any) relocated team goes to Houston and not Quebec City. I would like to see Quebec City, but i don't think it happens.
I also dont believe the nhl will dare be the first league to breach the 32 team mark.
About the 1:30 mark Don starts talking about the benches and how dangerous the doors are...
Vegas trading Tatar and Nick Suzuki to Montreal may prove to be a terrible trade as well.
https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/world-needs-brent-burns/
Like any good hockey player...missing his front teeth.
I would want st louis to win. 1967 entry into the league. No cups, but always very competitive but can rarely/never get out of the campbell/western conference.
Then san jose for similar reasons. Would like to see thornton, pavelski, and karlsson win a cup.
How long has Boston been in the league, 90 years and six championships...Never understood how in the original 6 eras how Montreal, Toronto and Detroit dominated while Boston, Chicago and Rangers did hardly anything...and Chicago and the Rangers are back to sucking.
Scoring did end over 6 this year, but just, just barely. It could easily revert back to the norm next year.
As russell mentioned, ideally, id like to get around 7-7.5 goals per game. Not lacrosse numbers.
I thought of an idea which will never happen (but brainstorming).
What if the defending team only allowed 5 players in the defensive zone (including the goalie). That way, a defender couldnt breach the zone, creating an odd man opportunity. It would leave a player open for a breakaway unless the offensive team covers him, which leaves 4v4 in the zone. If you use, say ovechkin often for this role, the player could also theoretically conserve his energy, leading to longer shifts and more offensive time.
I do not know enough about the NBA to know why lacks competitiveness...especially all these blowouts. what happened to Boston after game 1? Toronto in Game 6...it's ridiculous and to a very casual fan, the NBA will never attack me as a fan.
The NFL most definitely needs to speed up the game... too many TV commercials, video review and non-sense. But I am one who believes the NFL glory years will soon be behind them...Roger Goodale and greedy owners/players are going to bring that sport down.
The nba is skewed because the value of star players as opposed to the team. They dont roll 18 players and a goalie. You have wmds like curry and durant... thats 40% of your lineup most of the game, and in basketball, its much harder to bottle up stars than the nhl. Im not a big basketball guy but it can be very entertaining to see some of the stars dazzle. Imo, in 25 years, the nba will be king.
The flow of an NBA game and a series is so odd, and MayDay is right, it's so centered on individual star power. So when you have two fairly even teams, there can be huge swings. It is bizarre. Two game 7's today, so that's nice.
The Celtics have two main problems: 1. Kyrie isn't a leader and 2. Hayward's career is over after that injury. He is not the same. So they need to go back to the drawing board. They thought they had the team to compete,
SJ looks great at this point...they'll be tough to beat, especially with way Burns is playing.
I'm not sure NBA will every truly take over either. there are just not enough teams that win on a year to year basis.something like the number 1 seeds have won over 70% of the NBA titles. and the 1 and 2 seeds something like 85%. I think only 2 teams ever outside a 3 seed have won an NBA title. the chalk plays in the NBA and it's pretty boring unless you are one of those teams.
A good example, Carolina...they took out 2 of the better teams in the 1st 2 rounds...and I believe Boston has scored 11 goals in 2 games on them. No offence to the Carolina coach, but I would have stuck with goalie that got me past the Isle.
The 2 line pass has been controversial...I believe Bowman has not been a big fan of it either. Me no opinion either way, why? I have seen many analyst and coaches who all have different opinions on the 2 line pass...I believe originally the NHL thought that the 2 line pass would allow teams more opportunity to beat the trap.
The change's I want...eliminate that dumb shootout. In OT play 3 on 3 until a goal is scored, award 3 points for a win and 2 for an OT loss and 0 of you lose...
Too many teams in the last 5 minutes play for the single point, which is why the last 5 minutes of a tied playoff game is so much more exciting, teams are trying to win in regulation.
Awarding a point for a loss, that is nonsense.