2017 Offseason Thread 5.0 Summer Doldrums

[johnjm22]

Yet the fate of coaches will still be tied to the performance of players. If your job was dependent on the success of other people, not necessarily on your own skill and aptitude, would you let them make mistakes to increase the overall level of entertainment at the office?

"Let" isn't the right world.

We can see with 3v3 that the nets aren't necessarily too small, or that goalie equipment is necessarily too big. Full time 4v4 might be the way to go.

4 on 4 probably is the solution. I've thought that for a long time, but I don't think the players union would ever go for it. Also, people in general would be resistant to making that much of a change.

I think the best way to improve the product on the ice is to focus on game flow. Minimize play stoppages. Long periods of uninterrupted play are when the game is at its best. It's scoring chances that are exciting, not necessarily scoring itself.

 

[YP44]

I said "further limited."

All it would do is make it harder for injury call ups to adjust to the NHL.

Further reducing goalie gear and beveling (not widening) posts are all I would like to see done.

 

[johnjm22]

All it would do is make it harder for injury call ups to adjust to the NHL.

That's part of the idea.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The game being too over coached means things are too systematic. It's less about the talents of each individual and more about players who can stick to a robotic, stringent system.

And that's why so much emotion has also been sucked out of the game. It's also why you could hear a pin drop at most hockey games. They suck the life out of creativity and of all energy within buildings. We've gotten a good first hand impression of this at Kings games.

 

[kingsholygrail]

I find it weird that we complain about systems in a team based game. I'm sure when an uncoached pond hockey team wins the Cup, everyone will try to copy them.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I find it weird that we complain about systems in a team based game. I'm sure when an uncoached pond hockey team wins the Cup, everyone will try to copy them.

It's a league wide problem I'm referring to, it's not solely isolated to the Kings. Look at the comments made by Gretzky and other legends on today's game. There just doesn't seem to be as much emotion on the ice, and I feel like the fans are less emotionally invested in the product as a result.

Why do you think other leagues are far more successful? Perhaps they accentuate the personalities and talents? People want to watch Tom Brady or LeBron or Curry, they don't want to see a logo on the field/court/ice.

 

[kingsholygrail]

It's a league wide problem I'm referring to, it's not solely isolated to the Kings. Look at the comments made by Gretzky and other legends on today's game. There just doesn't seem to be as much emotion on the ice, and I feel like the fans are less emotionally invested in the product as a result.

Why do you think other leagues are far more successful? Perhaps they accentuate the personalities and talents? People want to watch Tom Brady or LeBron or Curry, they don't want to see a logo on the field/court/ice.

And Tom Brady plays on one of the most heavily coached teams in football. But if you wanna be more like basketball, a much more player controlled sport, then lets do it. Your top 5 players are all forwards, you eliminate the goalie position and they play for most of the 60:00 in a game with no shifts. On top of that, you outlaw the contact aspect of hockey. No checking. Game will be nice and fast, high scoring, and give them some clever nicknames. We can even XFL this up while we're at it.

Accessibility is what limits hockey. I can walk across the street right now with just a basketball and play a game. How does hockey compete with that level of accessbility?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Or let's just watch a game of hockey where we see less talent, less passing and shooting, and more plays along the boards. Seems like that'll satisfy your tastes.

I'm reminiscing of when the game was more open where individual talents were accentuated. Look at how players entering the league like McDavid, Matthews, Laine, etc. are untainted because they haven't been spending 10+ years playing in a rigid system where their talents have to be sacrificed.

Even Doughty has said he'd likely be able to score more points if he played in a different system. All of the changes the organization has made this off-season were precipitated because things had gotten stale.

Hell, even the game today is less physical. Who's talking about making the game less physical? Like I suggested, the game lacks emotion now. Do rivalries even exist anymore? And funny that you offer up the XFL idea when you also suggest making the game to be less physical. The XFL created rules that made football even more violent.

But you appear to be too dense to realize all of this given your vapid response.

 

[KINGS17]

Yes!!! Make those nets wider!!! It needs to be in proportion to how much % of the net was available to shoot at in the 1980's. Somewhere in there, there's a magical equation waiting to take us from a 3-2 league back to a 6-4 league. DO IT!!!!

A little wider and about 6 inches higher as well. Wider to give players on the wing a slightly better angle and more net for shots.

A little higher to take away some of the advantages goalies have with the butterfly style. Some goalies are tall enough to cover the entire lower portion of the net post-to-post, and still only leave an inch or two under the crossbar.

 

[BigKing]

Ditch the instigator and have the refs call roughing/unsportsmanlike/misconducts like they used to. Get rid of two or three bottom of the roster guys that only skate and play defense in favor of guys that aren't as good at hockey and can get taken advantage of sometimes in their limited ice time. The fact they can only play limited minutes puts more strain on the rest of the lineup. Tired players = more mistakes = more goals.

Safer = less exciting. At least we don't have to worry about the children anymore.

 

[Fishhead]

Hell, even the game today is less physical. Who's talking about making the game less physical? Like I suggested, the game lacks emotion now. Do rivalries even exist anymore?

It's so methodical now. How many times have we heard "It doesn't matter about the other team, we just play our game" or "We play the same against everyone"? The last time I heard anything really emotional about a team was when Doughty said something about how they didn't like Vancouver and Vancouver didn't like them. The Kings and Ducks are on completely friendly terms for gods sake.

I know the reason too - emotions lead to mistakes. Coaches want the players always thinking clearly and focusing on the task at hand. The players are robotic now. It helps some players for sure - guys like Dwight King, Trevor Lewis, and pure system players. It also hurts players like Brown, Clifford, etc. who thrive on that emotional aspect. I'm not saying its the reason Brown and Clifford haven't been all that great, but it surely has an effect on their type of player.

 

[KINGS17]

It's so methodical now. How many times have we heard "It doesn't matter about the other team, we just play our game" or "We play the same against everyone"? The last time I heard anything really emotional about a team was when Doughty said something about how they didn't like Vancouver and Vancouver didn't like them. The Kings and Ducks are on completely friendly terms for gods sake.

I know the reason too - emotions lead to mistakes. Coaches want the players always thinking clearly and focusing on the task at hand. The players are robotic now. It helps some players for sure - guys like Dwight King, Trevor Lewis, and pure system players. It also hurts players like Brown, Clifford, etc. who thrive on that emotional aspect. I'm not saying its the reason Brown and Clifford haven't been all that great, but it surely has an effect on their type of player.

To some extent you can thank free agency for this, and the increase in the number of teams. For example, when it was a 12-team league with 76 games the Kings played the Golden Seals eight times a season.

Players didn't know each other as well, and you can build up a healthy dislike for a guy you play against eight times a season. It was a much more emotional game in those days during the regular season. Now you have to wait for the playoffs.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Growing up watching hockey, I absolutely hated the division rivals and you could feel the excitement from the players and the fans of having beaten the likes of Edmonton, Vancouver or Calgary, back when division rivalries existed.

Look at the tepid response to the Doughty hit from Tkachuk. Perfect example of the lack of emotion in today's game.

 

[The Tikkanen]

Growing up watching hockey, I absolutely hated the division rivals and you could feel the excitement from the players and the fans of having beaten the likes of Edmonton, Vancouver or Calgary, back when division rivalries existed.

Look at the tepid response to the Doughty hit from Tkachuk. Perfect example of the lack of emotion in today's game.

It wasn't exactly Lemieux-McCarty. With the enforcers dying off the ice and looking at their brains I don't think you're gonna see those types of brawls ever again either.

 

[damacles1156]

You can't coach emotion, that has to come from the players.

 

[King'sPawn]

You can't coach emotion, that has to come from the players.

So... when Terry Murray was fired and Sutter came in, the turnaround in attitude came from the same roster?

Sounds like an oversimplification

 

[Fishhead]

You can't coach emotion, that has to come from the players.

This is true, but you can certainly coach it out of players.

 

[theMajor]

Growing up watching hockey, I absolutely hated the division rivals and you could feel the excitement from the players and the fans of having beaten the likes of Edmonton, Vancouver or Calgary, back when division rivalries existed.

Look at the tepid response to the Doughty hit from Tkachuk. Perfect example of the lack of emotion in today's game.

anecdotal at best. do you not remember the 2014 playoff run? the emotion-fueled game 7's? the emotion inside Staples is palpable every time the Kings play the Ducks and Sharks. to say there is no emotion in hockey anymore is absurd, just look around the league. its funny you brought other sports (football especially) into the fold considering most football fans are unhappy with the NFL and the stringent rules imposed to limit players' self expression

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

anecdotal at best. do you not remember the 2014 playoff run? the emotion-fueled game 7's? the emotion inside Staples is palpable every time the Kings play the Ducks and Sharks. to say there is no emotion in hockey anymore is absurd, just look around the league. its funny you brought other sports (football especially) into the fold considering most football fans are unhappy with the NFL and the stringent rules imposed to limit players' self expression

I brought them up more as examples of how their top athletes are viewed as superstars, whereas the NHL's stars are far below their stratosphere.

And you brought up a great example of how fans of other sports hate seeing emotion being sucked out of their sports.

Another great example of this is with basketball as well. Having watched the excellent 30 for 30 documentary on the Lakers/Celtics rivalry, it shows that there are sports other than the NHL that lack that same emotion in today's game. Heated rivalries have gone away.

You ask me to look around the league to look for existing rivalries. What examples could you provide? There really wasn't anything to build off of after 2014. That was a one and done thing due to their historic run to the Cup with the Game 7 victories on the road. It actually didn't create any more of a rivalry with San Jose, Anaheim or Chicago. Was anyone emotionally invested in the 2016 playoff matchup when the Kings met the Sharks again? Nope.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Always chuckle at how something that is explicitly not part of the game, fighting, as there is even a larger than normal penalty for it, is what fuels rivalries. It's not the game of hockey that does it. It's the extra stuff. Football is very boring to watch, but gambling on it is so easy. Why do Flyers fans hate Crosby? Because he's good at hockey? No, it's because he'll hit the glove away from an opposing player trying to pick it up.

Sports used to be the last place you could actively hate and it was ok, because ultimately, the result of the games aren't do or die. The Lakers and Celtics physically went at each other. The Bad Boy Pistons took it to Jordan, and anyone they played. The Riley led Knicks would knock you around all over the place. Today, players are increasingly friends, and in the NBA they go so far as to plan years in advance as to where they will play, and who they will play with.

Free agency was mentioned, and I definitely think that's part of it. When players had less power and say over their careers, it seems sports were better. Today, everyone knows it's all a business. A high paying business at that. We as fans have always been emotionally, and irrationally, attached to corporate logo's, but now we also have to care about salary caps, and contracts, and big and small markets and what's fair or not. Gretzky gets sold, Stevens ends up as compensation for Shanahan, Lindros chooses not to play in Quebec, players vs. owners is more contentious than what we see between player vs. player, fans end up being stuck watching players that have contracts that don't match their production, and knowing all too well how much players get paid. These are all part of the extra stuff outside of the actual game of hockey, but it's far more boring and detached than watching two guys, or twelve guys, or even more, hitting each other in the face.







We want blood. We love blood. We don't want technically proficient hockey. We don't care about the personal lives of players that fans will never be friends with. We want physical violence. At the same time, we'll cry about cheap shots, even though we really do want the cheap shots. We want the elbows to the back of the head, the stick swinging, the revenge.

 

[johnjm22]

People have a bias towards the past. People always have this tendency to feel like things were "better back then".

Today's game has more skill and speed than ever. It has it's problems, but it's definitely not the worst hockey we've ever seen.

 

[johnjm22]

I brought them up more as examples of how their top athletes are viewed as superstars, whereas the NHL's stars are far below their stratosphere.

I don't think this is a fair criticism. NHL stars aren't as big because hockey isn't as popular and that's not the NHL's fault. People in America don't grow up around the game. Very few people play it.

Also, in hockey the best players don't have as much impact on the game as they do in other sports. Lebron James has possession of the ball damn near half the game. Comparatively how often does Crosby have clear puck possession? Brady controls the ball every snap. A star MLB player is going to get 4 chances pretty much every game. If you watch hockey there's lots of times the best player on the ice goes an entire game without a decent scoring chance.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Nobody said it's the worst hockey ever. It's just lacking in areas that made the game more fun to watch. There was more time and space for the stars to show their stuff, there was plenty of physical action, heated rivalries across the league that mattered, and teams didn't collapse in a defensive shell like they tend to do today.

Why do you think the NHL is always trying to think of ways to open up space and increase scoring? The product has grown stale, not only in the eyes of former legends who played the game (see comments from Gretzky and Dionne for example), but it is not appeasing to the casual fan or if they are trying to attract new fans.

Some of you may say "who cares about the casuals," but in order for this game to grow and for the league to be successful, they need them. They need a better TV contract, they need fans spending money, and fans are not going to flock towards a product that is going to bore them away from a sport.

An increase in scoring isn't going to solve everything either, it's about creating stars, and if you look at the previous schedule of games on national broadcasts, none of them will get much of a chance to see the talents of a McDavid or Matthews, which is simply preposterous to me.

 

[johnjm22]

Nobody said it's the worst hockey ever. It's just lacking in areas that made the game more fun to watch. There was more time and space for the stars to show their stuff, there was plenty of physical action, heated rivalries across the league that mattered, and teams didn't collapse in a defensive shell like they tend to do today.

Why do you think the NHL is always trying to think of ways to open up space and increase scoring? The product has grown stale, not only in the eyes of former legends who played the game (see comments from Gretzky and Dionne for example), but it is not appeasing to the casual fan or if they are trying to attract new fans.

Some of you may say "who cares about the casuals," but in order for this game to grow and for the league to be successful, they need them. They need a better TV contract, they need fans spending money, and fans are not going to flock towards a product that is going to bore them away from a sport.

An increase in scoring isn't going to solve everything either, it's about creating stars, and if you look at the previous schedule of games on national broadcasts, none of them will get much of a chance to see the talents of a McDavid or Matthews, which is simply preposterous to me.

I'm not disagreeing, just throwing in a caveat. People are bias towards the past, and towards the things they grew up with.

Gretzky has said that you can't be creative in today's game. Probably because things have become so systemic. I'm not sure what can really be done about that. That's why I think the idea of further limiting coaches practice time with players is interesting.

I also think game flow is the most important thing. Play stoppages need to be minimized. But again I'm not sure how this could be accomplished.

4 on 4 is probably the best way to go, but it will never happen. Even if it did, I feel like coaches would eventually figure out a way to lock things down.

 

[Legionnaire]

I'm not disagreeing, just throwing in a caveat. People are bias towards the past, and towards the things they grew up with.

Gretzky has said that you can't be creative in today's game. Probably because things have become so systemic. I'm not sure what can really be done about that. That's why I think the idea of further limiting coaches practice time with players is interesting.

I also think game flow is the most important thing. Play stoppages need to be minimized. But again I'm not sure how this could be accomplished.

4 on 4 is probably the best way to go, but it will never happen. Even if it did, I feel like coaches would eventually figure out a way to lock things down.

I would try putting the two-line pass rule back into effect as Dionne suggested.