News Article: Less padding = more production

[Alan Jackson]

I think the League needs to make the goalie equipment smaller (which can't be as difficult as some suggest), or make the nets bigger.

There just aren't enough goals and scoring chances for my liking. I don't need a bunch of 7-5 games, but some goals/chances off the rush would be nice.

It seems now the only goals that are going in are rebounds and rugby scrums in front of the net.

 

[Fat Tony]

It seems now the only goals that are going in are rebounds and rugby scrums in front of the net.

Depends on how hard you look. All 3 goals in the last game against Minny were highlight reel worthy.

 

[Alan Jackson]

Depends on how hard you look. All 3 goals in the last game against Minny were highlight reel worthy.

Nice goals still happen, but it seems to me, the vast majority of goals are the result of deflected point shots through a mass of bodies, or four or five hacks at a rebound. Maybe I'm wrong, but my perception is that I very rarely see a goalie beaten cleanly. It almost seems like when the puck does go in, it's as much the result of luck as anything else.

A goal like Hodgson scored last season vs Boston used to happen with some regularity, but if a goalie lets that shot in today with any frequency, he'd be playing in the ECHL.

 

[Fat Tony]

Nice goals still happen, but it seems to me, the vast majority of goals are the result of deflected point shots through a mass of bodies, or four or five hacks at a rebound. Maybe I'm wrong, but my perception is that I very rarely see a goalie beaten cleanly. It almost seems like when the puck does go in, it's as much the result of luck as anything else.

That has little to do with a goalie's equipment. Imo, if equipment size is reduced, a lot more of these crash and whack goals will occur than "skill" goals.

A goal like Hodgson scored last season vs Boston used to happen with some regularity, but if a goalie lets that shot in today with any frequency, he'd be playing in the ECHL.

I hear that a lot about goalies from younger fans looking at video from the 80s.

People look at the 80s and have a certain perspective regarding it. I remember an Oilers team that was very innovative (on top of their skill). They would intentional draw coincidental minors to get 4-on-4 play. Their line changes were designed around speeding up their transition game. That neutral zone drop pass that Canucks fans are sick of seeing was used extensively by that Oilers team. Skill and tactics is how I believe this "problem" should be solved.

 

[Proto]

Teams still score on a healthy percentage of scoring chances. Goalies are bigger, sure (and shaving down size safely should be looked at), but players are also bigger, stronger, and have significantly better equipment themselves.

The game just needs more scoring chances. I'd rather see them experiment with ways to open up the game than alter the size of the net.

 

[Alan Jackson]

That has little to do with a goalie's equipment. Imo, if equipment size is reduced, a lot more of these crash and whack goals will occur than "skill" goals.

I think, if you reduced the width of goal pads, shrunk the blocker, and reduced the size of the glove, you'd be seeing more pucks sneak into the net off clean shots. The size of goalie gear isn't the sole factor in the reduction of offence from the 80's and early 90's, but it is a factor.

I hear that a lot about goalies from younger fans looking at video from the 80s. People look at the 80s and have a certain perspective regarding it. I remember an Oilers team that was very innovative (on top of their skill). They would intentional draw coincidental minors to get 4-on-4 play. Their line changes were designed around speeding up their transition game. That neutral zone drop pass that Canucks fans are sick of seeing was used extensively by that Oilers team. Skill and tactics is how I believe this "problem" should be solved.

Well, I'm not sure how "young" I am. I'm 36. I agree with the most of the above, but I'm not entirely sure what that has to do with having more net to shoot at. A shot from the top of the circle used to be considered a scoring chance. That's not the case now. Yes, goalies are better, but they also take up more of the net.

Now, I'm not suggesting smaller goaltenders or bigger nets is the be all and end all, there are other factors at work that are hurting the amount of offence in the game. Better coaching, better systems, better players are all factors. But in my opinion, having a little more net to shoot at couldn't hurt the entertainment value of the game, could it?

 

[Hank4Hart]

Save percentage today is actually higher than before the 2004 lockout when the equipment sizes got reduced.

If it were as simple as reducing goalie gear sizes, you would have seen the save percentage dip instead of going even higher.

 

[Alan Jackson]

Save percentage today is actually higher than before the 2004 lockout when the equipment sizes got reduced.

If it were as simple as reducing goalie gear sizes, you would have seen the save percentage dip instead of going even higher.

Without looking it up, I'd guess that shot totals have gone up, which would account for a higher save percentage, especially when so few shots actually have a chance of going in.

Also, I'm talking about reducing gear to 80's sizes, not whatever minor tinkering they did back in 2004.

And again, it might not make a huge difference. What's the objection to trying it?

 

[Wizeman*]

That has little to do with a goalie's equipment. Imo, if equipment size is reduced, a lot more of these crash and whack goals will occur than "skill" goals.



I hear that a lot about goalies from younger fans looking at video from the 80s.

People look at the 80s and have a certain perspective regarding it. I remember an Oilers team that was very innovative (on top of their skill). They would intentional draw coincidental minors to get 4-on-4 play. Their line changes were designed around speeding up their transition game. That neutral zone drop pass that Canucks fans are sick of seeing was used extensively by that Oilers team. Skill and tactics is how I believe this "problem" should be solved.

No.

Fact is the forwards are all blocking shots as well as the D men and NONE of them have these intelligence insulting space suits on . There is no argument from the goalie apologists .on this matter. Its just a fact they are more than willing to IGNORE.

The whole point of the football size shoulder pads, gloves the size of fishing nets, and upper body chest wear the size of Texas is to SHRINK the size of net the player sees coming in to shoot at. Less net means more shots wide or the player chooses to try to pass instead of shooting at all.

The size of the equipment is a joke and this argument that its not bigger is just a joke. You have to be an outright fool to believe it isnt.

 

[me2]

No.

Fact is the forwards are all blocking shots as well as the D men and NONE of them have these intelligence insulting space suits on . There is no argument from the goalie apologists .on this matter. Its just a fact they are more than willing to IGNORE.

The whole point of the football size shoulder pads, gloves the size of fishing nets, and upper body chest wear the size of Texas is to SHRINK the size of net the player sees coming in to shoot at. Less net means more shots wide or the player chooses to try to pass instead of shooting at all.

The size of the equipment is a joke and this argument that its not bigger is just a joke. You have to be an outright fool to believe it isnt.

Nobody ever gets injured blocking shots either. No broken feet or hands. Nothing but little bruises like this

Dryden was a freak in day, 6'4"!!! Now 6'4 doesn't even raise an eyebrow. The padding may be bigger but so too are the goalies. Butterfly suits guys with long legs to cover the ground floor and long bodies to cover the height of the net.

 

[Fat Tony]

The size of the equipment is a joke and this argument that its not bigger is just a joke. You have to be an outright fool to believe it isnt.

Never said equipment wasn't bigger. I just don't think it's a problem.

 

[Wizeman*]

Here is Tim Thomas, Vezina and Conn Smythe winning goaltender.

The guy is wearing a Space Suit

 

[Fat Tony]

Here he is again. I thought we already went through the photo evidence thing.

 

[Scurr]

That's great, but you choose to make those sacrifices, if you chose to you could probably wear extra protection to save you some punishment. Myself, as a goalie, I'm not interested in taking unnecessary punishment and I'll wear as much protection as possible without impeding my ability to stop pucks. Like I said, I think some gear can be streamlined so its not as bulky but I really don't believe it causes a serious impact on scoring league wide.

I find it hilarious that you're fine with the short and long term effects on a guy getting his lights put out for your entertainment but you're dead against a goalie getting more bruises for more scoring chances/goals.

Teams still score on a healthy percentage of scoring chances. Goalies are bigger, sure (and shaving down size safely should be looked at), but players are also bigger, stronger, and have significantly better equipment themselves.

The game just needs more scoring chances. I'd rather see them experiment with ways to open up the game than alter the size of the net.

If over the next 5 years we can make small, methodical changes to goalie gear and eventually reduce them by 20% through more streamline gear and better technology it will increase scoring chances by making the area you can score from bigger, teams will have to defend more ice, more shots will be scoring chances and more saves will be entertaining.

Save percentage today is actually higher than before the 2004 lockout when the equipment sizes got reduced.

If it were as simple as reducing goalie gear sizes, you would have seen the save percentage dip instead of going even higher.

If you read the article... the changes they wanted to make were nixed by the NHLPA and the changes that came out were marginal.

Also, with the rule changes, the style of defence changed from neutral zone trap to collapse to the net. With blimps in net and 5 defenders in the slot it's pretty hard to score.

 

[RobertKron]

I think, if you reduced the width of goal pads, shrunk the blocker, and reduced the size of the glove, you'd be seeing more pucks sneak into the net off clean shots. The size of goalie gear isn't the sole factor in the reduction of offence from the 80's and early 90's, but it is a factor.

I don't want to see more shots "sneak in." If you're not going bar down with an absolute laser, you shouldn't be scoring from the top of the circles.

 

[Hank4Hart]

If you read the article... the changes they wanted to make were nixed by the NHLPA and the changes that came out were marginal.

Also, with the rule changes, the style of defence changed from neutral zone trap to collapse to the net. With blimps in net and 5 defenders in the slot it's pretty hard to score.

Have you seen the size of Garth Snow's pads? Marginal?

 

[RobertKron]

Yeah, saying that the changes from before the 04 lockout have been "marginal" is basically equivalent to admitting that your argument isn't grounded in reality.

Also, OMG look at all the net he's showing! This is conclusive evidence that the pads must have been smaller then!!

 

[Canucker]

I find it hilarious that you're fine with the short and long term effects on a guy getting his lights put out for your entertainment but you're dead against a goalie getting more bruises for more scoring chances/goals.

I find it hilarious that you think this is a real serious issue that will actually have a significant impact on scoring.

 

[Scurr]

Yeah, saying that the changes from before the 04 lockout have been "marginal" is basically equivalent to admitting that your argument isn't grounded in reality.

Also, OMG look at all the net he's showing! This is conclusive evidence that the pads must have been smaller then!!

Or you could read the article and find out the changes were marginal because the NHLPA nixed a bunch of them.

 

[Linters*]

Or you could read the article and find out the changes were marginal because the NHLPA nixed a bunch of them.

The NHLPA nixing something that would put players at risk of getting injured, who'd of thunk it.

 

[Scurr]

The NHLPA nixing something that would put players at risk of getting injured, who'd of thunk it.

Bruises are not injuries.

 

[RobertKron]

Or you could read the article and find out the changes were marginal because the NHLPA nixed a bunch of them.

Except the changes weren't marginal. Look at guys from the height of the dead puck era compared to now. It's a massive change. Pad width is smaller now than it was in 1990. I believe they started regulating length of thigh rises, they changed the configuration of knee blocks, they set up rules on the pants and sweaters, if I remember correctly, and changed gloves and blockers. I believe blockers are currently smaller than at any time in recent memory.


Actually, ****, let's just do this correctly, since you apparently are the authority on such things:

What were the specific rule changes regarding goaltender equipment coming out of the last lockout, and since then?

 

[Scurr]

Except the changes weren't marginal. Look at guys from the height of the dead puck era compared to now. It's a massive change. Pad width is smaller now than it was in 1990. I believe they started regulating length of thigh rises, they changed the configuration of knee blocks, they set up rules on the pants and sweaters, if I remember correctly, and changed gloves and blockers. I believe blockers are currently smaller than at any time in recent memory.


Actually, ****, let's just do this correctly, since you apparently are the authority on such things:

What were the specific rule changes regarding goaltender equipment coming out of the last lockout, and since then?

I'm not the authority... I just read the article. You could do the same...

 

[RobertKron]

Bruises are not injuries.

What are you even talking about? The concern with leg pads was largely with repetitive motion knee and hip damage from the proposed pad configuration making guys' knees drop lower in a butterfly.

The impact injury concerns come up when people talk about CA and sometimes thigh rises.

 

[RobertKron]

I'm not the authority... I just read the article. You could do the same...

The article says nothing. You're the one claiming that the changes were marginal. So what, specifically, were the changes?