Hank

Thanks for posting this. In my opinion, the Wings need to be bold and make a big deal to get over the hump and win the whole freakin' thing. If that means shipping off Hudler, Lebda or Filpulla then they have to do it. But I would want a premier player in return. Jovocop has been looking better and better in the desert. He'd be a nice fit. But Hudler for Malone might scare me though. I'm a big Malone fan - he's big, physical and has hands. But he can be streaky too. Who's to say he doesn't pull a Calder and disappear come playoff time? If we're going to deal some key peices of our future I want as little left to chance as possible. A player like St.Louis would have to be involved. The problem is by the time the deadline comes around there's a legit chance that only 2 or 3 teams will be out of the playoff picture. That doesn't leave a lot of dance partners to tango with.

It seriously can't get more defensive than it is now. And if a 2nd or 3rd line guy can fire in more pucks from further out, the only thing a team can do to defend that is to spread themselves out. That in itself would open the offensive zone up. I really don't mean to sound condensending, but have you watched much hockey this year? This is EXACTLY what's going on during even strength situations. When the guys at TSN introduced these new lines they showed various clips of several teams playing a PK box+1 to defend in their zone. Nearly every single team does it now. I was watching a bit of the Sabres-Islanders last night and that was basically how the whole game was played. Unless they scored off the initial rush, teams settled into a Box+1 defense - essentially a "zone defense". That's why they want to introduce these new lines, to get away from this type of defense. If you force the wingers to remain high, it can't be done anymore. I know you disagree, but making the tenders gear smaller is essential to saving the game. If more 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th line guys can score from further out, it will force teams to open up that 'box', which, in turn, would create more space. It might also stop coaches from letting teams have their blueline. If a team has a better chance of firing goals from various lengths and angles, they'll have to attack teams before they gain the zone. All of this means that the game will become more aggressive and offenses won't be stifled as easily. Cheers.

True, however I'll add that the pants goalies wear today are nearly twice the size as well. Guys with a 30" waist are wearing pants for men who have a 44" waist. Regarding the material, this is true too. That's why goalies had much larger pads back then because it wasn't as protective they used a bit more of it to cover more angles. That's precisely why the goalies leg pads can and should be reduced. Heck, most skaters shin guards today protect better than the leg pads goalies wore in the 70's. For that reason alone, goalies could easily still be fully protected with 8" wide leg pads. Again, another good point. However, this comes down to the 'chicken-or-the-egg' argument. What came first? I might have to check some old tape but I am certain that I recall seeing Garth Snow parade out with giant equipment before composite sticks were introduced. An argument could be made that composite sticks evolved out of the ever growing goalie equipment. Having less talent would mean that coaches would play a far more simplistic game - meaning collapsing defenses and not playing aggressively. And having more ice surface, as Opie pointed out, won't mean more flow. Flow is considered north-and-south. And since the rink is already 200 feet long (same as Olympic surfaces) that won't be a factor. 25 out of 30 coaches already play a collapsing defense. Buffalo GM Darcy Regher and LA's GM Dean Lombardi have spoken about this extensively. And it's the precise reason why these new lines are being introduced. Wingers are no longer covering their point man but rather forming a 'star' formation around the crease area. It's because of the simplicity and effectiveness of it, that almost every coach employs it. It's also why you'll see almost every game finish with one team scoring 2 goals or less. Regarding the larger ice surface, teams will allow players to dispy-do and play puck possession around the parameter all they want. Every team in the league knows that the only scoring zone in the game today is 6 feet from the crease - hence the collapsing defenses. Trust me, Olympic ice surfaces are not the answer. But don't take it from me, ask some of the Europeans playing in the NHL. During the lockout several of them were asked if this was the answer and players such as Zetterberg, Alfredsson, Satan, the Sedins and Ohlund all said that it wouldn't be good and it would result in even more boring defensive hockey. Look at all the changes that have been made to increase scoring and what have coaches done with it? They've devised new and un-exciting ways to shut them down. The two-line pass was supposed to open things up but all it's done is back the defensmen up more. No hooking, holding or obstruction? No problem. All of the slow players were dumped from the league with new speedy players. The trap was moved from the nuetral zone to the defensive zone. It's all about holding your ground and causing the other team to make mistakes or take penalties on turnovers or through cycling. And how many Ovechkin's are there in the league? Even if I admitted that your point could be valid how is this extra ice going to turn the 600 slugs in the NHL into scoring stars or even offensive playmakers? It's not. A coach is still going to look down his bench and see 2, maybe 3 good players, with the rest being plumbers and muckers. He's going to use that extra ice to keep the other team even further away from the crease. Try telling all 30 owners that they have to remove about 40 seats, averaging $200 in price (around $325,000 US per year), to bring in bigger ice. And I'm being generous with 40 seats and $200 as an average price. Certain teams charge a LOT more than $200 for seats along the ice. To me, I'm very much against using European ice. The game already resembles the Swedish Elite League more than the NHL did 20 years ago.

You're right on both counts. But please, don't for one second dare to say that the equipment today is even close to what it was back in the day. It's not even close and it definitely prevents more goals from being scored today. Ken Dryden - 6'4", 210 lbs Roberto Luongo - 6'3", 205 lbs I think that says it all. P.S. Olympic sized ice is not the answer and would hurt scoring. First, Olympic hockey is basically 6 allstar teams going at it - not 30 watered down teams. Secondly, how is making the ice wider going to increase the size of the scoring zones. Just because a player can be 15 feet wider of the net, doesn't mean the puck has 15 feet more room to score. You could make the ice as big as a lake and teams will still collapse around the goalie to block shots like they do now. So now, not only would defenses still be in place, but it would take guys like Ovechkin 2 more steps to walk out of the corner to get in a scoring postion. Besides, have you seen elite European hockey? It's horrible. Absolutely horrible. And it has a lot to do with how coaches use the bigger ice surface to implement suffocating defensive systems. What do you think guys like Lemaire or Julien would do with it. People would be begging for barn-burning 2-1 games. Everything would end with 1-0 (SO) wins.

That's precicely what these new lines would do. It would force teams to keep their wingers out of the action down low. With 3-on-3 hockey taking place below the top of the circles it would be next to impossible to play zone defense. If you really, truly wanted to get rid of the trap you'd almost have to go with no lines at all. Just make it wide open. But I don't want to see that. Short of brainwashing every coach in the league to not use defensive traps or zone coverage, the only thing you can really do to create more scoring zones is to make the scoring area bigger. That can be accomplished by making the nets bigger or shrinking the goalies. What really bothers me is that fans and 'hockey people' worldwide have been begging to reduce goalie gear for over a decade now with little success. This is why I hate the PA. Without them, it wouldn't be an issue. Eventually, within the next year or 2, you'll see the NHL give the PA an ultimatum; either agree to slimmer gear or they'll implement larger nets.

Me too. It's why I hate watching teams like the Wild or Canucks who sit back and wait.

It can be done. Goalies know it, the PA knows it and manufacturers certainly know it. It's up to the PA to allow it to happen.

That sounds like it would be the case. Either that or wingers (or two forwards) would only have access to 2/3 of the ice. Some coaches will love the strategy that would evolve from this. They'd have swing plays where a winger would go in the 'extra zone' and a dman would slip below the new line. Maybe that would create confusion or whatever. There's some interesting intangibles that would accompany this rule but I still hate it. Hockey has always been touted as a 'team sport' but now you're essentially taking 40% of your players out of the equation in certain situations. Just shrink the freakin' goalies already! You could smuggle immigrants in some of the trappers out there!

To back you up Opie, Denis Savard has suggested the same thing. I believe the Gardens, Chicago Stadium and Buffalo's rinks were around 180x70. Savard feels that with a smaller rink it won't be as easy to collapse because everyone will be in the same. Who knows if this would be the case. But making the ice bigger would have an adverse effect as it would mean traps and zone defenses would be even easier to implement. Yeah, I'm not sure if they meant both the dmen and wingers couldn't enter the zone. I'm not even sure the BOG got into the exact rule of it. But if they prevented the wingers from entering it would be a risk-reward play to have your dmen jump in the play. Sure, they could add to the offense but that would leave a man wide open for a breakaway.

Exactly! Good post Opie!

I'm glad that others here see that this is a retarded idea. However, I'm in disagreement with a few that feel the game is perfectly fine. In one breath I hear that the game needs to be marketed better and needs to get back on ESPN. But in the other I hear that low scoring games are fine. A low scoring affair isn't always a bad thing but when 90% of today's game's end with one team scoring 2 goals or less (every game last night had this), then there is an issue. I'm sure ESPN can't wait to promote a sport where a lot of the games are borefests that feature little-to-no forechecking, zone defenses and goalies that blot out the sun. If a low scoring game features lots of flow, up-and-down action, hits, chances and big saves, it's a good thing. The issue is that a great, great majority of low scoring games feature almost none of this. In my mind the NHL DOES need more scoring. I'm not asking for lacrosse totals, but an average of 6.5-7.0 goals per game is the magic number. Not 5.0 - 5.5. However, saying that, HOW the goals are scored is almost as important (or more important) to how many. In today's NHL, I'd venture to say that 9 out of 10 goals are scored in this fashion - tip, rebound, screen shot. You don't see the nice top-shelf markers or long slapshots that you saw back in the day. Anyone remember Messiers classic goal from the right-wing boards on his wrong leg? Messier would have maybe 2 of those goals if he was starting his career now. The issue is that scoring zones that existed for almost 100 years in the NHL are gone. Unless your name is Lecavailer, Heatley, Ovechkin or Kovalchuk, you need to be within a 6 foot radius of the crease to score a goal. Also, Bill Clement made an excellent observation the other day that in today's NHL goals are generated either on the PP or off the initial rush into the offensive zone. Meaning that, if you don't score immediately after gaining the zone with some speed, there's a great chance you're not going to score. Teams are almost finished with chasing guys around and getting caught in the cycle. They simply collapse around the goalie and play a zone defense. We need to get the game back to where a shot from 15 feet out from even a 3rd liner can be seen as a dangerous play. The 'anticipation' of a possible goal needs to return. Almost everyone in Joe Louis (all 15,000 ) knows that when one of our players, or the opposition, lets a shot go from 20 feet out, unless there's a screen happening, the puck ain't going in the net. The drama has been sucked out of the offensive zone. The only way I can see this happening is to shrink goalie gear. The size of the current tender is so large that not only are they stopping pucks they shouldn't but it's also affecting shooters psychologically. Case in point: the Wings game vs the Coyotes - Kronwall steps in from the point with the puck unchecked. He makes it to the middle of the hashmarks with nobody around him and what does he do? He passes off to Cleary who's standing on the boards. Why? Because he saw no room at all. That needs to change. Just my $.02.

Yeah, I almost think it would make more sense if they just kept all the current European clubs the way they are but have them play each other. Each country could be like a "Division" within the league. So the RSL would remain in tact as would the SEL and FEL. I actually love this idea as it would keep idiots like Yashin out of the NHL. I don't want anyone in the best league in the world who cares about $$$ only. Let them play 44 games in the new EHL and make all the rubles their heart desires. The NHL will always be a great product to watch even if a handful of the worlds best aren't playing in it.

Thanks for posting this. I think it's a great move by Philly. This kid can basically do it all - score, pass, check, defense, fight. I'd LOVE to have Mike Richards on the team. And I have to admit that I was way-off when I said on another board that he had limited offensive upside. He might not score 100 points but putting up 70-90 points in his prime, combined with all the other stuff he does for a team, is excellent. I wonder what this means for Carter? They'll have Briere and Richards locked up for close to a decade and seeing what they gave Richards I don't see him getting stuck on the 3rd line. Carter will be the odd man out. Especially when you look at his numbers since turning pro. I certainly believe he has a lot more upside than what he's shown. I'd love for the Wings to take a crack at him. But I doubt they have the right player for what Philly wants in return.

In my opinion, yes. I'm not anti-European in any way. But I know I would invest a lot more emotion in the team if we had a player like Eric Staal, Rick Nash or Jonathon Toews. And I can almost guarentee you if we had any of the above players, there would be a lot more fans at the Joe. It might take more than 1 of these guys but if you replaced Filpulla for Toews, Kronwall for Komiserik and Sammy for Raffi Torres more people would be interested in the team. That's just my 2 cents and I could be completely off, but I know for my own personal taste, I would love to see more North American content on this squad. P.S. Great post F.Michael. I couldn't agree more.

Ugh, I can't imagine Burke being the commisioner. That would be a disaster. Plus, we'd all have to endure even more press conferences where he does his best vantriliquist impersonation by talking without moving his lips. But out of that list, he might be the most qualified. Although I think Hull would be the best one for the job.

In all honesty, how is going back to ESPN going to help? Are bars in New Mexico and Florida really going to put on the weekly game? Just because it's on ESPN doesn't mean people will give a crap. You could give the game away free to every channel on the planet and the same amount of people will tune in. In another question, why do we care? In one breath we're all upset that the NHL isn't on a 'real' station because we feel it stunts the growth to new non-fans. But in the other breath nobody here wants any part of the game changed to cowtow to new non-fans. Why would someone who couldn't care less about hockey tune in to watch a 2-1 game that features no forechecking, defensive zone traps and goalies so inflated sumo wrestlers are jealous. I dont' care anymore where the NHL is or isn't broadcasted. I like the sport (while still recognizing what's wrong with it), and will continue to watch it wherever it's broadcast.

My guess would be Todd Marchant. He's making over $2M and is basically useless as the Ducks only play 3 lines. He'll be waived and, if there aren't any takers, placed on the farm.

As a repeat offender he should have gotten 10-15 games. That was a braindead move on his part.

EEEEEEEEEEEFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF you.

UGH! Thanks to you guys my great-great-great-great-grandkids are going to grow up on "What's Going On?" and "Open Up Your Eyes"!!!!

Sure, he points out some of the finer moments but he neglects to speak of the 100000000 times he's played "What's Going On?", "I'm An Innocent Man" or "Open Up Your Eyes" every time the Wings get a penalty. It was slightly humerous the first time I heard it, but it's been 15 years. Enough already. If I met this guy I'd punch him in the colon and burn his CD collection that consists of 4 albums.

Great idea! The funny thing is, almost immediately after he retired Patrick Roy said the gear can get smaller. And I've heard Kelly Hrudey and Ken Dryden say the same thing. That's 3 goalies from 3 different eras that think it can and should be done. I can't help staring at the picture stevkraus posted. Look at that goalies trapper - it's half the size of today's gloves. Phil Esposito said he took his brother Tony's old trapper and was able to put the entire thing in Holmqvists glove. And this is after the gloves were reduced. Ridiculous.

I hope that's the case too. Paul Kelly has been making the rounds and speaking with all the player reps and reducing goalie gear is one of the topics he's discussing. I really hope he can convince them that they're making a mockery of the game. stevkrause, I like your ideas. I'd also like for them to go back to divisional playoffs. THAT'S where rivalries are made.

Larry Murphy and Freddy Oloussan were both struggling when the Wings picked them up. All they did was help us to 2 Cups. Rob Blake would thrive on our team.