NHL Still Boring Defensive Hockey?

[toby91_ca 620]

So, just looking at stats, there were 2 games last night that produced a total of 5 goals (1 of which was an empty netter). Is it just me, or is that simply not enough?

Think about this for a minute, if you are not a fan of any of the teams playing last night, are you going to be watching those games? I didn't see any of the Ottawa game, so I am not sure how pleasing the product was, but I did watch the Detroit game and I thought it was pretty good from an entertainment point of view, but I am probably biased because I have a vested interest in whether Detroit wins or loses. If you have no vested interest, how exciting were these games?

Of course, you can't always look at stats to make decisions, case in point, the NYR vs. Buffalo game on Sunday. I am not a fan of either team and even though it was a 2-1 game, it was probably one of the most exciting games of the playoffs so far.

I really do not like these GAA stats:

MARTY TURCO - 1.30

J GIGUERE - 1.30

ROBERTO LUONGO - 1.70

DOMINIK HASEK - 1.71

HENRIK LUNDQVIST - 1.85

RYAN MILLER - 1.98

I'm okay if there is one wonder goalie who is just playing out of his mind in the playoffs (on a hot streak), but to have this many guys sub 2.00 GAA just doesn't sit right with me. There are also a few other guys that are just over 2.00, I'm talking 2.01, 2.04...

Edited May 1, 2007 by toby91_ca

[Wings_Dynasty 267]

It's one thing to limit the scoring chances of the opposing team (ie the trap) and another to have a back-and-forth with tons of scoring chances and solid gaoltending (ie BUF @ NYR).

[toby91_ca 620]

It's one thing to limit the scoring chances of the opposing team (ie the trap) and another to have a back-and-forth with tons of scoring chances and solid gaoltending (ie BUF @ NYR).

This is exactly why I have always been against bigger nets just to produce more goals. They need to fix the way the game is played, not simply produce more goals from the same boring style.

[Wings_Dynasty 267]

I hate the idea of changing the game because the only way they could do it would be to have NBA style play. Like defensive zone lines that players had to be out of after a certain amount of time or a SHOT CLOCK.

[Hank 0]

This is exactly why I have always been against bigger nets just to produce more goals. They need to fix the way the game is played, not simply produce more goals from the same boring style.

Just to play devils advocate, bigger nets would actually make the game closer to how it was played in the 80's. If you took cubic space for players to shoot on, it's probably 50% of what guys like Bossy and Orr had.

Add in much lighter equipment (that doesn't soak up water like the old ones), better conditioned and stronger goalies, as well as defensive systems, quicker players, you have far less time and space to score goals than what they did 20 years ago.

The fact is, as long as there are 5 skaters aside, you will see this type of hockey for years to come. I think the NHL has done a tremendous job making the game better and more entertaining than what it was before the lockout. But the players today are so freakin' fast and defensively responsible that there's simply a lot less time and space to do anything out there. If you went 4-on-4 full time, the game would be incredible.

And for those that cry "sacriladge!", professional hockey used to be played 6-on-6. It's not that much of a stretch to go with less skaters. And it would certainly eliminate the trap altogether.

On a seperate note, last night on XM Home Ice, Billy Clement was saying how the TV networks like NBC are really upset with the overtime format. He said they spent a ton of dough making that special on Barbaro (the horse for those that don't know or don't care - like me) but couldn't show it because the Buffalo-Rangers game went into Overtime. Many are also talking about how the quality of play in OT is horrilbe. I totally agree with that. If you're watching your favourite team you might think it's exciting because the next goal wins, but if you're simply a fan or someone trying to get into the sport, the quality in OT is terrible. Teams take far less risks and it slows down to a crawl.

Clement said that he doesn't feel it's going to be very long until the NHL institutes something like 5-on-5 for the first 10 minutes and then 4-on-4 after that. And possibly even 3-on-3 if there's no goal after 20 minutes with only a dry scrape of the ice after 20.

I know a lot of people might not like that, but if corporate sponsers and TV partners raise enough hell, something will happen. NBC doesn't want games going 7 hours with boring OT hockey. They want it to be exciting and with a foreseeable end in sight.