Leafs @ Wild - Dec. 3rd, 8:00pm - TSN4. TSN 1050

[Kin]

It's 6' x 4'. Though, honestly, whether the average fan knows doesn't matter to me. In fact, I really don't think it even applies. It's more about maintaining the same standard measurements for scoring.

Right, but my point is that those dimensions aren't fundamental elements of the game. An 88 or 92 distance between the bases would make for a huge change in the game, ditto with a 9 or 11 foot high net in basketball. The reason most fans don't know 4' x 6' is because an inch or two more or less wouldn't shift things in a major way. 

And, if the effect on scores would be small, why bother?

Well, because we don't want there to be a drastic shift in scoring, just a correction upwards. It's more like how MLB tinkers with the height of the pitching mound. They made it too high in the 60's and it killed offense and brought it back down in the 70's. Offense didn't return to it's 1961 height but it brought it a little bit more into balance.

 

[Kin]

I think there a lot of other areas that should be explored in terms of making the game better before starting to seriously discuss changing the size of the nets.

In terms of efforts to increase scoring, the only suggestions I've heard have been ones that seem like they'd be largely ineffective(full 2 minute powerplays), have been tried before(clamping down on goalie equipment) or are even more drastic(requiring players keep one skate on the ice to block a shot).

Honestly, I think the reason we're hearing so much about bigger nets is because it is something of a last resort.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Honestly, I think the reason we're hearing so much about bigger nets is because it is something of a last resort.

Right. This whole "we need to get scoring up" conversation isn't new. We've been having it for 20 years.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

vs.

 

[bustaheims]

In terms of efforts to increase scoring, the only suggestions I've heard have been ones that seem like they'd be largely ineffective(full 2 minute powerplays), have been tried before(clamping down on goalie equipment) or are even more drastic(requiring players keep one skate on the ice to block a shot).

Honestly, I think the reason we're hearing so much about bigger nets is because it is something of a last resort.

I don't think the full 2 minute PP would be ineffective. In fact, I think it would probably increase offence to roughly the levels the league was looking for, if it was applied in conjunction with another crackdown on how the rules were enforced (though, preferably, not quite to extent we saw in 05-06). In terms of the goalie equipment, there's still plenty of room to go in terms of adjusting it. The other proposed changes, I agree, are mostly silly. I do think there's other adjustments that can be made, like altering the rules around high stick deflections or goals being kicked in. That might not have a huge impact on it's own, but cumulatively with some other small changes, I think it could be enough, without changing the size of the goalmouth.

 

[bustaheims]

Looking at the pics that Potvin jsut posted, I think you'd see a decent increase in scoring if you just took away the chunk of the pads that extends above the knees. It's open up the 5-hole, and it would mean that butterfly goalies wouldn't be able to cover as much of the bottom of the net when they went to close it.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

80+% of all powerplays end after a full 2 minutes without a goal being scored already anyway. If you want to introduce that rule in conjecture with something like the defending team can't ice the puck or has to hit the blue line before icing the puck then sure, maybe that helps. Although I'd prefer to focus my efforts on increasing 5-on-5 scoring.

In my mind though I just don't see how those types of changes are any more game-altering than a couple extra inches.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Looking at the pics that Potvin jsut posted, I think you'd see a decent increase in scoring if you just took away the chunk of the pads that extends above the knees. It's open up the 5-hole, and it would mean that butterfly goalies wouldn't be able to cover as much of the bottom of the net when they went to close it.

Sure. Good luck getting the goalies to approve that. The league's only been trying for over a decade.

 

[Kin]

Looking at the pics that Potvin jsut posted, I think you'd see a decent increase in scoring if you just took away the chunk of the pads that extends above the knees. It's open up the 5-hole, and it would mean that butterfly goalies wouldn't be able to cover as much of the bottom of the net when they went to close it.

The problem with that, the reason why the post-lockout crackdown on goalie equipment didn't really work, is because I don't think the league can unilaterally make decisions where player safety is concerned(and while I agree that isn't a huge real issue, it would definitely be the issue raised by the PA).

But even then, the picture Potvin used was of Lundqvist, who is one of the smaller goalies in the game.

I mean, there's only so much you can do to regulate how much of the net he takes up.

 

[Frank E]

Honestly, I think the reason we're hearing so much about bigger nets is because it is something of a last resort.

Right. This whole "we need to get scoring up" conversation isn't new. We've been having it for 20 years.

Yeah, and they've tried to regulate pads and equipment for some time, but it's difficult to regulate given different sized people.

I think the net size is something that's easily done, doesn't really cost much, and you don't really have to enforce anything.

 

[Peter D.]

Thin out the size of the posts before making the nets bigger.

 

[bustaheims]

Thin out the size of the posts before making the nets bigger.

I was thinking about that, too. I'm not sure what kind of impact it would have, but, man, do the posts/crossbars seem unnecessarily thick.

 

[Peter D.]

I was thinking about that, too. I'm not sure what kind of impact it would have, but, man, do the posts/crossbars seem unnecessarily thick.

Well, if the whole argument is that shots off the posts would become goals with an extra inch on either side, I'd think shrinking the size of the posts would have a similar effect.

 

[ZBBM]

So where exactly is the line here? Would adding 1/8th of an inch to the top of the net completely destroy the game of hockey as we know it?

All you folks falling all over yourselves to make the size bigger need to answer that question, not me.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

So where exactly is the line here? Would adding 1/8th of an inch to the top of the net completely destroy the game of hockey as we know it?

All you folks falling all over yourselves to make the size bigger need to answer that question, not me.

Ok.... No. Adding 1/8th of an inch to the top of the net would not completely destroy the game of hockey as we know it.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I posted the goalie pics just to basically say...as far as I'm concerned put Ovechkin in the 80s and his scoring is even more insane.  Put some of the 80s/early 90s guys in todays game and their scoring is well down.  So I don't get the sanctity of the records sorts of arguments - there's always been different standards for players.  And yes you can go even further (better conditioning, better stick tech, etc) but in the end the goalies' equipment (not to mention style) was much smaller then and it only takes a few minutes watching old clips to see it was easier to score on them.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I posted the goalie pics just to basically say...as far as I'm concerned put Ovechkin in the 80s and his scoring is even more insane.  Put some of the 80s/early 90s guys in todays game and their scoring is well down.  So I don't get the sanctity of the records sorts of arguments - there's always been different standards for players.  And yes you can go even further (better conditioning, better stick tech, etc) but in the end the goalies' equipment (not to mention style) was much smaller then and it only takes a few minutes watching old clips to see it was easier to score on them.

The ironic thing to me is that the purpose of making the nets bigger would be to OFFSET some of the changes that have occurred in the game in the past 20-30 years that have made it impossible to directly compare a player today to a player in the 80s.

 

[Kin]

The ironic thing to me is that the purpose of making the nets bigger would be to OFFSET some of the changes that have occurred in the game in the past 20-30 years that have made it impossible to directly compare a player today to a player in the 80s.

Exactly. Especially because it feeds into some of the BS that people try to present as evidence that players today aren't as good as they used to be.

That might not come across as a big deal to some but I do think that when stars of the 90's and 2000's come up for HHOF selection it'll play a role. Pavel Datsyuk might not hit 1000 points in his career but I'm pretty comfortable saying he's miles better than a bunch of guys from the 80's who got into the HHOF on the strength of hitting a bunch of arbitrary milestones.

 

[ZBBM]

So where exactly is the line here? Would adding 1/8th of an inch to the top of the net completely destroy the game of hockey as we know it?

All you folks falling all over yourselves to make the size bigger need to answer that question, not me.

Ok.... No. Adding 1/8th of an inch to the top of the net would not completely destroy the game of hockey as we know it.

The question I was referring to is your first one.

So: if they doubled the size of the nets, say, to REALLY increase scoring to amp up the entertainment value, such that the average score of the game doubled (it would probably increase even more, but leave that aside) -- tell me how you would draw comparisons Before v After.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

The question I was referring to is your first one.

So: if they doubled the size of the nets, say, to REALLY increase scoring to amp up the entertainment value, such that the average score of the game doubled (it would probably increase even more, but leave that aside) -- tell me how you would draw comparisons Before v After.

Well, no, I think we can have a more realistic discussion about the limits. Like I said in my last post, the goal of making the nets bigger would be to offset the changes in goalie equipment that have been made. Basically I want to be able to see SOME of the net when a goalie is standing in front of it. You would also want to make sure it doesn't become so big that an average-sized goalie can't be expected to make a save when he's standing up.

Ideally the goal would be to make the average shooting percentage go from 8-9% to closer to around 10-11%. That would be accomplished by a) giving a player more net to shoot at thus making it easier for them to score and b) having coaches rely less on defensive tactics especially once they get a 1-0 lead because they know that the opposing team can score easier.

So with that in mind doubling the size of the nets would obviously be absurd because it would be be overboard. It would require some experimentation but I'd imagine something in the 2-4 inch range could do the trick.