Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to kelvana33's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Wow, was I wrong. I would have guessed blocked shots over the past 5 years would have doubled blcoked shots in the 80's-early 90's.Easily. ..And thats just from watching games.

     

    The composite sticks, one piece argument etc..Yeah players can shoot the puck faster, but that never bothered me in net. If a guy can shoot, he can shoot, doesnt matter what he has, it's his accuracy I'm more worried about. As far as safety for goalies regarding them, when I'm down in my crease and people are hacking away, I'm sure glad not many people use the wooden ones anymore, they hurt more on the back of your head.

    The chest protectors,pads,blockers and gloves can all be reduced without compromising safety. The two smallest items on me, cup (that doesnt sound good) and knee gaurds happen to provide the best protection.

     



    Thanks for the support, Kel.  According to others, because I've never played goal, I must not know what I'm talking about.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    When you were loooking up those blocked shots stats, were you at least a bit suprised by them? I was thrown for a loop when I saw them, would have never had guessed that. For me, it just seems more now, next time I see an old game (Tugnutt game should be on this week) I'm going to pay attention to the blocked shots. And who knows, there probably were as many shots blocked in a 7-5 game as there are in a 2-1 game today...Which brings us to.....

    I'd love to break this down one day, look back those years at shots attempted,shot on net etc.Compare it today...Stuff fascinates me.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!


    Kel, I think why it seems to be more frequent is because the style of blocking shots has changed so dramatically, making it much more obvious. I was taught to clog the lanes, get square with the puck, be mindful of my keeper's sight lines, use my lower body, never "flamingo", and not to go down on the ice as it would temporarily take me out of the play. Not very sexy or noticeable or dramatic, but pretty effective as you could still respond to the pass. However, you covered minimal ice surface

    Now players are taught to clog up as much ice surface as possible, which means sprawling across the ice like they're sliding into second. Very dramatic and very noticeable. But it opens them up to the pass or the raised shot. I've seen plenty of plays in recent years where a player pulls his shot after the D goes down and plays it to the point or down the boards instead. That doesn't count as a block, but it does stop the shot from happening.

    Which style is better? I'm not sure, but the second style is certainly more obvious when you're watching the game.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    I'm so pleased about this pad size reduction.  They should also make the shin pads a little thinner (by about .5") and more form-fitting, but I guess I should be happy with any progress at all.  A 6" by 11" reduction in blocking surface gives us about an extra half a square foot to shoot by, which means about a full square foot of net is now visible to shooters that wasn't there before.

    That doesn't mean that goalies won't be able to react and stop the shots, but it puts more emphasis on skill vs skill.  This should make scoring a little more possible and offensive coaching strategies a little more viable and hockey a little more exciting.

    And yes Isla, this is a much more impactful move than increasing the net size.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    Increasing the size of the net would be my absolute last choice to help to increase scoring. New equipment regulations are at least a step in the right direction.


    "wow,check out all of the losers in here......"

    -Gerry Dee
     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from OrrEspoCash. Show OrrEspoCash's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    I have a simple solution that would probably increase the scoring by 3 goals a game--just slant the goalposts inward instead of their current flat surface.  The integrity of the game would be maintained (versus increasing the goal net size) and all those agonizing post clangers would now be goals, and WITHOUT changing goalie pads or net size! I think this would work, IMO.

    I think he lost a couple of Chicklets Fred--The Turk

    The goal isn't for the Bruins to take a beating for the team, it's to cause the opponents to take a beating for theirs.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

    Increasing the size of the net would be my absolute last choice to help to increase scoring. New equipment regulations are at least a step in the right direction.


    "wow,check out all of the losers in here......"

    -Gerry Dee
     



    Agree, changing the size of the net is way too drastic. I want goalies to stop the puck because theyre good, not because they have chest protectors that are too big.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    It doesn't matter how fast the shot is coming if there is less open net.

     

    This really isn't a difficult concept.  Bigger equipment on goaltenders leaves less room for shots to go in, resulting in lower scoring games.

    Stick technology, what?  The pucks are coming in faster so the goalies need larger equipment?  Help me understand that, and be sure to leave out the safety point of view.  The only thing 20" of thigh risers protect against is 5-hole goals.

    Blocked shots? 

    "Year","Regular Seasons","Playoffs"

    "1983-84","30.597618","30.057142"
    "1984-85","30.505953","30.842857"
    "1985-86","31.052977","29.930555"
    "1986-87","30.006548","30.017241"
    "1987-88","30.43988","27.845238"
    "1988-89","30.371429","30.030487"
    "1989-90","30.265476","29.335295"
    "1990-91","29.810715","31.038462"
    "1991-92","30.504545","30.05814"
    "1992-93","30.984127","32.135296"
    "1993-94","30.297619","30.522223"
    "1994-95","29.381411","28.907408"
    "1995-96","30.25469","31.16279"
    "1996-97","29.80394","31.70122"
    "1997-98","27.340525","28.676828"
    "1998-99","27.866304","28.94186"
    "1999-00","27.975174","27.801205"
    "2000-01","27.70813","26.906977"
    "2001-02","27.581707","27.844444"
    "2002-03","28.367073","28.35955"
    "2003-04","28.051626","27.393257"
    "2005-06","29.977236","29.427711"
    "2006-07","29.583332","29.790123"
    "2007-08","29.063416","30.041176"
    "2008-09","30.202032","30.977011"
    "2009-10","30.311789","31.061798"
    "2010-11","30.389025","32.207867"
    "2011-12","29.747561","29.523256"
    "2012-13","29.141666","31.901163"

    That will put an end to that 100% false premise.

     



    Where did these numbers come from?  They don't seem to jive with NHL.com's stats.  For instance, 1997-1998 stats have the top team with 871 blocks, and an average of 16 per game; while the top 2011-2012 teams had about 1300 blocks, and the league-wide average was 28 per game.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to DrCC's comment:


    Where did these numbers come from?  They don't seem to jive with NHL.com's stats.  For instance, 1997-1998 stats have the top team with 871 blocks, and an average of 16 per game; while the top 2011-2012 teams had about 1300 blocks, and the league-wide average was 28 per game.



    Wow, my error, Doc.

    That list is average shots on goal per game.

    I did not make that clear at all.  Dur!

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    DrCC if you want to post the NHL.com numbers I as well as others would appreciate it.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to DrCC's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     


    Where did these numbers come from?  They don't seem to jive with NHL.com's stats.  For instance, 1997-1998 stats have the top team with 871 blocks, and an average of 16 per game; while the top 2011-2012 teams had about 1300 blocks, and the league-wide average was 28 per game.

     



    Wow, my error, Doc.

     

    That list is average shots on goal per game.

    I did not make that clear at all.  Dur!

    [/QUOTE]

    I can't believe how significant shot blocking has become. The worst shot blocking team from 2011-12 (NJ-928) still had 57 more blocks than the top team from 1997-98 (NYR-871).

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

     

    Wow, my error, Doc.

     

    That list is average shots on goal per game.

    I did not make that clear at all.  Dur!



    That makes much more sense, and I see how that supports your point.  Taken together then, that means that nowadays there are a lot more attempted shots than in the past?  That is something to wonder about.  That roughly 30 shots on goal per game number has been amazingly steady!

     

    @lambda - I'd have to manually computed the average for every season.  I'm not sure I'm in the mood.  A cursury examination suggests that it's about a 20% increase over the past decade.

    So total shots in a game has held steady at about 60, and blocked shots has gone from about 23 to 28.  That's about a 6% increase in total shot attempts (not counting misses), with almost all of it going into blocked shots.  There's got to be some insight to be taken from that.  

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    I guess that answers my question as to which style of shotblocking is more effective then.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    Shot blocking is an unfortunate byproduct of increased interference calls. You can no longer use a pick to keep a shot blocker out of the lane. It's now commonplace to see a clean offensive zone faceoff win fired off of a defender's shin pan. Clear shooting lanes are shut down almost immediately in today's game. 


    "wow,check out all of the losers in here......"

    -Gerry Dee
     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    Ok if the NHL can legislate the size of goalie pads etc. , I for one would say increasing the size of the net is not necessary.  Yet, who then legislates ?  The manufacturer, the NHL officials, the teams, or the player.  Boondoggle of a regulation Issue.  Enlightenment is worth the discussion though.

     A scientific theory should be as simple as possible, but no simpler. -- Albert Einstein

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    I don't see how it's a difficult enforcement issue - the l;eague already measures pads, just like they do sticks, skate blades, and other equipment, measurements that are carried out by league officials.. I would like to see them do more measurements though like measuring the elbow pads to ensure that they have the required amount of soft outer padding already required by the rulebook. Just checked the rules and realized there's no similar soft padding requirement for the shoulder pads - I thought there was a rule but that it just wasn't enforced. Here's the rule regarding the enforcement of the illegal equipment restrictions.

    12.5 League Inspections - The League’s Hockey Operations, Officiating and/or Security departments are specifically authorized to make a check of each team’s equipment to ensure the compliance with this rule. They shall report their findings to the Commissioner for his disciplinary action.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    Thanks Red, my thinking is always a matter of outcome not regulation especially in sports.  The frequency of the inspections by NHL league offices is the key.  The mentioning of NHL officials only leads me to think it is a NHLPA bargaining issue. 

     A scientific theory should be as simple as possible, but no simpler. -- Albert Einstein

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:



    I can't believe how significant shot blocking has become. The worst shot blocking team from 2011-12 (NJ-928) still had 57 more blocks than the top team from 1997-98 (NYR-871).



    And yet with that many more blocks, the average shots on goal has remained the same (give or take a shot or two) over the years.

    Of course, if players had more concern with being injured, they'd stand in front of less.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    The goal of shot blocking is not to reduce the number of shots on goal, but the quality of shots on goal. More shots are being taken because the net front is crowded making it tough to be creative, and defending teams allow the outside shots. It's another reason reducing goal pads is important. If allowing a whole bunch of outside shots becomes a bad strategy because some will eventually sneak by your goalie, teams will need to be more aggressive, creating more entertaining hockey.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from xdrive. Show xdrive's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to xdrive's comment:

    [QUOTE]

    Exactly...scoring is down due to defensive systems now used by many teams and the fact that the goalies are much better than they used to be, take the body armor off the skaters and there will be far fewer blocked shots, more pucks to the net = more goals. Some of the goalie equipment has been getting out of hand but so has the stick technology so to me it's a wash

     

     



    It doesn't matter how fast the shot is coming if there is less open net.

     

    This really isn't a difficult concept.  Bigger equipment on goaltenders leaves less room for shots to go in, resulting in lower scoring games.

    Stick technology, what?  The pucks are coming in faster so the goalies need larger equipment?  Help me understand that, and be sure to leave out the safety point of view.  The only thing 20" of thigh risers protect against is 5-hole goals.

    Blocked shots? 

    "Year","Regular Seasons","Playoffs"

    "1983-84","30.597618","30.057142"
    "1984-85","30.505953","30.842857"
    "1985-86","31.052977","29.930555"
    "1986-87","30.006548","30.017241"
    "1987-88","30.43988","27.845238"
    "1988-89","30.371429","30.030487"
    "1989-90","30.265476","29.335295"
    "1990-91","29.810715","31.038462"
    "1991-92","30.504545","30.05814"
    "1992-93","30.984127","32.135296"
    "1993-94","30.297619","30.522223"
    "1994-95","29.381411","28.907408"
    "1995-96","30.25469","31.16279"
    "1996-97","29.80394","31.70122"
    "1997-98","27.340525","28.676828"
    "1998-99","27.866304","28.94186"
    "1999-00","27.975174","27.801205"
    "2000-01","27.70813","26.906977"
    "2001-02","27.581707","27.844444"
    "2002-03","28.367073","28.35955"
    "2003-04","28.051626","27.393257"
    "2005-06","29.977236","29.427711"
    "2006-07","29.583332","29.790123"
    "2007-08","29.063416","30.041176"
    "2008-09","30.202032","30.977011"
    "2009-10","30.311789","31.061798"
    "2010-11","30.389025","32.207867"
    "2011-12","29.747561","29.523256"
    "2012-13","29.141666","31.901163"

    That will put an end to that 100% false premise.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    It's the release off the stick that's more important than the speed and the puck comes off the stick much quicker than ever before, I agreed some of the equipment is too big 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from xdrive. Show xdrive's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to DrCC's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     


    Where did these numbers come from?  They don't seem to jive with NHL.com's stats.  For instance, 1997-1998 stats have the top team with 871 blocks, and an average of 16 per game; while the top 2011-2012 teams had about 1300 blocks, and the league-wide average was 28 per game.

     



    Wow, my error, Doc.

     

    That list is average shots on goal per game.

    I did not make that clear at all.  Dur!

    [/QUOTE]

    I stand by my theory fewer blocked shots = more goals

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from xdrive. Show xdrive's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

    The upper thigh is not an issue.The pants have plenty of padding for the upper thigh.  I have never in 30 plus years of goaltending got a bruise on my upper thigh. When butterfly became popular and your pads go to the side while going down the knees became exposed. They put boards on them to block pucks from getting through to the knee and  called them thigh risers since thats where they are while you are standing up straight. Now, they are more designed, bigger, to block pucks from going in there at all.

    When Tuuka goes down in the butterfly, 90% of the time his pads meet and theres nothing there. Being tall and athletic, he can do this. Same with Price. Crawford, when he goes down, leaves an opening, so he has the the longer thigh risers wich stop pucks once they get past the opening in his pads. I'll try to put pics in but it's hard from my IPad.

    To me the thigh risers are an issue, but the bigger issue is the size of the pad. (height)..Look where Corey Crawfords pads are while he is standing straight up. Right below his stomach. Same with Tim Thomas. I would see the height of the pads as more of a priority.

     

     






    I've had plenty of bruises 6 inches above the knee

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to xdrive's comment:


     



    I've had plenty of bruises 6 inches above the knee

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd have to assume your doing something wrong/different with your equipment. Do you wear the knee wraps? Also, what kind of pads are you wearing?

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

    In response to xdrive's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     


     

     



    I've had plenty of bruises 6 inches above the knee

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I'd have to assume your doing something wrong/different with your equipment. Do you wear the knee wraps? Also, what kind of pads are you wearing?

    [/QUOTE]

    What kind of pants is he wearing that he's not protected 6 inches above the knee? Sounds iike he plays in a speedo.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    I've had bruises to the thigh after blocking a shot (if it catches you at the right speed or angle, you can get a bruise through the pants easily enough), but so what? It's a bruise - I don't consider that an injury. If being bruised bothers you, maybe play a different sport?

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Goalies Getting the Gear Downsized Again...YES!

    In response to xdrive's comment:



    It's the release off the stick that's more important than the speed and the puck comes off the stick much quicker than ever before, I agreed some of the equipment is too big 



    Please explain this.

    Can't wait.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share