Jump to content

NHL 15-16: wife-beaters, adulterers, cokeheads, rapists, pill-poppers, AND METHODISTS


the admiral

Recommended Posts

Jesus, no one wants 12-10 scores. We just need to hit the reset button on calling obstruction fouls. We're getting back to the bad old days of defenders going jet-skiing on their guys without a call. Don't tell people they're not hockey fans for not fetishizing defense. That crap has to stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
10 minutes ago, chcarlson23 said:

You say it like you know that he did it on purpose. The only thing he did on purpose was dive to stop the forward. He didn't mean to knock it off. If he did it on purpose, he would have gotten a delay of game penalty... He can't stop sliding, so he ran into the net. NEWS FLASH: Hockey is played on ice,and it's slippery... This isn't field hockey on grass, wear he could have stopped. Now I agree that not backchecking, or knocking the net off on purpose isn't defense, but what Hartnell did WAS defense. He went all out to stop the player from even getting a shot off. Now he didn't succeed, but actually gave the effort. You said you'd rather have him stand and watch the guy score, because EXCITING. Once that kind of stuff happens, we get games like an all star game 12-10. Goalies now have lacrosse like numbers... Why? To draw in a couple more fans with a few more goals, in games that are barely like hockey anymore. Let me guess, you'd like players to stop blocking shots... 

If you can watch the last iteration of the replay in that video and not think he knocked the net off on purpose, I doubt we'll even agree on which day of the week it is.

 

However, I'm not against going to the ice to block a shot. I am mildly in favor of it in general, and I think trying to ban it would cause way too many judgment calls being made by the ref about whether someone fell, was pushed, dove, etc. I would like to reduce the amount of replay fodder; it's the same reason I would allow kicking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cosmic said:

If you can watch the last iteration of the replay in that video and not think he knocked the net off on purpose, I doubt we'll even agree on which day of the week it is.

 

However, I'm not against going to the ice to block a shot. I am mildly in favor of it in general, and I think trying to ban it would cause way too many judgment calls being made by the ref about whether someone fell, was pushed, dove, etc. I would like to reduce the amount of replay fodder; it's the same reason I would allow kicking.

I guess it's a difference of opinion, because I don't see it... Hartnell dove to stop the play, missed, so he tried to lift the stick, he missed again, so he slid into the net, and sat up. The net then came off. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to be trolling at this point. He clearly changes body position prior to hitting the back of the net. And before you come back and say it was probably to avoid injury, if I'm (relatively slowly) sliding into the net head first, I'm not gonna turn onto my side to avoid injury as that would actually increase the chance of injury when the shoulder on the ice hits the camera. That coupled with the definite change in kinetic energy as Hartnell didn't just turn, he threw his shoulder, tells me you're either a troll or an idiot.

 

It also tells me Hartnell knew there'd be a rebound and he didn't trust the goalie making his NHL debut.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Cosmic said:

Here's what I would do:

- Don't let penalty killers ice the puck.  I don't understand why you're allowed to break a rule because you're being punished for breaking a different rule.

- Reduce the goalie equipment, but wait on the nets for a couple of years.  I think it would be good to change that kind of stuff slowly.  I think the goalie equipment will have a noticeable impact, if they're serious about it.

- Allow kicking the puck in.  I don't want to see soccer out there, but I don't think it will come to that.  It gets rid of stupid "distinct kicking motion" BS to argue about.

- Stop taking goals off the board because a guy was an inch offside.  Get rid of the coach's challenge; a timeout lost is not a significant enough deterrent to limit challenges.  Have some oversight from Toronto to stop the couple of crazy goals where a guy is 15 feet offside and the linesman misses it.

- Fix the "Carey Price Rule".  Goalies shouldn't be able to initiate contact and have a goal waved off for it.

- I would say "call obstruction", but I don't think they have the heart to stick to it.  I'm sick of seeing a guy hacked to death on a breakaway, only to have the announcer complement the "good defense".

-Red: I can't get on-board with this.  You do have to give the defense a fighting chance.  When the penalty killing team ices the puck, they're purposely conceding possession of the puck and allowing the offense to set up...even trade-off.  Plus, hand-passing has different legislation depending on position of the ice...it's legal for 1/3rd of the ice but disallowed for 2/3rds.

-Blue: We've seen the NHL try this before, after the 2005 lockout.  Unless the end result of goalie equipment resembles what baseball catchers and home-plate umpires wear, I'm skeptical of pad reduction doing much good.  Something more needs to take place to offset the sheer size and skill today's goalies have.

-Bold: Not just "no", but "hell no".  This isn't soccer or billiards with purposely badly-aimed shots.  I'd actually vouch for no goals allowed for any puck that hits an offensive player's knee or below.  Eliminate all that gray area.  Use your sticks!

-Green: I can agree to this.  Instant replay doesn't really work well for a free-flowing game...that's why basketball limits when replay can be used, in relation to the time of the game.  Limit replays in hockey to special teams situations, the last 5 minutes of the 3rd half period, and overtime.

-Purple: Enforcing the current penalties would be a good start, too.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HedleyLamarr said:

-Purple: Enforcing the current penalties would be a good start, too.

 

The last couple of times the league has pulled its head from a deep, dark, remote location and actually enforced the rules, scoring has gone up.  All of this other non-sense about bigger nets, rinks, and small equipment can be negated if the rule book were actually called consistently.  Admiral's post from earlier has it exactly right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't usually like radical ideas but here's a scenario if anyone wants to ponder it. It could increase scoring but who knows. For any penalty called the coach gets an option.

 

1) keep the traditional 2 min penalty and attempt the power play or...

 

2) decline the power play and choose a penalty shot. Regardless of the outcome the penalty is over. It'd be a roll of the dice. 

 

I would imagine most coaches would elect the free penalty shot over the 2 minute power play. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, HedleyLamarr said:

-Red: I can't get on-board with this.  You do have to give the defense a fighting chance.  When the penalty killing team ices the puck, they're purposely conceding possession of the puck and allowing the offense to set up...even trade-off.  Plus, hand-passing has different legislation depending on position of the ice...it's legal for 1/3rd of the ice but disallowed for 2/3rds.

-Blue: We've seen the NHL try this before, after the 2005 lockout.  Unless the end result of goalie equipment resembles what baseball catchers and home-plate umpires wear, I'm skeptical of pad reduction doing much good.  Something more needs to take place to offset the sheer size and skill today's goalies have.

-Bold: Not just "no", but "hell no".  This isn't soccer or billiards with purposely badly-aimed shots.  I'd actually vouch for no goals allowed for any puck that hits an offensive player's knee or below.  Eliminate all that gray area.  Use your sticks!

-Green: I can agree to this.  Instant replay doesn't really work well for a free-flowing game...that's why basketball limits when replay can be used, in relation to the time of the game.  Limit replays in hockey to special teams situations, the last 5 minutes of the 3rd half period, and overtime.

-Purple: Enforcing the current penalties would be a good start, too.

 

 

I think that it should just be no kicking, because if you took away goals that hit players in the leg, scoring would go down. There could even be a player that tips a puck that deflects off of his own leg and into the back of the net. So that goal would be taken away? He used his stick... 

 

And most people here argue that the shootout isn't hockey, so a penalty shot instead of a power play wouldn't really be hockey. It's just a skills match instead of hockey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A shootout may be considered a skills competition between the shooter and the goalie but that would ultimately fall on the coaches shoulders (based on my penalty vs. shootout idea).

 

If a coach has a shootout expert like Oshie let's say, of course the coach would option to choose the free shot. But if the coach has a top 5 power play unit and not a clear cut goal scorer, i'd rather take my chances with two minutes to score.

 

I will agree, I hate shootouts being used to decide games. But if you ever watch a shootout, fans lose their minds over it. So it may not be what's best for hockey but it's good for the fans and adding excitement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Ducks and Sharks can clinch with either a win tonight (at Montreal or vs St. Louis, respectively) or with a Coyotes loss to Edmonton. Stars can also clinch with a win in Chicago.

 

And speaking of Chicago, especially if they lose... Nashville is only four points behind the Blackhawks. If the Blackhawks were to fall into that top wild card, you could have Kings/Blackhawks in the first round. (then potentially Ducks second round, or potentially Ducks/Blackhawks first round and Kings second round. ((and sure, I guess the Sharks))) That'd be pretty anticlimactic for the WCF (and make that Pacific bracket a bloodbath.)

 

Like Kings/Ducks/Sharks/Blackhawks or Stars/Blues/Perds/Avs/Wild? Choice is easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea, Nashville ain't gonna catch them, so it'd likely be a repeat of some previous years series between the Blues and Hawks, with a battle of mustard and relish in the other Central showdown.

 

As for San Jose, I like their chances against Anaheim, but I suspect another second round exit is in their not to distant future. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, HedleyLamarr said:

-Red: I can't get on-board with this.  You do have to give the defense a fighting chance.  When the penalty killing team ices the puck, they're purposely conceding possession of the puck and allowing the offense to set up...even trade-off.  Plus, hand-passing has different legislation depending on position of the ice...it's legal for 1/3rd of the ice but disallowed for 2/3rds.

I don't think it's a radical change.  In practice, it will make the defenders take an extra half second to send the puck down the ice in a way that won't be icing instead of blindly firing it anywhere that happens to be far away.

 

6 hours ago, chcarlson23 said:

-[Kicking]Bold: Not just "no", but "hell no".  This isn't soccer or billiards with purposely badly-aimed shots.  I'd actually vouch for no goals allowed for any puck that hits an offensive player's knee or below.  Eliminate all that gray area.  Use your sticks!

Purposely badly-aimed shots happen all the time, and guys hit the puck with their sticks.  I don't think kicking would take over the game; the stick is a much more effective tool for moving the puck.  In an ideal world, I wouldn't really mind banning pucks that hit a player knee-or-lower, but it would be an absolute nightmare to figure out with the way pucks move and bounce.  A 95 MPH slapshot travels 5.8 feet in between every frame of video.  I also think kicking would give offensive players another option when their stick is being illegally-but-not-illegally-enough held up in front of the net.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, worcat said:

A shootout may be considered a skills competition between the shooter and the goalie but that would ultimately fall on the coaches shoulders (based on my penalty vs. shootout idea).

 

If a coach has a shootout expert like Oshie let's say, of course the coach would option to choose the free shot. But if the coach has a top 5 power play unit and not a clear cut goal scorer, i'd rather take my chances with two minutes to score.

 

I will agree, I hate shootouts being used to decide games. But if you ever watch a shootout, fans lose their minds over it. So it may not be what's best for hockey but it's good for the fans and adding excitement.

No coach would ever choose a power play over a penalty shot even if he has the greatest power play in NHL history. Here's why:

 

AVqd7.png

 

your percentages of scoring on the penalty shot are far far greater. You'd be stupid not to take those odds.

 

More reasons this is a bad idea:

- not every penalty is worthy of a punishment that gives the other team ~35% chance of scoring. An accidental delay of game penalty resulting in a penalty shot? Screw that noise.

- puts way too much power into the officials hands. Soccer has a huge problem with this and it drives me nuts. Bad call in the box and a guy gets a free kick. Officials make a bad call and a guy gets a free shot at the goaltender with a pretty good chance of scoring. 

- The penalty shot is exciting because it's so rare. If we were doing that 8 times a game it wouldn't be fun anymore.

- People only like it in shootout form because it's only worth one point and we've already contested the game using normal hockey to reach that point. It's not fully deciding the game. Your penalty shot idea would FULLY decide the games. 

- That's not adding excitement and it would come at the expense of powerplays which are one of the most exciting parts of the actual game. 

- It would change the way the rest of the game is played. Hey don't worry about scoring a goal the normal way, just try to draw a penalty and then you get a penalty shot. It would make regular gameplay unbelievably cautious and boring. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Blue Jackets are skating down 2-0 with 1:10 left and I've accepted the loss and allowed myself to take solace in the fact that this loss will push the Red Wings out of the playoffs. Blue Jackets go on to score twice with the empty net and win in the shootout on a nasty Boone Jenner fake against former Jackets great and current arch-enemy Steve Mason. 

 

So even when they do cool things I can't fully enjoy them. This team is annoying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

New rules?  I've surely mentioned before...

 

- Tie games.  3 periods, no questions asked.  Overtime will look even better during the playoffs.  

- I would keep a team's power play for the full duration of a penalty.  Not only would it maybe add some scoring, it would also hopefully curb some cheap shot artists from injury'ing guys.

- Tighter goalie equipment.  As Corey Hirsch pointed out, the position has gone beyond safety to mere shot stopping for the sake of it.

 

Long term if the game doesn't pick up after a bunch more changes, try 4 on 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elliot helps Sharks Midwest steal a game at the take, despite losing the Corsi battle for pretty much all the 2nd and the first half of the third period. Considering how well they've played on the road this season, I actually don't mind giving home ice to Anaheim. 

 

Also, Dallas goes to town in the UC again and has beaten the Hawks four out of five times this season, and outscored them 20-11. If I'm wearing the Indian Head, I want nothing to do with this team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.