The Most Wonderful Time of the Year - Playoff Hockey

[sterlingice]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
I really don't understand what you mean by not playing hockey, the Wild/Ducks game was filled with scoring chances, the Wild just couldn't get anything past JSG.

There were only 65 shots in a 2OT game. Not only that but Anaheim only had 25. I love goalie duels: my favorite game being the Panthers/Avs 3OT 1-0 game in the 1996 finals. But this wasn't that- it was just boring. That game had over 110 saves in it, and was filled with scoring chances. This was just boring.

SI

[Cards4ever]

Originally posted by Travis
Hey, just think, had it gone another 8 minutes or so, it would have been down to a shoot out, an even better way to decide it.

Give them a few years though and it'll be different again, last time Canada won the gold, it was a best of 3 series, and now it's a 1 game deal, so they very well could switch it to a 5 on 5 unlimited OT format (heh, I wish).

And no way it'll ever be held that close to the start of the NHL season because of the possibility of injuries carrying over into the season. I can't see it changing time as you obviously can't go earlier, and to try and wait until after the Cup finals, you'd have NHL players that would be off their skates for a couple of months, so would be nice and rusty, while those just completing a Cup run would be exhausted and wouldn't want to play, so you'd end up with a team of guys eliminated in the 2nd and 3rd rounds probably.

When is the Canada Cup usually played?

[Cards4ever]

Originally posted by sterlingice
There were only 65 shots in a 2OT game. Not only that but Anaheim only had 25. I love goalie duels: my favorite game being the Panthers/Avs 3OT 1-0 game in the 1996 finals. But this wasn't that- it was just boring. That game had over 110 saves in it, and was filled with scoring chances. This was just boring.

SI

If you had a rooting interest in the game, how would you feel?

[sterlingice]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
If you had a rooting interest in the game, how would you feel?

It doesn't matter: the majority of fans won't have a rooting interest in any given game so I fail to see how that would affect it. You can't say "it was a good game because you would have loved it if you were a Ducks and Wild fan"- using that logic, every close game is a good game because fans of two teams enjoyed it.

Also, with the Avs/Panthers game I noted- I could have cared less who won, but that doesn't take away from the fact that I saw it as an amazing game. Aside from rooting against the Wings and Blues, I don't have a team who I want to see win but that hasn't stopped me from enjoying this playoffs more than pretty much any other in recent memory just on the strength of many amazing and exciting games.

SI

[Cards4ever]

Whatever dude, I didn't think it was that bad of game.

Oh yeah, I found it, the World Cup of Hockey is played in late August thru September.

http://www.canadianhockey.ca/e/news/2003/gn007.html

[tucker342]

Which is the best time to play it in my opionion(sp?)

[Maple Leafs]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
What does being American have to do with not following the Championships? Either you follow hockey or you don't. That would be like saying I know you're Canadian, but the Super Bowl was held today.

Not at all... you need to stop being so defensive over this US/Canada thing. My point was that the World Championships gets very little coverage in the US. Do you honestly think it was even in the top 10 sporting events today in terms of US coverage? Top 20? Did it even get mentioned on Sportscenter?

[Cards4ever]

My point is hockey fans know it is going on, I knew Canada was playing, I followed soccer without being able to watch many games either in the past.

[ice4277]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
My point is hockey fans know it is going on, I knew Canada was playing, I followed soccer without being able to watch many games either in the past.

Cards, you are most like a much more die-hard fan than most hockey fans. Most casual fans couldn't tell you anything about the World Championships, and even the harder-core fans I know don't really care much about it. Sports fans in the U.S. rarely pay much attention to their national teams; notable exceptions being the olympics and MAYBE the World Cup. Do you think many people really cared that much when the USA Basketball team got destroyed at the World Championships last year? It's just the nature of sports in this country, and its not any different with hockey.

[Honolulu_Blue]

I headed to the local sports pub to watch the gold medal game yeserday afternoon. I arrived a bit early and they were showing the Ducks-Wild game. At the time I had no idea who had won, but wasn't at all surprised to see the score "0-0" in double overtime. Could be the lowest scoring series of all time. That stick save by Giguere was amazing. Truly amazing.

World Championship game was great. A hard fought comeback win by the Canadians. Oilers (Horcroff) and ex-Oilers Carter were the stars. After the second goal, Luongo looked very solid. He was looked shaky in the first period, looking behind him all of the time, misplaying the puck, but he really turned it around and got a lot of confidence. Well done. They beat a better team. Sweden had the talent, especially upfront.

This is the end of Tommy Salo's international career. First the headshot against Belarus, then the meltdown against the Fins. I reckon he's done.

Horcroff is really ugly.

Maple Leafs hada good point. The World Championships barely register with most hockey fans in the US. They just don't care. When I lived in the States, I was always aware they are going on and kept up with what happened, but it was little more than checking the boxscores, etc. The play-offs are going on and take most of my hockey attention. And I consider myself as hard-core a hockey fan that's out there. If I wasn't living in Europe there is pretty much no way I'd watch a game. I don't even know if I could if I wanted to. Was it broadcast in the States?

The Canada Cup (aka World Cup) was played in August/September and I think there is a plan to have another such event in 2004. I think it's right before the impending strike. Canada Cups have been fantastic. They may lose a little luster now that NHLers play in the Olympics. That has become the biggest international stage. Though, the Canada Cup should still be great. The last tourney was fantastic. A ton of fights between US/Canada. US became enemy #1 in Canada. And the final saw Richter put on the greatest goaltending performance I've ever witnessed.

[Cards4ever]

ice-I think most people realize that if the US had sent it's best players, the result would be much different. The problem is, players are playing so many games, that after the season is over, they just don't feel that playing more games is good or in their best interest. I think you'll see a change next time because of the whipping we took in basketball.

HB-No, the games weren't broadcast here in the US, but, I still checked boxscores, and I know that there is a blurb in the paper everyday with the results and some highlights. Still, there is no need to be a hockey snob and act like no one knows it is going on.

We need the Hockey Channel!

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
Still, there is no need to be a hockey snob and act like no one knows it is going on.

We need the Hockey Channel!

Agreed.

[Cards4ever]

Leaf and Stars fans, here is the latest Hatcher rumor, courtesy of The Sporting News, the Flyers are said to be very interested in him.

[Karim]

Does anyone know if ABC will broadcast the finals in HD? I'm almost 100% certain CBC isn't HD-ready but I've been anxiously waiting for HD-hockey.

[Cards4ever]

Doesn't ESPN have a HD network now? It should be available on there.

[sachmo71]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
Leaf and Stars fans, here is the latest Hatcher rumor, courtesy of The Sporting News, the Flyers are said to be very interested in him.

The only problem with that rumor that I can see is that Hatcher isn't a huge Hitchcock fan. If he has a choice, playing for Hitch again might not be #1 on his list. Here is a quote, again from Andrew's:

Last year the Stars were considered to be one of the major players in the free agent market. This year it's a Dallas Stars player who is considered the cream of the free agent crop. That would be Stars captain Derian Hatcher. And the rumors have already started.

The Philadelphia Inquirer reported this week that the Flyers have a keen interest in Hatcher to bolster their defense. And to add to the intrigue, the Inquirer reports Hatcher is interested in the Flyers.

Why? None other coach Ken Hitchcock, the ex-Dallas coach who is now at the helm of the Flyers. Tim Panaccio, who writes for the Inquirer, said sources close to Hatcher say the Norris Trophy finalist is interested in playing for Hitchcock.

Well, if you believe Hatcher's comments in the latest issue of the Hockey Digest, the Stars defenseman likes playing for current Dallas coach Dave Tippett. Here's how Hatcher described the difference between playing for Tippett and Hitchcock.

"[Hitchcock] would do a lot of yelling and screaming. The thing about Hitchcock is that he was relentless," Hatcher told Hockey Digest. "The difference with Tippett is that he played the game. He still yells, but on the other hand he understands what players go through in everyday life. That helps players quite a bit.

"I know it may not sound like a lot, but I think we went from a coach in Hitchcock who didn't necessarily understand those things. For Tippett to be able to grasp everything we are going through -- I really like that."

[bbor]

We have a hockey Channel in Canada...it's called Leaf tv

But seriously....there is a hockey package you can buy here through sataliete...tv.

The final of the WC was the best hockey game i have seen in at least 5 years....exciting end to end action..it was awesome.

2 breakaways in the last 3 minutes of the 3rd period of a final game???Come on,that was F'N amazing.

And 4 on 4 Overtime???

Sweet!..and offensive hockey watchers dream.

[mrskippy]

Ducks up 2-0. The way these guys play, I don't think anything will keep them from the Stanley Cup.

[Karim]

I'd have to vote Giguere for Conn Smythe, even if the Ducks don't win the Cup. Unless someone like Havlat or Hossa go insane from here on out, J.S. has to be a lock for playoff MVP.

As a Flames fan, my stomach hurts every time he makes a save...

[bbor]

Minny has the Ducks right where they want them.

[sterlingice]

Originally posted by bbor
Minny has the Ducks right where they want them.

Nah, they won't be in the perfect spot until it's 3-1.

SI

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally posted by bbor


And 4 on 4 Overtime???

Sweet!..and offensive hockey watchers dream.

That was something I found interesting. In the NHL you get, at best, 4 on 4 hockey for five minutes in a sort of contrived situation. The World Championship gave us 4 on 4 for quite a bit longer. Granted, it was sudden-death so it was slightly different than your usual hockey, but at the end of the day, I must say, I much prefer 5 on 5.

There was some talk, nothing serious mind you, that the NHL would be a better product if it were 4 on 4 all the time. More room to skate, more offense, etc, etc. I really didn't find it all that more exciting. You eliminate a forward which in turn eliminates a forechecker. You have less passing, no cycling, a more carrying the puck. I prefer 5 on 5.

[Cards4ever]

I do have the Center Ice package, but it ends after the second round of the playoffs. I really love to watch CBC, they do a great job and watched their feed instead of the local feed on the Wild playoff games when it wasn't blacked out. What I'm thinking about is a channel that covers minor, juniors, college and International hockey, and when that isn't going on, they show old team highlight films, cup films and the like.

4 on 4 OT to determine a champion? Something doesn't sit quite right there. If you are going to play the game 5 on 5, then the OT should be 5 on 5.

The Wild are in deep trouble, I don't see them coming back, at this point I just hope we don't get swept.

[Canadian Football Guy]

If they ever tried to go to 4 on 4 all the time in the NHL I think that the game would be relegated to minor league status. I do enjoy the 4 on 4 overtimes but the games has been 5 on 5 for over 100 years and I think that would be like the NBA dropping a player or the NFL eliminating a receiver. Who would really want to watch? Not to mention that the players association would probably not allow it.

The NHL could do so much more to improve the game if they would a) Call the damn penalties all the time. There is a rule book, apply it, all the time!! If it is in the rule book as a penalty then it should be called as such in teh first period or in triple overtime. For those who say that the referees should not decide the game by making a call I counter with the players that are taking teh penalty are the ones deciding the outcome by knowingly doing something illegal. b) The NHL should move to an International ice size. While the larger ice surface does remove some of the more expensive seats from a building the last time I checked not too many teams were selling out their building anyway. The more open and exciting hockey would pay for those lost seats through more people coming to all the games and hopefully through a larger tv contract due to increased interest.

Just my 2 cents worth.

GO SENS GO!!!

[Cards4ever]

Ah yes! I'd love it if they went to the larger sheet! Also, eliminate the red line, the 2 line pass has got to go.

[Fidatelo]

To most important things to get the game back to being the way it should:

1) Call the rules. This has been beat to death, but I mean really, call the f**kin rules!

2) Scale back the padding. Goalies look ridiculous these days. Look at a goalie from even 10 years ago and it's unbelievable how much the equipment has changed. Garth Snow wouldn't even be in the NHL if it wasn't for his XXXXXXXL padding.

As an aside, my brother and I have discussed this a few times now, and can't understand why no one has ever signed a sumo wrestler to be their goalie. I'm serious. Take a sumo, strap a bunch of padding on him, and put him between the pipes. There would be all of about 3 inches of space to shoot at. It sounds goofy, but really, couldn't it work? Isn't it at least worth a shot in a minor league system somewhere?

[bbor]

My name is Bobby Clarke..and i just told my starting goalie who had a 1.88 GAA this year that we don't want him back..

Robert Esche will be our starter next season..

Oh ya..we are also firing Ken Hitchcock and bring in Dave "the Hammer" Shultz to coach the team.

[Karim]

Rule changes are always a fun discussion:

1) Players should serve the full duration of penalties. If a team can score 2 times on a minor penalty, that serves not only to increase scoring, but acts more of a deterrent.

2) On coincidental minors during a penalty, or minors during a penalty, keep taking players off. Instead of going from 4 on 4 back to 5 on 4 during a penalty, go to 4 on 3. Coincidental minors during 5 on 5, go 4 on 4, during 4 on 4, go 3 on 3. Bryan Murray has mentioned this during the playoffs.

3) More division and conference play. I'd like to eliminater inter-conference games but I'm probably in the minority.

4) Scale back goalie equipment.

5) A holding penalty in the first minute is a holding penalty in the fifth OT.

6) No-touch icing.

7) Reduce the number of pre-season games and have the playoffs done before June 1st.

I don't think the ice surface will ever change and I'm not convinced removing the red line will actually improve the game.

[Cards4ever]

Originally posted by bbor
My name is Bobby Clarke..and i just told my starting goalie who had a 1.88 GAA this year that we don't want him back..

Robert Esche will be our starter next season..

Oh ya..we are also firing Ken Hitchcock and bring in Dave "the Hammer" Shultz to coach the team.

Chemanek for Cloutier might not be a bad for both teams after the playoff meltdowns that both had.

[Cards4ever]

Originally posted by Karim
I don't think the ice surface will ever change and I'm not convinced removing the red line will actually improve the game.

Sure helps the college game.

[bbor]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
Sure helps the college game.

How so Cards?

I've never seen a college game.

[Cards4ever]

The college game is much more freewheeling, much like the international game.

I'd just like the NHL to give it a try, it certainly can't hurt. I believe that it would punish teams that like to trap, get your forwards caught too far up, and you are going to allow more odd man rushes.

[Karim]

That's assuming you actually put your forwards up. I remember hearing Bill Watters talk about regular season games in Europe (larger ice, no red line) and it was absolutely boring with no one using the open ice to create chances like we would assume. Coaches afraid of giving up odd-man rushes simply keep everyone back and we're right back where we started.

[bbor]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
I believe that it would punish teams that like to trap, get your forwards caught too far up, and you are going to allow more odd man rushes.

This is why i think it won't work...instead of the trap starting in the other teams end......teams will just move their trap back to the neutral zone.

[Cards4ever]

But, it hasn't been tried yet either, has it? I watch alot of college hockey, and I prefer it to the pro game for some of the reasons I have outlined. It will benefit teams that skate well, which is the best part of hockey.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
The college game is much more freewheeling, much like the international game.

But is that because of the rule differences, or because the players haven't been taught an NHL style defensive game?

That's not rhetorical, by the way, I really don't know college hockey very well. But in Canadian junior hockey with essentially the same rules as the NHL, the games are very high-scoring because the players (mostly the forwards) just don't know how to play defense very well.

[Cards4ever]

I think NCAA hockey at the top levels is great hockey. I think we all saw what it could do at the last Olympics. Unless you want to tinker with the size of the net(which I'm not for), I would think it's worth a try, give it a preseason and let the AHL try it for a season and lets see. I don't know, maybe you are happy with the game as it is too, if so, then I understand the reluctance to change.

[bbor]

I have no reluctance to change...i just don't think that it WILL change anything....

Now a bigger ice surface...i think that has some merit...it is much harder to trap on a larger ice surface..also...if you have a team that can't skate you are screwed.

[ISiddiqui]

Ah, no love for the Devils! What did you Senators fans think of Game 2?

[Maple Leafs]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
I think NCAA hockey at the top levels is great hockey. I think we all saw what it could do at the last Olympics. Unless you want to tinker with the size of the net(which I'm not for), I would think it's worth a try, give it a preseason and let the AHL try it for a season and lets see. I don't know, maybe you are happy with the game as it is too, if so, then I understand the reluctance to change.

I'm with bbor, in that as much as the game needs a change I don't think the redline is the problem. The Olympics rocked because the best players in the world were playing games that mattered. You could have had three red lines and it still would have been great hockey.

I think the NHL's main problem is watered down talent. They expanded too fast, while the player pool has remained the same since the euro-invasion in the late 80s/early 90s. They expected an influx of US players, but it hasn't happened -- the game hasn't taken off in southern markets at all. If the league had 100 good forwards in 1992, that was five per team. Now it's three. The talent just isn't there. An addendum here is that because the good players are becoming relatively rare, their salaries shoot up. So now half the teams can't even afford more than one good player, even if they could find them.

So what do you do when there aren't enough good players and they cost too much? You hire coaches who can win without top talent. That means defense, defense, defense, with as much hooking and holding as the rules will allow. It was probably inevitable that the trap would take over, but seeing the Devils win the cup in 1995 with what was (at the time) a stifling defense no doubt sped things up considerably.

So you have few good players, being asked to make defense their first (sometimes only) priority. Combine that with a handful of smaller factors (bigger players, shoddy rule enforcement, better goalies) and it's welcome to the "dead puck" era. Not surprisingly, the games are boring, attendance levels off (even drops), TV ratings plummet, hockey slips behind soccer and Nascar in US popularity.

OK, this is turning into more a thesis than anyone wants to read, so I'll get to the point: NHL hockey is fundamentally broken. Ideas like dropping the red line or enforcing the rules differently might help, but they're bandaids on a gaping wound.

[Cards4ever]

Get rid of the redline, IMO, would improve the skills of players, because skating and passing teams would definitely benefit. D-men that can pass would become much more valuable, because passes would hit forwards in full stride deep in the neutral zone instead of being restricted by the redline. The best players in the world play in the NHL, I think you would see hockey similar to what we saw in the Olympics.

The bigger players are a reason why I would like to see a bigger ice sheet, maybe not a full Olympic sheet, but midway between the Olympic and what is now. More ice always helps the skaters.

No matter what they change about the ice or the redline, they need to have zero tolerance about clutching and grabbing in the neutral zone.

Having lost a team once, I'd hate to be the fans that lose a team, but, I understand what you are saying about too many teams. I'd especially hate to see Canada lose any more teams.

[bbor]

Cards...you have to realize we will never get the same calibre of hockey as we did in the olympics.The NHL is 30 teams as opposed to 6(?) olympic teams.

You will never have that level of skill on the ice at once in an NHL game.

[Cards4ever]

I think you might be surprised at what they can do, as I said, I watch high quality college hockey on the big sheet, I don't know why the pros couldn't do it. I'm just hearing alot of reluctance to try some different things on your part bbor, why is that?

Another thing I'd like to see is the tag-up rule instituted on offsides.

Well, the Wild are down 4-0, stick a fork in em, the Ducks are marching on!

[bbor]

I did'nt expect the Ducks to have it this easy

I don't think i am reluctant to change...i just think it has to be absolutly the right change.

The NHL had that stupid in the crease rule a few years ago and it was embarassing how badly it failed.

I would hate to see something like that happen again.

[Fidatelo]

I agree with bbor on this one, in that I don't believe getting rid of the redline is the answer. The Olympics were fantastic because only the best players in the world were on the ice.

Here are the two rules that NHL referees allow to be broken repeatedly:


Rule 60. Hooking
(a) A minor penalty shall be imposed on a player who impedes or seeks to impede the progress of an opponent by "hooking" with his stick.

Notice the line "or seeks to impede"? For some reason in the NHL you can hook the guy with the puck all night, as long as you don't actually succeed in hauling him over. What announcers call "back-side pressure" is really just the trailing forward making countless little hooks to the puck-carrier's arms, waist, and legs.


Rule 62. Interference
(a) A minor penalty shall be imposed on a player who interferes with or impedes the progress of an opponent who is not in possession of the puck, or who deliberately knocks a stick out of an opponents hand, or who prevents a player who has dropped his stick or any other piece of equipment from regaining possession of it, or who knocks or shoots any abandoned or broken stick or illegal puck or other debris towards an opposing puck carrier in a manner that could cause him to be distracted. (See also Rule 81(a).)

This rule gets broken almost constantly in the NHL, but one of the more glaring, and repeated, infractions is when the team with the puck attempts to dump it into the other team's zone. One defenseman will block out the incoming forechecker, allowing the other defenseman to scoop up the puck and hopefully move it out. This is never called, but that first D-man blocking the forechecker is totally against this rule, and it's frustrating as hell to see it happen over and over again.

[Fidatelo]

dola...

My point with those rules is to state that if you call those as they are written, the game would once again become amazing to watch. Decreasing the goalie padding would help to increase scoring, but folowing these rules is what would make the 95% of hockey that isn't shooting a lot more enjoyable.

We can talk all we want about removing redlines, increasing rink-size, or going to 4-on-4 all the time, but while one or all of those might work, they don't actually solve the problem. Hockey was hella-exciting to watch back in the 70's, 80's, and early 90's, and they all had to play with a red-line. The difference is that Wayne Gretzky didn't, for most of his career, have to put up with all the bullshit that someone like Mike Modano has to nowadays.

Ah crap, I gotta get ready for work. This post is a little scatter-brained, but hopefully it's still readable.

[Cards4ever]

The only problem is, no one is going to accept a constant state of PP's. They just aren't. Fans will bitch about players deciding the game, etc, etc.

So, instead of trying anything, we will sit like this. Now, that is a great solution!

[Maple Leafs]

I know I'm in the distinct minority, not just here but probably among hockey fans in general. But I don't mind the way the rules are called these days. I think that, all things considered, the refs do a decent job.

Do they call the rulebook as written? No, but neither do umpires (strike zone, phatom tags at 2B, etc), football refs (holding could be called on every play, WR push-offs), or basketball refs (travelling, anything inolving the Lakers, etc).

I like the fact that the refs are expected to get a feel for the game and call it accordingly. Clearly, the veterans are much better at this than the younger guys, who seem to wet their pants as soon as anyone barks at them. But I think the officiating has been good in this year's playoffs -- not great, but good.

[Fidatelo]

Originally posted by Cards4ever
The only problem is, no one is going to accept a constant state of PP's. They just aren't. Fans will bitch about players deciding the game, etc, etc.

But fans are already bitching that the game is boring. What the NHL needs to do is look long term. So what if there is a year of fan backlash? The players will eventually adjust. The idea that "refs decide the game" is total BS. If a player performs an illegal action and is caught, he made that decision, not the ref. They are simply there to inforce the rules. I'd argue that non-calls affect the outcome of the game as much or more than penalties.

So, instead of trying anything, we will sit like this. Now, that is a great solution!

But why make decisions that alter the fundamentals of the game when they aren't inherently necessary? No red-line, bigger ice, 4-on-4, these are things that effectively change the entire game. I'm not necessarily against change, but I am against making changes that are simply band-aids to a problem that can be solved within the existing structure.

This is similar to if I told you that the scoring surge in baseball could be fixed if the pitcher's mound was moved in towards home plate, or the base paths stretched out, or maybe the ball changed to be more 'dead', you'd probably argue vehemently against it, right? Because the real problem is thinned down pitching talent and beefed up, roid-raging batters that wear armor so they can hang all over the plate. Sure, my suggestions might lower scoring, but they don't fix the problem and they change the game in ways that shouldn't be taken lightly.

[sachmo71]

Does anyone here follow the LA Kings?