How to Increase Offense in the NHL

[OrrFour]

Someone please explain how the "glove pass in the defensive zone" helps the game?

[OrrFour]

I see what your saying, so perhaps just the watered down talent pool is what the main problem is. Why the league expanded to 30 teams is beyond me.

[Tangelos]

The typical regular season nhl game lacks intensity, hits, battles, speed and yes, goals.

[sting]

are ppl's attention span so short that they can't sit through an entire hockey game if only 2 goals are scored? If you're watching hockey for the high scoring games then you're watching for the wrong reasons. You watch hockey for the hits, on ice battles, the speed and the overall intensity. If you can't go 5 minutes without seeing a goal scored then go watch basketball.

[Vansicle]

Remove shot blocking. You can block with your stick but not your body. Same with pass blocking.

It not only increases scoring, it greatly reduces injury. I don't know how to enforce it and I'm not convinced it is possible, but it would open up scoring big time.

It shouldn't be a penalty, but rather an automatic face off above the crease or something. Or maybe it should be a penalty.

[Tangelos]

It's not goals its how the game is played. Entertainment value is paramount when selling the game. While I agree hits, on ice battles, speed and intensity are important. You can get this at any junior A or above level game.

What separates the NHL is creativity and skill. It is why every draft has teams selecting the highest talent available. The NHL is a product and the game right now is being suffocated by tactics, lack of defined rules and goalies that are so big and talented that players with the best sticks ever are shooting at the lowest percentage ever. Not to mention 5 vs 5 goals are at an all time low.

This is a hot button topic at GM meetings and as a fan..... Nothing beats a game with two talented teams attacking each other as opposed to a game with 2 teams playing shut down. The league is trying to evolve and gain popularity and they need innovative thought as to how they can change without messing up too much tradition.

[J.I.A.H.N]

I didn't read all the posts, but I would like to advocate widening the nets by 3 inches and making it higher by an inch. If you think how many times throughout the year, you hear the clank of a puck off the post, I think you would be amazed how more goals there would be. Safe to say there is 3 to 4 a game. Just think how many times Garrison missed by inches. I would start there. then I would start narrowing goalie gear, which should actually be the first thing back. Take it back to the old days, when goalies had narrow wet, gear! LOL......old goalie gear had horse hair in it that got wet and stayed wet, goalies would end up with gear that was 5-10 lbs heavier at the end of the game.....even if they kept the recent materials in, shooters would have more to shoot at............if the pads were narrower.

[CALGARY!]

Training more kids to be as good as Crosby/ Stamkos would be a good start.

[OrrFour]

Looks like the rules committee is tabling the goalie equipment issue so it will likely get bogged down and very little will be done.

The only change they made that will impact offensive chances is taking 4 inches away from the depth of the goal nets.

So more room behind the net to make plays and a quicker route around the net for wrap-around attempts.

[sting]

Training more kids to be as good as Crosby/ Stamkos would be a good start.

[poetica]

By doing nothing to restrict goalie equipment sizes you are not "letting the game be played the way it's supposed to be played". You are letting change happen that effects scoring and doing nothing about it.

[OrrFour]

I think you are missing the point!

[OrrFour]

So, it may be that they're not reducing goalie size because it's not a sure bet it would have any significant impact on overall scoring, especially in light of the continuing improvements to the defensive side of hockey.

[poetica]

It is interesting isn't it? I'd been wondering why they were all switching to white pads...

But I think the issue is that the lowered scoring is more a result of changes to the game itself than anyone's equipment. It used to be more scoring focused and the defensive aspect was weaker. Now, the game has transitioned to a more defensive focus and that's likely the real issue behind the lowered scoring. I'm not sure how that can be addressed, or even if it should to be honest. It's just the evolution of the game. I guess I just don't understand how retarding, or even reversing that natural evolution will improve the game.

The one thing I'd personally like to see that would lead to increased scoring, though, is the NHL making some actual effort towards ensuring more consistency in reffing. If some players/teams weren't allowed to interfere, hook, grab and otherwise keep the other team from scoring illegally without getting called most of the time, games would likely be higher scoring. If all deserved penalties were called, the increased number of PPs alone would likely increase overall scoring. Once players got used to how games were getting called, they would simply learn to stop relying on those tactics to prevent goals. It would likely force the game to evolve again, but in the meantime it would result in more scoring.

For me, protecting (restoring?) the integrity of the game is a higher priority than increasing just the entertainment value because the two are intrinsically linked.

[goalie13]

My suggestion on increasing scoring... don't let a guy out of the penalty box following a power play goal. Make him serve the whole penalty.

Same goes for delayed penalties. If you score when the ref has his arm in the air for a delayed call, the offending player should still serve his penalty.

[We Are All Cucks]

If I may jump into the conversation late - and without having read all the posts, but I think two different ideas are being convoluted here. Some are discussing an increase in offense and others an increase in scoring. To me offense means: pace of the game, flow, opportunities and chances. Scoring means goals. Although increased offense would likely increase scoring, more goals doesn't necessarily equate more offense.

Imagine a scenario where there were no goalies for an entire game: players would get to the red line and shoot every time. In the end, there would be a helluva lot of goals (scoring) but really no flow or excitement (offense).

The league needs to decide which is more important, higher scoring games or a more exciting product. Personally the goalie equipment size (although I do support some sort of reduction) is just a red-herring. It does nothing for the game but increases scoring only. Same thing with net size. Creating a shallower net, on the other hand, does something to improve speed, by producing more room.

I'd have to agree with some of the previous posters saying that an increase in penalties (and some bloody consistency in calling them) has to serve a purpose, which would be to condition teams and players not to clutch, grab and interfere not just to increase power play scoring. If it's done right, calling more of certain types of penalties would result in increased 5 on 5 chances/scoring too.

[poetica]

If I may jump into the conversation late - and without having read all the posts, but I think two different ideas are being convoluted here. Some are discussing an increase in offense and others an increase in scoring. To me offense means: pace of the game, flow, opportunities and chances. Scoring means goals. Although increased offense would likely increase scoring, more goals doesn't necessarily equate more offense.

Imagine a scenario where there were no goalies for an entire game: players would get to the red line and shoot every time. In the end, there would be a helluva lot of goals (scoring) but really no flow or excitement (offense).

The league needs to decide which is more important, higher scoring games or a more exciting product. Personally the goalie equipment size (although I do support some sort of reduction) is just a red-herring. It does nothing for the game but increases scoring only. Same thing with net size. Creating a shallower net, on the other hand, does something to improve speed, by producing more room.

I'd have to agree with some of the previous posters saying that an increase in penalties (and some bloody consistency in calling them) has to serve a purpose, which would be to condition teams and players not to clutch, grab and interfere not just to increase power play scoring. If it's done right, calling more of certain types of penalties would result in increased 5 on 5 chances/scoring too.

[sting]

Hate to beat a dead horse.....but.

Floating blueline:

1. Easier to gain line with possession = better flow and less stoppages.

2. Less offsides...which means less times 5 players between you and the goal.

3. Larger attack zone = more scoring chances.

4. Makes ice bigger without costing anything.

5. Gives defenseman more room to give and go or control a puck that hopped over the line because of crap ice.

6. Less tagging up where a defenseman is forced to dump = more possession.

7. Easier for a team to wear down defense as more room to cycle.

8. Power plays are better = less obstruction and stupidity.

9. Greater emphasis on mobile defense = less clunkers that slam pucks off glass.

Opinions???

[erkayloomeh]

Implement a three goalie system where you have a backup and two goalies that have to share the game switching at around the half way point of the second period

[We Are All Cucks]

Floating blue line eh...?

Doesn't sound like a bad idea, but it is pretty drastic. Maybe something to test out in AHL or pre-season or something. I almost feel like instant implementation could result in more injuries (change in conditioning or tactics or something), so it would have to be done slowly.

Frankly, though, the NHL doesn't need such a drastic change. Clearly if the game has been offensive before, it can be again without overhauling the system. I just feel like the NHL isn't truly invested in this, and if they were, something would've already been done about it. (ie. reffing and consistency)