Officiating Changes and the Canucks

[JamesB]

As is obvious from the preseason games so far, the NHL has made two important officiating changes. The rules haven't changed, but the NHL has decided to move to a "zero-tolerance" policy on slashing and on face-off infractions.  It remains to be seen if the new policy will stick as the season wears on, but it could be very similar to the changes in enforcement regarding hooking, interference, and holding, all of which did eventually stick.

 

Personally, I like the changes, but the focus of this post is about the effect on the Canucks. First, here is my assessment of what the impact will be.

 

A.. Slashing enforcement.

 

1. Initially, this will lead to more penalties, resulting in increased importance for PK and PP special teams. Last year the Canucks were 29th out of 30 in PP percentage and 28th in PK percentage, making them 29th overall in combined special teams performance. With  better coaching and better players, the Canucks will be better this year, but probably still below average. So more penalties probably does not play to the Canucks advantage, but I think players will adjust fairly quickly, so I do not expect this to be a big effect.

 

2. More importantly it will change the game in much the same way enforcing hooking and holding did, increasing the value of speed. In recent years, subtle slashes to the hands have become very common. If the puck carrier is pulling away from a checker a quick slash to the hands might force a bobble with the puck or even cause a loss of possession. At a minimum it is likely to slow the player down or distract him. Taking away that tactic will  make it harder for slower players to keep up with faster players, just as holding and hooking enforcement did. I am not saying this is a big effect, but I think it matters.

 

On the Canucks, this will hurt the Sedins, especially Henrik, who uses subtle slashes a lot, not to hurt anyone, but to contain faster players and on the forecheck to try to release the puck. It will help Baertschi and Horvat and Virtanen (if he makes the team) because of their speed. It helps them on offense and it also makes them more valuable on defence because they have the speed to get back on the backcheck (as Virtanen has already shown in the preseason).

 

B. Face-offs

 

1. Everyone used to cheat on face-offs, with feet over the line, stick off the ice and moving toward the dot as the puck was dropped instead of being behind the line, stationary, with the stick on the ice. But established veterans were given more leeway than young guys. So I think zero tolerance helps young guys like Horvat and Granlund and probably hurts vets like Henrik and Sutter.

 

2. WIth both guys often over line and moving toward the dot as the puck was dropped, a lot of faceoffs involved a wrestling match between the players, tying each other up. That will decline, decreasing the importance of physical strength and increasing the importance of pure reflex. Once again this helps younger guys.

 

3. A lot of guys will be tossed from the circle, increasing the value of having a winger who is good on face-offs to step in.

 

 

C. Bottom Line

 

On balance I do not see a big advantage or disadvantage to the Canucks, but i think the value of young fast guys like Virtanen and Baertsch and Granlund is increased.

 

My analysis could by way off and I would be interested in any comments.

 

Thanks

 

 

[Alflives]

You're 100% correct.  The league is younger and faster than ever.  There is a greater question: was it wise of JB to sign several older, slower vets, considering the new game?  I say: YES.  Those older, slow bets should guarantee us another bottom three finish.

[brownky]

I suspect #2 is why Green was having nontraditonal people play centre for a bit, get some faceoff work in when the games don't matter - they'll be called upon to win draws more this year.

[DSVII]

Call me skeptical but I wonder just how strictly the league maintains this stance in playoffs

[Green Building]

I believe %100 there is absolutely no way that the league has the balls to enforce these new rule adjustments for the whole year and playoffs, and that's one of the biggest things that bothers me about the league, the fact that officiating is so variable from one night to the next that you never know what an actual penalty is. 

 

If the league has officially declared full time war on slashing then this is bigger than removing hooking from the game. Essentially, it means you cannot stick check the way people grew up learning how to do. Some, or most, players who aren't quick enough to get into position are going to be on the outside looking in at future training camps as they won't be as effective anymore.  

 

What will hockey look like in 5 years if they stick to this? Will they have the scrote to enforce this in the playoffs where rules are all but officially different than the regular season? I'm not against rule changes, and tend to like both of these as they look on paper. The onus is on the players themselves to not rake up the minor penalties, not the refs for enforcing them, so we'll see just how smart these NHL'ers are if we move forward with zero tolerance. 

 

As far as I'm, concerned every change that feels half-ass enforced brings me closer to walking away from the league. I'm fine with them doing something regarding player safety, but do it %100, don't f*** around with it.

[King Heffy]

Won't be relevant until the NHL forces the refs to actually call the game professionally.  When Kelly Sutherland is allowed to blatantly rig games with zero consequences, any rule changes simply don't effect us as the refs have made it clear that they will not respect the rule book when they're assigned our games.

[luckylager]

Given today's technology, there's no reason we couldn't elimate refs (keep the linesmen to break up fights).

 

A few dozen 4k eyes in the sky, sensors etc. and program the system. Eliminate "human error". 

 

Refs are terrible. Ask any fan. Yes, it would be a hard job, so lets get computers to do it.

[Mackcanuck]

I wonder what Manny Mulhotra thinks of the new face off rules?

[butters]

50 minutes ago, Alflives said:

You're 100% correct.  The league is younger and faster than ever.  There is a greater question: was it wise of JB to sign several older, slower vets, considering the new game?  I say: YES.  Those older, slow bets should guarantee us another bottom three finish.

whats the pool of young and fast free agents look like?

[xereau]

Benning saw these changes coming and has built for it with speed and skill.  The team will adjust and this team should flourish.  I love the changes -- calling the game like the book says?  What a novel concept!

[kingofsurrey]

2 hours ago, JamesB said:

As is obvious from the preseason games so far, the NHL has made two important officiating changes. The rules haven't changed, but the NHL has decided to move to a "zero-tolerance" policy on slashing and on face-off infractions.  It remains to be seen if the new policy will stick as the season wears on, but it could be very similar to the changes in enforcement regarding hooking, interference, and holding, all of which did eventually stick.

 

Personally, I like the changes, but the focus of this post is about the effect on the Canucks. First, here is my assessment of what the impact will be.

 

 

 

NHL is famous for reffing preseason one way.

 

Once the reg season starts the refs will call it like usual.

Once the playoffs start the refs will eat their whistles.

 

Canucks need to build a club that is designed to win in the playoffs.  Not another 2011 team that accepts getting facewashed...

[Slegr]

Sedins will be racking up the penalty minutes this year. I feel bad for them, but those little slashes and hooks are part of their DNA. Still great players, but these penalty priorities do not fall in their favour.  Too bad these changes didn't come earlier when the Sedins were so dominant, cycling non stop and getting hacked and wacked constantly.  

[-AJ-]

I constantly find that your analysis of the game is well founded and enjoy reading your perspectives. I agree with your assessment. I believe we will see a significant spike in penalty minutes this year due to slashing calls, but they'll start to drop off by the season's end and as well into next season, assuming the refs are consistent, like they were back in the first post-lockout seasons.

[coolboarder]

This will be a good test for the referee to enforce the rules properly because every players in the league slashes other players and that ref cannot show his bias by calling this primarily against the Canucks.  This will become too obvious if it will ever happen by showing his bias by calling this way and not call the same infraction against other team in the game.  This should weed out who is too biased from years of refereeing.   If the Canucks want to contend in the future, they should keep their book by scouting the referee for future reference.  We cannot allow Kelly Sutherland to continue showing his bias against the Canucks any longer.  I forgot who other referee that has bias against us for no reason at all.   One of my pet peeve about the referee is that he is looking at this infraction and not calling this penalty on purpose and would say, I didn't see this one but call this same type of infraction against us for years already even on replay showing clearly is the case.  

[Green Building]

2 hours ago, xereau said:

Benning saw these changes coming and has built for it with speed and skill.  The team will adjust and this team should flourish.  I love the changes -- calling the game like the book says?  What a novel concept!

Call me skeptical, but I'll reserve judgement of the seasons refereeing until at least 1/3 of the way through the regular season. If they did implement it across the board that would be the biggest leaf turned over since, I don't even know when. But huge. 

[xereau]

Just now, Green Building said:

Call me skeptical, but I'll reserve judgement of the seasons refereeing until at least 1/3 of the way through the regular season. If they did implement it across the board that would be the biggest leaf turned over since, I don't even know when. But huge. 

They tried this after the last lockout, and is not coincidentally when the Sedins really broke out.  They called everrrrrrything.  Till the playoffs, then was same old $&!#e.

[Green Building]

You're right, and I mentioned in another post somewhere (maybe here, I don't remember) that I don't believe the league has the nards to call it the same in the playoffs as they do in the regular season, and that's IF they call it as hard as they have during the preseason. I'm skeptical towards all of it because of, as you accurately say, and I paraphrase, history.

[granpappy]

5 hours ago, DSVII said:

Call me skeptical but I wonder just how strictly the league maintains this stance in playoffs

by the time we make the playoffs they may be enforcing the rule regularly

[Adarsh Sant]

By the time the playoffs come around, the refs will go back to " let them play". Mark my words.

[coolboarder]

8 minutes ago, Adarsh Sant said:

By the time the playoffs come around, the refs will go back to " let them play". Mark my words.

Let them play is not good as it is not what they have played for all year, let's stay consistent for once.   Hopefully that they will follow up with automatic no playoff assignment next playoff if they comes to that crap.  Time for a new group of ref taking over that has a gut to make calls like this in playoffs if I'm a commissioner.