2010 NHL Offseason Thread

[Selamis]

God how I love hip checks, they are a thing of beauty when timed right.

[Oxyminus]

I'm curious what other people's thoughts are on Hybrid Icing...from what I've read it sounds like it's going to be subjective if the play goes or is whistled dead based on where the defensemen and forwards are who are chasing down the puck.

All in all, I don't like this potential rule. Penalties are judgement calls, but they're based off tangible facts. This would make icing almost totally subjective "well did he mean to ice the puck or didn't he?" I don't dig it.

Also, the league needs to take steps to making the game safer (better rule enforcement, CONSISTENCY, banning hits to the head) this is one of those aspects of the game that should be kept a tough part of the game...really wanna get that icing? well, be prepared that there's a guy who's barreling after you to get that puck as well...From what I'm getting, this would really take some good toughness out of the game.

And I don't know how to post videos/links...but Kaspiritis was a MASTER of the hip-check!

ALSO -- Glad this "no icing while shorthanded" isn't getting much news, because that was a STUPID idea.

[NynJa]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRwAyABEVBE
yup, showing you're realllllllllllly tough.

[Sepukku]

Mark Eaton broke his leg going back for an icing and came back the next season to eliminate the Flyers the following season. Just saying.

[Oxyminus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRwAyABEVBE
yup, showing you're realllllllllllly tough.

one bad apple?

That's an extreme example to use...guy didn't make any attempt to play the puck blah blah blah

[Callisto]

I'm curious what other people's thoughts are on Hybrid Icing...from what I've read it sounds like it's going to be subjective if the play goes or is whistled dead based on where the defensemen and forwards are who are chasing down the puck.

All in all, I don't like this potential rule. Penalties are judgement calls, but they're based off tangible facts. This would make icing almost totally subjective "well did he mean to ice the puck or didn't he?" I don't dig it.

Also, the league needs to take steps to making the game safer (better rule enforcement, CONSISTENCY, banning hits to the head) this is one of those aspects of the game that should be kept a tough part of the game...really wanna get that icing? well, be prepared that there's a guy who's barreling after you to get that puck as well...From what I'm getting, this would really take some good toughness out of the game.

And I don't know how to post videos/links...but Kaspiritis was a MASTER of the hip-check!

ALSO -- Glad this "no icing while shorthanded" isn't getting much news, because that was a STUPID idea.

I'm a fan of the hybrid icing, there's a reason why almost every lower league uses automatic icing or is about to change to hybrid, there's no sense in guys getting smashed against the boards in a footrace, too many injuries come of it. Hybrid icing allows for there to still be a footrace(which is the appealing part of current the current icing rule), just to the faceoff dot instead of the goal line so guys aren't getting thrown into the boards in prone positions. There's a difference between being 'tough' and just having something that is asking for an injury, like when the XFL junk was around and they did punt returning with no fair catch allowed.

I watched the NHLN coverage of the RDO Camp and read up where I could, some of the stuff seems interesting like the 4-on-4 turning into 3-on-3 overtime. The faceoff changes they were tinkering with all seem stupid outside of the one where you have to back up a step instead of getting tossed for another player if you fault, though at the same time 90% of the time when I see a guy get tossed out of the faceoff circle I have no clue why(one of the GMs said the same thing too, think it may have been Buffalo's).

No icing while shorthanded is actually decent IMO, being shorthanded is supposed to be a punishment for taking a penalty, letting the shorthanded team break a rule(normal icing) while they're being punished for breaking the rules isn't the most logical thing. That said, I think scoring is adequate at the least in the league right now, there were a ton of games with at least one if not both teams scoring 6+ goals last year, I don't like how they're still trying to change more and more shit to keep upping the scores, real fans like seeing good defense/great saves as much as they like seeing goals.

[isladar]

I don't know.. I agree that no icing while short-handed is a way of breaking the rules while you're being punished, but on the other hand, you're down a duder already. I don't know that a PP should be an almost guaranteed goal. There were a number of PKs in the playoffs that if they didn't have the no icing rule, the short-handed team would have been murdered.

I'm kinda 50-50 on it, as I'd rather see really tight defense rather than just "nail the puck as far from your zone as possible", but I guess we'll see if it gets implemented.

[Thoronas]

I think I like it, but that's only in theory. If it was implemented I could see teams relying more on their goalies to stop the play when the team is getting gassed. It would definitely lead to more goals but I think it also gives refs too much power to influence the game since it will give the team on the power play such a huge advantage.

[Bweigelt]

I'd personally rather see just straight no touch icing, but this hybrid rule sounds like a good compromise.

[Sepukku]

I liked the icing rule as-is... Although Im the ridiculously set-in-his-ways type of guy...

[Selamis]

I like icing as it is now, and has been since the game started being played. Technically there's supposed to be no contact anyway if you're racing for the puck to save/cause an icing, and they're technically supposed to give penalties if you throw a check when going for icing. Meh.

[Ishido]

I like icing as it is now, and has been since the game started being played. Technically there's supposed to be no contact anyway if you're racing for the puck to save/cause an icing, and they're technically supposed to give penalties if you throw a check when going for icing. Meh.

Wouldn't that be the point of changing the rules? I think the problem is less about penalties in this situation and more about eliminating that situation, since most of the incidents are penalized in the game today.

I personally don't have a problem with the current icing rules, since although there are some horrific crashes you can find, there are probably more man-games lost to a myriad of other causes. Just trying to be a bit of a devil's advocate here, and hybrid icing would be a step in the direction they seem to want, which is a "safer NHL."

[Sepukku]

Pierre Lebrun posted a more thorough non-twitter recap of the rules forum thingy for ESPN.com today, not previously mentioned here is that he (Pierre) suggested the possibility of requiring teams to kill all of 2 and 4 minute penalties regardless of the other team scoring once or more, like major penalties are current administered. Apparently this was the case before the 56-57 season.

Also suggested by the folks in Toronto, not Pierre, was a 2nd, yellow, line inside the net behind the red line that if the leading edge of the puck even grazes it would validate a goal because it would be one puck width + a tiny, tiny fraction behind the red line. Also, the league is considering removing the goalie trapezoid already? Good, I say.

[Callisto]

I like both the yellow line and the abolition of the trapezoid, but I think not having a minor end when a goal is scored is excessive, when you start getting into a position where a team could potentially give up 2-3 goals because someone took a convincing dive and got a minor out of it(looking at you, Sid) you're going a bit far.

[Ishido]

The "every penalty being a major" is a bit strange to me because you could get an accidental high stick that manages to draw blood being almost as severe as something that gets someone ejected/suspended (in manpower, obviously not counting misconduct PIMs and not having the player available). I'd also hate to see some of the really weak penalties result in 2+ goals during the 2 mins.

[Ivaden]

Yeah, I don't think that rule is very smart at all.

[NynJa]

Pierre Lebrun posted a more thorough non-twitter recap of the rules forum thingy for ESPN.com today, not previously mentioned here is that he (Pierre) suggested the possibility of requiring teams to kill all of 2 and 4 minute penalties regardless of the other team scoring once or more, like major penalties are current administered. Apparently this was the case before the 56-57 season.

This was changed when the habs PP unit scored 3 times on one powerplay lol

[Thoronas]

Yeah that power play rule was changed for a reason. No need to go back to the old days when teams with insane PP would utterly dominate.

[Oxyminus]

I'm a fan of the hybrid icing, there's a reason why almost every lower league uses automatic icing or is about to change to hybrid, there's no sense in guys getting smashed against the boards in a footrace, too many injuries come of it. Hybrid icing allows for there to still be a footrace(which is the appealing part of current the current icing rule), just to the faceoff dot instead of the goal line so guys aren't getting thrown into the boards in prone positions. There's a difference between being 'tough' and just having something that is asking for an injury, like when the XFL junk was around and they did punt returning with no fair catch allowed.

I watched the NHLN coverage of the RDO Camp and read up where I could, some of the stuff seems interesting like the 4-on-4 turning into 3-on-3 overtime. The faceoff changes they were tinkering with all seem stupid outside of the one where you have to back up a step instead of getting tossed for another player if you fault, though at the same time 90% of the time when I see a guy get tossed out of the faceoff circle I have no clue why(one of the GMs said the same thing too, think it may have been Buffalo's).

No icing while shorthanded is actually decent IMO, being shorthanded is supposed to be a punishment for taking a penalty, letting the shorthanded team break a rule(normal icing) while they're being punished for breaking the rules isn't the most logical thing. That said, I think scoring is adequate at the least in the league right now, there were a ton of games with at least one if not both teams scoring 6+ goals last year, I don't like how they're still trying to change more and more shit to keep upping the scores, real fans like seeing good defense/great saves as much as they like seeing goals.

After thinking it over a bit, I think what really gets me about the hybrid icing thing is the subjectivity of it. I'd say subjectivity, and the interpretation of the rules is the one thing that plagues the league as far as how the game is played. I want icing to be icing, not to sometimes be icing and not icing other times.

Totally agree about the no icing while on the PK point. It's clearly another attempt to increase scoring to bring in more fans. It's just such a lousy idea...I'm still baffled it would be considered.

[Palin]

I'm a fan of the hybrid icing rules. Honestly I think no-touch icing is the way to go, but the NHL won't go for it, so hybrid is the next best thing. The difference between racing to the boards or racing to the faceoff dot is trivial, except when it comes to potential for injury.

4v4 for 5 minutes followed by 3v3 would be great for OT and reducing shootouts. And no more 3 point games, unless they adopt an Olympic style points system.

Also get rid of the damn trapezoid.