Jump to content

Random Hockey Observations


Recommended Posts

Serge, why is one better than the other? This kind of thing has to evolve naturally. pad stacks and Poke checks have gone the way of the dodo because they are inneficient. You can't just artificially try to bring back a style that does not work.

 

also, fwiw, Dominik Hasek's game was all about positioning and not at all about reflexes. He may have been upside down or backwards, but that guy had a ridiculous ability to always have his body in front of the puck

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 22.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • serge

    3931

  • Zach6668

    2871

  • digitalmonkey

    2649

  • MapleLeafpoker

    2008

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Taking Jin to his first NHL game Sunday. Seats close to the glass and I get to see McDavid. Probably the last game I see at The Joe.

I want Subban to win all the Norrises now.

vezina NOMINATION for Dev. **** yeahhhhhhhhhhhh. Going to vegas in June

Posted Images

When you hear a good shooter talk about a goalie and he says "he's not good, he's just big. There's no place to put the puck" , it tells you what the problem is. Get rid of oversized equipment. Leave the net alone. I'm with Dubey on that point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Playoff games are more exciting not because players are skating faster or getting more chances, but because the outcome of each of those chances holds way more importance to me.

 

I think as fans we confuse the two a lot, and attribute way more importance to the latter and less to the former. In this case, I think the NHL has gotten it "right" by trying to artificially create more parity. Not saying I think this is right, but I do think it keeps more people interested in more games for longer into the season.

 

Interesting point. If I understand you correctly, you're saying adding drama to the game, by making it mean more, makes it entertaining on its own.

I dont disagree with this, but I would argue this is not always the case, and especially not for me.

 

What I mean is, I can watch a game in the playoffs of Nashville vs Chicago, and see the effort+hitting+fast skating, and appreciate it even if I could care less who wins or loses.

But in the regular season, I rarely see that kind of all out play.

 

That said, its always more "exciting" when you're watching playoff OT, and sometimes thats not the best hockey at all.

 

 

Problem for me is this. Great plays are no longer rewarded with goals. Great passing doesnt get you a goal, rebounds do.(in most part)

If you listen to any player, they will say "you have to get to the area in front of the net"...why, because rebounds and garbage hit off 3 players plays are the ones that get you a goal. Most of the great passes come from the defending zone as an outlet or in the neutral zone. You dont have enough space+time to make a really nice pass in the offensive zone, so why bother trying. This isnt 100% the case, but the game is moving more and more away from "plays" and more+more to get a shot through, hope for a lucky bounce, and get a rebound. Its boring.

 

when I start to prefer soccer goal highlights over hockey goal highlights, thats not good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we all agree as a fan 3 on 3 is exciting?

 

But it's not real hockey and I believe coaches hate it , because it's hard to coach and put systems in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we all agree as a fan 3 on 3 is exciting?

 

But it's not real hockey and I believe coaches hate it , because it's hard to coach and put systems in.

 

anything that makes it harder for coaches to put a system on I'm all for

 

It's more hockey than a penalty shot contest and it is exciting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In nearly every sport I watch, the work being done behind the scenes by the plethora of analysts each team has, is hurting the game. It makes me think of the shift being deployed so much in baseball, or reminds me of how the crazy car setups of F1 in the 90's ruined that sport, and they constantly tinkered with the rules trying to "excite" the fan base.

 

I found this interesting, mostly because of how much I wanted to disagree, but didn't really. I think saying "hurting the game" is unfair, since it is a natural evolution of winning being important. But I do agree that many of the analyst-driven measures, especially the shift, make it less exciting. Then again, we always see the ugly things, like the shift or the trap, as being analyst-driven. We are conditioned to pretend that an amazing pass up the middle or Bautista home run always has a huge amount of analyst work behind it, but since it is player-dependent and not boring, we don't see it that way.

 

What I find interesting is how many of the "worst" analyst-driven things are specifically anti-TV. I don't mind seeing a baseball team play the shift if I'm actually at the game, and I'm seeing the positioning of the fielders at the same time as the batted ball. But it's frustrating when I watch TV and I see a ball hit but the result of the play is not what I expect because the third baseman is playing right field or whatever.

 

The biggest change in equipment is the addition of the cheaters all over the goalie gear. Look at the catching glove.

 

To be fair, I feel like every goalie should have the right the outfits they give to the guys defusing bombs, given what they are being subjected to...

 

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/470907704758182161/

 

p.s. I have no idea why the best link I could find was to a pinterest board...

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I find interesting is how many of the "worst" analyst-driven things are specifically anti-TV. I don't mind seeing a baseball team play the shift if I'm actually at the game, and I'm seeing the positioning of the fielders at the same time as the batted ball. But it's frustrating when I watch TV and I see a ball hit but the result of the play is not what I expect because the third baseman is playing right field or whatever...

 

I agree with this. And before I was actually going to post (or did I, doing too many things at once!)....I was going to post that I think certain things play better live in person.

For example, I can appreciate the skills of certain players live, and the pace of the game is so crazy fast in person, you dont really even see the def deployed tactics. But watching a game on tv, with the wide angle, you see what could have been and you are forced to accept that the systematic D just shut down the play before it got off the ground. I dont know if that makes sense, just my way of saying that I think there is a difference between what I find entertaining live, and what I like to see on TV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Arp, regarding your Nashville/Chicago example. That is exciting to me mostly because of the perceived gravity of the situation. I know the fans are into it, I know the players are into it. I know how much the game "matters". I might not care who wins, but I am still emotionally invested in the outcome. I don't think the actual quality of hockey being played is noticeably better than a Nashville/Chicago game in the middle of the regular season. I think the heightened emotional impact of the game and the energy from the crowd and the gravity of the situation makes us perceive the action on the ice to be faster and more entertaining.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we all agree as a fan 3 on 3 is exciting?

 

But it's not real hockey and I believe coaches hate it , because it's hard to coach and put systems in.

 

I dont know what "real hockey" is. I suppose an argument could be made that 3 on 3 could easily happen during regulation time. (it still can, cant it? ie coincidental minors for 2 pairs of players?)

Either way, its way better than the shootout, and I find it great to watch. Its bordering on mickey mousey a little for me though TBH.

 

Id rather 4 on 4 all night til someone scores, or just end in a TIE. NOTHING WRONG WITH A TIE! :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Arp, regarding your Nashville/Chicago example. That is exciting to me mostly because of the perceived gravity of the situation. I know the fans are into it, I know the players are into it. I know how much the game "matters". I might not care who wins, but I am still emotionally invested in the outcome. I don't think the actual quality of hockey being played is noticeably better than a Nashville/Chicago game in the middle of the regular season. I think the heightened emotional impact of the game and the energy from the crowd and the gravity of the situation makes us perceive the action on the ice to be faster and more entertaining.

 

Its an interesting viewpoint, but I disagree. But I am now curious to actually watch a game in the playoffs and see if I was "imaginging" the play being better, or if I was just getting caught up in the atmosphere.

 

How about this...would you not agree there is a lot more hitting in the playoffs? And less fighting? I think that alone raises the bar for me, with or without scoring chances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, I definitely think playoff hockey is more intense. I do believe the level of play is higher. I just think that it's probably barely noticeable without the other factors amplifying it. I think if you could somehow watch 2 games without sound, and with the crowds removed from the picture, it would be difficult to decipher which one was a playoff game and which one was a regular season game by just watching the play. Your best clues would be the player's reactions to scoring, not so much how they actually play.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with this. And before I was actually going to post (or did I, doing too many things at once!)....I was going to post that I think certain things play better live in person.

For example, I can appreciate the skills of certain players live, and the pace of the game is so crazy fast in person, you dont really even see the def deployed tactics. But watching a game on tv, with the wide angle, you see what could have been and you are forced to accept that the systematic D just shut down the play before it got off the ground. I dont know if that makes sense, just my way of saying that I think there is a difference between what I find entertaining live, and what I like to see on TV.

 

Oh I absolutely get you. Even if you are watching the Lemaire-era Devils, it wasn't "boring" to see it live because you can really see the skill and coaching on display when watching the whole ice. It's only boring if the camera is on the puck and every time your player touches it, there are 4 guys between him and the net. Same with all the pick and rolls in basketball - amazing to watch all the off-the-ball movement in person, but watching on TV just looks awkward and crowded.

 

I dont know what "real hockey" is. I suppose an argument could be made that 3 on 3 could easily happen during regulation time. (it still can, cant it? ie coincidental minors for 2 pairs of players?)

Either way, its way better than the shootout, and I find it great to watch. Its bordering on mickey mousey a little for me though TBH.

 

Id rather 4 on 4 all night til someone scores, or just end in a TIE. NOTHING WRONG WITH A TIE! :)

 

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH A TIE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you guys know Jake Gardiner is more important to the Leafs than Duncan Keith is to the Hawks, defensively speaking?

 

Naaa

Link to post
Share on other sites

Goalies should be required to wear an eye patch over one eye. They change which side it's on each period. Home goalie gets to choose which eye he puts it over in the 1st & 3rd period.

I like this.
Link to post
Share on other sites

So I asked someone who knows about increasing scoring. Here's his take:

-leave the nets the same size, not fair to the goalies

-shrink the equipment

-do something to address shot blocking. His suggestion was outlaw sliding shot blocks. He also said take away all the shot blocking gear guys wear like extra skate armour, and blockers shin pads. He said making guys pay for blocking shots would help open the lanes. He mentioned that's the biggest problem, is that you never get a clean look at the net anymore.

 

On an interesting side note, he said that the MTL goalie (Condon) had the biggest gear he's ever seen. Filled the entire net. Figured his pads were illegal, gloves were illegal, breezers were illegal, and body armour illegal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got game centre live and the Xbox nhl app to watch games but the app is a joke and looks like a mid-nineties website. I've had to watch the last two games with NBC and fox broadcasts. Is there a way to watch Canadian broadcasts through this or see the extra angles etc?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

-do something to address shot blocking. His suggestion was outlaw sliding shot blocks. He also said take away all the shot blocking gear guys wear like extra skate armour, and blockers shin pads. He said making guys pay for blocking shots would help open the lanes. He mentioned that's the biggest problem, is that you never get a clean look at the net anymore.

 

 

I hate this suggestion. Guys are still going to try to block shots, taking away the pad just means they're going to get hurt. I guess you can take away sliding blocks, but doubt that makes much of a difference.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got game centre live and the Xbox nhl app to watch games but the app is a joke and looks like a mid-nineties website. I've had to watch the last two games with NBC and fox broadcasts. Is there a way to watch Canadian broadcasts through this or see the extra angles etc?

 

I have GCL and stream in my phone, iPad and Apple TV. It's been great. You get home and away broadcast teams. The only issue is if the game is on your local cable package it will be blacked out, including national games

Link to post
Share on other sites

National games don't get blacked out in Canada. It's great. I can watch all the CBC games on GCL. Just not non-national Leafs games.

 

Home and away broadcasts if they exist. When they're on CBC or NBC, you'll likely only get one feed though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...