Holland: Limit goalies playing the puck

[JesterDevil]

Holland: Limit goalies playing the puck

Canadian Press

2/10/2004

HENDERSON, Nev. (CP) - League commissioner Gary Bettman told general managers weeks ago to arrive at this posh resort near Las Vegas armed with ideas to open up the game.

Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland has a clear vision of what would bring on more scoring, and that's limiting how much goaltenders can play the puck.

``The goaltenders are so good at handling the puck,'' said the former minor-league netminder. ``A lot of teams don't go in to forecheck out of respect for their abilities. So how do we limit what they can do so teams are more encouraged to forecheck?

``With forecheck comes pressure, with pressure comes scoring chances and also odd-man rushes.''

The best example of what Holland means is the New Jersey Devils. They clog up the neutral zone and trap the opposing team, forcing the puck-carrier to dump it in instead of trying to stickhandle through a wall. But then Devils netminder Martin Brodeur scoops up the dump-in and fires it back out.

Boom, a turnover.

``I think limiting where they can go and what they can do with the puck would be an important change,'' said Holland. ``I understand puck-handling for goalies is a special skill but over the last 25 years the ability for a goaltender to handle the puck has been an incredible evolution.

``I watch some of the kids handle the puck in junior hockey, you can't even forecheck because it's like three defencemen back there.''

Even in Holland's playing days he noticed the effect goalies had when they played the puck.

``Actually, that was my strength, that's how I survived,'' he said. ``I thought I could cut down three to four scoring chances a game by handling the puck.''

At least triple that with netminders such as Brodeur, Marty Turco or Ed Belfour.

``The goaltending is so good. They've perfected the position,'' Holland said.

When it was pointed out to him that it doesn't seem fair to punish goaltenders for having developed a skill, Holland countered: ``It depends on what your philosophy is on what a goaltender is. To me, he's a puckstopper.''

Holland's solution is two-fold. Either forbid the goalie from going behind the back-end red line (behind the net) to play the puck at all, or let him go behind the red line but disallow the goalie from advancing the puck.

``So maybe they can just go back and stop it for their defenceman.''

He insists it would open the game in no time.

``I noticed at the world junior championships that European goalies don't really handle the puck,'' Holland said. ``And that gives the opposition a green light to forecheck.''

Goalies are under the microscope at these meetings in more ways than one. The touchy subject of goaltender equipment is once again on the table. The league has cracked down on it in the past few years but not nearly enough for many people.

Wayne Gretzky, for one, thinks goalies still wear equipment that's too big.

``It's been really difficult reducing the goalies' equipment,'' said Colin Campbell, the NHL's director of operations. ``These guys are passionate that they're going to get hurt.''

The biggest issue remains the pads. The current limits are 38 inches in height and 12 inches in width. Patrick Roy over the weekend raised eyebrows at the NHL all-star game in Minnesota when he recommended goalies wear 10-inch pads, which was the case 20 years ago.

``Can we reduce the size of the pads? The feeling is we can reduce the width,'' said Campbell. ``But if you're going to do that, you're going to have to get to the manufacturers in a hurry. This isn't just an easy fix come July 15. You're going to be affecting goalies' pads around the world.''

Any recommendation from the GMs this week must be officially approved by the league's owners at a Board of Governor's meeting this summer.

Bite me Holland, go stuff your face with some more "Pizza, Pizza!".

[CRASHER]

*yawn*

I look at this like trying to restrict the ability of a Quarterback to run with the

football after all "his job is to throw it ain't it ?? "

It's retarded... yes let's now punish players for being better then someone

else... hey Mike Modano is faster then Grant Marshall.. let's make Modano wear

weights on his ankles

no wonder the league is going to hell ....

[Triumph]

You have to agree with Holland that it is the goaltenders' stick handling ability that limits the forecheck. And without forechecking, there's only neutral zone hockey.

I know some people have the delusion that the game will suddenly open up if they start enforcing the rules or whatever (of course, no one talks about how much punishment guys take in front of the net as part of this selective enforcement of rules, but that's a whole other thread), but until you A: widen the rinks or B: prevent the goalies from playing the puck, forechecking is going to be very difficult.

I'm not saying I'm in favor of this possible rule change, but you've got to look at it objectively. Fortunately or unfortunately none of the GMs will either, probably resulting in this one dying at the table.

Edited February 10, 2004 by Triumph

[Rock]

I just wonder if Holland would be pushing this if he had a better stickhandling goalie? This proposal seems too agenda driven by some GMs and teams.

[SueNJ97]

Should they have stopped Orr from changing the way defensemen played???

I just don't think they should punish players for developing a skill. Other players should figure out how stop it. For example, if you dump it in correctly, Marty can't get to it. The Isles have figured out how to do it and it is one of the reasons they are so effective against the Devs.

BTW, Holland didn't seem to mind goalies playing the puck when he had Osgood. Then it was OK. Once again, hypocricy rears its ugly head.

[redruM]

Should they have stopped Orr from changing the way defensemen played???

I just don't think they should punish players for developing a skill. Other players should figure out how stop it. For example, if you dump it in correctly, Marty can't get to it. The Isles have figured out how to do it and it is one of the reasons they are so effective against the Devs.

BTW, Holland didn't seem to mind goalies playing the puck when he had Osgood. Then it was OK. Once again, hypocricy rears its ugly head.

So we want to see teh skills of the players, but only the offensive players???

I have no problem making goalies fair game outside the box, that should increase the forechecking because every fwrd will want to hit the golaies and once a golaie is hit he will not be so fast to leave the net, it will also create more transition as the fwrds make bad decisions about when to forecheck....

all these GMs are pathetic , they are not looking out for the game, only their teams....

[rbdf]

While we're at it, we can put height and weight restrictions on forwards, I mean, isn't it unfair how Todd Bertuzzi can barrel down the ice and knock people out of his way as he drives to the net. And Derian hatcher at 6'5", well, his reach is just too long and gives him an unfair edge at pokechecking the puck off the stick of some poor little forward trying to create something in the offensive zone.

Hell, before Lindros, how many guys who were capable of scoring and skating, but stood what 6'4" at 235, 245 lbs, had EVER played in the nhl? Now it's the norm.

From the hockey hall of fame: "Gordie Howe made his professional debut when he was 18, taking up the right wing for Detroit at the beginning of the 1946-47 season. He was 6' tall and just over 200 pounds, making him one of the heavier players in the league. "

So, based on that I'd say that all players should have to diet down to at least a 220 lb. maximum weight. Also, if your more than 6'2" tall, well, better find a reconstructive surgeon who can knock a couple inches off. I mean, how unfair is it when someone tries to lift the puck up off the boards or through the middle and a guy like Chara just sticks his hand up and swats it back into the offensive zone. That didn't happen back in the day.

Hey, while we're at it, let's fix basketball and get rid of that slam dunk stuff. They didn't do that 30 years ago. Think about how unfair that is to guys like clyde and dr. j who had to rely on jump shots and layups. And no more steroids and growth hormones for baseball players. Babe Ruth would have had more homeruns than god himself if he had a personal trainer, less alcohol and more GNC high protien growth shakes (not to mention a weight room and steroids). No more weight rooms for football players either, and make it illegal for a quarterback to run with the football, Y.A. Tittle never rushed for a hundred yards in a game, why should michael vick be allowed to.

Face it people, the players are bigger, stronger, faster, better coached, have video experts isolate things for them to watch so they learn people's tendancies or weaknesses, they have training facilities, dieticians, trainers, doctors, and work year round at their sport (not off season farmers and car salesmen like the old time nhl'rs were). The game evolves, just like everything else in the world. You can't selectively restrict certain people's abilities. As a coach, you have to find out how to attack that ability. To ask your gm to just outlaw it because your guy can't do it is the equivalent of running home to tell your mommy on the kid next door after he beat you at something.

The real solution is to make the ice surface larger, and the nets as well. But that won't happen since all existing arena's would lose very valuable seating areas.

[Devil Dog]

I would say that they should allow goalies to continue to play the puck, but if they go behind the net to play it they are fair game. In this way, only the goalies that are very good and very confident at puckhandling will continue to take this chance. Those goalies that are less sure of themselves will tend to back off. In this way the truely skilled goalies will be the ones that try and handle the puck. And even those will tend to back off if the opposing forwards are too close.

Just a thought.

[JesterDevil]

I think they should only be fair game if they are in POSSESION of the puck, when out of the crease. If they don't have the puck you can't touch them, if you do, interference. That way it's just like the skaters, that's what they want isn't it?

[rbdf]

think about the damage to a forward that a goalie who learns how to hit is going to do - if he gets his weight square and cracks the forward with the blocker or that big goal stick as he comes in for the hit. This could be fun.

[Devildude]

sniff... sniff... sniff...

what is that i smell ... is that Holland ... being jealous over not having a puck handler for a goalie...

boo hoo, cry me a river Holland... if you cant beat a puck handling goalie, why dot you just buy one... isnt that the Detriot way... or am i thinking of another team... hmmm

[LOTCB]

I just wonder if Holland would be pushing this if he had a better stickhandling goalie? This proposal seems too agenda driven by some GMs and teams.

I agree with you, but at the same token, would a lot of you be so against it if puckhandling was Marty's weakness????

[NJD Jester]

Re: Puck-handling goalie ban

This is exactly the sort of p ssy move Bettman would help usher through. Ban goalies from playing the puck rather than ENCOURAGING CHECKING AND CONTACT by having goalies simply be fair game.

This thinking by Holland is flawed. If they called obstruction in the neutral zone, there'd be no reason to always dump and chase.

One more thing: Will this goalie restriction be enforced during a penalty kill?

<JESTER>

[SueNJ97]

I just wonder if Holland would be pushing this if he had a better stickhandling goalie?  This proposal seems too agenda driven by some GMs and teams.

I agree with you, but at the same token, would a lot of you be so against it if puckhandling was Marty's weakness????

I would be against it...I don't think you deliberately legislate against skill. Just like it was wrong to deliberately stop 4-4 coincidental PPs because Montreal and Edmonton were scoring too much.

[Triumph]

Right, legend. They wouldn't be. In fact, I'm sure the Flyers fans are loving this proposal.

rbdf (and Crasher), it's not worth drawing analogies to other sports. Here's the facts: The NHL has twice made rules limiting great teams because they were too great: The Montreal Canadiens rule, where 2 minute power plays now expired if a goal was scored, and the rule against coincedental minors taking a man off the ice, made against the Oilers.

Goalies as fair game is foolish, unless they take out the instigator. Then if you want to mess with a goalie, you'll have to pay the price. But there's no need for more goalies to be getting injured..

As it stands now, I don't see it passing because too many teams have an advantage over too many other teams. But in a few years, if they're still looking to increase offense, the stickhandling abilities of goaltenders will only have increased. But as with offense and defense in the NHL today, the gap between the best and the worst will get narrower to the point that a majority may consider doing away with it.

Edited February 10, 2004 by Triumph

[Devildude]

I just wonder if Holland would be pushing this if he had a better stickhandling goalie?

Edited February 10, 2004 by Devildude

[Rock]

I just wonder if Holland would be pushing this if he had a better stickhandling goalie?  This proposal seems too agenda driven by some GMs and teams.

I agree with you, but at the same token, would a lot of you be so against it if puckhandling was Marty's weakness????

If a player develops a skill that's never really been done before at that level why ban it? No one told Bobby Orr he couldn't do end to end rushes anymore. Good teams figured out a way to "contain" Orr to an acceptable amount of damage. Instead of banning it show the tapes of the Islander's soft dumps against the Devils to other teams. Then either the other teams overcome Marty's stickhandling or Marty adapts and overcomes that tatic. Isn't that what competition is all about? The individual or team that performs the best at their gameplan usually wins the game.

But to arbitrarily say you are to good at that, so we are going to enact rules that hinder you!

To answer your question, I think I would still feel the way even if Martin Brodeur wasn't my favorite team's goaltender.

[NewarkDevil5]

You have to agree with Holland that it is the goaltenders' stick handling ability that limits the forecheck. And without forechecking, there's only neutral zone hockey.

I know some people have the delusion that the game will suddenly open up if they start enforcing the rules or whatever (of course, no one talks about how much punishment guys take in front of the net as part of this selective enforcement of rules, but that's a whole other thread), but until you A: widen the rinks or B: prevent the goalies from playing the puck, forechecking is going to be very difficult.

I'm not saying I'm in favor of this possible rule change, but you've got to look at it objectively. Fortunately or unfortunately none of the GMs will either, probably resulting in this one dying at the table.

Tri, you usually make a decent bit of sense in your posts but here you don't. If the referees were to actually enforce the rules as written ie. NO holding, hooking and interference PERIOD, the game would open up tremendously. Watch for these situations: a forward dumps the puck in and chases it, the defensemen play it thus: the defenseman closest to the chasing forward ties him up, completely ignoring the puck, while the other defenseman goes to get the puck. Or how about this: a guy gets a breakaway and gets hooked, just enough where he loses the puck, but not enough to fall down, or gets hooked enough where he gets slowed down to the point where the other defenseman can catch up and knock the puck away. These are things that happen on a regular basis and don't get called. Those are the sorts of plays that if they were uninterfered with would result in scoring chances and offensive pressure. You cannot hook a player in the game of hockey. It is against the rules. You cannot bearhug him. Those rules are in place for the specific purpose of opening up the game. That is why if they are not enforced the game gets bogged down. Its very simple. Forechecking is not difficult if obstruction is concretely outlawed. That is a fact. Goalies handling the puck helps the defense, but it isn't illegal nor does it have such a tremendous affect on the game because there are ways around it. The only thing that goalies handling the puck affects is the dump and chase game. Obstruction hurts both the skill game and the dump and chase game.

[David Puddy]

I think if a rule like this were instituted, this would be acceptable to me:

A goalie cannot pass the puck forward from behind his goal line. He can stop and leave it for a skater, but to clear or pass it he must skate it in front of the goal line.

Edited February 11, 2004 by David Puddy

[rbdf]

Newark, you hit the nail on the head. Especially on the dump and chase issue. That's standard tandem defense, defenseman A gets in the way of the oncoming forechecker, not a full out Pick, or Body Check as the referee would be forced to call an obstruction penalty if you laid into the guy, but just enough to hamper his forward progress and give defenseman B the added couple of strides to get to the puck and make the outlet pass. Defenseman A is not looking at the puck, skating for the puck or in any way positioning himself for receiving the puck, all he's doing is creating an obsticle that the forechecker needs to get past. He's essentially setting up a Pick, which is an obstruction penalty that needs to be called. That would open things up tremendously. It would not mess with the incidental contact (pushing and shoving) that happens when two guys are racing after a loose puck, which is legal and easily differentiated as defenseman A IS looking at the puck, skating towards the puck and trying to put himself in position to make a play on the puck. I'd much rather see that, watch two guys race for the loose puck, than see one guy just tie someone up so his teammate can go pick up the freebie.

[femalenynjazfan]

I know Bob Clarke is in favor of not letting goalies handle the puck behind the net. But I bet you if he still had Ron Hextall as his goalie, he would not support this rule because Hextall was a good puckhandler. He has scored a goal.

[Pepperkorn]

Newark, you hit the nail on the head.  Especially on the dump and chase issue.  That's standard tandem defense, defenseman A gets in the way of the oncoming forechecker, not a full out Pick, or Body Check as the referee would be forced to call an obstruction penalty if you laid into the guy, but just enough to hamper his forward progress and give defenseman B the added couple of strides to get to the puck and make the outlet pass.  Defenseman A is not looking at the puck, skating for the puck or in any way positioning himself for receiving the puck, all he's doing is creating an obsticle that the forechecker needs to get past.  He's essentially setting up a Pick, which is an obstruction penalty that needs to be called.  That would open things up tremendously.  It would not mess with the incidental contact (pushing and shoving) that happens when two guys are racing after a loose puck, which is legal and easily differentiated as defenseman A IS looking at the puck, skating towards the puck and trying to put himself in position to make a play on the puck.  I'd much rather see that, watch two guys race for the loose puck, than see one guy just tie someone up so his teammate can go pick up the freebie.

Oh sheeee-IT!

I feel the exact opposite -- I agree with Newark to take away all the hooking and crap! -- see what you're saying rbdf is take the defense out of defense - everyone just has to chase the puck around. I say it's the forwards job to figure out how to get around the dman - to draw the penalty. OR you call it all -- otherwise you'll have this messy chase around the rink crap and it'll suck! call the piddly little messy sh!t - open up the game make room for some real HITS --- THEN maybe when you get some intimidation back into the game you can take away the strategy you dub illegal. If there's no mind f*ck in hockey it's no damned fun.

and there it is, isn't it? Give me a player who provides one huge freaking mind boink and I'm his forever mental masterbation is a distant second hence my hanging out here all the time!

Edited February 11, 2004 by Pepperkorn

[SueNJ97]

I know Bob Clarke is in favor of not letting goalies handle the puck behind the net. But I bet you if he still had Ron Hextall as his goalie, he would not support this rule because Hextall was a good puckhandler. He has scored a goal.

Bobby even said it. When he made the suggestion to stop goalies from playing the puck he said that it was OK when it was only Hextall, but there are too many goalies who can do it now, and it's ruining the game.

In other words, it was OK when it was only my guy, but God forbid when it is other guys, especially the guy who keeps on beating us in the playoffs.

[Triumph]

Right. If you take out all the penalties, what you have left is a game where no one would hit anyone. At the front of the net, neither guy could touch the other, else it's a penalty, right? So you'd have a game where guys were just trying to tie each other's sticks up.

I agree that on the dump-in, that the defenseman should not be allowed to pick the oncoming forechecker. That's what I've been saying. But what I don't think is that the game should be called exactly by the book, or else we'll end up with a mockery of traditional hockey.

[Pepperkorn]

Blahhh... when i think about it it's all just so fuzzy. If you don't want to call all the rules then why have them? You need some fantastic ref geek... like a Doc of the ref world who understands and loves his jobs and would enjoy getting into the minutia of the rules to head a committe and just clean things up - not this generalized wackoff they're putting together now. EVERY RULE SHOULD BE REVIEWED AGREED AND ENFORCED. ... If that's the way you want to play it anyhow.