Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

Mathieu Schneider On A Few Topics At The GM Meetings

via Darren Dreger tweets,

Mathieu Schneider says players aren't interested in making games longer. Says players would prefer games not ending in shootout...so...

...PA would like to see more testing on long change in 4 on 4, or ways of encouraging games ending in regulation.

Schneider says players would like to see more interference allowed to slow game down. Removal of trapezoid to relieve pressure on D-men...

Filed in: NHL Teams, NHL Talk, NHLPA, | KK Hockey | Permalink
  Tags: mathieu+schneider

Comments

Avatar

I hate the trapezoid, makes no sense.

Posted by George0211 on 03/11/14 at 12:06 PM ET

RockWestfall711's avatar

So the players want to go back to the Dead Puck era style of play that nuked ESPN ratings, got the NHL kicked to the curb, and was totally unwatchable.  No thanks.

And I’d rather rock ties than have the shootout.  No OT, just ties.

Posted by RockWestfall711 from Las Vegas on 03/11/14 at 12:06 PM ET

Avatar

So the players want to go back to the Dead Puck era style of play that nuked ESPN ratings, got the NHL kicked to the curb, and was totally unwatchable.  No thanks.

And I’d rather rock ties than have the shootout.  No OT, just ties.

Posted by RockWestfall711 from Las Vegas on 03/11/14 at 01:06 PM ET

That kind of interference was way over-board, I agree, but some interference should be allowed, the game has gotten so fast that players get injured left and right.

Posted by George0211 on 03/11/14 at 12:08 PM ET

SYF's avatar

That kind of interference was way over-board, I agree, but some interference should be allowed, the game has gotten so fast that players get injured left and right.

Posted by George0211 on 03/11/14 at 01:08 PM ET

The kind that makes Eddie Olcsux spit out every ten seconds in a Wings national broadcast?  lOOKING fORWARD tO tHAT.

Posted by SYF from Alana Blanchard's Bikinis and Surfboards on 03/11/14 at 12:13 PM ET

Paul's avatar

Elliotte Friedman tweet,

Burke says Schneider talked about defencemen being able to set picks for their partners on forecheck “and their is some merit to that.”

Posted by Paul from Motown Area on 03/11/14 at 12:14 PM ET

Avatar

The kind that makes Eddie Olcsux spit out every ten seconds in a Wings national broadcast?  lOOKING fORWARD tO tHAT.

Posted by SYF from the Swedish Ice Mafia on 03/11/14 at 01:13 PM ET

The kind that Red Wings were the best at for the past 20 years in the league that we had to hear about for half of the Wings/Rangers game.
Argh, is he awful

Posted by George0211 on 03/11/14 at 12:15 PM ET

RockWestfall711's avatar

While I get the speed injury issue I just fear allowing a little will end up turning into a lot and start things down a slippery slope.  Even though the game is far better, faster, and more exciting, the scoring is no better than pre 2005 and I don’t see where allowing a little more obstruction is going to help on that issue.

Posted by RockWestfall711 from Las Vegas on 03/11/14 at 12:21 PM ET

Down River Dan's avatar

Were about 9 seasons into the “new” rules enforcement. Have not seen a single statistic to show that the absurd crackdown in hooking / interference has resulted in a significant goals per game increase.
All that has done is create a nonstop PP/PK scenario which completely breaks up the flow of the game.

It does however create plenty of stoppages for tv timeouts.
sick

Posted by Down River Dan on 03/11/14 at 12:24 PM ET

phillyd's avatar

It does however create plenty of stoppages for tv timeouts.

Posted by Down River Dan on 03/11/14 at 01:24 PM ET

How do you figure? There’s only 3 TV timeouts per period regardless of old or new obstruction rules.

Posted by phillyd from Southern New Jersey on 03/11/14 at 12:33 PM ET

Avatar

Can we just get a better definition of a “distinct” kicking motion? I don’t want one more call going to the NHL war room in Toronto where they call back a goal when no one in the known universe can determine that the puck was actually kicked in. It should not take five minutes if something is distinct. If the skate is on the ice and moving perpendicular to the body it is not a kick.

Allowing a defenseman to maintain a lane or follow the path of the puck should be legal. If a defenseman has his back turned why can’t he impede the path as long as he is not moving towards the attacking player and moving towards the puck.  That also allows the forwards to set picks and screen out the D in the offensive zone.

At a minimum, get rid of the trapezoid when on the Power Play. Allow the goaltender to move the puck back out of the zone while his team is a man up. Better yet, no longer allow the defensive team to ice the puck. why give teams a free clear when they are penalized?

Get rid of the automatic delay of game for over the glass, treat it like an icing where the team that chipped it out can’t change. Keep the rule intact for goaltenders.

Allow pucks played off the net to remain in play. Why stop play if the puck remains within the confines of the playing area?

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 03/11/14 at 12:43 PM ET

Avatar

Better yet, no longer allow the defensive team to ice the puck.

Yes.  One of the stupidest rules in hockey, and if you take away the penalized team’s ability to ice it you’ll end up with one of two things: more time tiring down the penalty killers in their own zone or more faceoffs in their on zone without them being able to change lines.  Either of those has to result in more scoring, right?

Posted by Garth on 03/11/14 at 12:50 PM ET

MoreShoot's avatar

Can we please get rid of the double call of “general infraction” + enhancement?  If it’s a dive, it’s a dive.

Posted by MoreShoot on 03/11/14 at 12:53 PM ET

Avatar

If it’s a dive, it’s a dive.

To be fair, if you can be hooked, slashed or cross checked and still dive.

Posted by Garth on 03/11/14 at 12:57 PM ET

MoreShoot's avatar

To be fair, if you can be hooked, slashed or cross checked and still dive.

Oh, and, I’d like hooking to be hooking, not “careless touching with the stick between the shoulder and knee”.

Posted by MoreShoot on 03/11/14 at 12:59 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by MoreShoot on 03/11/14 at 01:59 PM ET

I’m with you there.

Posted by Garth on 03/11/14 at 01:11 PM ET

Avatar

I’d also like to see slashing be called when it isn’t actually a stick check. Just because your stick breaks doesn’t mean it is a slash. Used to be that you had to make contact at the gloves or above. Now if you come over the stick and the stick shatters it is a slash.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 03/11/14 at 01:16 PM ET

RockWestfall711's avatar

I like the no icing for the PK team idea but I also want to see 5x5 scoring improve far beyond where it is now.  Playoff hockey is more 5x5 oriented and even more of a shutdown style.  Need to open it up there as well and the only realistic answer is bigger nets.  The goalies are just too damn big and take up too much of the net.

Posted by RockWestfall711 from Las Vegas on 03/11/14 at 01:58 PM ET

Primis's avatar

There’s a very simple way to encourage trying for regulation wins:

Reg. Win = 2 pts
OT Win = 1 pt.
OT Loss = 0 pts.

Screw the 3rd point.  If you get into OT and lose, I fail to see what you’ve “won” to deserve a point.  It just means you took longer to lose.

If an OT loss meant 0 pts, a lot of incentive to play safe for OT would evaporate.  OT wouldn’t get you anything.  Only a Win would, and a Regulation iIn *should* be worth more than an OT Win.  Once you get into OT, there’s only 1 pt. up for grabs between the two teams.  Watch them play harder for it.

Posted by Primis on 03/11/14 at 01:59 PM ET

TreKronor's avatar

As long as we are putting rule ideas out there…

I’d like to see “Holding the Stick” be called.  Often a player will get called for hooking, when in fact the player who was being “hooked” was actually holding the stick (usually chicken-winging it). 

Hard for the refs to catch it all?  Well obviously, but I hate seeing the wrong guy getting penalized just for having his stick in the vicinity of their opponents mid-section.

Posted by TreKronor on 03/11/14 at 02:09 PM ET

Avatar

Posted by Primis on 03/11/14 at 02:59 PM ET

1) This wouldn’t change the fact that some games are worth more than others.

If you deserve the same number of points no matter how long it takes you to lose, then why do you deserve fewer points if you longer to win?

If every loss is worth zero points then why isn’t every win worth two?

Posted by Garth on 03/11/14 at 02:14 PM ET

Avatar

There’s a very simple way to encourage trying for regulation wins:

Reg. Win = 2 pts
OT Win = 1 pt.
OT Loss = 0 pts.

Screw the 3rd point.  If you get into OT and lose, I fail to see what you’ve “won” to deserve a point.  It just means you took longer to lose.

How was the Olympics set up? I thought

Regulation win = 3pts
OT WIN =      2pts
OT Loss =      1pts
Regulation loss= 0pts
This might encourage teams to play for regulation wins.

Posted by Pasha1277 on 03/11/14 at 02:31 PM ET

phillyd's avatar

Posted by Pasha1277 on 03/11/14 at 03:31 PM ET

That’s the way it was in the Olympics and I think it’s the way it needs to go in the NHL. Yeah, it’ll mess up all the old points-records but then you do it based on winning pct., i.e., number of points divided by 246 (3pts x 82 games). I would also like to see no more icing while on the PK as well as the idea that if you shoot the puck out it’s treated like icing instead of a 2 minute penalty.

Posted by phillyd from Southern New Jersey on 03/11/14 at 02:40 PM ET

Avatar

Yeah major things I would love changed. No trapezoid period, not just on the PP. And I would like to see no icing for the PKers. Making the defensive team actually drag the puck into the neutral zone will create more scoring opportunities on the PP.

Posted by Pasha1277 on 03/11/14 at 02:42 PM ET

mrfluffy's avatar

Were about 9 seasons into the “new” rules enforcement.

Posted by Down River Dan on 03/11/14 at 01:24 PM ET

And every season they call less and less of the “new” rules making it more and more like 2003…2004…etc.

Posted by mrfluffy from A wide spot on I-90 in Montana on 03/11/14 at 03:31 PM ET

Chris in Hockey Hell's avatar

I could go on and on about the way points are awarded in the standings in this league, but here’s a radical idea that I would be okay with. How about going to the “games back” method of determining the standings?

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from Ann Arbor, MI but LIVING in Columbia, TN on 03/11/14 at 03:47 PM ET

Chris in Hockey Hell's avatar

Oh, and, I’d like hooking to be hooking, not “careless touching with the stick between the shoulder and knee.

I’d like to expand upon that idea to include holds that are actual holds. Not this “Well, anytime you put your free hand on a guy, they’re gonna make that call” nonsense.

Posted by Chris in Hockey Hell from Ann Arbor, MI but LIVING in Columbia, TN on 03/11/14 at 03:49 PM ET

bigfrog's avatar

Allow pucks played off the net to remain in play. Why stop play if the puck remains within the confines of the playing area?

You can call it the “Setoguchi” rule

Posted by bigfrog on 03/11/14 at 05:12 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at pk@kuklaskorner.com