from Pierre LeBrun of The Athletic,

Some​ of​ the​ following​ ideas​ I’ve​​ suggested before, others are new. But in step with our wonderful set of stories this week at The Athletic tackling the future of hockey, here are changes I espouse for the next decade or two:

On ice

Different formations: Why is it for 100 years plus of the NHL the idea that one must have three forwards and two defencemen on the ice 5-on-5 has been the only way the game has been played? In the same way in which we’ve seen the evolution of power plays with four forwards and a D-man, why don’t coaches tinker with their 5-on-5 approach? Depending on the score and the time of the game, why don’t we see three defencemen on the ice and two forwards if you’re protecting a lead? Or if you’re down 2-3 goals to open the third period, why don’t coaches go with four forwards and one D? There are no rules against it but it’s been 3 F/2 D for the entire history of the NHL at 5-on-5. There’s got to be a head coach out there with the guts to challenge this and be the first guy to mix it up, at least in preseason.

read on (paid subscription)