Tuesday, September 25, 2007

Luongo slams bigger nets

Roberto Luongo was asked about the possibility of increasing the size of the net during an NHL conference call today, and he responded by saying he would retire if that was a change that was brought in.

Call his bluff, I say.


At 5:31 p.m., September 25, 2007, Blogger Cameron said...

Given that the nets have never changed before, while goalie equipment has been subject to an incredible evolution over just the last 15 years, I'd way rather see some adjustments made to the size of the pads, etc. long before we make the nets bigger.

Compare any current NHL goalie (we don't have to use the ole Garth Snow in super-sized equipment pic, any current netminder will do) and compare them to what Patrick Roy wore as a rookie.

Given the advancements in technology I'm sure we could restrict the size of pads, webbing, etc. to those original Roy pad sizes and you'd have your increase in offense without sacrificing the size of the nets, goaltending safety - or Luongo's career

At 5:33 p.m., September 25, 2007, Blogger npietran said...

Something tells me he'd suck it up for the multimillion dollar salary he's making. An inch or two on each side and the top is probably all they really need.

At 5:38 p.m., September 25, 2007, Anonymous Lucas Aykroyd said...

Hey, that might open the door for Charles Wang's sumo wrestlers--or at least the likes of Vasili Koshechkin, Russia's 6-6, 242-pound backup goalie at the last World Championship.

Seriously, let's hope they defer any enlargement of the nets until the day when all goalies are even bigger than that. It would be impossible to compare past and future scoring records if this was implemented.

At 5:42 p.m., September 25, 2007, Blogger Earl Sleek said...

While I'll agree that Luongo is full of it in his retirement threat (you sir are no Niedermayer), I'm also not a guy who will blindly subscribe to the notion that "bigger nets equals more excitement".

The NHL can do whatever it wants to artificially pump scores (more PPs, drier uniforms, whatever), but I think it's misplaced. I think addressing play between the bluelines would probably do more to address game excitement than having more bouncy goals go in.

At 5:43 p.m., September 25, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Three things I don't like about the idea of bigger nets:

1. goalies have spent their whole lives learning to play with the net the size it is now; maybe this is a stupid analogy, but would it make sense to make a professional pianist play on a keyboard with keys that are wider than they've been on every keyboard he's ever played? Obviously the intention is in part to make it harder to play net, but I think this is way too radical a change -- these guys have spent years getting to the point where they know every angle in the rink, and know exactly where the net is behind them at all times -- to take that away would invalidate all the work they did to get to that point

2. have you ever watched a professional lacrosse game? When you can count on a dozen goals being scored, each one isn't very exciting by itself

3. real hockey nets are big, heavy and expensive; if the nets get bigger, every rink in every town in Canada, the U.S., and around the world will have to buy new ones. And what happens to all the old ones? Not to mention every net in every driveway in Canada.

I'd be happy to be proven wrong, because I'd love to see the Rick Vaive goal back in the NHL (in moderation), but I think the negatives far outweigh the positives at this stage

At 5:49 p.m., September 25, 2007, Blogger James Mirtle said...

1. We're talking about an increase of an inch or two; goaltenders wouldn't have to relearn their position.

2. There would not be this much of an increase in goal scoring. I think we're looking for an extra goal or two per game.

3. This could be an NHL-only change for now, and other rinks could grandfather in the change.

At 6:11 p.m., September 25, 2007, Anonymous noah said...

1. I don't know, I think the inch or two would make a significant difference for guys at that level. Luongo seems to think so too.

2. Agreed, unless I'm right about 1, in which case it would make goalies a lot less effective, and increase scoring more substantially.

3. How would that work in leagues that don't play all their games in the same rink? The same goalies and shooters would be playing with two different sized nets, depending on where the game was played. I can't see that going over very well at competitive levels of minor hockey.

At 10:38 p.m., September 25, 2007, Anonymous Anonymous said...


you made a small mistake in your entry at the Globe. Brodeur left the competition committee as he felt he wasn't heard and Turco took his place.

Hopefully he's not in it solely to preserve the status quo for goalies, but move the game forward.


At 10:42 p.m., September 25, 2007, Blogger James Mirtle said...

Thanks Andre; now that you mention it, I do recall that change.

At 1:21 a.m., September 26, 2007, Blogger Patty (in Dallas) said...

Why is an 8-4 game better than a 3-1 game?

At 1:28 a.m., September 26, 2007, Blogger Patty (in Dallas) said...

1. We're talking about an increase of an inch or two; goaltenders wouldn't have to relearn their position.

If that's the case, then wouldn't it take about a half-season for the goalies to adjust and then be right back at the same level?

2. There would not be this much of an increase in goal scoring. I think we're looking for an extra goal or two per game.

a. Is one or two goals a game worth such a big change?
b. Over how long a time? The first year? A decade? Forever?
c. What evidence is there that widening the net by an inch will make any difference whatsoever? Guesses? Computer models? (See new jerseys.)

At 11:47 a.m., September 26, 2007, Blogger npietran said...

Is that a valid comparison? Who thought new jerseys would make a difference in scoring? Anyone with half a brain knew that their talk about being "dryer" and "faster" was marketing crap.


Post a Comment

<< Home

Links to this post:

Create a Link


Free Page Rank Checker
eXTReMe Tracker