Should the NHL get rid of the trapezoid and enforce icing on penalty killers?

8 Comments

brodeurandthetrapezoid.jpgWhile casual fans probably don’t really bat an eye at the league’s post-lockout “trapezoid rule,” it’s something that bothers purists for sure. For those of you who aren’t aware, before the lockout a goalie had much more freedom to play the puck (and therefore hamper an opposing team’s dump-and-chase game). In hopes of increasing scoring, the NHL decided to pass a rule that would charge a team with a two-minute delay of game penalty if their goalie handled the puck outside of that dreaded trapezoid behind the red line.

Ken Campbell makes a passionate argument against the trapezoid for The Hockey News. Here is his argument in a nutshell (click on the link to read his well-reasoned thoughts in greater depth).

Well, we’ve had five full seasons with the trapezoid and while it might have been a concern in the pre-lockout NHL, the game has changed so much and the flow of play has so greatly improved that the league could easily abolish the trapezoid and allow goalies to play the puck with impunity without compromising offensive chances.

I agree with Campbell, but again, I don’t think this is a subject that should create much debate. The rule change that Campbell brought up late in the column, however, has my Nerdy Hockey Spider Sense tingling as if I had a whole bottle of Denorex on my scalp.

Another one I’ve never been able to figure out is why teams are allowed to ice the puck with impunity when killing a penalty. First, you give a team a disadvantage for breaking the rules, then you allow it to break the rules again to mitigate the disadvantage it faced for breaking the rules in the first place.

Here are a couple of remedies: One would be to abolish the free-pass icing when killing a penalty and, just to make it more interesting, retain the rule that doesn’t allow the team that iced the puck to make a player change during the stoppage in play. That way you’d have four tired penalty-killers taking a faceoff in their own end. Another would be to allow each team a pre-determined number of icings per period, let’s say three. The first three icings would not be called, but each one after that would result in a defensive-zone faceoff, even on a penalty kill.

Sound crazy? Well, it’s no more outlandish than establishing a small, defined area in which goaltenders are allowed to play the puck.

penaltykilling.jpgOK, I’m not a fan of his “three icings per period” addendum, but the no free-pass icing on the penalty kill idea smells like mad scientist genius to me.

After all, why should a team be given extra rights after committing a penalty? For the record, I’m one of those people who wants sports games to be played the same way at all times. Not only am I against the shootout, but I’d also rather see overtime be 5-on-5 during the regular season. (Of course, I have some more bold ideas about giving teams more incentive to play hard all game long, but that’s a whole other discussion.)

I mean, can you really give me a good reason why icing is allowed on penalty kills … aside from making things easier for teams down a man? Imagine how much more interesting it would be if an opposing team had to get to the middle of the ice before they dumped the puck on the kill? It would make it easier for the powerplay team to retain the puck and make opposing teams “earn” every killed penalty.

If the league was bold enough to do away with the trapezoid and make that icing change, it would signify – to me at least- a subtle nudge away from dump and chase strategies. That, to me, would make hockey that much more appealing for casual fans who need to witness the beautiful skill this sport often exhibits.

With these rule changes in mind, I thought I’d ask you folks out there. Would you like to see either one of these rules changed? Vote in the two polls below. (Yup, that’s right, two of them.)



Holtby ‘wasn’t as sharp as he can be,’ says Trotz

Getty
Leave a comment

Presidents’ Trophy winners once again in the regular season, the Capitals once again face an uphill climb if they are to advance beyond the rival Penguins and the second round of the playoffs.

What began with a strong first period for the Capitals in Game 2, albeit without a reward on the score board, faded into a frustrating 6-2 rout, as the Penguins took a commanding 2-0 series lead as it shifts back to Pittsburgh for a pivotal Game 3 on Monday.

Braden Holtby was pulled after the second period. He gave up three goals on 14 shots, while his opponent at the other end, Marc-Andre Fleury was brilliant with 34 saves.

“He’ll tell you that he can be better. He’s a straight up guy and he will be. I was just trying to change the mojo,” said Capitals coach Barry Trotz of his decision to sit Holtby.

“I thought some of the goals, he wasn’t as sharp as he can be for us. He’s a game-changer for us. So when he didn’t change the game, I just looked to change the mojo a little bit there. That’s all. Braden’s our backbone. He has been all year. We’ve got to find some goals for him, too. We can’t just put it on Braden Holtby.”

Now in a deep but not insurmountable hole against the defending Stanley Cup champs, the Capitals reportedly held a players’ only meeting following this latest defeat.

After failing to open the scoring in an otherwise dominant first period, Washington surrendered three goals in the second, as the Penguins broke it wide open with their transition game, led by two great plays from Sidney Crosby.

“We can’t get frustrated. I think that would be our biggest mistake is to get frustrated right now,” said T.J. Oshie, before expanding on the meeting between the players.

“It was things that people need to say and things that some people need to hear. We were very together with what we said. I don’t need to go into details. Sometimes in our game … you need to hear from your teammates more than your coach. And tonight was one of those nights.

“It was the players in here and what was said is what needed to be said.”

We’ll find out Monday if what was said actually has any impact on the ice.

Penguins rout Capitals to take commanding series lead

14 Comments

The Washington Capitals are in trouble. Against the Pittsburgh Penguins.

Again.

Despite a dominant first period, at least in terms of shots on Marc-Andre Fleury and puck possession, the Capitals saw this game go sideways in a hurry during the second period, on the way to a 6-2 loss to the Penguins in Game 2.

Washington is now in quite a hole, trailing its nemesis 2-0 in this second-round series.

Last year, Matt Murray stymied the Capitals. Though it’s only been two games this year, Fleury has stepped up in the absence of the injured Murray and given the Penguins solid goaltending and frustrated a dangerous Capitals lineup.

After withstanding the storm of pressure from the Capitals in the first period, the Penguins broke this game open with a trio of second-period goals. It started with a shorthanded goal from Matt Cullen, and later continued with a beautiful goal from Phil Kessel and then Jake Guentzel‘s sixth goal of these playoffs.

That led Barry Trotz to take Braden Holtby out of the game, after he gave up three goals on 14 shots, putting in Phillip Grubauer to begin the third period. The Penguins continued the onslaught.

For the Penguins, there are some injury concerns to keep an eye on.

Patric Hornqvist left the game in the first period after blocking a shot around his foot or ankle. He didn’t return. Ron Hainsey had to go to the locker room late in the third period after taking an Alex Ovechkin shot up around the head.

Game 3 goes Monday in Pittsburgh.

‘I wasn’t good enough,’ says Lundqvist after double OT loss to Senators

2 Comments

The task wasn’t impossible, but certainly daunting.

The Ottawa Senators needed five goals on Henrik Lundqvist just to send Game 2 into overtime.

The Rangers goalie had been spectacular for most of this post-season entering Saturday’s contest, but the Senators, led by a sensational four-goal performance from Jean-Gabriel Pageau, found a way to break through for a 6-5 double overtime win to take a 2-0 series lead against New York.

They did so on just 34 shots through almost 83 minutes against Lundqvist.

“I wasn’t good enough,” said Lundqvist, per the New York Daily News. “Coming up with the extra save there in the end, that’s my job. Even though it’s tough plays on deflections, I’ve got to find a way.”

On three occasions, the Rangers held a two-goal lead. That includes with under five minutes remaining in regulation. They even had a pair of shorthanded goals. But they couldn’t hang on, as Pageau scored twice in the final 3:19 of regulation to record his hat trick.

That set the stage for the eventual winner, as he beat Lundqvist over the left shoulder with a shot from his off-wing on a two-on-one rush.

With the Senators in control, the series returns to New York for Game 3 on Tuesday and Game 4 on Thursday.

“We played well enough to win this game, there’s no question about it,” said Lundqvist. “It’s really tough to lose this one. Clearly they’ve gotten the bounces here in the first two games.”

Capitals’ Holtby begins third period on the bench, Grubauer takes over in net

Getty
3 Comments

Braden Holtby began the third period of Saturday’s Game 2 on the bench, giving way to Philipp Grubauer.

The Washington Capitals fell behind the Pittsburgh Penguins 3-1 after two periods, with Holtby allowing three goals on just 14 shots. It will be interesting to hear the reason for this decision from coach Barry Trotz following the game.

The Capitals had dominated on the shot clock, but gave up a pair of quick goals to fall further behind Pittsburgh in this game, while trailing in the series 1-0.

Phil Kessel — on a great play from Sidney Crosby — and Jake Guentzel scored 3:10 apart to give Pittsburgh a two-goal lead.