That being said, I thought I’d point out some of the most interesting changes, even if we covered many of them throughout the summer. It’s a nice snapshot of the changes that were made by a league that experienced a mostly successful 2009-10 season but has plenty of room to improve. Now, to the bullet points.
The rule book reflects the many subtle changes being made to goalie equipment. We were all over this subject earlier this summer, but those tweaks will give you a good idea of the amount of differences. Even if you probably won’t be able to make much of an eye-ball distinction.
Want confirmation that hits to the head will be given additional emphasis? There will even be a special signal for the penalty, as described in the new rule book: “Patting flat (open palm) of the non-whistle hand on this side of the head.”
An interesting change to what a video goal judge can call a goal. Here’s the explanation, with the intriguing new addition in bold face.
The video review process shall be permitted to assist the referees in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals (e.g. to ensure they are “good hockey goals”). For example (but not limited to), pucks that enter the net by going through the net meshing, pucks that enter the net from underneath the net frame, pucks that enter the net undetected by the referee, etc.
Interesting stuff. I assume that this doesn’t kill the “intent to blow” rule altogether, but it sounds like it gives video judges a little more flexibility. Or it just changes the language of the rule.
I haven’t heard of this new rule yet: when a team bats in a goal illegally (for example, scoring with a high stick), the faceoff will take place in the neutral zone instead of the defending team’s zone. This actually seems more fair since you cannot be sure the alternate universe legal version of the play would have resulted in a faceoff in that zone.
There are also some changes to the legal sizes of sticks and a few tweaks to protect goalies, but I’ll spare you the details because they’re super specific (and kind of boring).
So that is the Cliff’s Notes version of the rule book changes. Click here if you want more details or want to read the full list. Don’t worry, I won’t judge you for matching my dorkiness.
‘If he was in Toronto, there’d be no Carey Price, media-wise’ – Boudreau on Dubnyk
While his 11-6-3 record won’t blow anyone’s mind, his 1.65 GAA and .946 save percentage are jaw-dropping. With Dubnyk doing special things, Bruce Boudreau felt the need to say weird things* after Dubnyk helped the Wild beat the Toronto Maple Leafs 3-2 on Wednesday.
“If he was in Toronto, there would be no Carey Price … I’m just saying media-wise,” Boudreau said after the game, as you can see in this video:
Even if Dubnyk was in a bigger market, there’d probably be room in our hockey thoughts for Dubnyk and the consensus best goalie in the world, but Boudreau’s larger point is taken: Dubnyk has been right there with the best early on this season.
And, let’s be honest, we shouldn’t be too hard on Boudreau or he might stop saying … well, things like this:
Boudreau: "I told the guys, 'It may not look it, but my insides are really happy right now.'" #mnwild
It’s difficult to tell just how big of a headache this might be, but SBNation‘s Mary Clarke uncovered quite the eyebrow-raiser on Wednesday: the Vegas Golden Knights’ trademark request was rejected by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
You can read the 164-page document here (if you’re weird), but the gist is that “registration of the applied-for mark is refused because of a likelihood of confusion with the mark” used by the College of Saint Rose Golden Knights.
Clarke summarized it simply enough:
Essentially, the logos and stylizations are too similar. It’s baffling the NHL and Vegas didn’t go through the trademark process before announcing the name and logo last month. Yet, all is not lost. Later down, the document states the Black Knight Sports and Entertainment group “may respond to the refusal by submitting evidence and arguments in support of registration.”
Sports Illustrated’s Alex Prewitt received this release from the Vegas Golden Knights, which indicated that they will respond to the refusal (and also noted how teams like the Boston Bruins and UCLA Bruins share names without issues).
It wasn’t pretty, and they might have lost key defenseman Matt Niskanento injury, but at least the Washington Capitals managed a win against the Boston Bruins.
For a while, it was looking pretty ugly.
After going up 3-0, the Capitals went more than a period’s worth of time without even managing a shot on goal. Whether you lean more toward giving the Bruins credit for fighting back or beating up the Capitals for “sitting on a lead,” it’s staggering that such a dangerous offense could be held in check for so long.
Luckily for Washington, Nicklas Backstrom salvaged the night with an overtime goal to give the Capitals a 4-3 overtime win.
Both teams have had a knack for extending games beyond regulation lately, by the way:
Capitals over the last three games:
Shootout loss to the Lightning
Overtime win against the Sabres
Overtime win tonight against the Bruins
Bruins over the last five games:
Shootout loss against Flyers
Shootout win against Hurricanes
Regulation win against Sabres
Overtime win against Panthers
Overtime loss to the Capitals
Maybe that’s what gets it done in 2016-17: finding ways to carve out wins and shake out rough patches, like the Caps did tonight.
Matt Niskanen injured by Patrice Bergeron boarding hit
The Capitals consider Niskanen “probable” to return to Wednesday’s game against the Boston Bruins with what they’re calling an upper-body injury. Bergeron received a two-minute boarding penalty for the infraction.
(Check out video of the hit above.)
The Capitals’ Twitter acknowledged the brewing bad feelings.