|
|
 |
 |   |
EVENTS Fantasy Central Inside Game Video Plus Statitudes Your Turn Message Boards Email Newsletters Golf Guide Cities 
CNNSI.com GROUP
COMMERCE | |
Being offensive Adjusting the power play would be a good thingPosted: Sunday November 25, 2001 11:10 PMUpdated: Tuesday November 27, 2001 8:56 PM
Every day, I study the NHL boxscores over multiple cups of coffee, seeing who did what, to whom and generally getting a feel for the previous night’s action throughout the league. Lately, I’ve made a habit of looking at the power play conversion-rate of each team. Invariably, if a team outperforms the opposition on the power play, it wins. It is even more likely to be the case if a team scores multiple power play goals. Other scenarios include neither team scoring on the power play, both teams scoring with the man advantage and, on those rare nights when the penalty killers struggle, both parties each scoring more than once while up a man. And I’m not even looking at short-handed goals for and against or penalty shot goals (hey, I never said this was a scientific study). Just the root revelation that winning on any given night in the NHL is tied directly to being more productive on the special teams. OK, revelation is certainly an overstatement. However, as I was perusing the sports page in my Ottawa hotel room last Saturday, I went through the 10 games from Friday and the importance of winning the power play battle was again highlighted. Six winning teams scored more power play goals than their adversaries. Two teams won without scoring on the PP, but their victims failed to do so as well. Another game ended in a tie -- as was the case within the match on special teams -- with only one team besting the competition on the power play without winning. Still, if did not lose the game, settling for a draw instead. Who needs more proof than that, right? That morning’s ritual followed my watching a debate on Canadian television involving hockey journalist Bob MacKenzie, Hall of Fame broadcaster Dave Hodge and my partner on NHL Radio’s This Week in the NHL, Pierre Maguire. They were discussing different changes the NHL could adopt to boost the game’s offense. MacKenzie admittedly bewildered himself by giving credence to the notion of making the nets bigger because the goaltenders and their equipment are both bigger and bulkier now, allowing for less available net compared to bygone eras. Hodge presented the four-on-four at all times ideal that has support in certain corners. He offered that the overtime format adopted a couple of season’s ago is the most exciting brand of hockey because with one fewer defender available, players have room to maneuver offensively. Maguire opted to promote the possibility of removing the center ice red line as it relates to offside situations, thus stretching the available space on outlet passes. He cautioned that the NHL should turn to the AHL as a proving ground in the same manner it did to test the four-on-four OT concept. The group briefly touched on the role penalties might play in advancing the offensive cause, but they didn’t go far enough. To me, that's where the obvious answers lie when it comes to promoting scoring in the NHL -- obvious because of my earlier observation regarding the correlation between winning and scoring on the power play. The league does not need to order new nets, alter the full-strength manpower equation, or promote a whack-it-out-and-hope-for-a-breakaway brand of one-on-one isolation hockey. Instead, the league could simply reinterpret a couple of rules that the NHL changed once to more accurately reflect the game at the time. First, "the Montreal Rule" of the 1950s needs updating and second, "the Edmonton Rule" of the 1980s needs revisiting. For those of you into details and the fine print, that would be rule 26, section (c) and (d). Montreal's power play was so dominant in the '50s, the league modified the expiration portion pertaining to minor penalties, adding the clause that still stands today -- that once a power play goal is scored, the remainder of the penalty time is erased. Given the emphasis on power play production in today’s game -- coupled with the overall dearth of offensive opportunities -- allowing power plays to operate for the full two minutes, regardless of the number of goals scored, seems timely and relevant. Opponents will argue this will help the best teams more than the less talented. To them, I point to the Minnesota Wild -- a second-year team of modest talent that is scoring and soaring according to their power play. More minutes on the power play means less time focusing merely on defending at even strength. Plus, with extended penalty killing situations, teams would have to spread the minutes around in those situations, no longer able to tax their best players so extensively. Taking this idea of full punishment equaling increased offense even further, the league could tweak the coincident minor penalty language as well. The Edmonton Oilers' dynasty of the '80s was so skilled in the open ice that they used to goad their opponents into taking matching minors, trying to spend as much time skating four-on-four or three-on-three as possible. The NHL stepped in and took that strategy away by keeping both teams at full strength in coincidental minor situations. A few years ago, the league softened its stance somewhat by adding back four-on-four manpower action resulting from coincident minors. Well, the time has come to open it up entirely because the game and mentality has evolved and the need for speed in the open ice is all the rage. And if players felt the urge to play nasty while skating four-on-four, there is no need for hand wringing and controlling the environment. Let them sit for the full two minutes, while the teams perform at three-on-three. There should be plenty of room for the offensive game to flourish under those circumstances. The NHL making those modest language modifications would be the biggest power play yet. Darren Eliot, a former NHL goaltender, is a hockey analyst for CNN/Sports Illustrated and is a regular contributor to CNNSI.com.
| ||||||||||||||||||||
