The NHL is in the middle of a goal-scoring shortage. The New York Rangers have played in so many 2-1 playoff games that you’d think it was mandated in the CBA.
According to a recent Associated Press report, goal scoring in the playoffs is at a three-year low. It hasn’t hurt the excitement of the Stanley Cup playoffs this spring, but then along comes a game like Game 2 in New York -- a 6-2 contest in which actual goals were scored by actual players -- and it was a reminder that, yeah, goal scoring is fun. It’s exciting. It’s more entertaining than another 2-1 win.
You know what else is entertaining? A head-butted goal that ends a double-overtime marathon playoff game.
If you missed it, and it’s understandable if you did because it happened in the middle of the night, Chicago’s Andrew Shaw head-butted a goal past Ducks goalie Frederik Andersen in the second overtime of Chicago’s eventual Game 2 win in Anaheim. Shaw thought he had the game winner, and had it counted, it would have gone down as one of the most memorable goals in Blackhawks history.
It was truly a thing of beauty.
“I thought the game was over there,” said Blackhawks forward Marcus Kruger, who scored the actual game winner in the third overtime. “We had to regroup. I think we did a great job staying with it.”
Said Chicago coach Joel Quenneville: “It was crazy. Probably got that from the soccer before the games. ... I guess it was one of those instinct plays.”
It took instincts, athleticism and was a true highlight-reel goal. It was also against the current rules, which was why it was pulled off the board.
Goals don’t count when they’re “directed, batted or thrown into the net by an attacking player other than with a stick” according to Rule 78.5. It’s too bad.
During a time in which goal scoring is drying up, it might be smart for the NHL to loosen that standard.
The NHL’s general managers have already decided to allow for a more literal interpretation of the kicking motion rule, even if there is confusion on what is and isn’t a goal when deflected off a skate.
During a chat with an Eastern Conference goalie coach on Tuesday, the conversation shifted toward the idea of bigger nets to increase scoring. Naturally, he shot down that idea. He is a goalie coach, after all.
“There’s 500 years of muscle memory in the way we skate and position ourselves,” he said. “We’d need a 30-game exhibition season if we made the nets bigger.”
Then, somewhat surprisingly given he’s in charge of preventing goals against his team, the coach suggested another solution: Anything goes when it comes to allowing goals.
In his world, Shaw’s head-butt would have counted and we’d all be celebrating a memorable goal that ended a fantastic game.
“If we want more goals, we should allow them to score in any manner short of picking up the puck and throwing it in,” the coach said. “You should be able to high-stick it in. That’s an athletic skill. You should be able to kick the puck in. If you knock it in with your arm, it should count. Just don’t pick it up and throw it in.”
It’s an extreme position, but there are people around the game who would get behind some version of that rule change.
Ray Ferraro, the best analyst in hockey right now, is in Austria and woke up this morning to the controversy surrounding Shaw's non-goal. He immediately went online to see video highlights of the goal, and in his mind, without a doubt, he’d like to see it be legal.
He acknowledged that the officials got the call right by the letter of the law. He just doesn’t like the letter of the law.
“What’s written in the book is wrong. Our game needs a little zip,” Ferraro said when we chatted Wednesday morning. “There’s no question people would like to see more goals. I don’t think anybody needs to see 12-10 games, but five goals a game would be nice. Isn’t it nice when people get to stand up and cheer instead of sit there and watch save after save after save?”
In Ferraro’s NHL there wouldn’t be bigger nets. You couldn’t high-stick a puck in, for safety reasons. But if you don’t throw the puck into the net or wind up and kick it like a field goal, it should count, he said.
“If I can deflect it with my foot, what difference does it make?” Ferraro said. “Just think of how much cleaner it makes the front of the net.”
If the NHL relaxed rules in front of the net to allow goal scoring, there’s a risk that would come with it. If kicking were allowed, blades might go flying. If high sticks were allowed, there could be concussion issues.
It would add risk to the goalies -- players who are already facing frozen pucks traveling at 100 mph.
So yeah, most goalies would probably share the opinion of one prominent starter I chatted with on Wednesday morning. He’s completely fine with the current rules.
“If you talked to most goalies, I’m sure they would say no [changes],” said the Eastern Conference goalie. “Obviously head-butts are very rare. It would be more an issue for kicking. If you allowed that, can you throw it in? If you allow anything, it becomes a slippery slope.”
Yes, scoring is down, but this goalie still sees a product as good as anything out there, and tweaking the rulebook can come with unseen negative results.
“I’m probably a little biased, but the game is as good as ever. The game is so fast,” he said. “I’m not as worried about goalie safety. We’re protected. But if a guy winds up and has a full soccer kick and that puts him off balance, I suppose it could have negative consequence. You may not realize the consequences until somebody gets cut and all of a sudden it’s an issue.”