Hockey guys explain to me why shooting toward an empty net used to be frowned on in the NHL

[BigJay]

I’d never heard this before

Was watching the end of the Rangers-Carolina game and one of the Rangers announcers mentioned after a NYR player just missed the empty net with a long-range shot late:

“years ago that used to be frowned on. But it’s become such a big part of the game now because it greatly enhances your chances of winning.”

Why the hell would that strategy ever have been frowned upon? Just doesn’t make sense to me why getting the nail-in-the-coffin goal would be considered unsportsmanlike or something else that would make it “frowned upon.”

Now I will say this. I do remember years ago how you hardly ever had to worry about the late empty-net goal screwing up the under bet you had or messing up the puck line. But I never knew why I guess. Had no idea that it was frowned upon.

 

[BigJay]

@samsncharge99 @phillyflyers

Others??

 

[samsncharge99]

Gives free icing. Faceoff in your zone and cant line change. Also limited time coming off the clock

 

[MinnesotaFats]

Did the guy wind up a slap shot? That's generally frowned upon, but flicking a wrister towards the net and keeping the celey humble is fine

 

[BigJay]

Did the guy wind up a slap shot? That's generally frowned upon, but flicking a wrister towards the net and keeping the celey humble is fine

The shot on which the Rangers announcer made the comment came after a face-off.

Rangers up 3-2. Two minutes left.

Rangers player shot the puck nearly the length of the ice from one corner of the rink and missed the empty net on the opposite end by less than two feet.

And yes @samsncharge99 only a few second came off the clock and it was an obvious icing.

Rangers did, however, get an empty netter to seal the win not long afterward.

I do remember back in the day they seemed to play a lot more keep-away with the puck defensively to kill time than they do today.

And sorry @MinnesotaFats for not including you in my “hockey guys”

 

[MinnesotaFats]

The weird thing about hockey and empty nets is this:

Say you go down like 3-0 and replace your goalie w the back up. Your team scores 2x to make it 3-2.

You pull the back up for the extra skater, and opponent gets an empty netter, 4-2.

You put the goalie back in and your team gets a garbage goal but loses 4-3.

The backup, who played perfectly, actually gets the loss, because the actual GW goal, the empty netter, occurred after the backup because the goalie of record.

Little hockey trivia for ya there

 

[BigJay]

The weird thing about hockey and empty nets is this:

Say you go down like 3-0 and replace your goalie w the back up. Your team scores 2x to make it 3-2.

You pull the back up for the extra skater, and opponent gets an empty netter, 4-2.

You put the goalie back in and your team gets a garbage goal but loses 4-3.

The backup, who played perfectly, actually gets the loss, because the actual GW goal, the empty netter, occurred after the backup because the goalie of record.

Little hockey trivia for ya there

Last 3-4 years I’ve grown to really enjoy betting hockey.

Especially in the playoffs but it’s a fun way to kill three hours if you get the itch during the weeks constant action.

It’s such a rush.

And played at a very high level - for instance watching the Edmonton or Avalanche Power Play - it’s really a beautiful and technically brilliant thing to witness.

And in turn it can be a brutal sport at times. Although not anything like what it was back in the day.

 

[samsncharge99]

Playoff hockey is awesome

 

[drunkenhorseplayer]

Now I will say this. I do remember years ago how you hardly ever had to worry about the late empty-net goal screwing up the under bet you had or messing up the puck line. But I never knew why I guess. Had no idea that it was frowned upon.

Back in the day, teams didn't pull the goalie until about one minute left and only when down by one. Now they pull him with 2-3 minutes left and when down by two or even three sometimes.

 

[jamesy2422]

The weird thing about hockey and empty nets is this:

Say you go down like 3-0 and replace your goalie w the back up. Your team scores 2x to make it 3-2.

You pull the back up for the extra skater, and opponent gets an empty netter, 4-2.

You put the goalie back in and your team gets a garbage goal but loses 4-3.

The backup, who played perfectly, actually gets the loss, because the actual GW goal, the empty netter, occurred after the backup because the goalie of record.

Little hockey trivia for ya there

wow that is interesting

 

[jamesy2422]

Back in the day, teams didn't pull the goalie until about one minute left and only when down by one. Now they pull him with 2-3 minutes left and when down by two or even three sometimes.

it really has become very funny with pulling the goalie but i understand it. have nothing to lose.

 

[Tanko]

Microphone is a Hockey announcer. He probably has a lot of perspective on this question.

@Microphone Chime in on this question.

 

[Microphone]

Microphone is a Hockey announcer. He probably has a lot of perspective on this question.

@Microphone Chime in on this question.

The "A" (analytics) word rears its ugly head here. They've studied the odds of scoring vs. the damage that's ultimately done with a faceoff with no line change allowed and they found it's better if the 5 team in the 6 on 5 just fire at the net. I agree with some of what was stated above, the analytics don't take into account the flip out of the zone for the need for rest and the need to eat clock.

As DHP said above.....The other thing worth mentioning is it was always frowned upon that if you pull the goalie with more than 2 minutes to go in regulation. This is where I agree with the "A" word, why not extend your "power play" an extra 20-40 second by pulling the goalie earlier, especially if you have a ton of momentum? It's found the extra 30 seconds of EN for the offensive team and the risk involved outweighs the odds of being scored on.