I would also reduce the size of the lacrosse cage to five feet square nstead of six and take away the 2-point arc in the pro game. Give the goalies some hope of a decent outing.

For more scoring and more mobile, better protected goaltenders:

Go back to 10-inch-wide pads, the size used in 1937, as they should have done last time when they only went from 12 to 11. Since 1937, the padding material has gotten far lighter yet vastly more protective, the shape is now anatomical to protect the entire knee and leg, plus the pads don’t hold water. This size has worked just fine for Marty Brodeur to become the best all-time. Allow the height to remain the goalie’s preference. Hold a ruler across your shin–do you need more than ten inches of width to protect your leg–or is that about taking away the net? Let the goalie, not the equipment, make the save. Increase allowable thickness (“depth”) from 10.5″ to 12″ for more shin and knee protection.

Now the catching glove. Tony Esposito set a record that may never be broken, 15 shutouts in a season, using a glove that Phil has said would fit inside just the trapper portion of today’s leather dog-catcher’s net. Get a ruler–does that glove need to be literally HALF A YARD LONG from the wrist to the tip as it is today? Why not a whole yard?? Tony-O might have ended the season with a GAA around 0.00 with one of these things. Instead, cut the length back to 14″ (not even a 25% reduction), closer to a first base mitt; improve the actual palm and finger padding in any way desired. Completely remove the cheater slab between thumb and forearm that has zero to do with protection. Nobody’s wrist is 8″ wide; like the cheater slab, that ridiculously wide cuff is about taking away the net, not about protection. Reduce the width of the wrist cuff and the blocker pad both by 25%, from 8″ to 6″. Allow them to be made 25% thicker, though, for more actual protection of the goaltender.

Note these suggestions take away no protection of the goalie’s body, but actually improve it, and restore some of the equipment to dimensions more like those used by NHL netminders who did pretty damn well despite having no discernible “style” or relentless scientific coaching.

Result would be both better goaltenders AND more scoring, without forcing every rink in every town, suburb and rural outpost in N. America to buy expensive new cages.

If you really want to get rid of a rule that reduces scoring, bury the Montreal Canadiens rule that springs the guy from the box when a goal is scored on a minor penalty. Make him feel shame for the whole two minutes regardless.

http://ingoalmag.com/news/butterfly-and-hip-injuries-backstrom-back-to-surgeon/

I don’t understand how any of the GMs that have had their starting goaltenders injured this season would want to decrease the available protection for their star netminders in favor of higher scoring games. There’s talk of mandatory visor wear to protect skaters. Some skaters [that don't wear visors] beleive the visor interferes with their vision [which could have an impact on their ability to score goals]. The league is OK with safety before scoring when it comes to visor wear. When it comes to their goaltenders, somehow higher scoring takes precendece over protecting their goaltenders. Where was the talk that should have gone with this topic regarding enforcing the rules to [or modifying ] pertaining to ‘making an effort to avoid hitting the goaltender]. They want to reduce the size of the goalie equipment but do nothing about players skating full speed into the net ?

I agree with Babcock about making the nets bigger if the league wants to see higher scoring, I don’t particularly have an issue with the scoring [then again I live in Philadelphia so we tend to have very high scoring games]. However if the league is convinced that scoring is what’s needed to make the game better, I’d rather see the net size increase before they take away protection from goaltenders.

Like it or not, the game is always changing, it’s evolved and whether larger nets are the right or answer may be up for debate, the ‘hockey purist’ excuse isn’t really valid anymore. Prior to 1918 goaltenders weren’t allowed to drop to their knees to stop pucks. [see Clint 'Praying Benny' Benedict] Are the hockey purists still debating this one? While I’m not suggesting this is the solution, but f the goalies don’t need to go down anymore, they won’t need knee stack protection, so it’d be OK to reduce the equipment size. And think how much scoring would be increased! Getting rid of the 1918 rule allowing goalies to drop down when stopping pucks would make the hockey purists and NHL happy.

My own personal suggestion is before they go around making the nets bigger, how about we get rid of the stupid trapezoid. Goalies are already letting pucks in while running around outside the net, why not give them more freedom [Ha Ha Check out some of the KHL games where Pekka Rinne tried to play the puck in the corners...] More often than not the goalies are going to screw up and there will be more goals. It would also improve the game because in some cases, players may think about carrying the puck over the line rather than dumping it if they know there’s a goaltender that can play the puck on the other side. With Carey Price and Mike Smith picking up puck handling skills like Brodeur, we’d likely see less dump and chase. Which [to me] would improve the game more than increased scoring. I’d rather watch a game where players are skillfully carrying the puck down the ice than spend 2 hours watching 10 guys chase a puck from end to end. Let the goalies get the pucks in the corners. That could even fix the icing issues. Icing rules won’t matter if the goalies are goaling after the pucks and clearing the pucks out of the corners.

If the trapezoid isn’t going away and/or doesn’t lead to the scoring solution the NHL is looking for, then I’m all for making the nets bigger. Bigger nets might mean more skaters actually trying to shoot pucks into the net [instead of hannging around the net stabbing the goalie with their sticks looking for the puck for a trash goal]. I like to see goals scored by talented players who shoot the puck into the net. Not by 10 guys scrambling on their hands and knees until [maybe?] the puck went over the line, followed by 10 minutes of reviewing replays to determine if there is ‘indisputable evidence to overturn the call [or non call] made on the ice. Then 20 minutes later hearing they decided the puck brushed by somebody else’s leg so they’re now credited with the goal. It’s just luck [or Toronto's decision] at that point. When the broadcaster isn’t sure if the puck went in and/or doesn’t know who may or may not have scored, that’s when player’s aren’t really using they’re hockey skills anymore. With a bigger net, skaters will start relying on their ability to shoot pucks again instead of seeing who can shove the goaltender into the net while he may or may not be covering the puck so we can wait on the war room to let us know if it was a goal or not.

Don’t get me wrong, this [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRWiwBEpV7k] is certainly entertaining, but I’m not 100% sure they’re playing hockey anymore.

[1] Get rid of the trapezoid [2] Make the net bigger [3] If you have to reduce goaltending equipment, work on enforcing or improving the rules to protect the goalies better.

Goalie equipment is out of control too big. Modern catch gloves are rediculous. Look at game film from the 70′s even 80′s. The goaltenders look like 14 yr old bantams. The net was the same size and there were plenty of hard shooters. Reduce the goaltender equipment AND get rid of the composite sticks.
The game will be just as exiting if Chara’s slap shop is 93 mph instead of 108.

People complaining about needing more goals scored in hockey reminds me of the people who watch MMA just to see knockouts. Sure its exciting, but there is a lot more to hockey and MMA than goals and knockouts.