OPS benefits?

[Chadd 916]

Cujo is the one that comes to mind first. There were several catching glove injuries when OPS started becoming very popular. I think 4 or 5 went down at the same time.

[chippa13 1844]

OPS get the shots off faster so goalies have less time to react.  That's what Brodeur was trying to get across.

That was part of it. He was also concerned that since the sticks loaded energy faster and easier and that some shots were coming not only faster but harder than before. He felt there was a real safety issue for goaltenders.

Right, so shots are coming in faster so he has less time to react - yet his stats have been basically identical the last 6 years...to suggest that shooters have that much of an advantage from composites is ridiculous. I don't care if you're Rick Nash or Tyson Nash - it's no real advantage. A guy with a quick ass release like Sakic isn't scoring any more goals than he used to, and lower tier guys aren't scoring any more either - I for one don't feel that the release is any quicker. The sticks are lighter, and that may help a bit, but that's it...it's not like night and day...

And shots are also so much harder now that goalies are getting hurt by stopping pucks. Uh, no. I don't think I can recall any one instance of a goalie taking a puck in the chest in the last, well forever, and not getting up. C'mon, no goalie is getting hurt because he stops a shot, that's just dumb to try to use that as an excuse.

These sticks don't make people shoot harder Chippa, no one is really topping 100-105mph on slappers - the same as Iafrate did with wood.

The OPS aren't affecting slapshots so much as wrist and snapshots. And if you want some evidence of players who have had dramatically better numbers after OPS than before you can just take a look at the Bruins of the past 2-4 years. Players like Murray, Knuble, and Rolston have all had career years after switching to OPS. Then there's Bill Guerin who also had that same surge in his production. All of those guys cited the fact that they could release quicker, harder wrist/snapshots.

Oh, and goalies have had hand injuries from shots. I forget who it was but I'm sure someone will remember who it was that almost lost the tip of a finger from a shot in warmups. And I've seen plenty of goalies take high snappers and stay down dazed for a couple minutes in the last few years.

[beaucoup_fish 0]

Cujo is the one that comes to mind first. There were several catching glove injuries when OPS started becoming very popular. I think 4 or 5 went down at the same time.

Don't think that injury to Cujo was from a shot though...I think he snagged it on the net or something...

[Chadd 916]

He gets hurt every year, this one was from a shot. There was discussion at the time about changing goaltending equipment and adding padding to protect them.

[JR Boucicaut 3760]

I still think Brodeur is a bad example to use in this situation. The Devils generally do not allow him to face quality shots.

But yes, the shot gets off quicker, which means that the goalie has less time to react. That is why it is more dangerous (in Brodeur's mind). So if a puck is going to his head, he has less time to react to it.

And in the NHL game, the OPS has made some mediocre shooters much better shooters - Chippa summed it up pretty well.

[joshy207 15]

And in the NHL game, the OPS has made some mediocre shooters much better shooters - Chippa summed it up pretty well.

The biggest thing we need to figure out is, for all of us non-NHL players, do OPS provide any kind of advantage at all? And are they worth the money?

I say no, the vast majority of hockey players (highest levels excluded) do not have the strength, technique, or ability to realize the advantages of an OPS. And no, since the OPS don't do for us what they do for the pros, we shouldn't spend the money on them. (Especially for kids, but that's a different argument altogether.)

Same goes for $400 skates that are lighter and less durable.

[chippa13 1844]

And in the NHL game, the OPS has made some mediocre shooters much better shooters - Chippa summed it up pretty well.

The biggest thing we need to figure out is, for all of us non-NHL players, do OPS provide any kind of advantage at all? And are they worth the money?

I say no, the vast majority of hockey players (highest levels excluded) do not have the strength, technique, or ability to realize the advantages of an OPS. And no, since the OPS don't do for us what they do for the pros, we shouldn't spend the money on them. (Especially for kids, but that's a different argument altogether.)

Same goes for $400 skates that are lighter and less durable.

Actually, the impact will be relatively the same. Sure, buying little kids 110 flex sticks won't help, but if you go to an OPS that has a similar flex as the wood you were using then you will notice a difference. I noticed a difference when I went from traditional 2-piece sticks to low-connection and OPS in my ease of release and loading of wrist/snap shots. But I stuck with the 100 flex when I made the transition. The real trick is to find an OPS that matches you.

Are they worth the money? For some yes, for others no. That is a personal question that each player can only answer himself.

[beaucoup_fish 0]

The OPS aren't affecting slapshots so much as wrist and snapshots.  And if you want some evidence of players who have had dramatically better numbers after OPS than before you can just take a look at the Bruins of the past 2-4 years.  Players like Murray, Knuble, and Rolston have all had career years after switching to OPS.  Then there's Bill Guerin who also had that same surge in his production.  All of those guys cited the fact that they could release quicker, harder wrist/snapshots. 

Oh, and goalies have had hand injuries from shots.  I forget who it was but I'm sure someone will remember who it was that almost lost the tip of a finger from a shot in warmups.  And I've seen plenty of goalies take high snappers and stay down dazed for a couple minutes in the last few years.

Actually, Glen Murray has always been an excellent shot, he had a one year spike in goals (44), but has since come back down to the 30s. He hasn't switched back to wood or 2 piece or whatever it was he was using before an OPS, so you can't attribute a one year spike to OPS. Same with Rolston and Billy G.

Knuble - again, I don't believe his increased goal total comes from using an OPS either. It comes from playing on a line with Joe Thornton.

JR - the decrease in time that he has to react to a shot is minimal - probably not even noticeable. Sure, maybe Brodeur isn't the best example because the team plays solid D - but it's Brodeur who's doing most of the bitching even if it hasn't affected his game or stats.

Howabout Turco? The Stars aren't notoriously defensive in style, yet his numbers have still been pretty stellar. Or a run of the mill guy like Robert Esche? His numbers have only gotten BETTER over the last few years...

Chippa - the high shots that leave a goalie stunned or winded are usually ones that sneak under the mask and throat protector. That happens a lot regardless - often from deflections.

I understand that nothing any of us says offers conclusive evidence of anything, but I still believe that OPS don't have much impact, even at the pro level. The numbers don't indicate otherwise.

I think that the one stat that would offer the best evidence for the impact of OPS on the game would be average goals per game. This stat has not increased significantly in the past few years and has worse, dropped, which illustrates the negligible impact of OPS on the game.

[Chadd 916]

Howabout Turco? The Stars aren't notoriously defensive in style, yet his numbers have still been pretty stellar. Or a run of the mill guy like Robert Esche? His numbers have only gotten BETTER over the last few years..

You're kidding right? The Stars have been known for being a defensive team for years. They opened up a little more and that resulted in more shots against Turco. More bad shots equals a higher save percentage. As for Esche, his coach is Ken Hitchcock. There is a team with a $60M payroll that plays defensive hockey almost exclusively.

[beaucoup_fish 0]

Howabout Turco? The Stars aren't notoriously defensive in style, yet his numbers have still been pretty stellar. Or a run of the mill guy like Robert Esche? His numbers have only gotten BETTER over the last few years..

You're kidding right? The Stars have been known for being a defensive team for years. They opened up a little more and that resulted in more shots against Turco. More bad shots equals a higher save percentage. As for Esche, his coach is Ken Hitchcock. There is a team with a $60M payroll that plays defensive hockey almost exclusively.

I wouldn't say the Stars only play D...it's not like they're Jersey or Minnesota...they play a pretty balanced style. Yeah, Hitch is a defensive minded coach, true, but they don't play all D either. Again, I think they have a pretty balanced game - they've only become more defensively responsible.

The only time I remember the Flyers playing all out D all the time was Cechmanek's last year in the playoffs - they had to b/c Cechmanek was their one liability - he's garbage.

[Chadd 916]

If you think that's a balanced game, you must have enjoyed the pace of play in the NHL last season and the world cup.

[beaucoup_fish 0]

If you think that's a balanced game, you must have enjoyed the pace of play in the NHL last season and the world cup.

Could be faster but I've never been bored out of my mind watching a Flyers or Stars game...unless of course, they're playing Minnesota.

[Eazy_b97 1]

Minnesota = Dallas IMO. Defensive system with a few guys who can break it open. Philly plays a very defensive system as well.

Who's to say that the goals per game wouldn't be lower if they went to wood? You're looking for an increase in number, what if it's the opposite, OPS are holding the GPG at a higher rate than they should be considering the talent of the goalie. Very few things in Hockey revolutionize the game, I don't believe the OPS has, but it is a small improvement, just like shaft and blade combos.

From my experience shooting with wood creaters a greater velocity, but doesn't come off the stick even close to the rate of an OPS.

[dddatsyuk--48 0]

I used to plane his wooden shafts to get the right flex for him as he grew up and heat and bend the blades to his liking.

I dont mean to be disrespectful or anything but wow you are one dedicated father. :)

[chippa13 1844]

Yes, Murray has always had a hard shot, however, he now has a quicker release and that has made a world of difference for him. Guerin also has even said as much for himself. Guerin had 1 30 goal season before 2000, since he has had 3 30+ goal seasons. Coincidence? I think not. Murray had never come close to 40 goals before 2000, now he's topped the 40 goal mark twice.

Look, if players don't find that OPS give them an edge then why have so many pros, minor leaguers, and college players made the switch. I've personally noticed a difference when I made the switch to the OPS/low connection sticks.

[chippa13 1844]

Howabout Turco? The Stars aren't notoriously defensive in style, yet his numbers have still been pretty stellar. Or a run of the mill guy like Robert Esche? His numbers have only gotten BETTER over the last few years..

You're kidding right? The Stars have been known for being a defensive team for years. They opened up a little more and that resulted in more shots against Turco. More bad shots equals a higher save percentage. As for Esche, his coach is Ken Hitchcock. There is a team with a $60M payroll that plays defensive hockey almost exclusively.

I wouldn't say the Stars only play D...it's not like they're Jersey or Minnesota...they play a pretty balanced style. Yeah, Hitch is a defensive minded coach, true, but they don't play all D either. Again, I think they have a pretty balanced game - they've only become more defensively responsible.

The only time I remember the Flyers playing all out D all the time was Cechmanek's last year in the playoffs - they had to b/c Cechmanek was their one liability - he's garbage.

Calling Hitch a defensive minded coach is an understatement. He knocked heads with Hull because Hull isn't a defense first, scoring last kind of player.

[beaucoup_fish 0]

Yes, Murray has always had a hard shot, however, he now has a quicker release and that has made a world of difference for him. Guerin also has even said as much for himself. Guerin had 1 30 goal season before 2000, since he has had 3 30+ goal seasons. Coincidence? I think not. Murray had never come close to 40 goals before 2000, now he's topped the 40 goal mark twice.

Look, if players don't find that OPS give them an edge then why have so many pros, minor leaguers, and college players made the switch. I've personally noticed a difference when I made the switch to the OPS/low connection sticks.

Simple: it's psychological. It's why nearly everyone in the NHL uses an OPS now, but no one is scoring unheard of amounts of goals.

Easy - I don't think OPS are holding goals per game at the level they are at. It's been pretty consistent over the past several years - even before OPS were widely used. So yes, I would be looking for an increase.

Chippa - it does feel different, I'll give you that - but that's probably it. It's lighter (which, yes may allow you to get a shot off marginally faster) and feels different so you think that you are getting something out of it.

Hully - he's become far more well rounded since being under Hitch. Even on the Wings now, he still plays D when not with the puck.

[thunderbirds_are_go 0]

I recall McInnis breaking about three or four goalies about 5 or 6 years ago in the space of a couple of months - I can't remember exactly who, but Thibault was one, when he played for the Blackhawks, and whoever the Coyotes goalie was then. That was with a wood stick too. Some maybe the average speed of shots has risen, but the top end speed, which you would imagine would be the most dangerous, haven't gotten any faster. Again look at McInnis and Aucoin winning fastest shot competitions the last couple of years with wood sticks.

[chippa13 1844]

Yes, Murray has always had a hard shot, however, he now has a quicker release and that has made a world of difference for him. Guerin also has even said as much for himself. Guerin had 1 30 goal season before 2000, since he has had 3 30+ goal seasons. Coincidence? I think not. Murray had never come close to 40 goals before 2000, now he's topped the 40 goal mark twice.

Look, if players don't find that OPS give them an edge then why have so many pros, minor leaguers, and college players made the switch. I've personally noticed a difference when I made the switch to the OPS/low connection sticks.

Simple: it's psychological. It's why nearly everyone in the NHL uses an OPS now, but no one is scoring unheard of amounts of goals.

Easy - I don't think OPS are holding goals per game at the level they are at. It's been pretty consistent over the past several years - even before OPS were widely used. So yes, I would be looking for an increase.

Chippa - it does feel different, I'll give you that - but that's probably it. It's lighter (which, yes may allow you to get a shot off marginally faster) and feels different so you think that you are getting something out of it.

Hully - he's become far more well rounded since being under Hitch. Even on the Wings now, he still plays D when not with the puck.

I haven't even mentioned the weight advantages of the OPS. I have merely been talking about how the manufactured flex points and ease of energy loading has enabled players to get off quicker, harder shots with the same effort.

Also, the defensive schemes and the size and ability of goaltenders is what is hindering an upswing in scoring. Watch a game from as few as 10 years ago and then try to tell me that the game isn't a clogged version of what it once was. Also, notice how much less of the net the goaltenders took up then. The difference is night and day.

I'm not saying OPS will make a scorer out of a mucker, there has to be talent in there somewhere, but if you're a player whose bread and butter is a quick release snapper then the OPS route could be the way to go.

[chippa13 1844]

I recall McInnis breaking about three or four goalies about 5 or 6 years ago in the space of a couple of months - I can't remember exactly who, but Thibault was one, when he played for the Blackhawks, and whoever the Coyotes goalie was then. That was with a wood stick too. Some maybe the average speed of shots has risen, but the top end speed, which you would imagine would be the most dangerous, haven't gotten any faster. Again look at McInnis and Aucoin winning fastest shot competitions the last couple of years with wood sticks.

OPS don't make a difference with slappers. A player using an OPS or a similar flex woodstick will probably hit a slapper the same.

[Pachocolate29 0]

yea its works more with wrist shots, snap shots not so much as the slapper eh guies woot woot is the feel alot different if any different?

[QandA 0]

yea its works more with wrist shots, snap shots not so much as the slapper eh guies woot woot is the feel alot different if any different?

Am I the only person who doesn't understand this. Isnt' this guy a goalie?

[kovalchuk71 212]

I actually noctice a bit of lag if I swith from OPS to a woodie....Love the 9030 though....great stick...and I agree with Cavs, gimme a stick (as long as its a RH ;) and I could play fine with it...I think its all PP...I can never get the flex from a shaft/ops that I could from a woodie...

[beaucoup_fish 0]

I recall McInnis breaking about three or four goalies about 5 or 6 years ago in the space of a couple of months - I can't remember exactly who, but Thibault was one, when he played for the Blackhawks, and whoever the Coyotes goalie was then.  That was with a wood stick too.  Some maybe the average speed of shots has risen, but the top end speed, which you would imagine would be the most dangerous, haven't gotten any faster.  Again look at McInnis and Aucoin winning fastest shot competitions the last couple of years with wood sticks.

OPS don't make a difference with slappers. A player using an OPS or a similar flex woodstick will probably hit a slapper the same.

If you're claiming that an OPS makes shots harder, then you are saying that it does. If an OPS makes a shot harder, that should apply to all kinds of shots, not just snappers.

And in my previous post, I did mention how they were lighter.

I agree, Goalies are bigger and better now and wear bigger pads, yeah. But you figure if OPSes make shooters that much more dangerous, then it should compensate for the goalies' bigger pads and such, right? But no, they don't.

[beaucoup_fish 0]

yea its works more with wrist shots, snap shots not so much as the slapper eh guies woot woot is the feel alot different if any different?

Am I the only person who doesn't understand this. Isnt' this guy a goalie?

I'm with you Q&A. I have no idea what the hell he's saying.