I do believe this Deeznutz. To add to what I said, there were fifty-three 60 point scorers as of last season. This NHL campaign, we may be looking somewhere around 35 by April. That's concerning.
Now I know what some of you will say, 1-0 and 2-1 games can be exciting and old firewagon hockey is boring. I don't know many high scoring games that aren't fun or low scoring games that are the edge of the seat excitement you talk about. Come January and February, those are far and few between. Yes, there are boring high scoring games as there are entertaining low-scoring ones, but you would be hard pressed to find the majority of those games that tend to follow that trend. When it comes to playoff hockey, the low scoring games that tend to go on for lengthy OTs... those can be quite entertaining. Not all, but when the stakes rise, and the goalies are at the top of their games, it can be quite the spectacle to see. Having said that, I still prefer highlight reel goals... and guys setting up sweet tape-to-tape saucer passes to make them happen.
Perhaps I am superficial and I love bloated offensive games with guys getting even more bloated offensive numbers. The stats fan and the guy who grew up watching the Gretzkys and Marios of the hockey world, who averaged 2 points-per-game from yesteryear, has spoiled me. I am not saying it has to be what it was. I rewatched some of those old games. It was much more simple and the average player wasn't nearly as skilled as the players today. I like the game every bit today as I did growing up as a child watching it, but what's wrong with seeing guys wow us with reaching certain benchmarks?
In baseball, the game grew at its peak after a lockout that hurt it, when guys like Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa were in the midst of beating Roger Maris' old home run record of 61 dingers....
Records are meant to be broken, and while some of Gretzky's, like his 92 goals, 163 assists, and 215 points may never come close to being touched, what's wrong with seeing guys hit 50 goals and 100 points? What's next? We don't see guys hit 40 goals and 80 points? Sure you may balk at my question, but if I proposed to you 20 years ago we would see the top guys fail to reach 50 and 100 in numbers respectively for multiple seasons, you would think I was crazy. How bad does it have to get before, the elitist mindset stops thinking, "You don't get it because low scoring hockey is still great!"
The thing is we do get it. The game is great. I don't think anyone is questioning that. I said posts ago, less change is better. But sometimes, it's okay to contradict yourself and say, I still would like to see those gaudy numbers.