When I got to my game last night a couple teammates were talking about this. Dude is in his 40s and got to suit up!
Really awesome!
Just a shame they won, I hate the Canes
yeah, super rare.The last time I read about an emergency goalie making it onto the ice was the a Blackhawks in 2018. My best friend played youth hockey with the guy through HS. It’s an odd system but I guess it works.
This may be the worst rule in sports. Each rink has a guy that prior to the game is not on the roster. Then in an emergency he signs a deal, suits up and plays. WTF? How pathetic is this for a professional sports league? Either add a roster spot, or make a non-goalie suit up. Kinda like someone occasionally does in the MLB at catcher.
Wonder why this rule exists?
Dude got paid $500 by the team.
NHL minimum salary = $700,000.
hhhhmmmm?
Who pissed in your Wheaties this morning? I think the rule has been in place for a few years now. I think only 3 goalie have made it on the ice.
The rule exists because it makes no sense to waste one if 20 spots on a goalie that will never enter the game. You could use another player but these guys are better than sticking a skater in the net.
After the first 2 he played pretty well.
He's local and had his mask painted like local teamWhy did the guy have a Toronto helmet? Was he a former maple leaf?
This may be the worst rule in sports. Each rink has a guy that prior to the game is not on the roster. Then in an emergency he signs a deal, suits up and plays. WTF? How pathetic is this for a professional sports league? Either add a roster spot, or make a non-goalie suit up. Kinda like someone occasionally does in the MLB at catcher.
Wonder why this rule exists?
Dude got paid $500 by the team.
NHL minimum salary = $700,000.
hhhhmmmm?
I was discussing this rule a few weeks ago at work. In depth.
It is a horrible rule for several reasons. From a fan and hockey perspective it sucks. All it does is save the multi-billionaire owners from paying for another roster spot. So the fans and Canes could watch a guy that would never normally sniff the ice get play time. Glad the guy got his 5 minutes and didn’t flop. Good for him.
If you cry during Hallmark movies or the NBC personal stories they show during the Olympics this is for you. If you follow hockey or sports in general it is sad.
Hey let’s pull an ex-high school player out of the stands to pitch the 9th!
Why did the guy have a Toronto helmet? Was he a former maple leaf?
If you cry during Hallmark movies or the NBC personal stories they show during the Olympics this is for you. If you follow hockey or sports in general it is sad.
Funny thing, Ive yet to know a person upset by this rule or the RARE time it's used...till now.
you must cry during movies and stuff...Pretty cool story. Wish I had seen the game.
you must cry during movies and stuff...
Pretty cool story. Wish I had seen the game.
I was sports and I watch hockey. It has been used 3 times that I can remember where the guy got onto the ice. The rule is fine. Seems like 2 of the 3 that made it into the game actually played well. The other guy was in the game for about 30 seconds. I would argue if you actually watch the tape of the game from a fan perspective it was great. Toronto laid a giant turd on the ice and the only thing they had to cheer about was the reserve goal keeper. It sounds like you are just bitter about someone else having more money than you do and someone else getting to live out one of their lifelong dreams. Again why be such a downer?
Also the reasoning behind the rule has nothing to do with the owners being billionaires. It has to do with logistic roster sizes etc.... The money part is so minor that it is not a factor. It makes no sense for a team to carry 3 goalies. Just like it make no sense for a NFL to carry two punters. If the one gets injured you have the place kicker punt. If you lose both you put in another player who punted at some point in their career like Joe Theisman who shanked a punt for 1 yard back in the day for the Redskins. That really worked out great for the fans. The idea that the 3rd guy would be any better is laughable. There are not enough reps in practice for a 3rd. Similar to why a lot of NFL teams don't carry a 3rd QB.
Come on, I know you are a smart guy. Reading comprehension. I never trashed the guy. I trashed the rule. How great would it be if the Canes lost a playoff spot because some guy had to play goalie? The rule is foolish. It just hasn’t caught up to them yet.
More money than I do? Is the zamboni guy a well know rich guy or something? That’s funny.
It is about the league and teams offering a lesser product to save a few bucks. Most fans don’t pay what they pay for seats to watch the zamboni guy play. Well, at least I don’t. Maybe people like low-rent hockey.
Wow didn’t know people felt so strongly about this on either side. It’s a cool story, be happy for the guy and those who get to re-live their dream of playing pro sports.
But from a non-hockey fan it seems incredibly odd to be an actual rule. Just use another player. Oh they suck? Tough, that’s how the cookie crumbles.
Most fans don’t pay what they pay for seats to watch the zamboni guy play. Well, at least I don’t. Maybe people like low-rent hockey.
Referring to your billionaire owner comment. You seemed to feel the need to lash out at the owners who yes all make more money than you do. It's not about them being cheap or squeezing labor. Its about the realities and priorities of an NHL roster.
Do you honestly think the avg NHL owner cares about one additional player? That is your arguement? It is not about the money its is about player development for the franchise and the player. A 3rd goalie reps is is not going to get the reps to stay sharp and improve. Teams with 2 good goal keepers have problems keeping both of them on the top of their game. When someone gets hot they eat up all the reps. That 3rd guy would not ever see the ice enough to develop into a full time keeper even in practice.
The organization and the player are better off with them playing everyday at an affiliate team in the American Hockey league playing everyday and getting better. Why would you stunt a players development for the something that has happened 3 times since about 1963? That makes no sense to keep a 3rd goalie you are never going to use.
Considering how many people go to a hockey game EVERY NIGHT during the NHL season vs the amount that have paid for a ticket and seen a emergency go in...yeah, it's such a small percent that it's not worth noting.
Also I, a hockey fan, just saw an interview with him. CZ mentioned that he'd never get to 'sniff the ice' or something, he stated he's practiced with the Leafs and their local minor league team before. On that ice.
So, there's that.
Until it is. Remember the MLB All-Star game debacle? Nobody ever thought that would happen either.
Yeah, and he practices with the Leafs and their players. Then played for the Canes against the Leafs.
That makes a lot of sense.
What’s evident to me, is a lot of people in this thread making comments and/or asking questions haven’t read the article linked in the OP.
Dont you mean CZ?
Oh no!
I didn’t read what some sports writer wrote. I am a bad man.
I watched most of the game so I’ll sleep ok tonight.
As to not researching it and reading the OP, I watched the game and read several articles about it. Pretty sure I didn’t need to read that writer’s article to have a clue about what happened. Maybe before accusing me of not researching it you should actually ask me. I’m a pretty open book. Even when I am wrong and idiotic, I’m pretty honest. I’ll admit my ignorance when I am clueless.
How do we ask you if you start to make comments about how it was unlikely that the guy played with the Leafs and then played FOR the Canes?
So we're supposed to ask you about things we assume you know since you speak with such authority on it?
Gotcha.
Go be bitter some more about this guy (and the other two) who got to live out their childhood dream.