Following the NHL lockout the league’s newly formed competition committee introduced legislation designed to improve their product by speeding it up and increasing the potential for more offense.

Among the legislation were restrictions which shrunk the size of goaltending equipment. The theory was such reductions would increase goalscoring by prevent netminders from wearing oversized equipment, as there were numerous complaints that goalies wore such equipment more to block shots than for protection, the primary function of their equipment.

It appeared to be working in the first season following the lockout as goalscoring increased, but since then the increase has been so marginal as to appear stagnant, leading again to complaints that goaltenders were finding ways to work around the system to again wear out-sized equipment.

Several reasons why scoring hasn't significantly increased include the conditioning and skill of today's netminders compared to their predecessors and the adjustments in defensive systems by NHL coaches. Still, goaltending equipment remains a hot button issue.

As a result the NHL and NHLPA announced on April 29th the formation o####oalie Equipment Working Group, consisting of five players and four general managers, who’ll meeting in Toronto on June 11th to address again this niggling issue.

As per their press release:

“ The NHL representatives include Doug Risebrough of Minnesota, Garth Snow of the New York Islanders, Jim Rutherford of Carolina and Brett Hull of Dallas (co-GM). The NHLPA’s Executive Board voted to select three goalies and two skaters. Martin Brodeur of New Jersey, Rick DiPietro of the New York Islanders, Ryan Miller of Buffalo, Dany Heatley of Ottawa and Mike Cammalleri of Los Angeles will represent the NHLPA.

The Goalie Equipment Working Group will meet on June 11, 2008 in Toronto to examine the configuration and dimensions of goaltender equipment with respect to safety and performance. If the working group decides alterations to the rules governing goaltender equipment are warranted, and will not jeopardize the safety of the goalies, these recommendations will be forwarded to the Competition Committee for consideration. “

It remains to be seen what, if any, recommendations the group will make and if they’ll have any significant impact.

Eric McErlain of Off Wing Opinion - one of my favorite hockey bloggers - was among the first to voice skepticism:

“We already know that goaltenders are a pretty tight group, and I have little doubt that Snow, a GM and former goalie who is extraordinarily close with DiPietro, will fight tooth and nail to protect his team's most valuable -- and some would say only -- asset. And thanks to a Sports Illustrated piece from a few months back, we already know that DiPietro and Brodeur form something of a mutual admiration society.

Combine them with Miller, and that's four solid votes against doing anything that's going to make a goalie's job harder than it already is. And while those four could very well be outvoted if the other five stick together, my guess is the group won't want to forward any recommendations to the Competition Committee if they aren't unanimous.”

He suggests that Brodeur could cast a significant vote against such changes, but with all due respect to Eric, that doesn’t jibe with comments the Devils netminder has made in the past. If anything, Brodeur could be among those voting for change:

From NHL.com, September 29, 2003: “Brodeur, who led the Devils over Giguere's Mighty Ducks for the Stanley Cup, told Le Journal de Montreal recently, said that complaints by his goaltending brethren that restrictions to the size of the equipment -- and more precisely many flaps used as add-ons by goalies -- leave them vulnerable to injuries is not true.

"The limit for the height of goaltender's pads is 38 inches, so?" said Brodeur, a three-time Cup winner. "Mine have always been 34 inches and that's enough. I've always preferred less bulky equipment so I could move around easier. Certain goaltenders have really gone too far in the last few years and I can understand why the League wants to stop it.

"I have to point out that I don't use the butterfly style, unlike most Quebec goaltenders. With plastic foils attached to their pads, butterfly goalies could completely close the space between their legs. I can understand why forwards complained they can't score when they shoot for the 5-hole. Jean-Sebastien Giguere was the target of such complaints last year."

From The Sporting News, October 6, 2003: “"It's got to be proportional to your body" says Brodeur, who wears 34-inch pads. "That's why the rule should be individual. The advantage of a little goalie wearing 38 is bigger than a bigger goalie wearing 38. Everybody should get measured and say, 'OK, you can have this.' And the guys who don't (follow that) should be penalized. You shouldn't be penalized for being 6-4 or 6-5."

Most recently, from the Toronto Star, February 20, 2008: “From my point of view, and I hope they think about this, they need to make the effort to size everyone individually," said Brodeur in an interview from New Jersey. "If they do that, they'll see a big difference. They have to reduce the little guys to being little guys and the skinny guys to being skinny guys. Those guys are taking advantage of the system."

Brodeur, who is 6-foot-2, wears pads that are 34-35 inches in length and can't understand why most goalies in the league are wearing the maximum 38-inch pads.

"There's no reason why anyone under six-feet should be wearing 38-inch pads, but everybody is wearing them," he said. "It's like if you have a 33-inch waist, you shouldn't be allowed to wear XXL pants."

Garth Snow might be keen to protect DiPietro, but the aforementioned Star article also noted that, when the subject was discussed during this past February’s meeting of NHL general managers, he gave them information on how he used his equipment to add blocking area.

And given that the GM’s emerged from that meeting unanimously agreeing to address this issue, including Snow, it appears those in this group determined to maintain the status quo could be in a distinct minority.

The NHL world is abuzz over today's announcement of the NY Islanders re-signing goaltender Rick DiPietro to a 15-year, $67.5 million contract.

The response to this announcement from pundits and fans appears overwhelmingly negative. Not for the money DiPietro will recieve but the length of the deal, an astounding fifteen years, the second-longest contract in NHL history.

I can certainly understand the reaction. At 25, DiPietro has yet to prove he's about to join the ranks of the NHL's goaltending elite, and it's rare that a goaltender, even a starter, can sustain a career toward the age of 40, which is how old DiPietro will be when this contract expires.

There's already been more than enough analysis over whether or not this deal was worthwhile and questioning over the sanity of Islanders owner Charles Wang, so adding my two cents would merely seem like "piling on" at this point.  Suffice to say, I'm in agreement with those critical of this deal.

What I'm more interested in is what impact, if any , this contract could have upon the league, specifically, further contract negotiations between teams and players.

One thing this CBA has been renowned for thus far has been the increased length of contracts signed by RFA and UFA players. Where once deals of two-to-three years were the average, under this current CBA deals of four, five and six years are becoming more common.

So is it possible that the DiPietro contract could be the harbinger of deals to come, if not 15 year deals, then those of seven, eight, even ten years in length?

Depends on the player and the team.

We're not likely to see a lot of deals pushing ten years in length, but one shouldn't rule out the possibility.

Take the Washington Capitals and franchise player Alexander Ovechkin. The kid is only 20 and yet in his rookie season won the Calder, challenged for the Rocket Richard trophy and earned universal acclaim as the most exciting player to hit the NHL since Pavel Bure.

Would it be a stretch to assume the Capitals could make a ten-year, $80 million contract offer to Ovechkin to lock him up long term through his playing prime? Would it be unreasonable to believe Ovechkin wouldn't pass up an opportunity to earn $8 million US per season for the next decade, thus securing his financial future?

I'll bet more than a few Capitals fans would love to hear that deal announced today, and more than a few hockey sages would commend the club for doing so.

Don' t expect the DiPietro contract to be used as a comparable throughout the league, but don't be surprised if teams with genuine young superstars consider much longer deals to retain those players if it makes sense under their respective salary caps .