The article is written by a goalie who has won six Stanley cups.

And that is what makes it so disappointing. Dryden -- who is a genius, a brilliant writer, and one of the most accomplished NHL goaltenders ever -- is absolutely wrong on the point that goaltenders should just stay on their knees all game.

NHL shooters have no problem hitting the uppermost part of the goal at will, and a goaltender on his knees simply doesn't cover enough of that area. This is a 6'5" goalie in that position (presumably having dropped down from upright after the shot is taken): https://www.1stohiobattery.com/columbus-blue-jackets-news/20...

If the shooter is 5 or more feet away, and has a couple seconds to set up a shot, and the goaltender is on his knees, it is virtually an automatic goal. Someone employing the strategy Dryden suggests should be the standard would lose every game for their team.

This takes away from his other very good commentary about the aesthetics of the game changing.

Also, the stick is very substantial for covering the 5-hole already. When a goaltender is on his knees, he isn't going to be raising the stick over his head to cover the three hole.

Did you even read the article? I don’t think so.

He doesn’t claim that goalies should always be on their knees, but rather than it’s common for them to do so, exploring the reasons why.

Of course I read the article. See the paragraph beginning: "Really, the biggest reason for a goalie to get off his knees is that if he doesn’t, people might notice.", and the two paragraphs preceding it.

In no way does he argue that the goalie should always be on his knees. He says it’s common for some to be, then explores the reasons why that might be the case. That is called good, nuanced writing.

It’s an article in the The Atlantic, not a formal proof.

He says he noticed while watching Vasilevskiy that after having dropped he did not immediately spring back up as his team carried the puck out, but eventually did before the other team regained control -- "but he didn’t really need to", because Dryden, wrongly, thinks that when the team returns to the zone Vasilevskiy should face them from his knees.

Every NHL goalie plays much of the game on their knees, as they should, because they end up there in response to low shots and close-approaching shooters. What Dryden is wrong to imply is that they should adopt this as their default posture.

As I reread I see that even worse, he downplays the danger of adopting this position leading to taking a slap shot to the helmet, saying a modern goalie mask protects the head "as much as a catching glove does the hand". Just utterly false. https://www.tsn.ca/nhl-concerned-by-rise-in-goalie-concussio...

I’m sure that Vasilevskiy didn’t pop up immediately there because he was exhausted. If his team turns it over, he’s back on his feet in an instant. No way he stays on his knees the whole game

This quote does not support your argument.

That's why my claim was weaker than ctab's. He suggested they are equally suited on their knees.

Also nothing in the article suggested a misunderstanding of the goaltending rule.

Here you go:

> Only the ball needs to get to the hoop, and in this NBA game, it doesn’t matter whether you are 7 feet tall or 8 feet tall; a ball shot from beyond the 23-foot-9-inch arc will loop over the outstretched arm of even the tallest player.

That is absolutely untrue. Any player that can dunk can goaltend any shot.

I think you're misunderstanding the point the author is making. The goaltending rule only prevents blocking shots on their downward trajectory. Blocks on the upward trajectory are still allowed, but they become more difficult as the play becomes more spread out, which happens when longer shots are encouraged.

If he stated what you stated I would be misunderstanding.