NFT: NHL Shootouts

Ended 0-0 vs Tampa. Awesome back and forth, great chances, goalies were awesome. I left after OT ended and before the shoot out. I didn't want to see such an awesome game end like that.

and with 3v3 OT (which I thought I would hate but I actually love) they should just play sudden death until there is a winner.

It's pretty low risk of games going on too long IMO.

Soccer has this right - 3 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a win. Simple, and the extra point for the win incentivizes playing for wins. Overtime is unnecessary in all sports except for playoff tournaments.

In comment 15166387 Go Terps said:

Quote:

Soccer has this right - 3 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a win. Simple, and the extra point for the win incentivizes playing for wins. Overtime is unnecessary in all sports except for playoff tournaments.

everyone hates ties. especially the athletes IMO.

In comment 15166394 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

In comment 15166387 Go Terps said: Quote: Soccer has this right - 3 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a win. Simple, and the extra point for the win incentivizes playing for wins. Overtime is unnecessary in all sports except for playoff tournaments. everyone hates ties. especially the athletes IMO.

Why?

In comment 15166396 Go Terps said:

Quote:

In comment 15166394 pjcas18 said: Quote: In comment 15166387 Go Terps said: Quote: Soccer has this right - 3 points for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a win. Simple, and the extra point for the win incentivizes playing for wins. Overtime is unnecessary in all sports except for playoff tournaments. everyone hates ties. especially the athletes IMO. Why?

It's a competition, there is no fulfillment without someone being declared the winner.

baseball? That doesn't make any sense to me at all. I can understand not liking the shootout, but NFL OT is lacking in its own right. Baseball and basketball are both pretty reasonable.

I hope I can articulate my points in text as I talk about this a lot with my fellow hockey fans.

I go as far back as 3 periods and that’s it
The 5 minute OT

I think what bothers me even more is the artificial point in the standings.

Teams are rewarded for getting to OT, personally I hate it. There should be 2 points up for grabs and that’s it - a regular season game creates a point and rewards a loser if they go to OT.

the shitty outcome is worsened by the point structure.

I don't mind the 1 point for reaching the shootout though.

What they should do is adopt the international tournament point system.

3 points for a regulation win, 2 for an OT or shootout win, 1 for an OT or shootout loss.

but getting rid of the shootout solves the incongruity for the same 1 point for losing in OT or the shootout.

This way there would be 3 points up for grab every game.

either 3 to the regulation winner or 2/1

There is an overtime in hockey, so the shootout comes after 65 minutes. And the 3-on-3 overtime is easily the most exciting OT of the four major sports.
Would you want an NBA or MLB game to end in a tie?

I apologize. As is my brain right now after a few beers.

I kind of neglected the point that there is a very brief OT before the eventual possible game deciding shootout.

I was too focused on how I dislike how the shootout can be the deciding factor in a win.

I am not saying it can't be exciting. Just saying it should roll into regular gameplay and keep it going.

60 minutes of 6 vs 6 shouldn't be decided by 3 rounds of 1 vs 1.

In my opinion....

In comment 15166406 k2tampa said:

Quote:

There is an overtime in hockey, so the shootout comes after 65 minutes. And the 3-on-3 overtime is easily the most exciting OT of the four major sports. Would you want an NBA or MLB game to end in a tie?

Sure. I'd have no issues with that. In baseball especially it sucks to see your pitching staff screwed up by a long extra inning game. Also, the inclusion of ties in the standings would reduce the likelihood of needing to play an extra tiebreaking game at the end of the season, as two teams with identical records would become less likely.

It absolutely cheapens the outcome. I'd prefer the game end in a tie after 5 minutes of OT.

and "losers point" makes it all a giant waste of time. I have never watched OT since the losers point was instituted.

...play the games in the regular season as you do in the playoffs. So if you are tied after regulation, teams go to the locker room, fresh cut of ice and begin a 20 minute overtime period for sudden death and so on.

2 points to the winner, 0 to the loser. I understand there is a myriad of considerations. Teams may have a game the next night, the arena needs to be prepared for a possible extended work shift, etc, etc.

I also think coaches will play the game with a sense of urgency. I do not blame teams but under the current rules, teams certainly play for OT for the guaranteed point, especially in divisions that are tight.

Teams would have to be creative with roster moves with back to back nights (Although some playoff series do have to schedule back to back nights so it isn't unique).

I also think a random night where a game is going into a long overtime, you may get an instant classic during a regular season game.

My other preference would go back to the 2 point system. 2 pts to the winner or end the game in a tie and 1 point per team.

pjs suggestion of the 3 point system is also a good option.

If I was the hockey Overlord:

Regular Season
2 points for a game. 10 minute sudden death OT period without resurfacing the ice. Each team gets 1 point if still tied after OT.

Playoffs
Clean sheet of ice after regulation. Sudden death full periods until a goal is scored. The length of the game isn't as big a deal in the playoffs since the teams are playing in a series.

In my opinion shoot outs and 3v3 emphasize a small subset of skills on a hockey team. It's like the PGA deciding ties with a putting or longest drive competition or the NFL deciding ties with a longest field goal competition.

In comment 15166384 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

and with 3v3 OT (which I thought I would hate but I actually love) they should just play sudden death until there is a winner. It's pretty low risk of games going on too long IMO.

I felt the same way about 3 on 3 OT. It’s so exciting watching OT now and they should play until there is a winner. I’ve never been a fan of the shootout.

is a gimmick, however, it's a compromise I (as a fan) and willing to make to allow for the fact that waiting for a goal at 5v5 could actually impact travel, etc.

and 3v3 is not gimmicky like a putting contest or the shootout because 3v3 actually emphasizes the best players.

Notice who doesn't hit the ice in 3v3? the 4th line. sometimes even the 3rd line.

Some of the best and most creative plays I've seen the past couple years are in the 3v3 OT.

And not sure I buy people's argument that teams "play for OT" - if you have a tie how is it any different? won't teams "play for a tie" if they feel like it's one of those games where "we're lucky to get out of here with a point" in a tight division race?

the only true (or pure) way is sudden death OT at 5v5 played until there is a winner, but that is not practical except in the playoffs.

I'm fine with sudden death 3v3 until a winner.

we would never have this
Malik - ( New Window )

In comment 15166384 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

and with 3v3 OT (which I thought I would hate but I actually love) they should just play sudden death until there is a winner. It's pretty low risk of games going on too long IMO.

I wouldnt go with until there is a winner but a full 20 min OT should be plenty for 3v3 to determine a winner

isn't how any competition should be decided and I also agree with PJ. The 3 x 3 OT is both the most exciting and harrowing thing to watch and there's almost no chance it would go beyond 10 minutes.

In comment 15166702 Stufftherun said:

Quote:

isn't how any competition should be decided and I also agree with PJ. The 3 x 3 OT is both the most exciting and harrowing thing to watch and there's almost no chance it would go beyond 10 minutes.

yes, a shootout would be like trying to end extra innings by putting a runner on 2nd to start the inning

oh, wait ;-)

Manfred is probably working on instituting a HR derby to decide ties.

I'd rather it go 20 min OT and call it a tie if it's a tie. But I can live with it, and it is fun.

What I hate, absolutely HATE...is that they use penalty kicks in the World Cup. This is a world wide competition that happens every four years. It's the biggest sporting event in the WORLD for a month. And the build up is just as great as the event itself.

Those games should NEVER go to penalty kicks. It demeans the entire game. Those guys should play until someone wins, period.

In comment 15166761 Victor in CT said:

Quote:

In comment 15166702 Stufftherun said: Quote: isn't how any competition should be decided and I also agree with PJ. The 3 x 3 OT is both the most exciting and harrowing thing to watch and there's almost no chance it would go beyond 10 minutes. yes, a shootout would be like trying to end extra innings by putting a runner on 2nd to start the inning oh, wait ;-) Manfred is probably working on instituting a HR derby to decide ties.

The bastardization and gimmicking of sports!

The shootout is a fun gimmick to watch, but I don't like that it actually decides games. I'd prefer a 5 or 10 minute OT period with 1 point each if the game remains tied at that point. I know it's not feasible for regular season play, but I really like playoff OT and how the game just keeps going at 5v5 until someone wins.

More scoring, fewer ties.

In ANY sport. Football games used to be 2:45 unless there was overtime. Baseball games could easily be shortened up. I would watch more baseball games if I knew a typical 9 inning game would last 2 to 2 1/2 hours. Hockey is doing it right. Why deplete a team over 1 freaking point and I would be fine with a tie after regulation. Terps had it right . . . 3pts for a win and 1 for a tie.

In Europe..a football match is 2 hours. A Formula 1 race has a time limit of 2 hours. I don't have to plan my whole day around a sporting event.

terrific drama and you know this is how it goes down. No Problem

the 3v3 OT, what do you like about hockey?

I consider myself a purist, I felt like I'd hate it but when I watch sequences like this I feel like the NHL got it right, it's insane, awesome hockey. Even if it's a gimmick it's not a HR derby, slam dunk contest, etc. it's a gimmick that accentuates all that is great about the game.

this is a crazy sequence...from TBL/CHI tonight (and it went to a shootout because this had to end in 5 min)
link - ( New Window )