Shoot-out Issue

[Canuck You]

So, I was listening to a few podcasts about McJesus issue about the shootout and I found a lot of intriguing things but no end result! or a resolution..

 

 I do agree with him and my proposition would be an 8 min OT..First 4 mins it's 4 on 4 and the next 4 mins a 3 on 3?..As a nerd I will say that it would take approx the same mins if it were to go in to a shoot-out.

 

But what say you?

 

Edited January 17, 2023 by Canuck You

[-Vintage Canuck-]

I like this better (in order):

• 5 minutes 4-on-4
• 5 minutes 3-on-3
• Shootout

[Gurn]

5 minutes of 5 on 5 sudden death ot. 2 points for a win, 0 points for a loss

1 point each for a tie.

[Fanuck]

19 minutes ago, Canuck You said:

 8 min OT..First 4 mins it's 4 on 4 and the next 4 mins a 3 on 3?..

 

[Nucker 67]

10-minute period of 3-on-3

 

If it's still tied after that. They play a 5-minute period of 2-on-2.

[Gurn]

11 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

the two goalies shoot out against each other

goalies meet at center ice, drop the gloves and last one standing wins.

Stick swinging is NOT allowed.

[Gurn]

2 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

Cloutier would suddenly have a market again.  

Ryan Miller- a fair bit younger, but willing to go!

[Coconuts]

The issue with shootouts is that they exist 

[c00kies]

24 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

The issue with shootouts is that they exist 

Yes, I liked ties, especially since you had to earn and push for the 2 points or you would only get the 1. 

[Coconuts]

8 minutes ago, c00kies said:

Yes, I liked ties, especially since you had to earn and push for the 2 points or you would only get the 1. 

I just think it's a lousy way to end a team-based game 

[DownUndaCanuck]

2 on 2 would be nuts, puck moving defencemen would thrive. Imagine Petey and Hughes out there together, both can defend and both can score, one of the leagues better duos.

[Westcoasting]

1 hour ago, Gurn said:

goalies meet at center ice, drop the gloves and last one standing wins.

Stick swinging is NOT allowed.

Let’s get Hextall back in the league!

[-AJ-]

Back when 3-on-3 was being brought in, I was in favour of a 10-minute 4-on-4 instead, but I think the concern was going too much overtime for TV providers. That said, I don't hate shooutout, but would like to see it as more of a rarity, which 3-on-3 has already helped with. I think an extension or eight or ten minute 3-on-3 should eliminate the vast majority of shootouts, making it an actually exciting event when it occurs. 

 

Think about it, if shootouts were as rare as penalty shots, we'd appreciate them a lot more.

[Gurn]

42 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

Think about it, if shootouts were as rare as penalty shots, we'd appreciate them a lot more.

I'd appreciate never seeing a shoot out again.

To the point I've actually only watched like 10 in total, since their introduction, but the same goes for 4 on 4 ot; which is now 3 on 3 ot.

 

disgraceful way to decide a game.

[-AJ-]

3 minutes ago, Gurn said:

I'd appreciate never seeing a shoot out again.

To the point I've actually only watched like 10 in total, since their introduction, but the same goes for 4 on 4 ot; which is now 3 on 3 ot.

 

disgraceful way to decide a game.

You don't like overtimes? I feel like overtimes give me some of my most exciting moments in hockey.

[Gurn]

42 minutes ago, -AJ- said:

You don't like overtimes? I feel like overtimes give me some of my most exciting moments in hockey.

I love overtime, when it is 5 on 5 sudden death. 5 minutes during regular season, then a tie, and going till there is a winner in play offs was great.

I admit I definitely dislike having different  amounts of players on the ice. To me it seems bush league to change how the game is played, to decide the out come.

I'd have more respect for the league if they went to a 3 on 3 format for the whole game, than this mish mash they have going on now.- Though I'd probably not watch, at least I could respect their commitment.

 

 

 

[-AJ-]

45 minutes ago, Gurn said:

I love overtime, when it is 5 on 5 sudden death. 5 minutes during regular season, then a tie, and going till there is a winner in play offs was great.

I admit I definitely dislike having different  amounts of players on the ice. To me it seems bush league to change how the game is played, to decide the out come.

I'd have more respect for the league if they went to a 3 on 3 format for the whole game, than this mish mash they have going on now.- Though I'd probably not watch, at least I could respect their commitment.

 

 

 

Fair points. I definitely enjoy playoff 5 on 5 OT more than regular season OT, but I get excitement out of it in the regular season too.

[nuckin_futz]

6 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

10-minute period of 3-on-3

 

If it's still tied after that. They play a 5-minute period of 2-on-2.

If it's tied after that a steel cage descends from the roof and both team mascots get in and only 1 walks out.

[King Heffy]

8 hours ago, -AJ- said:

You don't like overtimes? I feel like overtimes give me some of my most exciting moments in hockey.

Agreed.  Who didn't like that Bedard goal?

[IBatch]

Nothing at all wrong with OT.   The entire reason the shootout was brought in (well this was the mantra anyways, it failed miserably though) was to get teams to stop playing defense half way through the third period to get a tie.   The Loser point actually made it worse.   Encouraged and rewarded not scoring during a tie game.    It was a gimmick they made to get fans back to arenas.  Came at a cost too.   Goalies shouldn't have to endure these, not just during extra practice time - but once they get to a shoot-out.    That's a lot of extra wear and tear.  

 

The worst thing about them (and the loser point) is every single year one or two or even three or four more deserving teams, with better 5 x 5 playoff type games,  get beaten by teams with a pile loser points and shout-out wins.   ROW makes it easy to figure out.
 

As a traditionalist, it also wrecks stats.   MTL and DET boffo seasons for example,  130ish points - without loser points!   90 points used to be a good year.   Now it doesn't get you in.   100 points was an incredible feat.   Vancouver did it 3 times (93 and two times with Naslund I think).   TO did it I think once with Sundin.    110 points is now the new 100 points. 

 

Goalies.   This is where it gets completely whacked out.    They get a win for OT and shoutouts.   Personally feel that the record books need to be represented differently.   Only include wins that were done 5 x 5.   That's a team win and a goalie win.   Any done 4 x 4 and 3 x 3 ?!  Need to be listed as a win but on a separate column.   And all shoot-out wins need to be added next to the tie column.    Lundqvist for example, had something like 80 plus shoot-out wins lol... Luongo over 50.   How's that fair to guys like Hasek,  Sawchuk, Joseph, Roy etc?   Parent, Dryden, Plante Bower etc.     It's not.   400 wins used to be practically an automatic HHOF career.    There are a lot of good goalies (Vernon, Beezer, Hextall, Barrasso) who'd have over 400 easily and others like Osgood who'd have 20 or so more wins.  

 

Have to wonder if MTL played 4x4  or 3 x 3 or Furh/Moog for that matter in the 80's - if they'd ever have a tie game lol.   Bet instead they'd have a lot more W's both as goalies and as teams. 

 

Sure it's fun to win a game.   And get its institutionalized... wonder if in 20 years some young idiot convinces the league to play the first round with shootouts how folks today would feel about it.    It's about the same as I feel about bringing them in at all.   OT is exciting  5 x 5 was just fine.   Winner takes all.   4 x 4 wasn't terrible didn't mind it.   3 x 3 isn't hockey it's a drill.