Truth & Rumors > NHL

GMs want to dump shootouts

Views
9950
Comments
227

07:57 AM ET 10.21 | The NHL isn't even waiting for the seven-year itch. After five seasons of using penalty shots to decide deadlocked games, it's pretty clear that if the league hasn't totally fallen out of love with the shootout, its eyes are wandering. Detroit GM Ken Holland is a leading proponent of changing overtime to reduce the number of times games go to shootouts. Last season, 301 NHL games went to overtime (24.5 per cent) and of those, 185 (61.1 per cent) continued on to be decided by penalty shots. For most GMs, that's too high.

Toronto Star

Marty Turco, Mikael Samuelsson, Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images Marty Turco, Mikael Samuelsson, Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images
October 21, 2010  08:30 AM ET

agree -change OT, lose the shootout

October 21, 2010  08:31 AM ET
QUOTE:

take a dump

settle down, Beavis

October 21, 2010  08:45 AM ET

I'm also in favor of dumping shootouts. But I also want to see ties broken. I've always thought a better option to the shootout would be 5 minutes 4-on-4, then 5 mins of 3-on-3. If it's still tied, then each team gets a point. The only problem I see with that is teams playing a long OT on the front end of a back-to-back. Could make for some tired legs on the second night.

October 21, 2010  08:47 AM ET

Why don't they let the goalies have free roam behind the net while they are at it?

October 21, 2010  08:52 AM ET
QUOTE(#4):

I'm also in favor of dumping shootouts. But I also want to see ties broken. I've always thought a better option to the shootout would be 5 minutes 4-on-4, then 5 mins of 3-on-3. If it's still tied, then each team gets a point. The only problem I see with that is teams playing a long OT on the front end of a back-to-back. Could make for some tired legs on the second night.

agree about needing to find a way to break the tie- it was mind numbing to watch the Devils of the mid-late 90's play for the T.
As far as the back-to-back games, every team could potentially be in danger of it at some point, so to me that is wash...

October 21, 2010  08:53 AM ET
QUOTE(#5):

Why don't they let the goalies have free roam behind the net while they are at it?

I liked the goalies having free reign... but that same token, IMO if they step out of the crease to handle the puck in the corner - a la Martin Brouder, et al. used to - then they are fair game to be be checked.

October 21, 2010  09:02 AM ET

GMs want to dump shootouts

Smartest thing from the To***to Star that I've ever seen. Dump away boys.

October 21, 2010  09:14 AM ET
QUOTE(#6):

agree about needing to find a way to break the tie- it was mind numbing to watch the Devils of the mid-late 90's play for the T.As far as the back-to-back games, every team could potentially be in danger of it at some point, so to me that is wash...

One way to keep a team from playing for the tie would be to give only 2 points for the win. Period. No soup for you if you lose in OT.

October 21, 2010  09:18 AM ET
QUOTE(#4):

I'm also in favor of dumping shootouts. But I also want to see ties broken. I've always thought a better option to the shootout would be 5 minutes 4-on-4, then 5 mins of 3-on-3. If it's still tied, then each team gets a point. The only problem I see with that is teams playing a long OT on the front end of a back-to-back. Could make for some tired legs on the second night.

I'd vote for your idea. I do agree with the dumping of shoot-outs.

October 21, 2010  09:22 AM ET
QUOTE(#9):

One way to keep a team from playing for the tie would be to give only 2 points for the win. Period. No soup for you if you lose in OT.

So basically winner take all - and teams would have to play until a winner

October 21, 2010  09:26 AM ET

I still think there is some merit to the 3 point system - 3 pts regulation win, 2 pts ot win, 1 pt ot loss.. I just think there would be some long games if there 'had to be' a winner, and that could lead to more injuries..
no system is perfect, and there will always be a deserving team on the outside looking in come playoff time.

October 21, 2010  09:29 AM ET
QUOTE(#11):

So basically winner take all - and teams would have to play until a winner

The NHL could hand out participant ribbons like they do in grade school.

October 21, 2010  10:07 AM ET

Even tho it kinda worked out pretty good for my team last year on game #82, i've never been a big fan of the shootout. I'm all for changing up the format and/or length of overtime and actually playing for a win rather than deferring to an individual skills competition.

They really need to get rid of the loser point as well. The salary cap SHOULD give them all the parity that the **** was looking to generate. You shouldn't get points for losing.

I remember trying to teach my girlfriend about hockey and trying to explain the fourth column on the standings and the whole loser point thing was pretty confusing to her.

October 21, 2010  10:10 AM ET

I don't think you should get any points for losing...

October 21, 2010  10:22 AM ET
QUOTE(#13):

The NHL could hand out participant ribbons like they do in grade school.

everybody's a winner! yay!

October 21, 2010  10:22 AM ET

But what about all the casual to non-fans the shootout was supposed to attract. Say it isn't so that Heir Poison Dwarf was wrong about something!!!

October 21, 2010  10:27 AM ET

Dump the shootout and lose the point for an overtime loss. I mean, who gets a point for losing??

October 21, 2010  10:29 AM ET
QUOTE(#13):

The NHL could hand out participant ribbons like they do in grade school.

Yup.

Nothing wrong with a tie. The NFL plays a while and if it's a tie it's a tie. No big deal.

The whole shootout gimmick is just that, a gimmick. Something to appease the Excited States fringe fans.

But it's OK for baseball to play all night long and maybe even continue the next day? They should have to settle a game after 10 innings with a long ball contest.

You play the game for 60 minutes. You play 5 minutes of OT at 4 a side. No result. It's a tie.

And no game should be worth 3 points. In the playoffs do you get credit for getting into OT? nope.

You lose the game in OT in the regular season you lose the game. No need for 1 point for hanging in till OT.

October 21, 2010  10:29 AM ET
QUOTE(#18):

I don't think you should get any points for losing...

Bingo.

 
October 21, 2010  10:30 AM ET
QUOTE(#20):

But what about all the casual to non-fans the shootout was supposed to attract.

I say frig them and the horse they rode in on.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Irving: Fans don't deserve the Cavs
    Views
    18965
    Comments
    682
  2. 2
    D'Antoni's newest 'blunder'
    Views
    886
    Comments
    522
  3. 3
    Red Sox dodged two injury scares
    Views
    3317
    Comments
    503
  4. 4
    Baseball's top 2015 free agent
    Views
    1040
    Comments
    256
  5. 5
    Trump taking a legit run at the Bills
    Views
    2702
    Comments
    109

SI.com

SI Photos