NHL likely to implement shootouts, other changes

Status
Not open for further replies.

joepeps

Registered User
Jan 2, 2004
12,697
674
Toronto
Visit site
Mothra said:
But when you say "alienate" I think you mean that these fans will stop watching. Is that what you mean?

I also doubt that 2-3 playoff spots will be unjustly determined because of shootouts....I just cant follow that logic. To me it seems like the more skilled teams (be it at forward or in net) will be the better teams at shootouts, just makes sense.....so you are saying that these teams, that are most likely more skilled, will be behind a couple less skilled teams after an 80+ game regular season in normal situations....but because of a shootout system they will leapfrog these less skilled teams who are ahead in the standings.....that doesnt make sense to me. I am not denying that a team now and then may make it to the postseason because of a great shootout record enabling them to jump past a team that had a poor one....but 2-3? that means 4-6 teams are affected and that seems a bit dramatic. Not to mention that if they are so close in the standings that the shootout success/lack of is the deciding factor after a loooong season....I think its safe to say that the teams were very much equal anyway


anyone can win a shoot out... I can go and score a goal if I am lucky against Brodeur... anythign can happen...

look at soccer...

just because GiGI Buffon is in net for italy and italy has

totti, vieri,Pirlo,Del Piero, and Cassano if extra Gilardino and many other to take the p/s... doesn't mean there going to win...

case in point... world cup ... case in point... champions league with Milan....

S/O is even to both sides...
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
Bring Back Bucky said:
I think that the irony in your post is that those were all natural evolutions of the actual game- the shootout is a totally separate entity from the game..

I disagree. The shoot-out has been a part of the game for as long as I can remember. Maybe not an integral part of the game in North America, but it has been around in Europe for quite some time. Heck, I remember as kid playing street hockey that games would come down to penalty shots to decide the winner when the street lights came on. I think the shoot-out has always been a part of our game, we've just never seen it in use in competitve hockey on this side of the pond.
 

Mothra

The Groovy Guru
Jul 16, 2002
7,717
2
Parts Unknown
Visit site
joepeps said:
anyone can win a shoot out... I can go and score a goal if I am lucky against Brodeur... anythign can happen...

look at soccer...

just because GiGI Buffon is in net for italy and italy has

totti, vieri,Pirlo,Del Piero, and Cassano if extra Gilardino and many other to take the p/s... doesn't mean there going to win...

case in point... world cup ... case in point... champions league with Milan....

S/O is even to both sides...

Using soccer is just silly.....in soccer a goalie must guess....and although I dont have numbers to back it up I am willing to bet that the shooter has the advantage....by a wide margin...

In hockey its the exact opposite, the goalie has the advantage. I'm sure someone can post the numbers but I have seen them before and on penalty shots the goalie wins more than he is scored on
 

joepeps

Registered User
Jan 2, 2004
12,697
674
Toronto
Visit site
Mothra said:
Using soccer is just silly.....in soccer a goalie must guess....and although I dont have numbers to back it up I am willing to bet that the shooter has the advantage....by a wide margin...

In hockey its the exact opposite, the goalie has the advantage. I'm sure someone can post the numbers but I have seen them before and on penalty shots the goalie wins more than he is scored on


that doesn't change the fact that every team will ahve a goalie in the net...

so whether it's Mats Sundin or Tie Domi going in on Ed Belfour or Trevor Kidd

it's an even chance...
 

TruGr1t

Proper Villain
Jun 26, 2003
22,906
6,497
Chili said:
The Swedish Elite League dumped shootouts and I'll count the days until they are removed from the NHL.

This is the kicker for me as far as the 'anti-shootouters' are concerned. This stuff has already been tried in other leagues and rejected. A lot of people are using European leagues as case studies to determine how taking out the redline would work and stuff like instituting no-touch icings. Why can't we look to the SEL's experience with shoot-outs? Anyways, tradition aside, I just don't like the concept of a glorified skills competition happening at the end of the game. I can't believe people have this big a problem with ties, it is just frigging weird. :shakehead

Patman said:
I mean, the Americans clearly love the shootout so much that the MLS stopped using it.

Also an interesting point. I remember reading about how the shootout wasn't getting that much love in the AHL this season either, but I can't seem to find the article on that.
 

bcrt2000

Registered User
Feb 17, 2005
3,499
3
the truth is, when the casual fan actually pays money to go see an nhl game, and it ends unresolved, they go home unhappier than they would knowing that a team actually won the game
 

WC Handy*

Guest
joepeps said:
that doesn't change the fact that every team will ahve a goalie in the net...

so whether it's Mats Sundin or Tie Domi going in on Ed Belfour or Trevor Kidd

it's an even chance...

Even chance? :biglaugh:

Which one of the scenarios would you put your car's title on the line for?

Tie Domi vs Ed Belfour

or

Mats Sundin vs Trevor Kidd

:help:
 

Hoss

Registered User
Feb 21, 2005
1,033
0
I like..

3 pts for win in regulation or overtime, zero for a loss. 2pts for shootout win, 1pt shootout loss.

5 on 5 ot for 5 minutes, then shootout. No shoot outs in playoffs.

Smaller goal equipment, no composite sticks.

Let coach decide if they want a penalty shot or the 2 minutes, rather than just awarding penalty shot.

Personal foul system similar to NBA or soccer card system, too many penalties and you sit.

Penalties for yapping at ref, no C or A better keep your yap shut.

Severe repercushions for crap like Nash pulled at World Champs.
 

Patman

Registered User
Feb 23, 2004
330
0
www.stat.uconn.edu
Steve L said:
Youre talking total bollocks, they are very frequent in competitions that allow them, ie knockout cups only and not in the league.

Yeah, sure are a lot of those... except that most of those matches are two-legged matches
 

joepeps

Registered User
Jan 2, 2004
12,697
674
Toronto
Visit site
WC Handy said:
Even chance? :biglaugh:

Which one of the scenarios would you put your car's title on the line for?

Tie Domi vs Ed Belfour

or

Mats Sundin vs Trevor Kidd

:help:


it was an example.... i'm sure Tie domi can score lol..

but i'm saying all teams ahve atleast 5 players who have moves and could put the puck in the net or they wouldn't be in the NHL..... they got there somehow... :teach:
 

PeterSidorkiewicz

HFWF Tourney Undisputed Champion
Apr 30, 2004
32,442
9,701
Lansing, MI
Heres another viewpoint about the shootout other people can look at. Lets take a look at the Wild, who play mostly all defensive hockey. I'm sorry to pick on them, but they do have a very high defensive style with not too many skilled players in shooting and stuff, I know they have some but I thought it would be a good example.

The Wild play a game vs. someone in the reg season and just keep icing the puck, all defense etc. Game winds up in a 1-1 tie, goes to OT, then a shootout. The shootout will actually favor the team with more skilled players in the area of shooting, and that team will have a better chance at winning the shootout. It doesn't mean they WILL win, but it gives them good odds. Yes I know the shootout isn't a team game aspect, but it could still help teams who choose to go the more offensive player skilled route.

Also, I just don't understand why people can't keep an open mind about things, if we stuck to pure traditionalism, we would have 0-0 games all the time because you couldn't pass the puck forward. Im not saying you have to like it at all, just at least give it a chance, I'm not sold on the shootout, but ill give it a chance.
 

WC Handy*

Guest
PeterSidorkiewicz said:
Also, I just don't understand why people can't keep an open mind about things, if we stuck to pure traditionalism, we would have 0-0 games all the time because you couldn't pass the puck forward. Im not saying you have to like it at all, just at least give it a chance, I'm not sold on the shootout, but ill give it a chance.

I have a very open mind about changes in the game... I'm okay with bigger nets. I'm okay with the Bowman line. I'm okay with no red line. I'm okay with no Blue lines. Those are things that will change the way the game is played but in the end the result of the game is still determined by the TEAM.
 

Steve L*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2003
11,548
0
Southampton, England
Visit site
EndBoards said:
The solution is to have a less severe penalty for obstruction. Take the offender off the ice for two minutes, but remove the change in manpower. This allows refs to make the call without awarding a power play that decides the game.
No, that will make the knuckle draggers grab the skill players at every opportunity as they will be able to stop any player and not harm their team. Obstruction would explode if this happened, just imagine the defending just just hauling down a player on every odd man break and the attacking team dont even get a PP.

This is one of the worst ideas ever and thats saying something on HF!
 

joepeps

Registered User
Jan 2, 2004
12,697
674
Toronto
Visit site
WC Handy said:
I have a very open mind about changes in the game... I'm okay with bigger nets. I'm okay with the Bowman line. I'm okay with no red line. I'm okay with no Blue lines. Those are things that will change the way the game is played but in the end the result of the game is still determined by the TEAM.

Sorry to say the game will still be decided by a team... a team of 6 players....

just like the 6 on the ice for your fav. team...

S/O is fine...
 

Steve L*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2003
11,548
0
Southampton, England
Visit site
Patman said:
Yeah, sure are a lot of those... except that most of those matches are two-legged matches
which dont go to shootouts in most of the tied matches because away goals are counted.

The only way to look at it is a game where the tie is decided on the day. Take a look at World Cups or Euro Champs and youll see England virtually go out of every tournament on penalties.
 

Brewleaguer

Registered User
Jan 31, 2005
260
0
joepeps said:
Sorry to say the game will still be decided by a team... a team of 6 players....

just like the 6 on the ice for your fav. team...

S/O is fine...

IMO the game is played on the ice, with 6 per side, on the ice. S/O is one shooter, one netminder. So it's not the same sport, more like tennis to me.
 

WC Handy*

Guest
Brewleaguer said:
IMO the game is played on the ice, with 6 per side, on the ice. S/O is one shooter, one netminder. So it's not the same sport, more like tennis to me.

Quit trying to use common sense.
 

MePutPuckInNet

Registered User
Jan 1, 2004
2,385
0
Toronto
Visit site
- just thought I'd toss this out there -
In my opinion, one of the BEST games of the '03-'04 season was between the Minnesota Wild and the NJ Devils. They skated to a 4-4 tie...but it was a freakin' hoot. Does anyone else remember this game? Devils vs Wild
 

LordHelmet

Registered User
May 19, 2004
956
0
Twin Cities
Steve L said:
No, that will make the knuckle draggers grab the skill players at every opportunity as they will be able to stop any player and not harm their team.
Like they already do? What we have - penalizing the team with a short-man situation - doesn't work... How many 'crackdowns' have we tried with no success?

Steve L said:
Obstruction would explode if this happened, just imagine the defending just just hauling down a player on every odd man break and the attacking team dont even get a PP.
Obstruction has already 'exploded' because players know that the refs won't blow the whistle - especially if late and the score is close. They already haul down players on odd man breaks because the refs & fans don't to have 40 minutes of PP/PK time per team/per game.

If this caused obstruction to further 'explode' as you say, then fine. The guys that do it the most would sit in the box the most. Eventually the benches would get short enough that the remaining players would be gassed and their opponents would walk all over them. Teams that rely on obstruction would get hammered and their coaches would change the system or be fired.

Sorry you don't like the idea, but it solves the problem. It frees up the refs to make the call without deciding the game, it keeps repeat offenders off the ice, making them less valuable in the marketplace.
 

HockeyCritter

Registered User
Dec 10, 2004
5,656
0
WC Handy said:
I have a very open mind about changes in the game... I'm okay with bigger nets. I'm okay with the Bowman line. I'm okay with no red line. I'm okay with no Blue lines. Those are things that will change the way the game is played but in the end the result of the game is still determined by the TEAM.
Then it would be in the TEAM’s best interest to play hard for 65 minutes to ensure they don’t tie, eh?
 

Bring Back Bucky

Registered User
May 19, 2004
9,997
3,071
Canadas Ocean Playground
EndBoards said:
Like they already do? What we have - penalizing the team with a short-man situation - doesn't work... How many 'crackdowns' have we tried with no success?


Obstruction has already 'exploded' because players know that the refs won't blow the whistle - especially if late and the score is close. They already haul down players on odd man breaks because the refs & fans don't to have 40 minutes of PP/PK time per team/per game.

If this caused obstruction to further 'explode' as you say, then fine. The guys that do it the most would sit in the box the most. Eventually the benches would get short enough that the remaining players would be gassed and their opponents would walk all over them. Teams that rely on obstruction would get hammered and their coaches would change the system or be fired.

Sorry you don't like the idea, but it solves the problem. It frees up the refs to make the call without deciding the game, it keeps repeat offenders off the ice, making them less valuable in the marketplace.


I didn't even read your post, I just wanted to congratulate you on your fantastic new bloody-chainsaw guy avatar. I love it!!!
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
Steve L said:
Originally Posted by PepNCheese
Shootouts are stupid. Hockey is supremely a team sport and to have to face the possibility of losing home ice advantage or a division title, or even miss the playoffs entirely over a shootout is just ridiculous.
Hey, guess how many players are involved in a shootout? 5 skaters and a goalie. Now how many are on the ice normally?

4 on 4 OT is less of a team game than a shootout.

My nominee for one of the most jaw droppingly stupid posts of the year.

On one side you have 5 skaters individually (no assists, no passing, none of that teamwork stuff) doing something that is except for very rare occasions completely alien to the normal play of the game. And if you do the numbers 5 skaters + 1 goalie per side = 12 total players out of 40.

On the other side you have 4 skaters from each team doing just what they've been doing for the last 60 minutes - face offs, line changes, passing, play making, you know - playing hockey. There are still line changes - the same 4 don't play all 5 minutes, you know. And again if you do the numbers, except for backup goalies and maybe a slightly shorter bench, everybody plays = 38 minus a goon or two.

So tell me again, which one is more of a team game?????
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->