Penalties in OT Should be a Penalty Shot

[LeafShark]

People love 3 on 3 hockey, so why not have more of it? Whenever a penalty is called in OT, it seems to slow the game down a little bit by 1. adding the extra man and 2. free icing for the team that has only 3 players. It gets relatively boring watching a team pound shots for two minutes at a goaltender, so why not just make all penalties a penalty shot and end the infraction right there and get back to 3 on 3? By definition, this is extra time, and you're trying to end the game with a decision as quickly as possible while staying true to the sport. Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[Nizdizzle]

This is actually the idea I most disagree with of any proposed rule changes I've seen so far.

so why not just make all penalties a penalty shot and end the infraction right there and get back to 3 on 3?

Because people don't want games to end in a silly skills competition. 3-on-3 (and 4-on-3) is at least still hockey.

 

[Eternal Leaf]

I'm on the other end of this. I want the penalty shootout/penalty shot to be completely removed from overtime hockey.

 

[Josepho]

someone has been stealing ideas from ea

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

counter idea, get rid of the "minimum of 3 skaters" rule in OT.

so a penalty becomes 3-2, and a 2 man advantage is 4-2

 

[Critical13]

counter idea, get rid of the "minimum of 3 skaters" rule in OT.

so a penalty becomes 3-2, and a 2 man advantage is 4-2

That's not even hockey

 

[VoluntaryDom]

counter idea, get rid of the "minimum of 3 skaters" rule in OT.

so a penalty becomes 3-2, and a 2 man advantage is 4-2

2 man advantage 3-1 tbh

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

That's not even hockey

neither is 3 on 3...

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

sounds good to me. 3-on-3 is stupid af.

 

[CanadianPensFan1]

Christ no.

This is terrible, this idea.

 

[BeastoftheEast85]

Do teams have a higher scoring % on penalty shots or 4 vs 3?

 

[Roomtemperature]

That's not even hockey

Anything without a rover and a forward pass is not hockey.

Get over it. Rules change. The game changes. Its all hockey because the rules of hockey are man made and arbitrary

 

[MartyOwns]

someone has been stealing ideas from ea

ruining hockey isn't ea's idea, they just perfected it

 

[Summer Rose]

I've played with various ideas in my head, like a penalty in the last 2 minutes of regulation or regular-season gives the option to the non-offending team for a penalty shot. Or, extending the period for the duration of the power play. At the end of the day, the NHLPA is unlikely to accept it so whatever. Teams can continue enjoying their 15-second power plays.

 

[BeLeafing]

2 man advantage 3-1 tbh

Why stop there. 2 on 0.

 

[LeafShark]

Do teams have a higher scoring % on penalty shots or 4 vs 3?

PS edges it out.

PS ~33%
4 on 3 ~ 20%-25%

3 on 3 scoring rate - 12+ goals per 60 minutes for both teams, which is more or less equal than a constant power play in terms of total scoring rate. Going on a powerplay might even cut total scoring rate. Total scoring rate for 5 on 5 is ~half of that of the 1 man advantage scoring rate currently. Players association would never be on for 3 on 2.

This is the easiest way to decide more games before they go to a shootout without extending overtime (which I would love). Play the full 5 minutes 3 on 3 and award the shot for any penalties.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

That's not even hockey

Neither is 3 on 3.

 

[lwvs84]

One thing I don't understand about 3v3 OT is why is it part of the tie breaker? 3v3 is almost as much of a gimmick as the SO. I'm guessing there are more penalty shots in the playoffs than each team taking 2 penalties and playing 3v3 (no proof to back that up though). Make the tie breaker in standings regulation wins, or go back to 5v5 OT (maybe for 10 mins) and get rid of the SO. If it ends in a tie, so be it.

As for the penalty shot for a penalty in OT, I guess it's no worse of an idea than the current format? They're trying to make the end of games more gimmicky, why not keep leaning in to it?

 

[Matty Sundin]

No they gotta stop trying to fix things that aren't broken. It would just open a can of worms and you'd have threads every week complaining about it lol.

 

[Klaus3154]

People are screaming to have the shootout taken away, loathing that it is deciding games. You think having more penalty shots determine the outcome of the gamewill make people happy? Not to mention it is just going to cause more scrutiny with the officiating for penalties called and those not called.

I understand that it could be seen as gimmicky but I guess I am fine with 3 on 3 but I think it should be played till there is a winner, seriously how long can 3 on 3 last without a goal?

My major discretion with the current OT system is please stop giving points to the loser. If you lose you lose. Not every kid gets a trophy

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Hell no, what a terrible idea

 

[CanadienShark]

To potentially end a sudden death game off ANY penalty? No thanks.

 

[Jray42]

HELL no

 

[me2]

Why stop there. 2 on 0.

That's Vancouver's 5 on 5 defensive scheme when Pouliot and Del Zotto are on the ice.

 

[LeafShark]

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. And the game is over anyways. This is extra time now and we are trying to determine the winner (without playing the players to death in the regular season). A deserved penalty shot is better than an arbitrary penalty shootout. Besides... drama drives revenue and increases viewership... without killing the players... very positive business decision.

But I mean I would also extend OT to 3 periods of 3 minute 3 on 3, but the NHLPA isn't taking the bait on more player time. I'd let it end in a tie. Fans will tolerate < 5 ties per team a year. And of course I support 3-2-1-0 or 2-0.