3 On 3 Overtime

kirby11 · Jun 24, 2015

Who do you want out there for it, and what are your thoughts on it?

I like it a lot more than going for the mixed 4 v. 4 then 3 v. 3 setup, as games won't last longer, but there will hopefully be more chances to end the game in OT as opposed to the shootout.

Sabre the Win · Jun 24, 2015

kirby11 said:
Who do you want out there for it, and what are your thoughts on it?

I like it a lot more than going for the mixed 4 v. 4 then 3 v. 3 setup, as games won't last longer, but there will hopefully be more chances to end the game in OT as opposed to the shootout.

Depends when I see the roster next year.

old kummelweck · Jun 24, 2015

I don't get the other two rules. If you are trying to aide scoring in the NHL, why do you give coaches the ability to challenge goals on offsides and crease/goalie interference. That reduces scoring. :shrugs

I like the 3 on 3 OT.

Myllz · Jun 24, 2015

Whatever makes the shootout less likely to happen.

HogtownSabresfan · Jun 24, 2015

The thing about this is that I'm thinking you might be looking for pickups who can play with no checking whatsoever for five minutes all out. Imagine Max A, if that existed.

You probably still need some shootout guys too but they will be less important.

If the goal is to make the playoffs, 5-6 OT points could be the difference.

Smart NHL managers will accommodate for this in their rosters.

Myllz · Jun 24, 2015

HogtownSabresfan said:
The thing about this is that I'm thinking you might be looking for pickups who can play with no checking whatsoever for five minutes all out. Imagine Max A, if that existed.

You probably still need some shootout guys too but they will be less important.

If the goal is to make the playoffs, 5-6 OT points could be the difference.

Smart NHL managers will accommodate for this in their rosters.

Nobody's going to pickup a roster player just for overtime periods. The 5-6 points you may pick up in the OT period are going to be lost by carrying dead weight in your roster for the rest of the games.

Jame · Jun 24, 2015

Did they make the faceoff change? Defender zone stick down first?

Revelate · Jun 24, 2015

Jame said:
Did they make the faceoff change? Defender zone stick down first?

yea.

--

wrt 3 vs 3.

1. Draft Kylington
2. Only let him on the ice during OT.
3. ???
4. Profit

Paxon · Jun 24, 2015

Kruschiki said:
I don't get the other two rules. If you are trying to aide scoring in the NHL, why do you give coaches the ability to challenge goals on offsides and crease/goalie interference. That reduces scoring. :shrugs

I like the 3 on 3 OT.

The technicality of overturning a bad goal doesn't negatively impact the sport. It's not like fans are going to say "wow this game would have been more exciting if that offsides goal had counted".

Husko · Jun 24, 2015

Maybe add an article to the OP so everyone knows what's happening?

I personally don't get why the NHLPA is adamantly opposing the mixed model (4 on 4 and then 3 on 3), and said they wanted all 3 on 3 or no change at all. I just don't get the rationale behind that position. I personally love to keep the 5 of 4 on 4 followed by 5 of 3 on 3, but I would understand the opposition to playing more from the NHLPA.

gallagt01 · Jun 24, 2015

Husko said:
Maybe add an article to the OP so everyone knows what's happening?

I personally don't get why the NHLPA is adamantly opposing the mixed model (4 on 4 and then 3 on 3), and said they wanted all 3 on 3 or no change at all. I just don't get the rationale behind that position. I personally love to keep the 5 of 4 on 4 followed by 5 of 3 on 3, but I would understand the opposition to playing more from the NHLPA.

My guess is the players don't want the games to be unnecessarily longer than they already are. The NHL season is a grind.

Husko · Jun 24, 2015

gallagt01 said:
My guess is the players don't want the games to be unnecessarily longer than they already are. The NHL season is a grind.

But does the AHL mixed model make them any longer?

CatsforReinhart · Jun 24, 2015

circus time. Consider me a traditionalist.

Why dont they just call interference and clutch and grab. Problem solved.

Paxon · Jun 24, 2015

Husko said:
Maybe add an article to the OP so everyone knows what's happening?

I personally don't get why the NHLPA is adamantly opposing the mixed model (4 on 4 and then 3 on 3), and said they wanted all 3 on 3 or no change at all. I just don't get the rationale behind that position. I personally love to keep the 5 of 4 on 4 followed by 5 of 3 on 3, but I would understand the opposition to playing more from the NHLPA.

It's all about game length. What players don't get is that a 10 minute OT isn't any longer than 5 minutes + a shootout. I like the 10 minute mixed OT idea. It showed in the AHL to drastically reduces shootouts. Still, I prefer this new rule to how it was.

HogtownSabresfan · Jun 25, 2015

Myllz said:
Nobody's going to pickup a roster player just for overtime periods. The 5-6 points you may pick up in the OT period are going to be lost by carrying dead weight in your roster for the rest of the games.

Wrong. Ability in a shoot out has been pretty damn important. I'm not saying the guy can be Andrew Peters otherwise but a softer player might have more value today.

I can think of border line Sabres I might have held onto a little longer because of 3-3 and shoot out.

Reddawg · Jun 25, 2015

Speedy two-way forwards with scoring touch just got a lot more valuable.

Chad Thundercock · Jun 25, 2015

I wish they'd just go back to regulation ties, but Murica MUST have a winner every night for some reason

But, whatever lessens shootouts is fine by me. I really wish they'd end

Husko · Jun 25, 2015

HogtownSabresfan said:
Wrong. Ability in a shoot out has been pretty damn important. I'm not saying the guy can be Andrew Peters otherwise but a softer player might have more value today.

I can think of border line Sabres I might have held onto a little longer because of 3-3 and shoot out.

A player like Gerbe comes to mind. Small guy who is good defensively and plays a chippy game such that he can fit onto a 3rd or 4th line, but then in 3 on 3 you could really see his skill emerge.

CatsforReinhart · Jun 25, 2015

Leelee Phoenix said:
I wish they'd just go back to regulation ties, but Murica MUST have a winner every night for some reason

But, whatever lessens shootouts is fine by me. I really wish they'd end

I dont get it. Who is murica?

Reddawg · Jun 25, 2015

HeartforReinheart said:
I dont get it. Who is murica?

Salzig · Jun 25, 2015

Even though I actually like ties, I think 3 on 3 is going to be fun to watch.

Wisent42 · Jun 25, 2015

To answer the question "who do you want out there?": Ennis and a couple of other guys.

Myllz · Jun 25, 2015

Wisent42 said:
To answer the question "who do you want out there?": Ennis and a couple of other guys.

Ennis, Eichel and Risto.

Onslow · Jun 25, 2015

Myllz said:
Whatever makes the shootout less likely to happen.

Pretty much.

Der Jaeger · Jun 25, 2015

HeartforReinheart said:
circus time. Consider me a traditionalist.

Why dont they just call interference and clutch and grab. Problem solved.

Ding! Winner!

Why enforce current rules when we can make things more complex?

3 On 3 Overtime

Registered User

Joke of a Franchise

Registered User

RELEASE THE KRAKEN

Registered User

RELEASE THE KRAKEN

Registered User

Registered User

202* Stanley Cup Champions

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

202* Stanley Cup Champions

Registered User

We're all mad here

Slayer

Registered User

Registered User

We're all mad here

I am laudable.

Registered User

RELEASE THE KRAKEN

Registered User

Generational EBUG

Ad

Ad

Ad