Claude Julien was asked about the shootout format tonight

[Killerbeez]

Hate the shootout, but can't judge too much on that one last night. Most of the shots, save the one bergy scored on were pathetic. Sad when you can't control the puck on open ice with nobody in front of you except the goalie.

 

[Scotto74]

I hate the shootout.

I would hate it if the Bruins went 100-0 in shootouts

I would hate it if the Bruins went 0-100 in the shootouts

I would hate it if the Bruins went 50-50 in the shootouts

dont see why a coach can't feel the same. It's not like he came out crying about it after the loss. He was asked about it. He was asked the question and he expressed his opinion.

Now if he came out and was the one to bring it up in the press conference thats a different story but that didn't happen here now did it.

 

[Gee Wally]

Im with you Scotto.

 

[Aeroforce]

I'm going to be the odd man out/glutton for punishment/trolling and say I do enjoy shootouts; though I HATE how inept the Bruins are in them.

In today's kinder, gentler NHL where hitting and fighting are diminished, after 65 minutes of possession-obsessed teams playing keep-a-way outside the dots and hoping a low percentage shot pinballs through screens, unobstructed skill is a welcome change. (I know, I know I'm exaggerating... )

Kidding aside, I love watching Patrick Kane in the shootout, and much like fights, in many buildings the crowd is on their feet throughout a shootout.

As others have stated, it's a part of the game, and the points we've left on the table are crucial. Just look at New Jersey last year.

3-on-3 may eventually be incorporated, but I don't know if that works in our favor much more.

 

[TaroTsujimoto]

I want shootouts; ties are boring. Also, shootouts give journeymen 7th defensemen the opportunity to display their hidden talents.

 

[talkinaway]

I agree that the shootout sucks. But pouting about it isn't going to change our abysmal performance in it. And it's not on Rask and Svedberg's shoulders - we're 6th overall in save percentage. But we're last - DEAD LAST - in shooting percentage. (I read earlier that we were 29th, but LA must have passed us last night.)

Drill it. Make it the dead last thing after practice, EVERY practice. Odds are, we get 1 or 2 more shootouts if we go at our current pace. That's 1 or 2 more points that we NEED to pick up.

Now for some math. Cover your eyes if you don't like it, but the shootout is ALL about the math.

If you compare our shooting percentage, 13%, to the median of 30%, you'll get some sobering facts. If we play the "median" team, and every player on each team has those exact shooting percentage stats, and you make it a sudden death shootout from the start (a slight tweak from the "first three rounds" format), here's what happens:

A) 65% of the time, you get another round because both teams score or neither team scores.

B) 9% of the time, the Bruins win in a given round (Bruins score, they don't).

C) 26% of the time, the Bruins lose in a given round (they score, Bruins don't).

That means the Bruins only win 9 out of 35 times, or a little over 25% of the time. Pretty close to how we've actually been doing, and pretty abysmal. If that's a coin flip, I don't want to go to Vegas with Marchand.

 

[BRUINS since 1995]

Hate or not the shoot out is actually irrelevant. Shoot out is actually part of the game and Bruins do not perform in these situation.

My thoughts: Bruins were the better team against the Flames. They need to crush the net and get dirty goals, which is actually not happening.

I also see Bruins closing gap with the 9 th spot losing bad points like against the Flames. They need to play closer to the edge with a live or die attitude against all team!

 

[Cid]

I call bullcrap on everyone saying they would still hate the shootout if the Bruins were dominant at them. Watching the pathetic failed attempts this team takes, yes I hate the shootouts too. If we were 10-0 and we displayed amazing goal scoring skill game after game, I would be okay with them. As is like every thing in life, you don't like what you suck at.

I disagree with many of you as well on the feeling that the shootout is irrelevant to the game. Breakaways are a part of the game. This isn't like a homerun, three point or field goal contest as mentioned in other sports. The difference between a shootout and those examples is that in a shootout there ARE 2 sides, including defensive player who can stop you.

What drives me mad is that we play a game that puts an emphasis on not losing. So it should comes as no shock to anyone that we are going to see shootouts. If you play not to lose I would suggest finding a way to win in a shootout situation. If not, you might as well pull your goalie in Overtime and play it 5 on 4.

 

[OutspokenMinority*]

two options i would be interested in seeing, in theory at least.

1. have 5 skaters from the first team take all their shots one after another in succession with a clock limiting the time available. then the other team goes as needed.

2. assuming option 1 is not being done, have the skaters alternate much more quickly, so that as soon as one player is done, the other is starting up.

i think i'm still in the minority that prefers shootouts to ties, but i'm not sure. early on i definitely was but i'm just getting tired of the debate. if they keep it, i'd still like to see one of the above changes, even just in an exhibition or something, but if they don't, i'd be fine with the 3-2-1 system someone mentioned or maybe even a 2 pts for a win, 0 pts for a tie. or even 3 pts for a win, 1 pt for a tie kind of a thing. all the options are kind of ugly but whatever.


devil's advocate: the faster you eliminate teams the more horrible hockey you'll have to watch at the end of the season.

 

[Tyler Biggs*]

The NHL not only needs to change overtime but how the scoring is done too. To reduce the amount of overtime they should have regulation wins as 3 points. If you win in overtime it’s 2 points and lose in overtime you still get 1. This should make teams push to win in regulation because those points will become critical down the stretch.

 

[Artemis]

I hate the shootout.

I would hate it if the Bruins went 100-0 in shootouts

I would hate it if the Bruins went 0-100 in the shootouts

I would hate it if the Bruins went 50-50 in the shootouts

dont see why a coach can't feel the same. It's not like he came out crying about it after the loss. He was asked about it. He was asked the question and he expressed his opinion.

Now if he came out and was the one to bring it up in the press conference thats a different story but that didn't happen here now did it.

No, but to some, context is irrelevant. Someone is asked a question, answers honestly, and he's "whining."

Julien isn't on an island here. I doubt you'd find a coach in the NHL who likes shootouts, no matter what their team's record. It's an arbitrary skills competition.

The 4-on-4, then 3-on-3 AHL experiment is by all accounts going well. If we must have a winner, that's the way to go, IMHO.

 

[ODAAT]

The NHL not only needs to change overtime but how the scoring is done too. To reduce the amount of overtime they should have regulation wins as 3 points. If you win in overtime it’s 2 points and lose in overtime you still get 1. This should make teams push to win in regulation because those points will become critical down the stretch.

scratch er all, I`d have no issues going back to the way it was, ya play 60 mins, if it`s tied, it`s tied

 

[Flannelman]

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ot-rule-minor-league-hockey-generating-buzz-171543273--nhl.html

But here's how the extra period works on the AHL level: It's seven minutes long - or until someone scores, of course - with the opening three minutes 4-on-4. Then, after the next whistle, it switches to 3-on-3 for the last four, leading to lots of room for creativity and scoring chances. If that doesn't decide things, it goes to a shootout, a concept that drives many a coach bonkers since it's almost like a skills competition.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/n...ow-3-on-3-ot-is-only-way-to-reduce-shootouts/

The next time Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland shows up at the GM meetings trying to convince his colleagues to change the rules governing overtime and shootouts and go to 3-on-3 hockey in extra time, he’ll have some real data to bolster his argument. And that data will tell him and everyone in the hockey world that the only way to lessen the impact of shootouts is to go to 3-on-3.

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/02/nhlpa-expresses-concern-about-3-on-3-ot/

My real concern is that top guys are going to be put in these situations, and there will be more wear and tear on them,†Schneider explained. “We’ve seen over the years that rules that are implemented in leagues below and they don’t always have the intended effect when we bring them to the NHL because the players are more consistent and more talented.

“I’m not sure we would see the same results at the NHL level.â€

 

[LSCII]

No, but to some, context is irrelevant. Someone is asked a question, answers honestly, and he's "whining."

Julien isn't on an island here. I doubt you'd find a coach in the NHL who likes shootouts, no matter what their team's record. It's an arbitrary skills competition.

The 4-on-4, then 3-on-3 AHL experiment is by all accounts going well. If we must have a winner, that's the way to go, IMHO.

Whether it's a shoot out, 4 on 4, or 3 on 3, it's still a gimmick. The only difference is that the Bruins would have a stronger chance for the extra point if it's one of the latter. Either way though, it's not real hockey. It's a variation designed to create more space, and by default, more chances. But again, it's a gimmick. And as a coach in this league, that gimmick has been around for a while now. Either you adjust to it, or you lose. Right now, they're losing.

 

[bp13]

Whether it's a shoot out, 4 on 4, or 3 on 3, it's still a gimmick. The only difference is that the Bruins would have a stronger chance for the extra point if it's one of the latter. Either way though, it's not real hockey. It's a variation designed to create more space, and by default, more chances. But again, it's a gimmick. And as a coach in this league, that gimmick has been around for a while now. Either you adjust to it, or you lose. Right now, they're losing.

I don't know how much is in his hands though.

I feel like his strategy to use full forward lines in overtime is incredibly aggressive (and I love it), but it's also a reflection of his confidence in his shooters in the shootout. So I think he has definitely adopted it as a means to avoid the shootout.

I also hate Rask in shootouts. Lately he's clearly not to blame, but historically he hasn't been very good. Combine that with an obvious lack of skill and finish up front (which is a result of roster building), and some bad luck and confidence issues, and you have a lousy shootout team. Not quite sure what I'd do as coach to change that. He switches shooters, he changes orders, what's left?

 

[Fire Sweeney]

It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that a coach who does his best to take skills out of the game is against a pure skill display.

 

[ODAAT]

not using the shootout in the playoffs yet using it in the regular season giving even inferior teams a chance to make it is alone enough to make me sick to my stomach in a team game

 

[Artemis]

Whether it's a shoot out, 4 on 4, or 3 on 3, it's still a gimmick. The only difference is that the Bruins would have a stronger chance for the extra point if it's one of the latter. Either way though, it's not real hockey. It's a variation designed to create more space, and by default, more chances. But again, it's a gimmick. And as a coach in this league, that gimmick has been around for a while now. Either you adjust to it, or you lose. Right now, they're losing.

That's why I said "if we must have a winner." Most if not all coaches, players, etc., from what I can see, don't have a problem with ties.

Funny that Julien's small but successful innovation of icing three forwards and one defenseman at the get-go of OT is gaining imitators around the league, but he gets no credit for it here.

 

[Artemis]

It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that a coach who does his best to take skills out of the game is against a pure skill display.

Please find me a comment from any NHL coach who says he loves the shootout.

 

[Artemis]

I don't know how much is in his hands though.

I feel like his strategy to use full forward lines in overtime is incredibly aggressive (and I love it), but it's also a reflection of his confidence in his shooters in the shootout. So I think he has definitely adopted it as a means to avoid the shootout.

There's another reason: ROW. Overtime wins are more valuable than shootout wins.

 

[LSCII]

That's why I said "if we must have a winner." Most if not all coaches, players, etc., from what I can see, don't have a problem with ties.

Funny that Julien's small but successful innovation of icing three forwards and one defenseman at the get-go of OT is gaining imitators around the league, but he gets no credit for it here.

Yeah, ties were a drag, but acceptable if that's what it came down to. I honestly think the one point just for getting through OT needs to go away. That's a far bigger issue than the shootout, IMO.

 

[LSCII]

I don't know how much is in his hands though.

I feel like his strategy to use full forward lines in overtime is incredibly aggressive (and I love it), but it's also a reflection of his confidence in his shooters in the shootout. So I think he has definitely adopted it as a means to avoid the shootout.

I also hate Rask in shootouts. Lately he's clearly not to blame, but historically he hasn't been very good. Combine that with an obvious lack of skill and finish up front (which is a result of roster building), and some bad luck and confidence issues, and you have a lousy shootout team. Not quite sure what I'd do as coach to change that. He switches shooters, he changes orders, what's left?

I get that he hates them. I do. I think most reasonable die hard fans do as well. The problem is that they are part of the game right now. So he needs to figure out how to get these guys better at it instead of saying how much he hates them. I get it. He doesn't like them. But for the sake of the extra point, accept it and adjust to it. Drill it if you have to. And they may actually do this, but it's like the PP from a few years ago. It was god awful but they kept doing the same things. It gives the impression they're not doing anything to fix it or get better, you know?

You're spot on about the lack of finish up front being the main issue though. And that falls on Mr. A Plus himself, Peter Chiarelli.

 

[chizzler]

It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that a coach who does his best to take skills out of the game is against a pure skill display.

They don't score because they can't shoot the puck from the blue line and hope for a deflection. They're not used to using their lack of skill.

 

[LSCII]

They don't score because they can't shoot the puck from the blue line and hope for a deflection. They're not used to using their lack of skill.

This is by the most brutally honest and painful post to read, but hilarious at the same time...

 

[TCDaniels]

You know what?

To all you people saying that I would LIKE the shootout if only the Bruins won? Turns out after last night I've had a change of heart and I really DO lik...

No - wait - that's not true at all. They still suck