News Article: New AHL overtime rules, could be preview for NHL

[BigGoalBrad]

3 on 3 sudden death no point to loser.

Awesome and no one gets tired b/c only 3 dudes on ice at a time. Only clean the ice if the games gone 40 minutes over.

 

[corpfan1]

So what happens when the penalty is killed? Can the player come out of the box? It will be back to 4 on 4 then!

If there is a 2-man advantage, we could be back to 5 on 5.

What if the penalty overlaps the under 4 minute whistle thing?


All SO SO SO stupid. Can't they just fix the system and go back to the old days?

It would be 4 on 3. They would never allow less than 3 skaters on the ice for a team.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

I believe in good games, win, lose or tie (ie. Tugnutt).

But, in the context of where we stand, I'm loving this development because reduction overtime adding two minutes and subtracting two players gives the game a much better chance of ending on a hockey play. And a hockey play no matter how many players are on the ice can involve a big hit, a great pass, a one-on-one move, a big defensive play, not just a big save that the static skills contest beckons.

I'm with ya. It's not IDEAL. But it's a step in a positive direction and I hope it's well received.

 

[Gee Wally]

I'm for anything that minimizes or even eliminates a shoot out.

Anything even if it mimics 3x3 pond hockey is better IMO.

 

[Artemis]

I'm for anything that minimizes or even eliminates a shoot out.

Anything even if it mimics 3x3 pond hockey is better IMO.

Agreed. Give it a shot and see how it works out.

 

[talkinaway]

So what happens when the penalty is killed? Can the player come out of the box? It will be back to 4 on 4 then!

If there is a 2-man advantage, we could be back to 5 on 5.

What if the penalty overlaps the under 4 minute whistle thing?


All SO SO SO stupid. Can't they just fix the system and go back to the old days?

Yes, it would probably be 4x4 or 5x5 until the next whistle blow. But, just thinking out loud and not looking at any stats, 5 on 3 seems to me to be a 1-in-10 games rarity at best.

Looking at extraskater.com for this year, the Bruins had 368 minutes on a power play, and 359 minutes spent playing 5-on-4. That's 9 minutes of either 4-on-3 or 5-on-3 action, out of 82 games. Multiply by 2 (for 2 teams), and bump it up to 20 minutes because the Bruins NEVER draw penalties. A lot of that time might be 2 minute chunks of 4-on-3 in OT, so 5-on-3 just doesn't happen often enough to warrant much worry.

I'm not too concerned that 3x3 turns into 5x3 and then into 5x5. I do agree with the point that it adds to some more time spent preparing for a 3x3 game, which is kinda lame. Then again, that time, in theory, would be taken away from prepping for shootouts.

While I thought TJ Oshie's Enterprise commercial was kinda cute and funny, nothing pissed me off about the Olympic coverage more than the story that Oshie saved the day with a shootout. Yeah, he's great at skills. But that's not hockey!(TM)(R) Plus, the win against Russia was a hollow victory at best. A shootout loss would have ensured virtually the same result.

As far as the change to the fighting penalties, I don't see it as a big deal. How many games would this have changed last year? You have to rack up 2 majors for fighting. Second one's usually a line brawl and somebody's going to get ejected anyway, no? Would this have changed any penalties in our games last season, either for or against?

Oh, and here's a third new rule nobody's mentioned so far (that I've noticed): helmets. The AHL is going by the Olympic/IIHF rule of no helmet, no play. You either immediately skate off the ice, or put it back on with chin strap attached. Sounds like a great rule.

Playing devil's advocate, I'd defer a little to IIHF fans if they say that it causes players to try and knock helmets off the opponent to get them off the ice, but somehow I doubt that happens.

 

[Artemis]

Yes, it would probably be 4x4 or 5x5 until the next whistle blow. But, just thinking out loud and not looking at any stats, 5 on 3 seems to me to be a 1-in-10 games rarity at best.

Looking at extraskater.com for this year, the Bruins had 368 minutes on a power play, and 359 minutes spent playing 5-on-4. That's 9 minutes of either 4-on-3 or 5-on-3 action, out of 82 games. Multiply by 2 (for 2 teams), and bump it up to 20 minutes because the Bruins NEVER draw penalties. A lot of that time might be 2 minute chunks of 4-on-3 in OT, so 5-on-3 just doesn't happen often enough to warrant much worry.

I'm not too concerned that 3x3 turns into 5x3 and then into 5x5. I do agree with the point that it adds to some more time spent preparing for a 3x3 game, which is kinda lame. Then again, that time, in theory, would be taken away from prepping for shootouts.

While I thought TJ Oshie's Enterprise commercial was kinda cute and funny, nothing pissed me off about the Olympic coverage more than the story that Oshie saved the day with a shootout. Yeah, he's great at skills. But that's not hockey!(TM)(R) Plus, the win against Russia was a hollow victory at best. A shootout loss would have ensured virtually the same result.

As far as the change to the fighting penalties, I don't see it as a big deal. How many games would this have changed last year? You have to rack up 2 majors for fighting. Second one's usually a line brawl and somebody's going to get ejected anyway, no? Would this have changed any penalties in our games last season, either for or against?

Oh, and here's a third new rule nobody's mentioned so far (that I've noticed): helmets. The AHL is going by the Olympic/IIHF rule of no helmet, no play. You either immediately skate off the ice, or put it back on with chin strap attached. Sounds like a great rule.

Playing devil's advocate, I'd defer a little to IIHF fans if they say that it causes players to try and knock helmets off the opponent to get them off the ice, but somehow I doubt that happens.

Helmet discussion has been going on in the Providence Bruins thread, and the media thread, the latter after a moronic comment by an EEI guy about OMG what if a player's helmet falls off during a 2-on-1!

 

[Bizarro Bandwagoner]

Do people go to minor league hockey games for the talent?

Umm...yeah. I agree that fighting is a big draw but there is also a ton of talent year after year in the AHL. This isn't the UHL.

 

[talkinaway]

Helmet discussion has been going on in the Providence Bruins thread, and the media thread, the latter after a moronic comment by an EEI guy about OMG what if a player's helmet falls off during a 2-on-1!

You can NOT be serious. The EEI guy must have a concussion himself. He not realize we're sending +/- $4 mil to Savvy, and the poor guy spent months doing absolutely nothing in a dark room suffering from headaches/vertigo/nausea/whatever other crap he had to go through, and will never, ever, ever play hockey again? Does he not know that an NFL player with TBI/PCS induced depression from repeated head contact committed suicide by shooting himself - and AVOIDED shooting his head because he wanted his brain available for autopsy and study?

Sorry. When it comes to protecting the head, there's no excuse. I admit, I never really thought of the helmet rule much until the Olympics, when it was mentioned - but now that it's in the AHL, I'm all for bringing it to the NHL. If it messes up your lines for half of a shift, think of it as an opportunity to get a "fresh look" at a new line combo for 20-30 seconds.

In response to the 2-on-1 rush: Just make sure the helmet's strapped on. If there's contact to purposely remove an opp's helmet, I'm sure that's a major penalty at minimum - the helmet is attached to the head, and the head is a sacrosanct area. If it's ordinary random and warranted jostling that happens (and, yes, I know hockey's a physical sport and accept that - we're not putting people in bubble wrap here), then chalk it up to random variance. Helmets occasionally pop off. It will happen to all 30 teams, and all 30 teams should learn to compensate for that fact.

 

[Jean_Jacket41]

I'd be fine with them going back to ties.
I'd be fine with staying with the shoot out.

Whatever they go with, I wish they'd just stick with it.

Why do you constantly need to tinker with the system?
All that matters is that in the playoffs, it remains the first to score wins.

Give me back my ties. Stop with these false winning points.

 

[hocky]

3x3 is just as gimmicky as a shoot-out.

No, the shootout is 1v1, and this proposal would be 4v4 (including goalies). That makes it only 1/4th as gimmicky as the shootout IMO.

 

[Odie]

Umm...yeah. I agree that fighting is a big draw but there is also a ton of talent year after year in the AHL. This isn't the UHL.

Alright, that was a pretty big stretch on my part.

 

[Blitzkrug]

I must admit, i hate the shootout system now that i'm older. But at the same time, i'm not really all that into ties either.

Obviously you can't expect them to play continuous OT in the regular season, but what if you just bumped it up to say like, one ten minute period 5 v 5? That way both teams have more than a chance to win and if they tie, well then they tie.

 

[ODAAT]

I must admit, i hate the shootout system now that i'm older. But at the same time, i'm not really all that into ties either.

Obviously you can't expect them to play continuous OT in the regular season, but what if you just bumped it up to say like, one ten minute period 5 v 5? That way both teams have more than a chance to win and if they tie, well then they tie.

much better chance for a team to pop one 4 on 4

Rarely did I feel ripped off in the event of a tie though

Again, my issue has never really been having an OT (hate shootouts), it`s always been about rewarding the team who loses

 

[Blitzkrug]

Fair point. I feel like i grew up too late to really to respect a tie game. My uncle goes on and on about how good a system it was, i don't get it.

I mean, i did grow up when ties were around before the lockout, but i wasn't nearly as fanatical/too young at the time, so it's kind of a moot point.

4 on 4 works too i guess. I think everyone can agree 3 on 3 is stupid.

 

[ODAAT]

Fair point. I feel like i grew up too late to really to respect a tie game. My uncle goes on and on about how good a system it was, i don't get it.

I mean, i did grow up when ties were around before the lockout, but i wasn't nearly as fanatical/too young at the time, so it's kind of a moot point.

4 on 4 works too i guess. I think everyone can agree 3 on 3 is stupid.

Not a fan of 3 v 3 but it would still be closer to being about a team deciding things than a skills competition

I don`t recall there being many ties when the game had no OT. Usually a game that ended in a tie was an exciting one with teams "going for it" rather than what we see now, which is far too often teams playing for the chance to get to OT in order to at least secure 1pt

 

[northeastern]

I like this idea. Less shootouts.


And too many people downplay the importance of the extra point. A few here and there can easily determine home ice

 

[Artemis]

You can NOT be serious. The EEI guy must have a concussion himself. He not realize we're sending +/- $4 mil to Savvy, and the poor guy spent months doing absolutely nothing in a dark room suffering from headaches/vertigo/nausea/whatever other crap he had to go through, and will never, ever, ever play hockey again? Does he not know that an NFL player with TBI/PCS induced depression from repeated head contact committed suicide by shooting himself - and AVOIDED shooting his head because he wanted his brain available for autopsy and study?

Sorry. When it comes to protecting the head, there's no excuse. I admit, I never really thought of the helmet rule much until the Olympics, when it was mentioned - but now that it's in the AHL, I'm all for bringing it to the NHL. If it messes up your lines for half of a shift, think of it as an opportunity to get a "fresh look" at a new line combo for 20-30 seconds.

In response to the 2-on-1 rush: Just make sure the helmet's strapped on. If there's contact to purposely remove an opp's helmet, I'm sure that's a major penalty at minimum - the helmet is attached to the head, and the head is a sacrosanct area. If it's ordinary random and warranted jostling that happens (and, yes, I know hockey's a physical sport and accept that - we're not putting people in bubble wrap here), then chalk it up to random variance. Helmets occasionally pop off. It will happen to all 30 teams, and all 30 teams should learn to compensate for that fact.

As I pointed out in the other threads, the helmet rule A. Brings in AHL in line with most other leagues around the world; and B. Has been instituted as a way to force players to wear their helmets properly. There is no way a helmet is going to simply fall off a player's head as he's skating, and if it's fitted and worn properly, should only come off if it's literally ripped off, which would obviously be a penalty.

Christian Fauria, who played in the NFL, understood immediately what the rule was meant for and tried to explain it to his co-host (I don't know his name), but the guy was too busy ranting to listen.

I posted links in the media thread to a couple of blog posts by the great Jo Innes, who goes into great detail about helmet regulations at different levels and leagues, and how they should be properly worn. A lot of pro players are doing it wrong.

 

[billings21]

i don't think 3 on 3 is going to be as exciting as some people are hoping. there's going to be a lot of keep away and big triangles with everyone terrified of turning the puck over and being the goat. i bet a lot of guys would secretly rather be sitting on the bench than out there with no where to hide.

i hate the fighting rule. that rule is just going to encourage nothing but staged fights which the anti-fighting crowd supposedly abhor.

 

[tragos]

Seems pretty convoluted and confusing, especially for new / casual fans.

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

Seems pretty convoluted and confusing, especially for new / casual fans.

If 3 on 3 is confusing and convoluted to a new/casual fan then their heads are going to explode watching 5 on 5. Not to mention a power play.

 

[tragos]

If 3 on 3 is confusing and convoluted to a new/casual fan then their heads are going to explode watching 5 on 5. Not to mention a power play.

"Full playing strength will be 4-on-4 until the first whistle following three minutes of play (4:00 remaining), at which time full strength will be reduced to 3-on-3 for the duration of the overtime period."

I'd be fine with a full 5-minute or even 10-min OT of 3-on-3, but a 7-minute OT where the amount of players on the ice changes depending on when after 3 minutes of play there happens to be a whistle seems odd and arbitrary to me.

 

[EverettMike]

I've been pleading for years to go to 8 minute overtimes.

Also, the idea of giving both teams the long change is great.

I bet those two steps would cut shootouts in half.

 

[acr*]

If any sort of 4 on 4 or 3 on 3 OT is adopted by the league, I stop watching. These rule changes are totally, totally absurd. I can't believe that THIS is their solution to what isn't even a ****ing problem. What a bunch of babies.

 

[Donnie Shulzhoffer]

If any sort of 4 on 4 or 3 on 3 OT is adopted by the league, I stop watching. These rule changes are totally, totally absurd. I can't believe that THIS is their solution to what isn't even a ****ing problem. What a bunch of babies.

I doubt that highly. Not to mention that means you are currently watching which means you don't have an issue with a skills competition to determine the outcome of a game.