Speculation: Our 3-on-3

[starling]

What do you think?
I think it's the opposite. Whoever can execute quick rush up the ice the best wins it.
That's actually the problem and the reason why all our 4 overtimes were boring and went into shootout. Once they get the puck they just try to enter the zone and hold on to it skating around defence and back without creating much.

Games decided in OT:
Senators: 0 out of 4
Rest of the league: 18 out of 23

Click to read more...

 

[Mingus Dew]

I agree with you - 3 on 3 games seem to end off the rush (don't know if the numbers actually back up my own sample).

That's why I'm somewhat confused at this team's ineffectiveness. We tend to score a lot of goals off the rush and have trouble maintaining zone pressure and the cycle. Yet our 3 on 3 rushes are crappy and we try to score OT goals through O Zone possession. It's weird.

 

[Ohhh Franco]

Biggest thing I've noticed with the Sens is that their guys are staying out there way too long. Gotta make quick changes and stay fresh. Otherwise you get burned or you have no jump.

 

[Baby Ryan]

I agree with you - 3 on 3 games seem to end off the rush (don't know if the numbers actually back up my own sample).

That's why I'm somewhat confused at this team's ineffectiveness. We tend to score a lot of goals off the rush and have trouble maintaining zone pressure and the cycle. Yet our 3 on 3 rushes are crappy and we try to score OT goals through O Zone possession. It's weird.

Pretty much it.

0 out 4 decided in OT, and based on Karlsson's comments they are just playing it way too conservative than it's meant to be.

 

[starling]

I agree with you - 3 on 3 games seem to end off the rush (don't know if the numbers actually back up my own sample).

That's why I'm somewhat confused at this team's ineffectiveness. We tend to score a lot of goals off the rush and have trouble maintaining zone pressure and the cycle. Yet our 3 on 3 rushes are crappy and we try to score OT goals through O Zone possession. It's weird.

Yeah, seems like 3-on-3 is best suited for Karlsson's game, yet they try slow it down and play it safe evening up the chances. Seriously need to reconsider that strategy.

 

[Sensinitis]

I think Karlsson is already tired at that point in the game, and 3 on 3 is VERY draining.

 

[Six Assets]

amazing how little changes the sens get in OT, while the opposition gets 2 on 1 every other shift.

They're doing it wrong.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

Why don't they just limit Karlsson's ice time if he is tired by that point

 

[stempniaksen]

From watching other teams play 3 on 3, it's definitely not "boring". The way Dave Cameron and the rest of the team is running the 3 on 3 is sure as heck boring though. It seems they care more about possession than scoring, they are playing OT extremely conservatively (which doesn't make sense for a team that is historically bad in shootouts).

 

[Xamar*]

They need to limit Karlsson ice time during the game

 

[Back in Black]

3 on 3 hasn’t exactly been the SENS strong point yet!

I agree with Karlsson on this, it has been boring instead of the excitement we were promised!

 

[DrunkUncleDenis]

3 on 3 hasn’t exactly been the SENS strong point yet!

It hasn't hurt us yet either.

And if you watch the rest of the league's 3 on 3's, they are nutso. With us there are so many "slowly up the ice" plays.

My favourite was I think our first one when Hoffman tried to burn it the length of the ice and almost succeeded.

 

[Busboy]

They need to limit Karlsson ice time during the game

If the game is close in the third than obviously we want Karlsson to play. Resting your best player at the end of a game because of a potential OT is probably not wise.

The best players play hard minutes in the final 10 minutes so it makes sense that the extra skating in OT is going to affect them the most, especially with the really short break between the 3rd and OT.

 

[Caeldan]

Basically what we're seeing with Ottawa is how most of the league will eventually go with 3on3.

It really is terrible hockey, because it's like a a heavyweight boxing match where one huge punch can end it quickly... but to do so you expose yourself to the opponent. Therefore both play it safe and conservative and never really go for that real KO unless the other side makes a misstep.

So all you do is watch risk mitigation for 5 minutes, and if something happens it's because of someone playing bad hockey.

4on4 at least provided that buffer of safety that you could attack and have one person marginally hanging back... 3 attackers is enough that they can make something work against 4 defenders because of the puck carrier having options. 2 attackers though, it's only pass or shoot -- so just one defender is enough to really handle it and 3 defenders means the attacker gets smothered.

 

[Super Cake]

I hated the shootout and thought 3 v 3 would make it so the Sens didn't really have to play in it. I guess i was wrong.

 

[Caeldan]

Honestly I think any of the OT is a bit of a gimmick once you get away from 5on5... my only beef with the shootout is that I think it should be a best of 5 to start. That and a regulation win should be 3 points. That's how you avoid OT. Make it so that it's worth actually finishing inside 60 minutes.

Heck, I'd even argue drop any skated OT and just finish with a shootout for regular season games. It's better than 3on3 for sure (and I'm getting tired of the forced narrative from every broadcaster about how 'exciting' it is).

 

[Super Cake]

Bruce Garrioch ‏@SunGarrioch 7h7 hours ago
Erik Karlsson voices his displeasure with 3-on-3. "It just makes me tired. I don't see the point in it," he says. #Sens

 

[Xamar*]

If the game is close in the third than obviously we want Karlsson to play. Resting your best player at the end of a game because of a potential OT is probably not wise.

The best players play hard minutes in the final 10 minutes so it makes sense that the extra skating in OT is going to affect them the most, especially with the really short break between the 3rd and OT.

True I think that Karlsson and the Sens should consider not even going to OT and playing harder during the game..

 

[UnHappyDude]

I think 3 on 3 is so overrated. As a replacement for the shootout, great. As a replacement for 4 on 4, garbage

 

[PoutineSp00nZ]

I think 3 on 3 is so overrated. As a replacement for the shootout, great. As a replacement for 4 on 4, garbage

Pretty much my thoughts as well

 

[Benjamin]

Just do ties.

 

[PoutineSp00nZ]

Just do ties.

I still maintain that the NHL should do 5 minutes of 4 on 4, 5 minutes of 3 on 3 and if its still tied its a tie. Everyone goes home.

No 3 point games. 2 for a win, 1 for a tie zero for a loss.

BAM

 

[JessicaN]

Honestly I think any of the OT is a bit of a gimmick once you get away from 5on5... my only beef with the shootout is that I think it should be a best of 5 to start. That and a regulation win should be 3 points. That's how you avoid OT. Make it so that it's worth actually finishing inside 60 minutes.

Heck, I'd even argue drop any skated OT and just finish with a shootout for regular season games. It's better than 3on3 for sure (and I'm getting tired of the forced narrative from every broadcaster about how 'exciting' it is).

I could get behind that actually.

 

[Six Assets]

I still maintain that the NHL should do 5 minutes of 4 on 4, 5 minutes of 3 on 3 and if its still tied its a tie. Everyone goes home.

No 3 point games. 2 for a win, 1 for a tie zero for a loss.

BAM

NHLPA would never approve. Never.

 

[PoutineSp00nZ]

NHLPA would never approve. Never.

Nope, would never happen for a bunch of reasons. The shootout is here to stay