Shoot outs are good for the NHL

[mr gib]

I think shoot out will be a great thing for the NHL. The NHL sold out during its massive expansion. Its not the hockey thats played on frozen ponds up north. Its not the hockey that The Great One played just a few years ago. The NHL needs change, it cant try and force this watered down dump and chase on to the fans.

The shoot out is needed. It will give the game some style back. Also think it will do wonders for the players and the game's marketing. The skill players will be highlighted every night somewhere in the NHL. It would get a face on sportscenter. People think thats overrated, but its a huge deal if you get a couple of players in Top Plays each night. Shows the emotions of a player winning a game, fans cheering for the win...it will be good. Every end of the game will finish with a BIG PLAY! thats a good thing.

Has anyone noticed the Salo vs Souray war of words going on in Europe? Maybe we will get these players talking to eachother and get some people hating eachother. Again getting the sport in the media! Getting people's attention and possiblilty of people getting interested in the sport. As annoying as it to hear that Shaq doesn't like Kobe every 5 mins on Sportscenter...it created a buzz in the off-season, it created a buzz when the schedule was released, etc you get the point.

That said...I think the point system has to be changed a bit..to make sure teams go for the win in regulation. I only want shoot outs in regular season, playoffs should stay the same.

more a comment more that anything - i saw the shoot out in the echl and ahl - sometimes it took a while for someone to score - 10 minute 4 on 4 overtime might do it -

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

I would like to think that the top players from each NHL team would be much better at getting into shoot out mode and finish the game quickly than ECHL or even AHL players. No knock on those players, but its the NHL the talent is way higher. Even my Caps could field a decent shoot out squad. People are now gonna say the Caps have no reason beating the Redwings in a shoot out and taking home X number of points. And my response to that is..the Redwings shoulda won in regulation or OT if they were the better team that night.

 

[Patman]

a penalty shot and is part of the nhl rule book. there is no rule in the baseball rule book allowing for a BP pitcher to serve and agreed number of pitches to a hitter for a free shot at a home run. there is a BIG difference. BIG.

I don't see how you can't see the obvious difference.

So, you're telling me that a tie game is a penalty? I can play the twist rule too, though I'd rather not do that. The penalty shot is so rare that it really only happens once every (guessing) 100 games or so and its only implemented on penalties on breakaways and other imminent scoring situations. Yet, we should take this freak event in hockey and make it center place in the game?!?! I don't understand why people don't realize this. Penalty shots by and large are very rare in hockey and are only given in circumstances that are very clear cut in terms of warrant of that shot.

----

I saw another post and I'll make an addendum. The MLS was taken over by guys who didn't know a damn thing about the sport. I want to say it was a football guy (not Anschultz)... you want to know what they did when they saw a league that was floundering. They took away the shootout. I'll repeat that again, they took away the shootout... now obviously the question becomes why did they do that. I mean the Americans love shootouts right? Americans cannot tolerate a tie right? Anybody with a mind knows this is false. Until 1994 there were ties in the biggest (can't think of a less vulgar term) sport in the nation, collegiate football, how could they go 80 years with that abominative result? I mean Americans had such a problem with ties they allowed it in their best sport for 80 years of NCAA Football?!?!? Of course there are also ties in the NFL... still in the rule book even 84 years after the league's inception.

Going back to the MLS. It turns out that while some considered ties exciting it didn't draw in new fans. As it turns out those people who were meant to be drawn in by the shoot-out were the same people that never went to the games because they didn't care about the sport to begin with and they were alienating fans of the game who thought the shootout was a perversion of the game. Now the MLS is having some moderate success, not a lot but getting better... as it turns out Americans that were soccer fans didn't have a problem with the ties and the shootout was a net minus for their league.

Now focusing on the NHL. We have a problem, a league that was fairly improving in prominance in the US for 30 years has slid back. Its success implies that it was once successful and even with that pariah of the tie it sold. Somehow with the tie this league had 15 american franchises, and now today 24. This tells me that the tie is not the real problem otherwise this team would not have been as successful in the states even at 15-18 teams (over expansion is another topic altogether). The problem is this game has become unwatchable due to the stifiling of talent through obstruction... players have gotten bigger, but the stick is not a 6th finger. The tie is a problem now because the elements that put the tie together has ruined the game. If teams score 4 goals a piece per game they tie a very small amount of the time (I'd guess about 5-7% of the time, i don't want to run the probabilites right now... I'm a statistican by schooling) and with the current 2.3-2.6 range the tie is more of a 16%-20% of the time occasion with OT occuring 30% of the time. This is endemic of another problem altogether. We don't need the shoot out... the shootout calls are just a symptom of the real problem of lack of fan interest in the game. This game does nothing if the last 2 minutes are exciting... you need to make 40-45 minutes of the prior hour and five interesting as well... otherwise those same people who aren't going now without the shootout will still not go with the shootout. The MLS is on the right track... grow from within with your base instead of placating to the tastes of those you "might" attract... ties are just the excuse not to go... they don't go because they don't like hockey... change that first.

What is the problem with the tie? I'll tell you. The problem is somebody's mind has decided that they can't accept the result because it conflicts with their view of the world and things. They cannot accept that somebody cannot win and so it seems necessary to contrive a result some how in a quick and efficient fashion. The shootout does this for us... but is it fair to the game. The easy answer is no because it dramatically changes the nature of the game. Its not just an "improvement" or the "natural progression" but rather a preversion to placate to those who can't handle the idea of the tie.

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

I think you missing the point. Many different people and many times have they said it.

No one wants a shoot out to end every game. That would be stupid.

I also do not think extending any type of regular season OT would be smart either. Someone brought up ice conditions...this is a big factor, someone said people wouldn't be happy to wait around for fresh ice, and is probably generally correct.

No one is saying a shoot out at the end of the game will solve all the problems the game has in the first 60 mins of it. This game has big problems, dont get me wrong I love it. But I look back and see these ESPNClassic games and wish the style of play was that very with the talent and speed we have on the ice today.

I was at 3 Ohio State playoff games this weekend and they were blowing quick whistles in the corners and along the boards when the puck would get tied up. I am not talking about a team cycling it, I am taking about when its not going anywhere. But still a quick whistle by NHL standards. Thats something else that has to be brought back to the NHL. And teams can't tie up the puck like that and then expect to change lines...make sure there is a quick faceoff.

The shoot is only a small part of what I hope the NHL is developing to be a large boost of excitement and offensive back in to the league. I am not a believer that oh we need 5-4 games every night...but there just needs to be more chances, more flow. And a reason to win in regulation. If you don't a lower team might get be able to steal some points from you.

Also the poster above me talked about ties in American sports. Tie did exist as you said...but they weren't nearly as often or as boring as ties in hockey.

Some one talked about changing rules the rules of the game just cause you move in to OT. The NFL goes on a clock, but suddenly in OT..its sudden death. Tell me the NFL doesn't know what they are doing. Also helps they play only 16 games and every game means something. Thats what hockeys goal should be, make every game mean something and then you will start to see teams try to win. If that ultimate goal is reached without the usage of shoot outs, thats fine...GREAT that will solve hockey's problems.

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

I just looked it up....

Last year 1230 NHL games were played.

Thats 248 total games going in to OT. 20.1% of all regular season games went in to overtime. That is ridiculous.

145 of those 248 games ended with a winner. 41.6% of all games that went in to overtime still didn't come out with a winner.

And in addition 8.3% of all games played in the NHL last season didn't have a winner.

Those numbers are shameful. Even if you respect ties, I would hope you just don't settle for a tie in life. Call me a crazy American who doens't like a tie, but thats not true. I just wanna fix the game so its exciting again and this is just one small aspect of it.

Edit: called numbers shameful that weren't correct to begin with. BUT i fixed them after someone was nice enough to give me the heads ups.

 

[Patman]

I just looked it up....

Last year 2460 NHL games were played.

In the East, 226 went in to OT.

In the West 257 went in to OT.

Thats 483 total games going in to OT. 19.6% of all regular season games went in to overtime. That is ridiculous.

145 of those 483 games ended with a winner. 70% of all games that went in to overtime still didn't come out with a winner.

And in addition 13.7% of all games played in the NHL last season didn't have a winner.

Those numbers are shameful. Even if you respect ties, I would hope you just don't settle for a tie in life. Call me a crazy American who doens't like a tie, but thats not true. I just wanna fix the game so its exciting again and this is just one small aspect of it.

Small problem 82*15=1230... and even if you have 483 games that went to OT of your 2460 games it means one of those games one team went to OT and the other didn't... I'm sure some fans will claim they were at that game when their souls stayed in the dressing room and coughed up a goal 12 seconds into it.

 

[Weary]

Those numbers are shameful. Even if you respect ties, I would hope you just don't settle for a tie in life. Call me a crazy American who doens't like a tie, but thats not true. I just wanna fix the game so its exciting again and this is just one small aspect of it.

Well there isn't going to be any NHL hockey until Goodenow and Bettman are both ready to accept a tie. You may not like ties, but they are part of life. Manufacturing fewer ties isn't part of fixing the game -- in fact, it's part of further damaging it.

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

Small problem 82*15=1230... and even if you have 483 games that went to OT of your 2460 games it means one of those games one team went to OT and the other didn't... I'm sure some fans will claim they were at that game when their souls stayed in the dressing room and coughed up a goal 12 seconds into it.

waittt... where are you getting 82 * 15 from??? It is entirely possible I messed up the numbers...I have been studying for finals for the past 3 days and my brain is a little worn out.

 

[nyrmessier011]

waittt... where are you getting 82 * 15 from??? It is entirely possible I messed up the numbers...I have been studying for finals for the past 3 days and my brain is a little worn out.

If you did 82*30 it would mean your counting each game twice because two teams play in one game...so u take half of the total teams which is 15 and multiply that by the number of games each team plays

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

If you did 82*30 it would mean your counting each game twice because two teams play in one game...so u take half of the total teams which is 15 and multiply that by the number of games each team plays

Right right....sorry its late, I have been up for days and the adderall makes my mind go a little faster than normal. haha still...kinda bad on my part.

Well the percentages are the same since i counted EVERYTHING twice!



To address Weary, who said "Manufacturing fewer ties isn't part of fixing the game -- in fact, it's part of further damaging it."

I can only say if I was in charge, my goal would not be to decrease ties, it would be to increase wins and loses. I said earlier, I dont mind a 1-0...they can be the best games. I also dont mind a tie. But if the league tries to get more wins and loses out of games, thats a good thing. And why cant the fans enjoy something. Shoot outs would have a terrific impact on the game if done in moderation! I think the marketing of the NHL would hit new heights. And if that was to happen the players might be able to start making money on the side like other players in the NBA, NFL, and MLB. The league might have something to pitch to the networks when the next TV deal comes rolling around.

 

[Bruwinz37]

I understand what people are saying about it not being hockey...yada yada

I dont think this is the only thing you do to change the game. But I think you change this aspect of it and the entire product will be better. I just think the game overall lacks excitement and therefore the on-ice product suffers heavily because of it.

I think you have to do a lot more work to the NHL product than just adding a shootout at the end. I will be happy to share my ideas but I am in the middle of finals week at college and should be spending my time doing that. I will be happy to share though, maybe later today.

Sorry, but this doesnt make much sense. How will having shootouts help the entire product be better? It wont. Should baseball have home run derbys to settle ties?

I also think it is bogus that new fans will watch the NHL if they have shootouts. Will these new fans watch the games as they are in hopes of the game ending regulation all knotted up? Give me a break. Maybe all new fans could get pagers that notify them when a game goes to a shootout.

I think the NHL will probably go with regular season shootouts because the NHL is typically known for doing things instead of focusing on real problems, but it wont help the game, it will just continue the abortion of it.

 

[PecaFan]

The penalty shot is so rare that it really only happens once every (guessing) 100 games or so and its only implemented on penalties on breakaways and other imminent scoring situations.

57 penalty shots last year in 1230 games, so 1 in 21.6 games.

Thats 248 total games going in to OT. 20.1% of all regular season games went in to overtime. That is ridiculous.

145 of those 248 games ended with a winner. 41.6% of all games that went in to overtime still didn't come out with a winner.

And in addition 8.3% of all games played in the NHL last season didn't have a winner.

Edit: called numbers shameful that weren't correct to begin with. BUT i fixed them after someone was nice enough to give me the heads ups.

Sorry, but those numbers are still wrong.

315 games went to overtime in 03-04.
Home team won 83, visitors won 62, for 145 ending with winners.
170 games ended in a tie (54%)

Giving out the bonus point in OT has resulted in more games going to OT, because teams play it safe in the third. Going to the shootout will cause even more games to go that way. You'll have way less being decided in overtime.

We need disincentives for going to overtime, and I believe 3 points for a regulation win (vs only 2 for an OT win) would do that.

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

Hmm makes me kinda wonder how I will do on my data analysis final later today. I am curious where did you get the number of overtime games, and whether home/visitor won?? I would just be interested to know if I am getting bad data from somewhere or if all the blames on me. Thanks

As for the updated points system..great if that works. I would like to see more games end in regulation with a winner, but if not I think a shoot out would be a good way to end games and the exposure players would get from such events would be large and have an impact on the casual fan.

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

ok...so 3rd times a charm. I see where I messed up.

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

Sorry, but this doesnt make much sense. How will having shootouts help the entire product be better? It wont. Should baseball have home run derbys to settle ties?

I also think it is bogus that new fans will watch the NHL if they have shootouts. Will these new fans watch the games as they are in hopes of the game ending regulation all knotted up? Give me a break. Maybe all new fans could get pagers that notify them when a game goes to a shootout.

I think the NHL will probably go with regular season shootouts because the NHL is typically known for doing things instead of focusing on real problems, but it wont help the game, it will just continue the abortion of it.

I think "new fans" might start watching the NHL, because they start to like the players and are impressed by what they do, because maybe they see it on sportscenter and might be impressed and interested in the sport. maybe even some day they can become a "real hockey fan" like yourself.

Please dont get misunderstand me. I do not think you leave everything else alone and just add a shoot out. I keep saying I think it can be part of a very exciting hockey that comes back in the fall. I have said many times, its the leagues job to encourage a better product. Teams should be trying to win games at all times. The league should reward those who actually try to win in the first 60 mins of the game. Less in OT and shoot out. But reward the fans with an exciting product at all times. Give them something to go home and talk about.

I also spoke of baseball...I made my points pretty clear earlier in the thread on that topic. Basball is not hockey. Hockey is not baseball. Dont confuse them.

 

[misterjaggers]

I don't care what they do in the regular season, but a playoff game shouldn't be decided by a shoot-out. When a playoff game is tied at the end of regulation, it should go to sudden death.

 

[Riddarn]

Shootouts are stupid, a bad way to end a hockey game and a silly circus stunt (at best) to lure in fans. After the novelty disappears, people will see right through it and Hockey will be considered as an even less serious major sport than it was before.

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

Shootouts are stupid, a bad way to end a hockey game and a silly circus stunt (at best) to lure in fans. After the novelty disappears, people will see right through it and Hockey will be considered as an even less serious major sport than it was before.

To the poster above you. No one wants to change the overtime rules of playoff hockey. Playoff hockey is really the only thing that the general public likes about hockey. Why change that?

The collection of "real hockey" fans who watch the regular season are getting smaller and its pretty clear that they can't support the league by themselves(attendance AND tv wise). The regular season is terrible for the casual fan. It should mean something. Players should care about it. Its been a long time coming, but the league better find a way to improve the product they put on the ice.

Riddarn, no one wants a shoot out to decide every other game. You are correct that would be stupid. Its the league's job to figure out a proper incentive for teams to actually play to win and not just play for a top 8 seed. The NHL lacks the quanity of built in marketing that other sports have. There is no home run, there is no hail mary pass to a streaking WR who gives a little dance in to the endzone. You dont have LeBron stealing the ball and racing down the court and dunking it. There is no saying "chicks love the slapper from the point"...So many hockey goals these days are ugly. They are no pretty goal scorers goals in the NHL these days. Tell me what part of the regular season consistently promotes the skill and speed of the game, more importantly the star players of the game.

And hey...if it doesn't work, they can always change it. Its not like they follow the rule book anyways. There are reasons why leagues have competition committees.

edit: I think I should clarify what I mean. Hockey has big hits, has breakways, etc...but its not like other sports. There are alot less in hockey than in other sports. the other leagues have games where there are extended pauses in between play.I am not suggesting a change in hockey's non-stop play, just pointing out a difference. I think that has a lot to do with it. For example, in baseball you have an hour between pitches and there is plenty of time to talk about the pitcher's slider/curve whatever...there is time to show a players highlights from last nights game. There is time to promote the game. In the NFL, its replay central and the sell the game to the viewing public and everyone loves it. They do everything perfect. The NFL season ends and people cant wait for it to come back. The NHL season starts and people cant wait for the playoffs. Thats not good. Hockey needs the exposure, it needs to find its passion back...even if shoot outs end up being the worst idea ever...maybe the players will hate it soo much that they will win the game in regulation.

Hockey is the ultimate team sport. individuals are not encouraged to show themselves. players speak out in the media and fans hate them. You might not believe this but people watch the eagles play just to see TOwens and if he does something crazy.Same goes for Randy Moss. Why, like them for dislike them...they capture your attention even if you arent a fan of their team. Thats what a good league can do. A player like those two would never fly in hockey. Hockey needs it's character back, quickly. What are the owners trying to sell whenever they finally come back?

 

[Chili]

Shootouts are stupid, a bad way to end a hockey game and a silly circus stunt (at best) to lure in fans. After the novelty disappears, people will see right through it and Hockey will be considered as an even less serious major sport than it was before.

Riddarn...didn't the Swedish Elite League have shootouts but got rid of them?

 

[Munchausen]

Giving out the bonus point in OT has resulted in more games going to OT, because teams play it safe in the third. Going to the shootout will cause even more games to go that way. You'll have way less being decided in overtime.

Not if they don't award a point for going to OT it won't. If they do award one point for going to OT (like the AHL formula) then yes, teams will continue to play it safe to at least get a point. But if they don't I don't know one coach who would play it safe in the 3rd in the hope to get to the shootout. Coaches hate that thing. They have no control over it.

The key is to not give incentives for any kind of loss or tie. You must win to get your points. So no point for going to OT and then either a shootout or you keep the ties but you give no points to any team after the end of the OT if none could come out on top.

I don't like the 3 pts system because IMO there will be less parity in the rankings and therefore less exciting playoff/position races. In fact, if it were up to me, I'd give 1 pt for a win, 0 pt for a tie and 0 pt for a loss, with no shootout and 10 min. 4-on-4 OT. Perfect system where the number of points = the number of wins. Nothing else matters (outside of goals +/- for season ties). Only winners are rewarded. No more tie rewarding and no need for the gimmickery people don't like either. You could also throw away the OT in regular season altogether. If there is no winner by the end of the 60 min. game, no points. Just throwing ideas out there...

One more reason to like such a 1 pt system is, if we go by last year's numbers, there was in the Eastern Conference 2 teams ending with 41 wins and 2 with 43 wins. In the Western Conference it's 2 teams that ended with 43 wins. If the #1 factor to seperate the season ties is goals for, it's one more incentive to put the emphasis on offense and not defense. I think if we find a system where teams see their ranking decided by the goals for, they will be more likely to want to win 5-4 rather than 2-1 in order to boost that stat. For this to happen however, there would need to be a lot of teams finnishing with the same number of wins/pts so that it is expected that there will often be a goals for tie breaker.

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

I have a question...with this 10 min OT...what are you doing with the ice? fresh sheet or quick turn around like it is now?

 

[Munchausen]

In an ideal world, the ice should be fresh, but I guess this would depend on the willingness for the spectators to wait for the zamboni to do its thing. My bet is they would be willing to wait (might be naive of me, but if I pay $100 to see a game, I'm glad they give me an extra 10 min. of 4-on-4 all out attack).

 

[GoBuckeyes9]

In an ideal world, the ice should be fresh, but I guess this would depend on the willingness for the spectators to wait for the zamboni to do its thing. My bet is they would be willing to wait (might be naive of me, but if I pay $100 to see a game, I'm glad they give me an extra 10 min. of 4-on-4 all out attack).

yea I am right there with ya. Hopefully you got glass seats for thaat $100!

 

[txpd]

Patman askes, "So, you're telling me that a tie game is a penalty? I can play the twist rule too, though I'd rather not do that. The penalty shot is so rare that it really only happens once every (guessing) 100 games or so and its only implemented on penalties on breakaways and other imminent scoring situations. Yet, we should take this freak event in hockey and make it center place in the game?!?! I don't understand why people don't realize this. Penalty shots by and large are very rare in hockey and are only given in circumstances that are very clear cut in terms of warrant of that shot."

play the twist rule too?? nice. is it a penalty for a tie game? no. is it a consequence of a tie game yes! my point without twisting anything is to point out that the conditions for the penalty shot are right there in the rule book. they are awarded. there are rules governing them from what conditions creates one to what both the shooter and the goalie may do while participating in one. there is no such rule or rules governing a "home run derby" for baseball games in the major leagues or otherwise.

The shootout is a part of most soccer games and as i recall one of the top 10 moments in sports over the last ten years was Brandi Chastain's winning penalty kick in the shootout in the world cup final.

I am certain that I would not want shootouts in playoff hockey. I am equally certain that the home run derby comparison to the penalty shot shootout is completely off base.

by the way, the penalty shot is called by most, "the most exciting play in hockey" and as you point out it is rare enough to a steady hockey fan could go years without actually seeing one at the arena or on tv. in some cases the team awarded the penalty shot would be better off with a power play opportunity instead, but the penalty shot is still awarded. are you saying that the penalty shot is a bad rule? that its not part of a team game? are you suggesting that the penalty shot should be abolished?

 

[19nazzy]

As much as I don't think I'd like it, they need to make a win in regular time more than a win in overtime. If you made 3pts for winning in regular time, 2 in OT and 1 for a tie, I promise that teams would be going for it in regular time and not setteling for OT. They have to stop rewarding teams for an overtime loss though, I hated that idea when they started it and I still hate it now.