Taking intentional penalties with 10s left in OT?

[Stickpucker]

I am talking about going for an all out grabbing a player, or slashing another player's stick penalty

I recall Giroux doing this and ending up in the papers.

 

[ClydeLee]

In the zetterberg scenario described it makes sense, but normally no, it'd be incredibly foolish unless it's to prevent some really good odd-man rush.

What could they do in 10 secs? That's more than enough time, even in 4 seconds you can set up a good play. A faceoff set up with the advantage is still a risky option vs not taking a penalty.

 

[Plural]

The game should extend until all penalties are expired.

Definitely not. What stops the losing team taking penalties to extend the game as long as they are tied/in the lead?

 

[Kane One]

Definitely not. What stops the losing team taking penalties to extend the game as long as they are tied/in the lead?

You can't be winning or losing since the game is in OT. If you keep taking penalties, you will eventually get scored on.

 

[Plural]

You can't be winning or losing since the game is in OT. If you keep taking penalties, you will eventually get scored on.

Oh, you were talking about OT penalties only. I didn't realize that. Still, don't like it but makes much more sense now.

 

[njdevscup30]

I think I saw it said before, but just make any penalty in the last 30 seconds of overtime a penalty shot.

 

[Plural]

I think I saw it said before, but just make any penalty in the last 30 seconds of overtime a penalty shot.

This is an idea I would like more.

 

[Butch 19]

The game should extend until all penalties are expired.

No, it shouldn't.

 

[Kane One]

No, it shouldn't.

Thanks for the great rebuttal. You convinced me I was wrong with your argument.

 

[10coach*]

The NHL may need to look at this soon. If at least 50 percent of the time cannot be served in the remaining time on the clock, the game clock shall be reset back to 2 or 5 minutes, depending on the type of penalty.

Man, that would be terrible.

 

[Fear]

So much for analytics and corsi and tracking ice time etc.

All that stuff is most concerned with even strength anyways so the extra 4-on-3 powerplay time isn't a big deal


But how about any penalty in the last 2 minutes of OT is auto penalty shot?

 

[HunterSThompson]

Refs rarely call OT penalties. Refs rarely call last minute penalties. I have never seen a ref call a penalty at the end of OT despite mucho obstruction. I doubt they will be calling anything if any of these proposed rules are in place. The only thing that will trigger one of these things is an automatic call like over the glass or playing the puck outside the trapezoid and wouldn't that be a shame.

 

[ChibiPooky]

So much for analytics and corsi and tracking ice time etc.

Why? The most frequently used shot-based metrics only consider 5v5 play, and are also percentage-based...

I think I saw it said before, but just make any penalty in the last 30 seconds of overtime a penalty shot.

There is no way the NHL is going to implement a rule that results in puck over glass or too many men awarding a penalty shot IMO (and probably not for the other penalties either).

 

[Unlimited Chequing]

Anyone in the penalty box at the end of OT cannot participate in the shoot out.

With that said if coaches were to try this, they wouldn't want their good shooters in the box and they probably don't want to put their goons on the ice in the dying seconds when they might give up a goal. I guess they could try this with their D since they are less used in the shootout, but again you're chancing it with the PK.

 

[Roomtemperature]

I'm with the camp that if the winning team takes a penalty they should play it out provided the other team can tie it up within those penalties (1minor in a 2 or more goal game just end it but a 5 on 3 we play til the first penalty expires if no goal is scored for example).

Also I would like to suggest if the foul takes away a clear scoring chance like tackling a guy in front of a wide open net it should be a penalty shot as well as 2min if they don't score. I mean that seems like a bigger scoring chance that got taken away then some breakaways I see yet the breakaway is the only one that gets the "skills competition"

 

[mrhockey193195]

Was thinking about this the other day. I don't like the idea of extending the clock for a powerplay for one reason. Imagine a scenario where a team, say the Rangers, needs a ROW to make the playoffs. A shootout win won't cut it because of the ROW tie-breaker. They're in OT, clock's winding down. Guys will start taking penalties to artificially give them more time on the clock.

My preference would be any player in the penalty box when OT expires is not eligible for the shootout. Or some variation on that, if people don't think that is a harsh enough penalty.

 

[Buck Aki Berg]

I think I saw it said before, but just make any penalty in the last 30 seconds of overtime a penalty shot.

Hopefully this would be enough of a deterrent to keep players from taking penalties, because I don't think any ref wants to award a penalty shot for a hook or hold. My fear is that a rule like this would keep the whistles in the refs' pockets.

 

[CherryToke]

The game should extend until all penalties are expired.

they can call it the David Backes rule.

 

[HunterSThompson]

Was thinking about this the other day. I don't like the idea of extending the clock for a powerplay for one reason. Imagine a scenario where a team, say the Rangers, needs a ROW to make the playoffs. A shootout win won't cut it because of the ROW tie-breaker. They're in OT, clock's winding down. Guys will start taking penalties to artificially give them more time on the clock.

My preference would be any player in the penalty box when OT expires is not eligible for the shootout. Or some variation on that, if people don't think that is a harsh enough penalty.

Eh, so if what happens in the Caps/Panthers game happens, the team with the penalty gets to go back to their top guys before the other team. I would have all my grinders and defensemen take penalties so we could just skip them in the shootout.

 

[aemoreira1981]

Definitely not. What stops the losing team taking penalties to extend the game as long as they are tied/in the lead?

The team with the incentive to take a penalty would be leading...usually by 1 goal, or there would be a tied game near the end of regulation time.

 

[almostawake]

Setting up a shorthanded defensive zone faceoff with 10 seconds left seems like a dumb move.

If the other team is going to score, sure, take a penalty. But that is actually true of pretty much any game situation.

 

[Rebels57]

I'm with the camp that says you can't go in a shoot-out.

 

[Ragamuffin Gunner]

I've always felt that if you're up with under 30 sec to go you should ice the puck whenever possible and take any penalty that will negate a scoring chance.

 

[Caeldan]

Eh, so if what happens in the Caps/Panthers game happens, the team with the penalty gets to go back to their top guys before the other team. I would have all my grinders and defensemen take penalties so we could just skip them in the shootout.

Well in that rare case - perhaps that's where the real 'penalty' occurs, and the team actually forfeits their attempt at a shot.

 

[znk]

You have to touch the puck to get the whistle. Why not just ice the puck instead of taking a penalty?