Do Shootouts Work?

[freak]

So, one of the arguments for the shootouts is that it will tend to create separation in the standings, due to the awarding of the SOW pt. This would, in theory, result in having to resort to fewer tiebreakers to decide playoff berths and/or seedings.

Given that, I think it is only appropriate to see if the theory will hold up over time.

For Hockey East, here are the 2008-2009 standings, the first year in which shootouts were implemented:

   Team   Record    Pts

1. UNH    15-2-4-1  35
2. BC     13-5-3-1  30
3. BU     10-6-5-4  29
4. PC     11-8-2-1  25
5. UC     10-8-3-2  25
6. NU     7-13-1-0  15
7. UVM    4-15-2-1  11
8. UMO    2-15-4-2  10

And here is how it would look without the shootouts:

   Team   Record    Pts

1. UNH    15-2-4    34
2. BC     13-5-3    29
3. BU     10-6-5    25
4. PC     11-8-2    24
5. UC     10-8-3    23
6. NU     7-13-1    15
7. UVM    4-15-2    10
8. UMO    2-15-4    08

The 2008-2009 season required the use of 1 tiebreaker, to determine whether PC or UConn would be the 4th seed, and thus earn home ice for the HEA quarterfinals.

Without a shootout, no tiebreakers would have been necessary, although the seedings would have remained unchanged.

As for 2009-2010, with between 3-4 games remaining, it is looking very likely that tiebreakers will be necessary to determine the seedings for the tourney field. It also appears, however, that it would be necessary in the absence of the shootout as well.

WCHA fans...how long have shootouts been used in the West?

 

[freak]

Re: Do Shootouts Work?

For Hockey East

2007-08: 1 tiebreaker, to determine the #3/#4 seed between PC and BU.
2006-07: No tiebreakers required.
2005-06: No tiebreakers required.
2004-05: 1 tiebreaker, to determine the #1/#2 seed between PC and UNH.
2003-04: No tiebreakers required.
2002-03: 1 tiebreaker, to determine the #4 seed between UConn and NU.

So in the 6 years prior to HEA instituting a shootout, there were 3 years that required a tiebreaker, and never more than one.

One might surmise that the league anticipates more parity in the coming years, and thus expected a higher probability of having to resort to tiebreakers. Given that the #1 seed hosts the semifinal/final round under the current format, it could be controversial to decide that by tiebreaker.

 

[ARM]

Re: Do Shootouts Work?

WCHA fans...how long have shootouts been used in the West?

This is the 2nd season that the WCHA has used shootouts. When the coaches voted (supposedly unanimously) to adopt the shootout rule, the expressed desire was to add some excitement. I don't know that they thought it would make tiebreakers any more or less common.

But if shootouts are here to stay, my advice to coaches would be to have the best goalie.

 

[dhmn]

Re: Do Shootouts Work?

Funny that this has been the topic in the WCHA thread for a bit now...

 

[WildShawn]

Re: Do Shootouts Work?

I've still yet to hear a justification for shootouts that even remotely makes sense.

Making some games worth 3 points while the majority are worth 2 is stupid.
Awarding an extra point in the important race to the regular season championship and seeding based on a skills competition after 65 minutes of hard fought hockey is stupid.

If the game is tied after 65 minutes, each team gets a point, shake hands and move on.

If they're awarding important points based on a skills competition to make it more exciting (what is it, 3 minutes of extra 'excitement'?) for the fans, has attendance in women's hockey east (and wcha?) skyrocketed since the installment of the skills competition extra point? I'm going to go out on a limb and guess no.

Why not do a fastest skater extra point after each game? Or hardest shot?

stupid.

edit: Bruins and Panthers game tonight, goes to ot, each team gets a penalty (both on horses#it calls 11 seconds apart), and they're skating 3 on 3, which was painful to watch.. I hate the shootout and 4 on 4 for an extra point in the NHL as well..