Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

[Leather helmet]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

Ever since ARM declared me to be rational, I have been walking a little taller, standing a little straighter, with a pensive yet knowing look on my face.

Now to get back to disagreeing. All of the parenting books say you should feed your children healthy, well-balanced meals, and keep them engaged with fun yet educational activities. But sometimes we all plop them in front of the TV with a McHappy Meal. Why? Because sometimes, doing things the right way is too much effort.

Same with regular-season games. This is just one out of 35 games...let's get it over with. When the playoffs (or the in-laws) come around, then we'll do it the proper way.

 

[Ahockeydad]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

I find shootouts entertaining. Past 2 OT’s during the regulation can be hard on the kids.

 

[pokechecker]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

let's look at the amount of time a SO takes, they re-ice the center surface, then if it takes 30 seconds for each player that's 3 minutes, I'm guessing close to 10 minutes total
why not play another 5 minutes of 5 on 5?

I get why they don't want to go on forever to find a winner during the regular season , who wants to (or can) hold up the bus or plane for an undetermined amount of time. Using a SO everybody knows how quickly it will end (OK, when the Gophers played Japan the SO went down to Goldie vs. Japan's interpreter and took about 1/2 an hour)

 

[ARM]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

Using a SO everybody knows how quickly it will end (OK, when the Gophers played Japan the SO went down to Goldie vs. Japan's interpreter and took about 1/2 an hour)

The best way to speed up shootouts for the Gopher games would be to just not have Minnesota skaters make attempts at all. It wouldn't change the outcome any.

 

[joecct]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

The IIHF has tossed the shootout in gold medal games. It will now be unlimited 20 min 3x3 OTs.

If the NCAA went to a 3-2-1-0 points system, I would be amenable to a 5x5/5 3x3/5 followed by shootout for regular season games.

Playoffs - 20 min 5x5 until a winner.

 

[ARM]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

The IIHF has tossed the shootout in gold medal games.

That's good.

It will now be unlimited 20 min 3x3 OTs.

Yuck! That means we go straight to 3x3 to start the first OT? Boo!

If the NCAA went to a 3-2-1-0 points system, I would be amenable to a 5x5/5 3x3/5 followed by shootout for regular season games.

I'm okay with that if only the 5x5 portion counts nationally. Anything else is a degradation from what we have today, IMO.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

I welcome your opinions. Please note that just because two rational human beings (+ Grant) are in favor of something, that doesn't mean it is a good thing.

IMO, the 3-on-3 OT, like shootouts, can be entertaining to watch. However, that doesn't mean that they are much better than coin flips in terms of measurements for whether Team A or Team B is more deserving of advancing. At no point while watching the three 3-OT NCAA games that I've seen in person did I think, "This would be much better played 3-on-3."

As for the regular season, is a tie so bad? Doesn't the fact that a decision couldn't be reached in 65 minutes tell us just as much as artificially forcing a decision to be made does?

I would NEVER want 3x3 for playoffs. Playoff overtime hockey is the greatest thing in sports. Wouldn't change a thing.

But, that doesn't mean 3x3 isn't exciting and fun to watch. And for the regular season where unlimited OT is never going to happen, it's a nice compromise.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

All of the parenting books say you should feed your children healthy, well-balanced meals, and keep them engaged with fun yet educational activities. But sometimes we all plop them in front of the TV with a McHappy Meal. Why? Because sometimes, doing things the right way is too much effort.

Same with regular-season games. This is just one out of 35 games...let's get it over with. When the playoffs (or the in-laws) come around, then we'll do it the proper way.

I absolutely love this analogy. You win the post of the month!

 

[robertearle]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

Has anyone compiled stats on whether 3-on-3 or 4-on-4 OTs actually results in more goals being scored?

I remember thinking or observing that in the famous 2018 Olympic women's final, the only period played when there were no goals scored was the 4-on-4 overtime.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

Has anyone compiled stats on whether 3-on-3 or 4-on-4 OTs actually results in more goals being scored?

I remember thinking or observing that in the famous 2018 Olympic women's final, the only period played when there were no goals scored was the 4-on-4 overtime.

The NHL has. The problem is, teams adjust. When the NHL went to 4x4 OT from 5x5, initially more goals were scored. But then coaches and defenses adjusted, and we were back to where we were. So, they went to 3x3. More goals were scored again. Initially. Then, once again, coaches and defenses adjusted, and OT goals declined (though not yet back to the original level).

 

[joecct]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

BTW, USA Hockey has eliminated unlimited OTs in its youth level national tournament medal round games. Now it will be one OT (length of 3rd period) followed by a shootout.

 

[pokechecker]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

The best way to speed up shootouts for the Gopher games would be to just not have Minnesota skaters make attempts at all. It wouldn't change the outcome any.

come on now, two years ago both the late season Badger games went to overtime and a SO with WI winning the first and MN the second

 

[ARM]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

come on now, two years ago both the late season Badger games went to overtime with WI winning the first and MN the second

True. Has anyone scored since Stecklein? I know nobody did in Duluth this year. Per collegehockeystats, I guess Brown scored in St. Cloud last year, but I didn't see it.

 

[pokechecker]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

Getting back to this is about the WCHA SO after one 5 on 5 overtime …

Strike #1: I have already shown how it can corrupt the standings. A SO win is worth 2/3rds of a REAL victory, a team going 0-0-0 with three SO wins is on par with a team that goes 2-1. IOW, a team unable to win a game is equivalent to one that wins twice as often as it loses.
Strike #2: I have also shown that A SO doesn’t neccesarily save time, although it does guarantee an ending with a victor and a loser. The same amount of time extending an OT would increase winners, although still some games would end in a tie that traditionalists do not object to.
Strike #3: the SO is based on a rare situation in hockey ( a penalty shot) and consequently doesn’t reflect which team is the superior one.
Strike # 4: A case can be made that it is good for the NHL or the Olympics which is a made for TV event. The only people watching WCHA women’s hockey are rabid hockey fans who want to see a hockey game end in the traditional manner, the stronger team vanquishing the weaker one.
Strike #5: None of the other conferences do it that way.
Strike #6: Even the WCHA once it gets to seeding the year end tournament throws out the bogus SO results, when two teams are tied the team with the most wins prevails.
Strike #7: The SO was supposed to be for the fans, the thinking was they didn’t want the fans going home without a winner. Really? The higher ranked team fans do not consider a SO win a WIN, it’s a failure to win. Lower ranked teams might consider it a win because it isn’t a loss.
In baseball 3 strikes and you are out. But this is hockey, I’m not sure how many strikes it takes but if 7 aren’t enough … but I am a realist, they aren't going to drop the SO, unless it is to do something else, gawd I hope not 3 on 3 ...

 

[thirdtime's . . .]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

Yeah the thing with shootouts is they are a result of OT being way too short. 5 minutes just often isn't enough, that's why you see the 3 on 3 gimmick becoming popular.

Agree. The five minute limit is as artificial as is reducing the number of players. A potential ten minute sudden death window is at least mentally more than twice five in OT because you’re allowed to play the same game you’ve played even-up for sixty minutes, having time to make even more adjustments, line changes, etc. if need be. I guess I’m just speculating that ten minutes on the clock would help remove the “sudden” mentality where the temptation is to make daring/foolish plays, instead of just continuing to play intense hockey (assuming most tied games after 60 minutes have been just that - - - intense.) Also, refs wouldn’t need to swallow whistles as much. For this same reason of wanting OT to approximate the regular game, I think any amount of 4x4 is preferable to the 3x3 circus because it is what teams play many times in the course of a season and are used to as real hockey.

 

[thirdtime's . . .]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

We've all been here many times before. Since it isn't the off-season it must be nerves.

 

[Puckdrop14]

We've all been here many times before. Since it isn't the off-season it must be nerves.

If 3 on 3 is a circus, a shootout must be the Gong Show!

 

[ChickHicks86]

Re: Those %&# @*%$ Shoot Outs!

I'm a little late to the party, but here are my thoughts:

1) A hockey shootout to me is analogous to going to penalty kicks in soccer. Is it the same as regulation play? Does it reward the better team? I'd say no to both questions, but as others have said, if you decide that ties are undesirable (as awarding an odd number of standings points for a conference game does), it does give you a winner without having to play all night.

2) While unlimited OT is exciting, it is also exhausting. Especially in a 2 game series, if the Friday night game goes to say 5 OTs, is anybody going to want to watch or play in the Saturday game? I think both players and fans would be happier with a tie or a shootout in that situation.

3) Sudden death normal hockey with normal timing rules is the best way to determine a winner in my book. A 5 minute OT makes it too easy for a team to park the bus for 5 more minutes. A shootout is quick and easy, but its more of a coin flip than a hockey game. Unlimited OT in the regular season isn't physically sustainable, so as much as I don't like ties, it seems that you either have to live with them or come up with some artificial way to decide the game.

 

[Russell Jaslow]

Agree. The five minute limit is as artificial as is reducing the number of players. A potential ten minute sudden death window is at least mentally more than twice five in OT because you’re allowed to play the same game you’ve played even-up for sixty minutes, having time to make even more adjustments, line changes, etc. if need be. I guess I’m just speculating that ten minutes on the clock would help remove the “sudden” mentality where the temptation is to make daring/foolish plays, instead of just continuing to play intense hockey (assuming most tied games after 60 minutes have been just that - - - intense.) Also, refs wouldn’t need to swallow whistles as much. For this same reason of wanting OT to approximate the regular game, I think any amount of 4x4 is preferable to the 3x3 circus because it is what teams play many times in the course of a season and are used to as real hockey.

Some of us are old enough to remember when college hockey did have a 10-minute overtime.

 

[shelfit]

Some of us are old enough to remember when college hockey did have a 10-minute overtime.

I like the idea of 10 minutes for OT. Isn't that the same amount of time some men's and women's conferences use for "mini games" in their playoffs? Btw, the mini game is an awful invention in my opinion. Back to the topic of OT, split the difference and put 7:30 on the clock for OT.