NHL Shootout Myth #47: Look! People are standing!
by Dominik on Nov 10, 2009 8:00 PM EST
in Big Picture Musings
Email
Print"You think the shootout is a bad way to end regular-season games? What if I told you the Olympic gold medal game could be decided that way? Because that's the truth. What an ugly thought that is. But as for NHL regular-season games, I don't mind it, my friend. Walk into an NHL rink during a shootout and tell me how many people are actually sitting down."
The most tired, circular and evasive justification for the shootout there is.
You like the shootout? Fine. We can agree to disagree on taste. If you think a breakaway drill -- that takes place at half of game speed, mind you, without even the threat of a backchecker to make the shooter think twice -- is a great way to award half a win's worth of points after 65 minutes of hockey, fine. If you're just tickled pink by some dangler spinning in circles, crashing into the goalie, and then fist-pumping as if he just accomplished something, then we just like hockey for different reasons. If your tie-allergic self needs a "winner" (falsely) declared so bad that you must "settle" games this way, great. I lose the vote. I concede.
But stop using the "no one is sitting down!" argument as justification. Because people aren't sitting down during OT scoring chances either. You know why? The game is on the damned line.
You could have a bow-and-arrow accuracy contest at center ice, with the players in their skivvies. You could have a stuff-the-clown-in-the-VW contest at center ice. You could make the players shoot for the empty-net wrong-handed and blind-folded. For all of these, if the outcome determined which team just earned another point in the standings, people would not be sitting down.
So stop the fallacy. Stop pretending that the artificial value ascribed to the shootout justifies its existence. If the two points in the standings were determined by who won the 2nd period, guess what? Few people would show up for the 1st for the overpriced pizza and beer, and not a sober soul would still be around for the exhibition 3rd.
I get that some people like it (and flippancy aside, I don't mind that you do). I get that it's exciting. Hell, I'm standing during shootouts, too. But that doesn't mean I like it. And it doesn't mean I feel good about things afterward, win or loss.
So please: If it must stay (and surely it will), at least stop letting teams who resolve their games via shootout earn the same reward as teams who take care of business in 60 minutes of actual teamwork.
Retort, refute or hallelujah in comments.
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
The 1994 Olympics Gold Medal game was decided by a shootout. Sweden defeated Canada and it left a bad taste in everybody’s mouth.
But the postage stamp! Who can forget the postage stamp?!
It’s often overlooked, but the ‘94 World Cup was decided by soccer’s equivalent for the shootout, and Italy lost because one of its stars (Roberto Baggio) sent his penalty kick — after 120 minutes of play — over the crossbar.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
BTW, several soccer or football stories making the rounds...
a German netminder committed suicide by speeding train
and
a US woman playing for New Mexico has been featured in some You Tube videos brutalizing opponents in a game against BYU.
Agreed.
The shootout is fun to watch but it’s a gimmick that shouldn’t be deciding crucial points for the regular season (and definitely not deciding something like a Gold Medal at the Olympics). I’m all for dropping the loser point while we’re at it.
I thought you knew that algebra was all razzamatazz. A Globetrotter always saves the good algebra for the final minutes.
The loser point
The stomach-kicking thing is, I don’t think they’re ever dropping the loser point, nor changing what a regulation win is worth, because this system artificially feeds parity.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
i was never a fan of the 3 point game, in a perfect world, points would be like this for me
Reg. and OT Win = 2
Reg. and OT Loss=0
SO win = 1.5
SO loss = .5
this would likely eliminate most of the awful tie-breaking scenarios that runs 15 deep
it would bring a lot more drama to OT and the SO as well
and yes i know it will NEVER happen
why isn't #16 hanging in the rafters?
I'd be a fan of that
Half points would be great, and I don’t like the cumbersome idea of wins suddenly being worth three. (But like you say: alas … will never happen. :sigh:)
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
The shootout is really a stupid way of deciding a game
I propose that they settle these games gladiator style. Give the two best goons on the team a trident and a net and let em have a go.
Kate Murray can reside over the whole affair with Colin Campbell her assistant. Certainly the benefit of instant replay in Toronto can be relied on to determine who fought valiantly. This way Kate can’t possibly fuck up deciding who lives or dies.
She certainly can’t be accused of bias toward the hometown team.
This, absolutely, will leave no one sitting down.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
I smell an ESPN contract coming.
Screw UFC!!!!!
is the reason they stand for excitement, or is there ALSO the fact that they know they’re leaving in 2 minutes? if the game was 5-0 and i stayed til the end, i would be standing up, maybe at the top of the stairs (or bottom if i was upper tier) waiting for the buzzer to walk out
why isn't #16 hanging in the rafters?
Shootout
No Shootout, no Ties. Play until there is a winner and if it goes 5 overtimes and you feel it is becoming a detriment to your team and you dont need the two points, then let a goal in. But am not a fan of the SO and hate ties.
Alternative to shoot-out
How about after the 5 min 4 on 4 overtime, they play another 5 min at 4 on 3 alternating pp opportunities at the halfway mark (2 min 30 sec). The team that gets first crack at the pp could be the team with the least amount of penalties that game or had the most shots or least takeaways (name your most random stat)….whatever at least its still hockey.
I find myself turning to other regulation games on tv when the game I’m watching goes to shootout (with the exception of Isles games of course)…shootouts are more often than not the most boring part of a hockey game for me.
I remember talk that doubling the length of OT would significantly increase the number of winners. I’d do that and accept ties (but ties didn’t bug me so much to begin with).
I agree with the boring part, obviously. They’re just anti-climactic, and the most revered moves generally leave a bad taste in my mouth.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
Shootout
When the shootout first started I thought it was a cool idea and would add excitement to the end of the game. Now though I am not sure how I feel about it. But like you said if they do keep the shootout around I totally agree that it should not equal the same amount of points you get for a regulation win. They should tier the points system where for example: win=3 points, shootout or OT win=2 points, and a shootout or OT loss= 1 point. That is just one possible solution so shootout wins do not equal the same amount of points as a regulation win.
Of course I agree :)
Are you an Isles fan? I suspect last night’s 11-rounder was a dream for shootout fans. It was a novelty to me … but it looks like even the players on the bench have this vibe about them that they’re watching a coin toss. Just weird to see them bust their tail and then see another point awarded that way.
Lighthouse Hockey: Side effects may include Weight gain and frequent game loss.
one thing about the SO...
it is a real benefit to the team that is being outplayed in OT…which was the Isles last night.
if the other leagues followed the nhl...
MLB to change rules, will have a maximum of 1 extra inning and then determine a winner via Home Run Derby where batters hit off of a tee
NBA follows suit and now will have ties broken with a game of HORSE
PGA is debating installing a mini-golf style “19th” hole at every course instead of going through hole after hole of playoff rounds…
NFL changes nothing- says, if you tie, so be it
why isn't #16 hanging in the rafters?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Featured Stories
Islanders Schedule
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Who are the Non-Smythe candidates for the Devils, Kings?
- End is near for Rick Nash, Blue Jackets as trade discussions set to resume
- Why the Devils and the Kings are evidence the Capitals shouldn’t trade Alex Ovechkin
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 New York Rangers
- Stanley Cup Final: 5 keys for New Jersey Devils and Los Angeles Kings
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Shawinigan wins Memorial Cup in OT
- Cataractes forward Chaput wins Memorial Cup MVP award after putting up 12 points
- Knights' impressive run comes up just short in Memorial Cup final
- Zlobin's overtime goal lifts Cataractes over Knights in Memorial Cup final
- Zlobin's overtime goal lifts Cataractes over Knights in Memorial Cup final
SBNation.com Recent Stories
1979-80
Source: Uploaded by user via NYIslanders on Pinterest
May 24, 1980: Tonelli to Nystrom. At long last, the steady build of the New York Islanders from expansion doormat to surprise semifinalist to annual contender reaches the promised land: Buoyed by a late season trade for Butch Goring that gave the team the depth up the middle GM Bill Torrey had been seeking, the Islanders knock off the Philadelphia Flyers in six games.
The victory justified the faith in coach Al Arbour who guided them from their second season to their first Stanley Cup seven seasons later. The Islanders would not be the first expansion team to win the Stanley Cup, but they would be the only one capable of a dynasty.
1980-81
Source: Uploaded by user via NYIslanders on Pinterest
May 21, 1981: This time it was much easier. After falling to "only" 91 points in the 1979-80 season, the Islanders returned to their division title tradition, piling up 110 points -- a whole 13 points over second-place Philadelphia.
Between the quarterfinals (where they beat the upstart Oilers in six games) and the finals, the Islanders reeled off eight consecutive wins -- with a four-game sweep of archrival Rangers in between. As they defeated the Minnesota North Stars in five games for their second Cup, their goal difference in the final was a combined +10.
1981-82
Source: Uploaded by user via NYIslanders on Pinterest
May 16, 1982: Another year, another landslide title. The Islanders won the Patrick Division by a whopping 26 points over the second-place Rangers, and were seven points clear of their nearest competition for the President's Trophy, the still-not-quite-ripe Edmonton Oilers.
A first-round scare against the Pittsburgh Penguins turned in the Isles' favor thanks to John Tonelli's heroics, and a true dynasty was on its way: Past the Rangers in six games, then an eight-game sweep of the Quebec Nordiques and Vancouver Canucks to run away with the Stanley Cup.
1982-83
Source: Uploaded by user via NYIslanders on Pinterest
May 17, 1983: Not so fast, whipper-snappers. The Edmonton Oilers' steadily rising challenge for league supremacy took them all the way to the finals for the first time, where the New York Islanders summarily dispatched them in a four-game sweep. For the Islanders, the Dynasty was secured. For the Oilers, it was a powerful lesson in where talent ends and the demands of playoff hockey begin.
Four years, four Cups, 16 consecutive playoff series wins (a record that would grow to 19 until the rematch with the Oilers the following year). Mike Bossy scored 60 goals yet again, and Wayne Gretzky became acquainted with Billy Smith's crease.
