In respose to the Vancouver Loss on the SO and CB's article on the Spin-O-Rama yesterday I thought I revisit my feelings on how to deal with the OT/SO/Points situation.
These shootout deals are tough to deal with.....Although I will say that even though we don't like it...I am actually in the camp that feels the games do need to have a winner...I HATE TIES...SO I THINK SHOOTOUT ARE OK IN THAT SENSE....JUST TRY WHATEVER THEY CAN TO MAKE SHOOTOUTS AS RARE AS POSSIBLE
However, a shootout win should count less than a Regulation or OT win.
I put out a Fan Post just after the NHL held their RDO Camp this summer and I was thrilled with some o the ideas they discussed there.....what I liked after the Jump!
Before I begin, let me preface this by saying that I thought the NHL did a very Good Thing by lessening the value of SO wins vs. Regulation/OT wins. This was a great decision by the league.
At RDO Camp some of the following ideas were discussed and tried out
1. Extending the length of OT....maybe extend to about 8-10 minutes of 4 v. 4 instead of just 5 minutes. The idea of changing to 3 v. 3 and even 2 v. 2 was a terrible idea though (I hated that)
2. Also, (And This is a Biggie).....make the teams switch sides for OT. The League said that they had done some research on scoring and found a significant difference in scoring in 2nd periods due to the fact that the bench is further away from the respective defensive zones and exposes teams just a little more often. With a longer change and 4 v. 4, I think the scoring chances would increase significantly enough to decrease the need for shootouts.
3. Loser Points - No Loser Points for losing in OT (only if you lose in a shootout) - This may open up a different can of worms I know (because then teams will just play ultra-conservativatively in OT to preserve at least the loser point..... but doesn't that happen already in Regulation?- Good Discussion). Maybe No Loser Points for OT losses only in games against teams in the opposite conference?
If a Shootout is still necessary:
1. I heard John Tortorella say recently that he would like it if the coaches did not have to submit all 3 of their shootout participants right away...he said he would like to be able to pick out his participants after each round (I like that....that sounds interesting)
2. In the AHL...they have 5 rounds instead of 3 rounds in the shootout (Anybody like that idea?)....might be interesting.
In any case...I think that if the NHL would implement the top 2 items above (Extended OT and Changing Sides in OT)...there would really be a decrease in shootouts which is what I think the Goal Is....