Shootouts in the NHL?

Question

So with the playoffs around the corner and the regular season coming to an end. Do you really think that shootouts helped the NHL.

If a game is tied 0-0 after regular time and 0-0 after 5 minutes overtime, does any of these teams really deserve to earn and additional point for the season.

Answer 1

Mark Y "stole" most of my answer, but:

1. Not Really. You play a 65 minute TEAM game, then have it decided by a bunch of 1 on 1 battles (and worse yet, get an extra point for doing it). It all makes no sense.

2. And where are all these fans and viewers it was supposed to bring in anyway?

3. NO, no, no, no and no!!!!! And I mean no, and by the way did I say NO? The NHL SERIOUSLY needs a class in Math and Logic. You play a certain number of games, there should be a FIXED number of points up for grabs between you and your opponent. Any "point records" that may be set in the future are meaningless, the 76-77 Canadians HAD to win in regulation to get 2 points.

4. And while we're at it, did I say no? Let's stop this insane political correctness of "they worked hard, they should get something". Baseball doesn't give a point for getting in extra innings, then have a "home run derby" after 12 innings!!!!!!

5. And if you STILL don't buy #3 and #4, why stop there? Why not award an extra point for each REGULATION period you're tied in (1st, 2nd , 3rd), I mean if you are the Kings and you're tied with Buffalo 1-1 after the first period you worked hard and you should get something for that, right?

Answer 2

The shootout is extremely brutal on the standings. A guarenteed 3 pt swing is a joke especially now in crunch time. How many fans of teams in the playoff bubble cringe when you see two teams fighting for the same playoff berth as your team playing each other and the game ends after regulation. Also in a game with an Eastern team playing a Western team, what is the incentive for these guys to decide the game in regulation during a close game? Since neither team is completing against each other, in any tied game towards the end these teams are better suited to let the game go to OT.

I admit, I am not running for the exits or turning off my TV for a shootout and I think that the actual shootout is entertaining, just not what it does to the game.

Answer 3

I think the extra point in general is a bad idea. The pens and the sabres would be far down in the standing if the extra point wasnt given. It seems they can't win a game in the regular 60 minutes, but thats ok they get an extra 5 min and if they can't score still there is a shootout which can take forever sometimes. I enjoy the shoot out but the whole idea is cheap in a way. The team didnt really win in the 60 minutes. What is wrong with a tie these days. It seems everyday the sabres go to overtime and the shoot out, I wish they actually had the skill to win in regulation time. I also find that it ruins records because they are counted as a win, but it is hardly a win in the old style game where they would have tied. On that note. GO SENS GO. Did you really need to fight Emery twice in one night sabres?

Answer 4

its the stupidest rule ever put in the NHL. in the next 5 years the stupid shootout will be gone. 3 pts for the win and if tied after 60 minutes of play then have 1 10 minutes overtime like they had in the past but keep the 4 on 4 if tied after OT then each team receives 1 point.

i will give you an example, you look at the football (soccer) in England there lots of tied games over the season and if they had the 2 points a win system Man. U, Arsenal, Chelsea would still be on top but they wouldn't look as dominate with that 2 points system, but with the 3 points for a win system shows the league which team clearly dominates the league which we should put in the NHL. look at the Sabres they have around 14 shootout wins so that's 28 points if no shootout then they would of gotten only 14 points for the tie. ask the Dallas Stars how the regular season shootout work out for them in last years playoffs.


GO HABS GO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Answer 5

I hated ties so yes I think the shootouts helped. The wild flames game yesterday was 0-0 after overtime and that was a hell of a game, i think both teams deserve 2 points for a game like that. Plus the crowds at games love shootouts, they are exciting. Just because they werent an original part of the game, people are bashing them. Do you really love a tie that much?

Answer 6

I agree with Drake, they are fine for the regular season because I want to see one team win after I just invested all that time watching.

I don't want the possibility of triple overtime in the regular season. Nor do I think in the season its a good idea because that would just kill a team if they have back to back games. They would be virtually guaranteed a loss the next day for being so sluggish.

All I can say is that I've never turned the game off because it went to shootout, contrarily I am on the edge of my seat and I think more casual fans probably like it. I do think it is kindof gimmicky though in the sense that it does not necessarily suit a team or players that are good hockey players and can be unfair to solid goaltenders like Giguere who just can't seem to get it together even if he has a shutout to that point.

I think there may be some merit to the 3-point system though. It is kindof wierd when two teams go head to head in your division and both pick up ground on you even though oner loses.

Answer 7

I like the shootout. I would give the team that wins the shootout 2 points and the team that loses it nothing. No single point for tying the game. Too many teams play safe boring hockey for the last 10 minutes in the third period. I'd also like to see a bit more seperation of the teams in points.

Answer 8

It really helped the Penguins!!! It seemed like almost every game they played ended in a shootout. Thank goodness for Erik Christensen and his amazing shootout percentage. I can honestly say that the Pens wouldn't be at the top of the Atlantic Division if it weren't for the shootout. Now, we'll have to see how things work out for them in the playoffs without being able to rely on it...

Let's Go Pens!!!

Answer 9

Each team goes out on the ice each time to prove that they are better then the other team.If it ends in a tie then it proves nothing. Teams need that extra point. But I like the idea that 3 points possible in a game. 3 pts for a win. Ot wins 2pts to the winning team and 1 to the loser. A shootout win would be 2pts for the winner and 1pt for the loser.

Answer 10

Check this out for fair.

In the eastern Standings:
Tampa Bay - 41 win currently 7th
Montreal- 40 wins currently 8th

Rangers 39 wins currently 6th?
Atlanta 39 wins currently 3RD!?!?!?!?!?!?

It doesn't take teams long to figure out the system. And this current system promotes that you don't have to win to be a top team. Bore the fans to death, keeping a low scoring game, keep it close, play the trap and try for the tie. There you are minimum a 500 team with any OT wins you get as a bonus.

The whole point of the extra point was to encourage teams to play for an OT win and not end in a tie, and make it exciting for the fan. Well they can't end in a tie anymore with the dumb shoot out SO get rid of the incentive point.

As for the SO itself? We sit through a slow dull uneventful 65 minutes so you can have 6 - 10 second bits of excitement? Dump it and get back to a traditional exciting game!