One problem with the shootout is that, once in overtime, some teams may decide to play to the shootout rather than go all out for a win, like a team in the NFL might decide to "tank" once they know they're destined for a top 10 draft pick. The post 2004-05 lockout rules would (and still do) reward teams with two points for a regulation, overtime or shootout win, one point for an overtime or shootout loss, and no points for a regulation loss. But the problem started from there being no difference to your league position, whether you won in regulation or overtime with "team" play, or via the "skills" competition, you had your two points. In an attempt to try and put teams in a more attacking mind, the NHL introduced a new statistic to the standings in 2010. The ROW column, or Regulation/Overtime wins. This means that teams are given priority in standings and playoff seeding tiebreakers if they have more ROW than a team they tied with on points. Emphasising the importance of winning in "team" play. But, the problem of teams settling for a shootout still happens.
Many believe, in particular Detroit GM Ken Holland, that the way to help reduce the chance of going to a shootout is once the five minute 4-on-4 period ends tied, that they should go to another five minute period, and reduce teams to 3-on-3. This is one option of moving forward. One we got a short preview of in a recent LA Kings-New Jersey Devils game, when the teams skated 3-on-3 for a full two minutes after Dustin Brown (diving) and Jaromir Jagr (holding) took penalties.
Another solution, posed by Jeff Klein of the New York Times, is to increase the amount of points awarded, further increasing the importance of the regulation 60-minutes. This would mean 3 points for a regulation win; 2 points for an OT or shootout win; 1 point for an OT or shootout loss; and zero points for a regulation loss. It's used in international hockey games and makes sense, because after all, shouldn't regulation be worth more than the five extra overtime minutes?
I'm quite in favour of going to a 3-on-3 and the adoption of the 3-2-1-0 point system, eliminating the current 2-2-1-0 system. As fun as the shootout is to watch, it isn't "team" hockey, it should be saved for the all-star game.
These would be the "new" 2013/14 standings (Reg W - OT/SO W - OT/SO L - Reg L), with the adapted points total, actual current record, and current points/position;
EAST
| Atlantic | "New" Record | (3-2-1-0) Points - Change | Actual Record (with ROW) | Actual Points |
| Boston Bruins | 47-7-9-19 | 164 | 54-19-9 (51) | 117 |
| Tampa Bay Lightning | 32-14-9-27 | 133 - down one | 46-27-9 (38) | 101 |
| Montreal Canadiens | 33-13-8-28 | 133 - up one | 46-28-8 (40) | 100 |
| Detroit Red Wings | 30-9-15-28 | 123 | 39-28-15 (34) | 93 |
| Ottawa Senators | 27-10-14-31 | 115 | 37-31-14 (30) | 88 |
| Toronto Maple Leafs | 24-14-8-36 | 108 | 38-36-8 (29) | 84 |
| Florida Panthers | 21-8-8-45 | 87 | 29-45-8 (21) | 66 |
| Buffalo Sabres | 11-10-10-51 | 63 | 21-51-10 (14) | 52 |
| Metropolitan | "New" Record | (3-2-1-0) Points - Change | Actual Record (with ROW) | Actual Points |
| Pittsburgh Penguins | 40-11-7-24 | 149 | 51-24-7 (44) | 109 |
| New York Rangers | 39-6-6-31 | 135 | 45-31-6 (41) | 96 |
| Philadelphia Flyers | 35-7-10-30 | 129 | 42-30-10 (39) | 94 |
| Columbus Blue Jackets | 35-8-7-32 | 128 | 43-32-7 (38) | 93 |
| Washington Capitals | 24-14-14-30 | 114 - down one | 38-30-14 (28) | 90 |
| New Jersey Devils | 26-9-18-29 | 114 - up one | 35-29-18 (35) | 88 |
| Carolina Hurricanes | 30-6-11-35 | 113 | 36-35-11 (34) | 83 |
| New York Islanders | 21-13-11-37 | 100 | 34-37-11 (25) | 79 |
WEST
| Central | "New" Record | (3-2-1-0) Points | Actual Record (with ROW) | Actual Points |
| Colorado Avalanche | 37-15-8-22 | 149 - down one | 52-22-8 (47) | 112 |
| St Louis Blues | 40-12-7-23 | 151 - up one | 52-23-7 (43) | 111 |
| Chicago Blackhawks | 39-7-15-21 | 146 | 46-21-15 (40) | 107 |
| Minnesota Wild | 32-11-12-27 | 130 | 43-27-12 (35) | 98 |
| Dallas Stars | 34-6-11-31 | 125 | 40-31-11 (36) | 91 |
| Nashville Predators | 33-5-12-32 | 121 | 38-32-12 (36) | 88 |
| Winnipeg Jets | 24-13-10-35 | 108 | 37-35-10 (29) | 84 |
| Pacific | "New" Record | (3-2-1-0) Points | Actual Record (with ROW) | Actual Points |
| Anaheim Ducks | 44-9-7-20 | 157 | 54-20-8 (51) | 116 |
| San Jose Sharks | 37-14-9-22 | 148 | 51-22-9 (41) | 111 |
| Los Angeles Kings | 34-12-8-28 | 134 | 46-28-8 (38) | 100 |
| Phoenix Coyotes | 27-9-15-30 | 114 | 37-30-15 (31) | 89 |
| Vancouver Canucks | 24-11-11-35 | 105 | 36-35-11 (31) | 83 |
| Calgary Flames | 21-14-7-39 | 98 | 35-40-7 (28) | 77 |
| Edmonton Oilers | 20-9-9-44 | 87 | 29-44-9 (25) | 67 |
Under the new idea the Metropolitan Division gets the largest change, whilst the Central Division doesn't change at all. The Atlantic and Pacific Divisions would just see Montreal leap over Tampa, and Anaheim jump ahead of San Jose.
Personally, having seen several short 3-on-3's and the two minutes between the Kings and Devils, makes me want both, obviously there's no way of telling how teams would play if there was an extra point for regulation wins. But, why not? Both ideas are great, in my opinion. I would be campaigning for both if I was a GM or on the NHL board of Governors.
Maybe the way forward was revealed in July when the AHL announced a few rule changes. From the 2014/15 season the AHL will feature a seven minute overtime period. Teams will skate 4-on-4 for the first three minutes, after the first stop in play after three minutes the teams will reduce to 3-on-3 for the remainder of the period. Before the period there will be a dry scrape of the ice and overtime will also be played using the long change, like currently done in the 2nd period.
The AHL is a test market for the NHL. Many of the rules implemented into the league find themselves in the NHL if successful, and many an NHL rule has been put on trial in the AHL before being used in the NHL.
This change is similar to the proposal by Red Wings GM Ken Holland of a ten minute overtime, half 4-on-4 and half 3-on-3 but shorter. The NHL likes to keep things as quick as possible. This change should be a success in what it's ultimately designed to do, creating space on the ice and prevent the shootout. I like the idea and would welcome the NHL adapting it in 2015/16. But limiting the amount of shootouts games go to is only half of the solution. There's still the problem of the points system. They still need to do something to make the regulation sixty minutes worth more than anything that comes after it. The current system is what makes the comparison to teams 3-2-1-0 records so lop sided. There isn't a stat more telling of the fact teams happily get to a point where they play for overtime, or settle for the shootout, than comparing the current points record to what it could look like with the IIHF scoring used.
Maybe the way forward was revealed in July when the AHL announced a few rule changes. From the 2014/15 season the AHL will feature a seven minute overtime period. Teams will skate 4-on-4 for the first three minutes, after the first stop in play after three minutes the teams will reduce to 3-on-3 for the remainder of the period. Before the period there will be a dry scrape of the ice and overtime will also be played using the long change, like currently done in the 2nd period.
The AHL is a test market for the NHL. Many of the rules implemented into the league find themselves in the NHL if successful, and many an NHL rule has been put on trial in the AHL before being used in the NHL.
This change is similar to the proposal by Red Wings GM Ken Holland of a ten minute overtime, half 4-on-4 and half 3-on-3 but shorter. The NHL likes to keep things as quick as possible. This change should be a success in what it's ultimately designed to do, creating space on the ice and prevent the shootout. I like the idea and would welcome the NHL adapting it in 2015/16. But limiting the amount of shootouts games go to is only half of the solution. There's still the problem of the points system. They still need to do something to make the regulation sixty minutes worth more than anything that comes after it. The current system is what makes the comparison to teams 3-2-1-0 records so lop sided. There isn't a stat more telling of the fact teams happily get to a point where they play for overtime, or settle for the shootout, than comparing the current points record to what it could look like with the IIHF scoring used.
No comments:
Post a Comment