3 on 3 OT is awful.

[the_fan]

Gaining the zone isn’t important 3 on 3 with only two guys to tag up. Hemming the other team in their zone isn’t really a great strategy 3 on like it is 5 on 5. You score mostly by transitioning through the neutral zone and creating your own odd man rusted with speed and passing.

There really isn’t a solution to fix 3 on 3. It is what it is and it results in like 70% of the games ending in OT which was the NHL’s goal. Just leave it as is I guess

 

[Commander Clueless]

The 3-2-1 point system would mitigate the impact of 3 on 3 in the standings.

It’s gimmicky pond hockey but it’s far better than a shootout and more exciting than ending a game in a tie.

Just needs less meaning in the standings

I like the idea of keeping the 2 point system, but both teams get 1 after regulation. OT and SO award only a tiebreaker stat in the form of "ROW".

Still fun to see your team "win", but less impact in the standings. Keeps the point totals low-ish.

 

[WhiskeyEE]

Not really more gimmicky than penalty kicks in soccer.

 

[Ollie Weeks]

I havent stuck around to watch a shootout in years, and almost 100% of the 3v3 I’ve watched this season have been very boring. Might stop watching that too. Free up my evening. Nod thoughtfully at the standings in April. Checked those for the first time today, too.

 

[Evilhomer]

I like the idea of most goals at 3-3 wins. It's already a gimmick, and a completely stupid one at that, so make it even more ridiculous by incentivizing teams to pile on the goals.

 

[PaulD]

Win the faceoff, go into the attacking zone, throw it around for about 45 seconds, take it back out of the zone and all the way down into your end, change two skaters without letting the other team change, make a play towards the net while doing everything you can to maintain possession. Rinse and repeat.

Since when did we go from end-to-end action to this bullshit cat and mouse game? Every team in the league is doing it now. I don't care if it works, it's boring as shit. I would rather just see them go right to a shootout if this is how it's going to be. Ideally they go back to 4 on 4.

The other thing they could do is implement some type of shot clock system where you have 30 seconds to get a shot on net after receiving possession. As it stands, if you win the opening faceoff, your team has a 70-80% chance of scoring without the other team ever touching the puck.

As others have said, maybe an over and back rule is the answer.

Nothing new here.
Gimmick game.
Child's play. Recess hockey.

 

[Mike C]

Not really more gimmicky than penalty kicks in soccer.

What's that old thing about 2 wrongs???

 

[x Tame Impala]

Ties are stupid. Counterintuitive to the purpose of sports. Save it for boring soccer, the worst of the big 5 sports

 

[Ciao]

There's a reason I consider any and all OT/SO games to be ties and move on from there. It's not legitimate hockey.

I don't care if it's legitimate or not. There's nothing worse than a 2-2 this on a Tuesday night in February. Without O/T the game slows down to a crawl in the second period and never picks up. It's unwatchable.

Now, with overtime, at least you know someone is going to score before the game is over. And with 5 minutes of 3 on 3, it won't take forever. It gives you a reason to stay up and watch the end of the game instead of just going to bed early.