Do Shootout Wins Feel Satisfying to You?

[1865]

Not that we've ever won one, but I find shootouts to be the worst thing in the league. You battle and fight for 1 point over 65 minutes of attrition and then you get another one for about 5 minutes of skills? It's an absolute nonsense and all because people can't accept a draw/tie? If the best sport in the world can embrace the draw, hockey can. It artificially influences the standings and it's ultimately just not very fair.

OT is better for the fan and you win or lose to a hockey play at least. Move to the 3-2-1 points system and get it over with.

 

[Silky Johnson]

No, but i get over it fast when I look at the standings.

 

[The Panther]

Shoot-outs suck.

More importantly, some games being worth 3 total points and some games being worth 2 total points is idiotic and would not pass muster in any other major professional sports league.

Overtime losses being worth 50% of a win is idiotic and would not pass muster in any other major professional sports league.

I didn't have any problem with ties myself, but since that cat's out of the bag I don't suppose we can ever go back. So, there's no choice left but to go to the "3-point regulation win" system (which is taking a giant dump on the entire history of the NHL, but such is life in the post-Lockout Bettman era). So, the best option would be this:

-- 3 points for a regulation win.
-- If tied after three periods, play 3-on-3 overtime for max. 10 minutes or until someone scores. If someone scores, that team gets 2 points and the other team gets 1.
-- If no one scores after 10 minutes of 3-on-3 (which would only happen about 10% of the time, I guess), then each team gets 1 point only. And that's the end of the game (no shoot-outs... ever).

This makes too much sense, though, so the NHL will not do it.

 

[Toby91ca]

I will never get the hardcore fan dislike of shootouts. It's always so foreign to me.

What is it that you don’t understand? Honestly, I can at least see the point of people that can’t live with a tie that thinks shootouts are ok, but not sure they even like it.

 

[Toby91ca]

Yes it is wasting 3 hours of your life for 1 game out of 82 in a year for no W or L is bad

This is probably one of my biggest pet peeves and probably the reason we have shootouts to begin with. The mentality that there must be a winner in a regular season game. Are people paying money to watch a game or just interested in a win or a loss? If all you are interested in is a win or loss, why bother watching the game, just check the scores?

 

[Toby91ca]

If the best sport in the world can embrace the draw, hockey can.

What annoys me about that “best sport in the world “ is that they will decide their most important championship with a shootout…I get why they do it, but so lame

 

[Ianturnedbull]

Gimmick hockey

Zegras!

 

[Toby91ca]

Overtime losses being worth 50% of a win is idiotic and would not pass muster in any other major professional sports league.

Hate to go there, but I will. OT losses are worth 0% of an OT win. You get 1pt for OT win and 0pts for OT loss. It also comes into play with tiebreakers.

I much, much prefer ties, but the point system doesn’t bother me. So I don’t think an OT win should be worth the same as a regulation win, but it really isn’t when you consider tiebreaker rules

 

[1865]

What annoys me about that “best sport in the world “ is that they will decide their most important championship with a shootout…I get why they do it, but so lame

This is true, but after a full 30 minutes (1/3 of the original game) of extra time played.

 

[Machinehead]

I don't care.

People say it's a coin toss like hockey in general isn't a coin toss.

 

[ponder719]

While everyone's putting up proposals for how to deal with this, here's my idea to make regulation time matter more: 2 points for a regulation win, 1 point for an OT/SO win, nothing if you lose. Can't get it done before the game's supposed to end? Now you're fighting for half as much. That'll drive up competitiveness during the actual hockey portion of the game, and add a sense of urgency in the third period.

Alternately, you could devalue just the shootout, and do 2 points for a regulation/OT win, 1 for a SO win, nothing if you lose, and again you're putting more emphasis on the actual hockey and making the skills competition a consolation prize, like it ought to be, while still giving the networks the guarantee that the game will end in a certain amount of time with a definitive winner.

 

[RANDOMH3RO]

It’s more relief than satisfying. If it’s a shootout between teams that aren’t the devils I don’t even care to watch.