Post-Game Talk: WJC 2024 Thread

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
23,220
16,755
I thought Gord Miller made valid point during the finals broadcast when he pointed out that if the U.S. and Finland played a 'best of seven' playoff series like just about every league in the world does, it would probably be 4-1 U.S.

And likewise if Canada played Czechia in a best-of-seven it would probably be 4-1 or 4-2. But in a one game, sudden death playoff, just about anything can happen. A hot goalie, some weird puck-luck and OT/Shootout bounce and it's over.

In a seven-game series, the team that possesses the puck more and badly outshoots their opponent will win most playoff series. That's why imo it's pretty hard to extrapolate anything from this World Jr. Tournament.

Sweden dominated Finland, but lost on a bad call and a soft OT winner. And then lost the bronze medal in a 14-round shootout.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitz and Bites

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
29,953
11,658
I thought Gord Miller made valid point during the finals broadcast when he pointed out that if the U.S. and Finland played a 'best of seven' playoff series like just about every league in the world does, it would probably be 4-1 U.S.

And likewise if Canada played Czechia in a best-of-seven it would probably be 4-1 or 4-2. But in a one game, sudden death playoff, just about anything can happen. A hot goalie, some weird puck-luck and OT/Shootout bounce and it's over.

In a seven-game series, the team that possesses the puck more and badly outshoots their opponent will win most playoff series. That's why imo it's pretty hard to extrapolate anything from this World Jr. Tournament.

Sweden dominated Finland, but lost on a bad call and a soft OT winner. And then lost the bronze medal in a 14-round shootout.
Both medal games went into Extra time, which just shows how close these tournament one off games can be. Just a darn shame that the IIHF opts to use 3 on 3 in OT vs letting them go 5 on 5. Heck 4 on 4 would be a fair compromise. I get 3 on 3 during the round robin play. And perhaps in the Quarters and Semis as well. But, for medals? Come on....
 

wetcoast

Registered User
Nov 20, 2018
25,297
12,059
It’s 3 on 3 OT in the Olympics too even for the medal games.
3 on 3 is soooo stupid and why is there no over and back rule like in basketball?

3 on 3 looks exciting at times but most of the time it's so boring and not even real hockey to me.

Give me 5 on 5 sudden death.
 

StreetHawk

Registered User
Sep 30, 2017
29,953
11,658
3 on 3 is soooo stupid and why is there no over and back rule like in basketball?

3 on 3 looks exciting at times but most of the time it's so boring and not even real hockey to me.

Give me 5 on 5 sudden death.
I get it for round robin and up to the Medal round. But, once in the medals, at the minimum 4 on 4. Ideally 5 on 5 for a full 20 then shootout. Just a horrible way to decide a tournament.

But, this appears to be how the Olympics will be decided if they get to extra time, which would suck.
 

VanJack

Registered User
Jul 11, 2014
23,220
16,755
Three-on-three OT was exciting and a novelty when it was first introduced.....but sadly it's run its course.

Now it's just a game of 'keep-away'. It's not uncommon now for a team to win the opening faceoff and then control the puck for two to three minutes.

Players skate in over the blueline and then retreat into the neutral zone if they don't see anything develop. It's all about 'puck possession' and it's about as exciting as watching guys gliding around on a open-air ice sheet.

And in terms of being a pointless exercise, the shootout is only barely ahead of three-on-three OT.

I don't have any answers, but at the very minimum, they should penalize teams for retreating to center ice with the puck. It would at least force teams to try and make a play in the offensive zone.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad