Wednesday, October 22, 2008

For what it's worth, which likely isn't much

Indulge me for a moment...

There has been some shoot-out debate in Toronto today (yes, largely because the Leafs are awful at them). The consensus is that the breakaway contest doesn't belong in the game, it's wrong to have it decide playoff teams, etc., etc., etc.

One thing I've never heard suggested is this. If you think that the shoot-out is entertaining--and it's clear that there are some powerful people in the NHL that do--but you think it has too much of an impact on the standings then maybe the answer is to have more shoot-outs, but have them count for less.

Keep with me for a minute...

Have a shoot-out after every game played. Immediately after the 60 minutes if there is a winner, following five minutes of overtime if the game is tied. The winner of the shoot-out doesn't get an extra point like it does now (wins are still worth two points, ties one each. I think we are all smart enough to handle the odd tie game). Instead, the shoot-out gets recorded in a separate statistical column that is only used to break ties in the standings--instead of wins, or goal differential, the first tie breaker would be shoot-out wins.

Such a set-up doesn't make the shoot-out meaningless, but it reduces its impact by eliminating the dreaded three point games. It also would keep people in the building in blow-out games. Even if the home team was losing 6-0, it could still win the shoot-out, which could be important (but usually wouldn't be).

8 comments:

kinger said...

It's a great idea I've talked about before too. Problem is it lessens the impact (and perhaps excitement) of the shootout, and means fans might go home thinking their team wasn't really the 'winner', which was why they got rid of ties. But it's better than what we have now.

Best option in my opinion is 5 extra minutes of 3-on-3 overtime. I think the AJHL does this and it massively reduces the number of shutouts.

kinger said...

Shutouts = shootouts

Tao of Stieb said...

Two words: Longer overtime.

Anonymous said...

Tao
The probleam is teams play back to back many times per season.As it is now teams get to there next city in the early morning.If you have a longer ot that will only make that worse.

kinger said...

5 minutes is not a long time.

GoGades said...

My solution:

3 points for a regular time win
2 points for an OT (4 on 4) or shootout win
1 point for a shootout or OT loss

Reward teams that win in regular time. In my mind, winning 4-3 or 8-0 in regular time is worth more, and rewards a team for winning it the old fashioned way.

kinger said...

A win is a win for me. We have to stop this whole awarding extra points in games thing. Everybody's above .500 these days.

Plus, do we really want sportscasters talking about the 17-32-7-3-1 Toronto Maple Leafs? Records are complicated enough.

sager said...

'Gades' 3-2-1-0 format would make more sense.

It's seriously going to get to the point where it's going to be like those "scoreless ties" that Czechoslovakia and the USSR would play in the world championship when that was the exact result that would hurt Canada ... some teams will stall just to get overtime and have an extra point available from that game.