[News] NHL will go to 5 minute 3-on-3 OT for regular season (no more 4-on-4)

[GioforPM]

Johnny, Monahan and Hudler are all good at both OT and SO.

But a big part of the Flames' offensive strength is top 4 D, which is way better served in 3 on 3 than in the shootout (OK not including Schlemko). Gio/Brodie/Russell's skating, Wideman's one timer.

In addition, I think 3-3 give guys like Bennett, Raymond and Backlund some opportunity. And you can throw out a Byron if he's here, Colborne, Ferland, Bouma etc. Those guys can score with open ice and have decent speed (Byron is more than decent).

[sec304]

I am not a fan of this decision right now, but in the same breath I am excited to see it happen.

Totally torn on this. IMO they should try it out for every preseason game first (regardless of score) to see how it goes.

[bdubbs]

Shot clocks need to stay in the NBA. We don't need more whistles per game than there already are.

[killer_carlson]

I wonder if this opens the door for platooning the 12th forward. Much like they used to do with goons, teams could park a guy at the end of the bench for one specific purpose.

Does this extend the careers - albeit at league minimum - for one dimensional offensive players, who may only get called upon for 5 on 3 powerplays or 3 on 3 and shootouts?

Do Phil Housley, Alexei Kovalev and Robert Reichel all start dusting off their skates?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

I wonder if this opens the door for platooning the 12th forward. Much like they used to do with goons, teams could park a guy at the end of the bench for one specific purpose.

Does this extend the careers - albeit at league minimum - for one dimensional offensive players, who may only get called upon for 5 on 3 powerplays or 3 on 3 and shootouts?

No, because there is still 59 minutes of regular hockey to be played.

[CroFlames]

I feel like I'm the lone voice crying out in the wind.

3 points for a win

1 point for a tie

0 points for a loss

5 on 5 OT for Playoffs only.

[Zevo]

I hope at the beginning of OT that each team throws their sticks in a pile and the ref randomly throws 3 sticks from each pile to the side. These three players start the game. Then to make the pond hockey experience complete, goalies can only wear regular equipment as there are no raiseys.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I feel like I'm the lone voice crying out in the wind.

3 points for a win

1 point for a tie

0 points for a loss

5 on 5 OT for Playoffs only.

There should always be 3 points given out no matter the scenario. Shootout is such a crap shoot that I'm okay for the loser point in that situation, while the winning team gets two points. Since 3-on-3 is a shimmy form of hockey, I'm even okay with the OTL point still as long as OTW get only 2 points rather than 3. The biggest gain should be from winning in regulation. Gaining two more extra points rather than getting one single point is much more rewarding, especially later in the season when the playoff races heat up.

[CroFlames]

I can't even really be called old fashioned since I'm not that old, but I'd much rather see a tie than all this hybrid stuff about handing out points for losers and caveats for winning a certain fashion. If the NHL wants more 'excitement' in their game, call penalty shots more consistently.

I think it's much better if it is simpler. Did you win? 3 points. Did you lose? No points. Tie, one point.

Rather than, did you win? OK 3 points. Was it OT? 2 points. Was it Shoot out? Ok 2 points, but it's really like 1.5 points because SO wins don't count as much as OT wins. So your win column is now split between W and ROW. Did you lose? Lose in OT? Lose in Shoot out? Ok, new point structure. It just makes the sport look weird.

I think the biggest reason people wanted OT & Shoot out in the first place was for the perceived reason of teams 'sitting back'. If you go to a W-L-T system with 3 point wins, you eliminate the notion of 'sitting back', if that's really a thing.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yeah 7 minutes of OT followed by a SO would be way too long especially if the SO goes more than three shooters per team.

That depends on how many more games would end in those extra two minutes. If enough games end in the sixth and seventh minutes of OT, the average length of all extra time games would be reduced.

In March, the AHL put out this infographic about the new OT rules (I can't find an updated one for the whole season):

Spoiler!

In that time, 224 games went to OT. 120 of those games (53.57%) ended in the first five minutes of OT. Of the remaining 104, 51 (49.04%) ended in the next two minutes of OT. Extending OT by two minutes reduced the number of shootouts by almost half. If that held true long term, playing 7 minutes of OT should be an easy decision for the league and PA.


We'll see next season if the effectiveness of 3-on-3 OT in the AHL was actually because of the 3-on-3 or if it was just a by-product of extending the OT by two minutes. My guess is that it'll be a little of both.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Bob McKenzieVerified account
‏@TSNBobMcKenzie
Speaking of 3on3, NHL may consider - nothing firm yet by any means - re-formatted NHL All-Star Game that could be multi-team 3-on-3 tourney.

There needs to be some sort of incentive for players at the ASG to be playing for if you don't want the current half arsed effort. Money doesn't matter, nor do bragging rights. Has to be something meaningful like conference home ice advantage or draft pick improvement (just as an example).

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

There needs to be some sort of incentive for players at the ASG to be playing for if you don't want the current half arsed effort. Money doesn't matter, nor do bragging rights. Has to be something meaningful like conference home ice advantage or draft pick improvement (just as an example).

Why? It's a nothing game, so who cares about the effort.

It's basically a fun weekend for the guys and their families until the hardest shot competition. Then it continues to just be a fun weekend.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

There needs to be some sort of incentive for players at the ASG to be playing for if you don't want the current half arsed effort. Money doesn't matter, nor do bragging rights. Has to be something meaningful like conference home ice advantage or draft pick improvement (just as an example).

Yeah. No thanks. Imagine the Flames busting their asses off to get home ice advantage, only to see an Eastern team get it instead because there have to be Oiler and Canuck players on the roster.

The All-Star game should never impact actual, meaningful hockey.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Yeah. No thanks. Imagine the Flames busting their asses off to get home ice advantage, only to see an Eastern team get it instead because there have to be Oiler and Canuck players on the roster.

The All-Star game should never impact actual, meaningful hockey.

Not should players risk injury in them by playing full out