[PGT] Nucks 4 Flames 3 SO LOSS

[cubistcastle]

Originally Posted by 442scotty

Hard to really blame Rittich for any of the goals when the scorers had all day to walk in as close as they needed , time to smoke a cigarette, then let her rip with no fear of someone checking you. That’s what ticks me off about the flames defending at times. The stretch in the second period where the flames totally checked Vancouver to death is what they will need a lot more of if they plan on doing any damage in the playoffs and the rest of the regular season for that matter

What in the world..

The second goal was a routine outside shot that went right through him and the third was pretty far out as well. I don't think the Flames need to be as dominant as they were in the 2nd to have success. In fact, I know they don't because they typically don't play at that level and still win plenty. You make it sound like they aren't one of the top teams in the league.

The stretch in the 2nd is as dominant as I have seen in this league though. Kind of infuriating they couldn't score a few more.

[cubistcastle]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Whatever the shootout gets replaced with, the alternative cannot go back to teams playing for the one point.

Right now, two points to one team are guaranteed. It has to remain that way. So ties aren't happening again.

...but why does it have to remain that way?

[Enoch Root]

Teams play for the tie in regulation - get the point, then worry about OT.

But in OT, you already have a point - nothing to lose, only an extra point to be gained. So teams don't play for the tie in OT, and wouldn't if SOs were eliminated.

140 games have been decided in OT so far this year, and 51 went to a SO. So 73% decided in OT.

I think if you increase the time to 10 minutes, you raise that 73% to over 90%. If less than 10% of the OT games resulted in ties, that would mean less than 20 so far this year. Or 1 or 2 per team for the season, on average.

And if you did something like what Strange Brew suggested, you probably get very close to 100% being decided. Something like: if you take the puck back over center, it results in a FO in your end, like icing. And also like icing, the defending team can't change.

[afc wimbledon]

You can't increase the time to ten minutes if you want televised games, the networks have 2 breaks built into the end of a hockey game they can drop if it goes to overtime, that's pretty much what those breaks are for but it gives the league around 6 minutes at most to play with and the preference is to have it done within one break only.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

You can't increase the time to ten minutes if you want televised games, the networks have 2 breaks built into the end of a hockey game they can drop if it goes to overtime, that's pretty much what those breaks are for but it gives the league around 6 minutes at most to play with and the preference is to have it done within one break only.

How do other sports leagues manage this?

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by AC

Personally, I will tune into any game that is going into OT because I love it.

If OT ends and the game is going to a shootout, I literally always stop watching unless the Flames are involved. I have no interest in the shootout at all.

me too, it takes forever to get the result and its anti climatic

[Coach]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

You can't increase the time to ten minutes if you want televised games, the networks have 2 breaks built into the end of a hockey game they can drop if it goes to overtime, that's pretty much what those breaks are for but it gives the league around 6 minutes at most to play with and the preference is to have it done within one break only.

I think with the time between the OT and shootout and how long the shootout takes to complete (lets not forget that some shootouts go into 5+ shooters), tacking that time onto OT would have almost all games resolved within 10 minutes of the start of regular OT. Too many odd man rushes happen for a goal not to happen in that time frame.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

How do other sports leagues manage this?

most sports have ties or at least very few overtimes. The size of a sport and its ratings are key, the NFL can do what ever the hell it wants, finish the game with 20 minutes of cheerleaders dressed as clowns pillow fighting, the networks have to go along with it.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Coach

I think with the time between the OT and shootout and how long the shootout takes to complete (lets not forget that some shootouts go into 5+ shooters), tacking that time onto OT would have almost all games resolved within 10 minutes of the start of regular OT. Too many odd man rushes happen for a goal not to happen in that time frame.

The 4 man OT went to the shootout too often and that's why they altered it, the NHL wants an OT that ends within in a few minutes most times, the networks will forgive them the occasional longer game its more a question of the averages

[Coach]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The 4 man OT went to the shootout too often and that's why they altered it, the NHL wants an OT that ends within in a few minutes most times, the networks will forgive them the occasional longer game its more a question of the averages

3 on 3 is vastly different than 4 on 4 and goals happen much more often within that 5 mins than they ever did in 4 on 4. My point is that if the NHL wants to end games sooner and more exciting, that with the 5 min of OT plus 5 min to re-scrape ice and another 5-10 of actual shootout, the games would end sooner and on a better note with just 10 minutes of continuous 3 on 3. Not to mention you have no one fight for the game to continue to a shootout. It has to end in OT. You might as well push from the beginning.

[afc wimbledon]

Personally I'm fine with a tie, just trying to point out the key to what the NHL can do is time and television, no more no less

[Coach]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Personally I'm fine with a tie, just trying to point out the key to what the NHL can do is time and television, no more no less

Im fine with a tie too, personally. I also think if you did the 10 min of 3v3 and it was still tied you could leave it at that. Obviously the game is evenly matched and the teams should just split the points.

The NHL doesn't want ties obviously though so that won't change. Maybe it should just go right to 1 shooter for each team.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

most sports have ties or at least very few overtimes. The size of a sport and its ratings are key, the NFL can do what ever the hell it wants, finish the game with 20 minutes of cheerleaders dressed as clowns pillow fighting, the networks have to go along with it.

Well that’s the NFL.

MLB routinely has extra inning games and they can go very long. And like in the NHL, most of their US viewership is regional.

Is the Canadian TV contract the issue for the NHL? Because that would be akin to the NFL in Canada.

I wouildnt agree most sports have ties. In fact I’m trying to think of any at all outside of soccer. Football, baseball, basketball, golf, tennis all have unpredictable run times for TV don’t they?

As others pointed out, most OT games would be over after 10 minutes. If 73% of OT games are decided after 5 minutes, then 90% should be done by 10 minutes and 97% by 15 minutes. After that we are talking about a very, very small number of games.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

most sports have ties or at least very few overtimes. The size of a sport and its ratings are key, the NFL can do what ever the hell it wants, finish the game with 20 minutes of cheerleaders dressed as clowns pillow fighting, the networks have to go along with it.

Dressed as clowns? Absolutely not.

[Itse]

About Rittich...

I've been critical of the way the team has handled the goaltending situation all season, and I'm seeing no reason to chance my mind. They're still playing Smith and Rittich like "1A and 1B and we might flip it back any day", which is absolutely ridiculous. Smith gets all the rope, Rittich gets very little, even though there really hasn't been any question at any point who is the better goalie and the goalie we'll need to rely on to make it deep in the playoffs.

Just in general it feels like the team has done everything it can to make goaltending a hot talking point every damned game, which in itself has to be nerve wrecking.

So to me, it's a small wonder Rittich has been able to keep it together as well as he has.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

I couldn’t disagree more. Peters has handled the situation perfectly. When it was clear Smith wasn’t cutting it peters gave him a chance to prove himself and when he didn’t, Peters transitioned to Rittich giving him the starter role. Since then he’s played Smith just enough to manage Rittich’s work load.

Given BSD’s struggles last year, it makes perfect sense to manage him closely to prevent burnout or a loss of focus.

I’m also a little concerned that Rittich has cooled off so much in the last month or so but I have confidence it’s just a mid season lull and he can recover. Given his recent struggles I’m happy that Peters has managed the goalie situation the way he has. I’d be mortified if Smith hadn’t seen the net in 2 months and was then called upon. As bad as he’s been all season, the solunion isn’t to play Rittich to death.

Hopefully Peters can help Rittich work through this and come out rock solid for our push to lock up the division and conference. And then hopefully for a long playoff run.

[AC]

Originally Posted by Itse

Just in general it feels like the team has done everything it can to make goaltending a hot talking point every damned game, which in itself has to be nerve wrecking.

So to me, it's a small wonder Rittich has been able to keep it together as well as he has.

I disagree. I would suggest the way Rittich has skyrocketed (until recently) is largely due to how Peters has handled the goaltending this season. We started the season with Smith as the number 1 or at least the 1A. As each goalie performed the splits shifted to Rittich.

The starts have been split up between Rittich / Smith as follows:
OCT: 4 / 9 (4 straight for Smith to start)
NOV: 8 / 6
DEC: 9 / 5
JAN: 7 / 4
FEB: 3 / 1

So far through February they've gone to a 1A / 1B combo a bit, which also coincides with Rittich struggling a bit. Remember he was getting criticized a lot for those soft late goals in January.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Rittich get 6 more this month and Smith 3.

As for the amount of "rope" each goalie gets, it's been pointed out a couple times recently but typically a backup goalie won't get pulled because he's specifically playing to give the starter a night off. See Vegas keeping Subban in all game when we massacred them. Starters get pulled more often as a result.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The 4 man OT went to the shootout too often and that's why they altered it, the NHL wants an OT that ends within in a few minutes most times, the networks will forgive them the occasional longer game its more a question of the averages

About 75% of OTs see a goal within the 5 minutes, that wouldn't change. What we are talking about here is the 25% that go to a SO. Most of those would end quicker, continuing with OT, than a SO takes. And even if it goes the full 10 minutes, that is still more predictable than a SO, which often goes beyond the 3 shooters.

With respect to the timing of it, the networks should love the idea, not hate it.

[TheScorpion]

I know he scored, but I'd still like to see Mangiapane demoted in favour of Quine.

[Cole436]

Originally Posted by skudr248

hey!

Can vouche he’s a legend.