LastPommerFan Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 I think I've replied this before, but you really must not remember the overtime from the pre-lockout years. It's exactly what you describe above, two teams playing to not lose. I think you'd see both teams' PK units out there for the 4-on-4. 3 points for a win. 1 each for a tie after 5 minutes of 4 on 4. zero for a loss, no matter when you lose it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 3 points for a win. 1 each for a tie after 5 minutes of 4 on 4. zero for a loss, no matter when you lose it. I think we just have to disagree. If you give an NHL coach the option of keep one point by not being scored upon, or opening it up and risking that point for possibly scoring another, they're going to chose to keep one (just like the ties up to 2004). Maybe 4-on-4 opens it up, but I'm not so sure. I could see a 3-2-1-0, with 1 point each for the tie at the end of regulation works if you just want to get rid of the shootout. I'm not sure I like the unbalanced point-per-game structure though. Edit: I kinda like that the more I think of it. 3 points for regulation win, 2 points for OT win, one point for OT loss or tie, 0 for reg loss. No shootout. I like the shootout, but I think I'd like seeing balls-out 4-on-4 since there's nothing to lose and no reason to protect to get to the shootout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
korab rules Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 I think I've replied this before, but you really must not remember the overtime from the pre-lockout years. It's exactly what you describe above, two teams playing to not lose. I think you'd see both teams' PK units out there for the 4-on-4. Don't forget the last 5 minutes of regulation in a tied game. That was 2 teams trying not to lose also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 I like the 4 on 4, then 3 on 3. If you want to prevent it from becoming a chess match it's easy. No points unless you win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 I like the 4 on 4, then 3 on 3. If you want to prevent it from becoming a chess match it's easy. No points unless you win. Regulation Win: 3 points; Overtime Win: 2 points; OT Loss: 1 point; Loss: zero points. Teams have no incentive to put opponents away in regulation, especially division and conference rivals (e.g. when the Sabres and Caps play each other in a little bit). Make the 4 on 4 a 10 minute period. It's WAY more exciting than the shootout. I'm not sure what a 3 on 3 would actually look like but it might be worth a shot as well (5 minutes). THEN, and only then, do the shootout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
korab rules Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 I like the 4 on 4, then 3 on 3. If you want to prevent it from becoming a chess match it's easy. No points unless you win. Henrik? Is that you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 That would be a 3 on 1 OT powerplay, wouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
korab rules Posted March 19, 2012 Report Share Posted March 19, 2012 That would be a 3 on 1 OT powerplay, wouldn't it? five hole. Those swedes are pretty slick stickhandlers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.