• Print

THN.com Blog: NHL shootouts still wrong after all these years

Carey Price of the Montreal Canadiens stops the shootout attempt of Phil Kessel of the Boston Bruins Nov. 22, 2008. The Bruins defeated the Canadiens 3-2.(Photo by Richard Wolowicz/Getty Images)

Zoom Image

Carey Price of the Montreal Canadiens stops the shootout attempt of Phil Kessel of the Boston Bruins Nov. 22, 2008. The Bruins defeated the Canadiens 3-2.(Photo by Richard Wolowicz/Getty Images)

A couple of days ago, a fellow THN editor asked me if I was still “down on the shootout.”

I promptly replied, “Yes.”

However, back when the tie-breaking format was introduced in 2005, I probably would’ve yelled, “Hell, yes!” and immediately launched into a double-decibel rant about the NHL selling out the game and the shootout’s complete lack of credibility.

“It’s a skills competition they ripped off from the All-Star Game!” I would’ve cried. “Nothing more than a novelty act!”

"Hockey is a team game!” I surely would’ve shouted. “Let the teams decide who wins and loses, not an individual player on a propped-up breakaway!”
 
Not being smart enough at the time, I wouldn’t have even thought to bring up the fact that four-column records (win–loss–overtime loss–shootout loss) are a royal pain in the standings. Or that the “loser point” would forever relegate a trusty stat like winning percentage to the trash pile. (Now teams have a “points percentage,” which is like winning percentage…but completely irrelevant.

A team could lose all 82 games in a shootout for a record of 0-0-82…And hey! Look! They’re .500! What a year! Stanley Cup, here we come! What do you mean there’s no shootout in the playoffs! Just wait…)

The truth is, though, I’ve mellowed on the shootout a bit.

A bit.

I still feel the same way I did when it was thrust upon the league three years ago – that a player-versus-player competition is an awful way to decide a team game – but my passion has subsided with the passage of time.

I can even grudgingly concede – as long as you don’t throw it back in my face – that fans, for the most part, seem to like the shootout. If you’ve ever been in attendance for an NHL game that required one, you know the in-arena intensity shoots through the roof. And, definitely, entertaining the fans and giving season-ticket holders the feeling they got their money’s worth is important.
 
However.
 
Nothing is more important than maintaining the integrity of the game. And while the introduction of the shootout did not sink the league’s credibility, it was a shot across the bow. Think about it. The next logical step is to introduce the shootout to decide playoff games; say, for games that remain tied after one 20-minute overtime period.

Related Links

Surely, we can all agree that would be a terrible day for the league. NHL playoff overtime is the best thing about hockey – you could argue nothing is more exciting in the world of pro sports – and the last thing the league should do is tamper with its most thrilling aspect.
 
In fact, I think the league should go the other way and extend overtime during the regular season. Forget the shootout; how about 4-on-4 OT for 10 minutes instead of five? Or 20 minutes? Or play until someone scores; that’s what sudden-death overtime is all about.
 
The naysayers might complain about games going too long – granted, no one wants to stay up until two in the morning on a Tuesday night in February to see who wins the fifth St. Louis-Nashville meeting – but the fact is, more than 40 percent of regular season games that go to overtime are decided within the five-minute frame. Plus, if teams know they don’t have the option to try and “hold on” for a shootout, they’ll be more apt to go for the win in OT.
 
And if it’s really a big concern that far too many games would go on for far too long, why not go to 3-on-3 after 10 minutes of 4-on-4? There won’t be any triple-overtime marathons under that format, we can guarantee you. Granted, 3-on-3 is a little cartoony, but it’s much better than deciding games with a 1-on-1 format.

Pretty much anything is.

Sam McCaig is The Hockey News' senior copy editor and a regular contributor to THN.com. His blog appears every weekend and his column, From The Point, appears regularly.

For more great profiles, news and views from the world of hockey, Subscribe to The Hockey News magazine.

COMMENTS (67)

Sort: Oldest | Newest    Filter: All | Videos


Jeff M Posted
(2009-04-30 07:39:54)



You can add me to the list of people who hate the shootout. Should baseball go to a HR derby after 12 innings because it's exciting? NO-it's a GIMMICK! If a tie is "like kissing your sister", then a shootout win is like "getting a pity kiss" If you want to reduce ties, play 5 min of 4-on-4 and then 5 of 3-on-3, then call it a tie (I'd prefer keeping OT at 5-on-5, but 3-on-3 is still better than a shootout!) And they need to stop giving points for just making it to OT! OT games award 3 points and regulation 2, which is terrible. If they MUST keep the shootout, give 3 points for a non-shootout win, and the 2-1 breakdown for shootouts (at least then you get a bigger reward for really beating a team, and aren't hurt as much for losing on a gimmick) I still don't see how the shootout attracts casual fans... I haven't heard someone yet say: "oh, I'll watch this hockey game for the next 2-1/2 hours because I MIGHT get to see a shootout"
    0



Paul Hiler Posted
(2009-04-30 07:33:40)



I hate the shoot out, and what also drives me nuts is, if there are no ties then why do teams get a point when the game is tied at the end of regulation? drop that point! It makes no sense.
    0



Greg Kershaw Posted
(2009-04-30 07:29:20)



I am not a fan of the shootout. It changes the game. But I also hate the 4-on-4 OT. However, I don't think that we will ever be without the shootout so I propose a 10 minute OT. That will, at least make it a little harder for teams who only play for the Shootout (Oilers, Rangers, etc...)
    0



11 Cups Posted
(2009-04-30 07:26:32)



Some fantastic comments on how ridiculous the shootout is. As so many say play until next goal wins. A shootout should not decide the end of an official game.
    0



johnny griswold Posted
(2009-04-30 07:24:25)



Shootouts really suck, but it's better than ending a game in a stupid tie. NEVER NEVER EVER should a playoff game end in a shootout.
    0



Matt K. Posted
(2009-04-30 07:24:21)



The shootout was great the first year back from the lockout but not anymore. If the NHL Board Of Governors are smart enough to fire Bettman, then the way NHL regular season games that go to O.T. should be decided with a 10 minute period 4 on 4 with no point going to any team who loses in overtime and if nobody scores within those 10 minutes, both teams receive one point in the standings. Another rule I would propose is that for a minor penalty in overtime during the regular season, it's a 1 minute minor, while a major penalty in regular season overtime would be a 3 minute major. This would make regular season games which go to overtime MUCH MORE entertaining than a shootout.
    0



Bob Storie Posted
(2009-04-30 07:24:13)



I also hate the shootout, just a cheesee way to decide a team game! For anybody that has seen an Edmonton Minor Hockey Week tie game decided in O.T. That's exciting and quick, can you imagine N.H.L. calibre players in that format.
    0



Derek Posted
(2009-04-30 07:24:04)



Why not award no points to either team and end the game after regulation. Surely a tie is equal to a loss if you don't / can't beat the other team, no? If they must keep the overtime period, make it worth the same 2 points for a win, and zero points for a loss - OT loss or not. You can get rid of the shoot-out, maintain an intense OT, and still make the stats mean something.
    0



Michal Pesta Posted
(2009-04-30 07:24:02)



Great, another article crying about the shootouts. You'd think that after a few years of most fans LOVING them this would come to an end. I'd like to remind these so-called "purists" of just how much the game has changed over the years. If the "purists" had their way we'd still have 6 teams, straight sticks, no helmets and no forward passes in the neutral zone. All I can think of when I read stuff like this is old men sitting on their porch, in a rocking chair muttering things that begin with "Back in my day..."
    0



Shona Posted
(2009-04-30 07:24:02)



I hate the shootout always have and always will...I wont even watch them anymore...I wait 5 min then turn the tv back on to see who won. I refuse to accept that this is how a hard fought game is decided. This is not an "innovation" it is a cheap, ridiculous way to placate fans. "Create excitement" Give me a break, the excitement in hockey is watching two team go head to head and play hard and if by the end of that they are tied well then so be it...that is exciting...
    0



1 2 3 4 5 6 7

ADD YOUR COMMENT

Register or Login to submit a comment
Player/Injury News - Up to the Minute NHL Updates This Week - Subscribe Now

Which team has been hit worst by injuries this season?










THN Newsletter - Sign Up Now

“I don’t know if I’ll ever feel 100 percent this year.”

- New Jersey's Patrik Elias, who is recovering from hip and groin surgeries and has two points in five games this season.

Our Partners