#8 spot in east decided today by a shootout

[T-Ruff 47]

Well that's nice for ifs and buts. I'd rather have no limit OT and let them play till someone scores. But I'd much rather a team get into the playoffs due to a win on SO rather than some team limping in cause of 5 minuite period of trap hockey that turns into a 2-2 tie.

Part of what makes playoff games great is those marathon overtime games into the wee hours of the night..... They are a playoff novelty, a reason shootouts are not in the playoffs, and continuous overtimes are not in the regular season....

[Viperar 16]

Part of what makes playoff games great is those marathon overtime games into the wee hours of the night..... They are a playoff novelty, a reason shootouts are not in the playoffs, and continuous overtimes are not in the regular season....

i hope SO never make it to playoff games, but in regular season games, im all for the shootout, i think the points system can be adjusted, but the SO works in my book

[Heroes of Hockeytown 694]

The day they introduce a shootout into the playoffs is the day I stop watching hockey.

That said, it'll never happen.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Well that's nice for ifs and buts. I'd rather have no limit OT and let them play till someone scores. But I'd much rather a team get into the playoffs due to a win on SO rather than some team limping in cause of 5 minuite period of trap hockey relating to a tie.

No limit OT in the regular season is impractical. The season is long enough without having one game drag on like that.

I don't follow the logic here:

Somehow the possibility of a tie will inevitably lead to a team playing 5 minutes of trap hockey?

Yet the possibility of a shootout won't?

With a tie, the most you're getting is a point if you just sit back and trap, trying to survive OT.

Under the current shootout and points system, it seems to me that a team would be more likely to play trap hockey. They've already got the one point just by making it into overtime, but if they can hang on through OT then they've got a chance at that second point in the shootout.

Edited for typos.

Edited April 9, 2007 by haroldsnepsts

[WingsWingsWings 3]

Part of what makes playoff games great is those marathon overtime games into the wee hours of the night..... They are a playoff novelty, a reason shootouts are not in the playoffs, and continuous overtimes are not in the regular season....

I went to a Game 7 for the Kelly Cup (ECHL) championships once. It went to 3 overtimes, and my team - the Mississippi Sea Wolves won!!

FABULOUS GAME!

[Mudvayneowns91 0]

Part of what makes playoff games great is those marathon overtime games into the wee hours of the night..... They are a playoff novelty, a reason shootouts are not in the playoffs, and continuous overtimes are not in the regular season....

There isn't many playoff games that last more than a period. But anywas, what I am saying is that's the only way to decide a fair winner in OT. That solves the problem for the anti-SO and the anti-ties.

[betterREDthandead 58]

No limit OT in the regular season is impractical. The season is long enough without having one game drag on like that.

I don't follow the logic here:

Somehow the possibility of a tie will inevitably lead to a team playing 5 minutes of trap hockey?

Yet the possibility of a shootout won't?

With a tie, the most you're getting is a point if you just sit back and trap, trying to survive OT.

Under the current shootout and points system, it seems to me that a team would be more likely to play trap hockey. They've already got the one point just by making it into overtime, but if they can hang on through OT then they've got a chance at that second point in the shootout.

Edited for typos.

I think he's going back to the example where a shootout might in the future decide a game that pits two teams fighting for the last spot (like today's Flames-Avs game if the Avs hadn't lost last night). In that case it'd be obvious to everyone who a tie benefits, and thus that team would have no incentive to open up the game at all. In which case a shootout would be just about the most exciting possible result of the game.

[Mudvayneowns91 0]

No limit OT in the regular season is impractical. The season is long enough without having one game drag on like that.

I don't follow the logic here:

Somehow the possibility of a tie will inevitably lead to a team playing 5 minutes of trap hockey?

Yet the possibility of a shootout won't?

With a tie, the most you're getting is a point if you just sit back and trap, trying to survive OT.

Under the current shootout and points system, it seems to me that a team would be more likely to play trap hockey. They've already got the one point just by making it into overtime, but if they can hang on through OT then they've got a chance at that second point in the shootout.

Edited for typos.

I'm talking the Isle/ NJ game. Under the old rules, NJ plays the trap for 5 minutes and the Isle are done for the year. The SO this year stops that from happening. Understand?

[Drake_Marcus 890]

This shootout is not the reason the Leafs missed the playoffs....Where were they in the 3rd period of the Sabres game they led 4-1? Where were they in the game vs the Islanders just 3 days ago when the lost 5-2?

The bottom line is...every team has the chance to get the job done during the season.....you can't blame a last game of the season shootout between two completely different teams.....

That's what I said to a room full of leafs fans when it happened tonight. Yeah it sucks, of course it sucks! But where you sit in the end only has less then 2% to do with a single game! No one wants to be relying on the other guy's loss to get them into the playoffs anyway. Huge win for the Leafs yesterday, sure, but in the end they just need to take it in stride like we 29 other teams do a year.

[Guest Crymson]

wow. the isles needed 2 points today to get the #8 seed...it goes to a protracted shootout and they win.

on the one hand, i suppose that's pretty exciting...on the other hand, it seems rather cheap and disturbing.

what do you think (especially toronto fans!)?

I'm not a big fan. Record inflation is reaching dangerous levels. The Sabres and the Pens would be far down the playoff chain were it not for shootout wins.

[Never_Retire_Steve 35]

Yeah, the contrast between the moods of the two benches was pretty comical. Lou Lamoriello had his players cracking up, while half the Islander bench had their heads down. It honestly looked like Aaron Asham was ready to cry.

Anyways, I'm sure it stings for Toronto fans to miss out on the playoffs this way, but ultimately, 16 out of the 30 teams in the league make the playoffs, and if you miss out on the post-season as a result of the points awarded in a SO, you're probably not a very good team.

And as others have already mentioned, ties blow.

The other thing that was interesting was the game that the two teams played earlier and I'm sure looking back at it, Toronto will look at the game that they got killed against the Islanders when the Leafs probably thought they were out of the race

[Heroes of Hockeytown 694]

For the record: The points playoff and bubble teams would have had if there were no shootouts.

East

1. Ottawa - 103

2. NJ - 97

3. Atlanta - 90

4. Buffalo - 103

5. Pittsburgh - 95

6. Carolina - 88

7. Toronto - 87

8. NYR - 85

9. Montreal - 84

10. NYI - 84

11. Florida - 84

12. Tampa Bay - 83

West

1. Detroit - 111

2. Anaheim - 106

3. Vancouver - 100

4. San Jose - 105

5. Nashville - 104

6. Dallas - 98

7. Minnesota - 94

8. Calgary - 93

9. Colorado - 90

Some dramatic shifts in the East, while the West is virtually unaltered.

[Elshupacabra 0]

I'm for the shoot outs in the regular season, ties suck, not only does it leave you with a so-so attitude after the game (as a fan), but it also really blows when at the end of the season you don't make the playoffs by a win or two. Being that unlimited overtimes are impractical in the regular season, the shoot out is the only way to determine an absolute winner. Now granted it may take SOME excitement out of the regular season playoff race but not that much. I does however take more excitment out of the game when teams try to just tie it up in the second and then both teams are just playing defensively to get to a shoot out, but I think that the excitment of the shoot out itself makes up for that. However, Shoot outs have no place in playoff hockey I think that the old cliche: "if it aint' broke, don't fix it" applies here, to playoff hockey tremendously.

[Kass 7]

Well that's nice for ifs and buts. I'd rather have no limit OT and let them play till someone scores. But I'd much rather a team get into the playoffs due to a win on SO rather than some team limping in cause of 5 minuite period of trap hockey that turns into a 2-2 tie.

Agreed. I'd much rather watch a neverending hockey game than see five minutes of boring trap hockey decide a playoff spot.

[auxlepli 17]

SO's are way better IMO than OT's, the five-minute, four-on-four kind.

I understand the POV that SO's kinda cheapens the game, but so does four-on-four hockey that isn't that way because of penaltys. It also kinda sucks that a SO determined a playoff spot.

However SO's are part of the game now and if the Leafs wanted in the playoffs, they should have made damn sure they were in them instead relying on another team for help. The Leafs should have won a few more regular season games!

[PunkChildP 0]

I, for one, think that a team would need to do some SERIOUS soul searching before blaming a missed playoff spot on a shootout. Toronto had 31 losses and 11 OT/SO losses. Thats 42 chances (over HALF of their games) they had to pick up the extra one point needed to get into the playoffs.

The teams that make the playoffs are the ones who made the most out of the opportunities they were given. The teams that miss are the ones who blame the point structure because they didn't.

QFT

[sWINGED 0]

The day they introduce a shootout into the playoffs is the day I stop watching hockey.

That said, it'll never happen.

how do you read that, though? think about it: shootouts are allowed in the regular season but not when it's really important? shouldn't that tell you right there what a shootout is and what it does to the game--let alone what the nhl thinks of it?

if it's such a good thing and adds such integrity to the game, let it go for the playoffs, too. that it doesn't should raise a red flag about it.

hockey is the only pro sport of the main 4 (bb, baseball, football, hockey) that uses a DIFFERENT SYSTEM IN THE PLAYOFFS TO DETERMINE A WINNER THAN THEY DO IN THE REGULAR SEASON.

can you imagine if the nfl used the college system of football overtime and then switched back to the coin toss/kick-off thing in the post-season? most people would say that's stupid. yet, people here backing the SO have no problem with the nhl doing what they're doing.

look: it's simple: if you're a fan of the SO, then back it up: the nhl should also be using it in the postseason. if you don't want to go that far, you're not a true supporter of the SO.

end of discussion.

SO's are way better IMO than OT's, the five-minute, four-on-four kind.

I understand the POV that SO's kinda cheapens the game, but so does four-on-four hockey that isn't that way because of penaltys. It also kinda sucks that a SO determined a playoff spot.

However SO's are part of the game now and if the Leafs wanted in the playoffs, they should have made damn sure they were in them instead relying on another team for help. The Leafs should have won a few more regular season games!

it cheapens the game because the nhl yanks it in the postseason--in effect saying "it's a fun litlte gimmick to help pass the time in the regular season, but jesus no we don't want the REAL games decided that way."

the nhl's very attitude about the SO cheapens IT and the game.

Edited April 9, 2007 by sWINGED

[ColdWarrior 0]

wow. the isles needed 2 points today to get the #8 seed...it goes to a protracted shootout and they win.

on the one hand, i suppose that's pretty exciting...on the other hand, it seems rather cheap and disturbing.

what do you think (especially toronto fans!)?

I thought it was a great ending to an otherwise boring game.

I knew there'd be a 'shootout' controversy... but: Who cares!?

The rules are the rules. I was sick of hearing the 'I hate the shootout' rant 2 septembers ago. Sure, toronto fans will be pissed... but if there were no shootout, they'd be pissed off about some linesmans call, or some cheap shot by an islander that should have been called, or someones foot being in the crease, etc, etc, etc...

Either way, Leaf fans would find something to be pissed about... when the bottom line is, their team lost the season on April 5th when they got slaughtered 5-2 BY THE ISLANDERS.

I shall now applaud my brilliance:

[ColdWarrior 0]

I'm not a big fan. Record inflation is reaching dangerous levels. The Sabres and the Pens would be far down the playoff chain were it not for shootout wins.

It's funny you pick on Sabres & Pens when Detroit has the 2nd highest OTL total among playoff teams. We have 13 OTLs, 13 extra points. That drops us to 100, while Sabres would drop to 106.

[StevieY9802 6]

The shootout win for the isles doesn't bug me that much. If they won in ot no one would be saying anything and if they ended up tying people would be saying, see if there was a shootout it would be different. the worst thing would have been if Calgary/Colorado game would have been the game deciding who got #8 in the west and it went to a shootout. The shootout was good last season but it has lost its excitment now I think. Maybe they go back to ties but make it 10 minutes of OT instead? I always thought that should have been the first step before trying the shootouts. Like I said the isles game didn't bug as much as if the flames and avs would have come down to it.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

I'm talking the Isle/ NJ game. Under the old rules, NJ plays the trap for 5 minutes and the Isle are done for the year. The SO this year stops that from happening. Understand?

So because of this one instance where the shootout might keep a team from playing the trap, it's a good solution??

Even in that situation, I still prefer that the Isles actually have to win a game in a legitimate contest, rather than potentially get into the playoffs based on an illegitimate win from a shootout. They put themselves in that position by not winning enough games during the regular season.

And like I said, I'd rather the NHL lose the shootout, switch to a 10 minute 4-on-4 OT, no points for the loser under any circumstances. As far as I know, the NHL has the proud distinction of being the only pro sport to award a team points for losing.

[Guest Tunbo Batman]

I'm not a big fan. Record inflation is reaching dangerous levels. The Sabres and the Pens would be far down the playoff chain were it not for shootout wins.

QFT

everyone and their mother is now pretending that they are "breaking records" left and right. when EVERYONE is breaking records at the same time, it can only mean one thing : it has been made EASIER.

[motorcitykid 42]

Hey, the Leafs go away. Their fans disappear, since they only follow their team and lose interest once they're ousted. And we don't have to see JP Ferguson's ugly mug on TV anymore.

And this is a bad thing?

OT is better, but boo-hoo, bye bye Leafies.

Edited April 9, 2007 by motorcitykid

[Firehawk 305]

Didn't read the previous posts so sorry if it's been said...

But it's a shame someone's season ends by shootout. I honestly love the shootout, which it was extended to 5 players per side though instead of 3, but I'd love to see the shootout go until the trade deadline, then all games after that are decided in Sudden Death OT.

There's just nothing like SD OT.

[betterREDthandead 58]

hockey is the only pro sport of the main 4 (bb, baseball, football, hockey) that uses a DIFFERENT SYSTEM IN THE PLAYOFFS TO DETERMINE A WINNER THAN THEY DO IN THE REGULAR SEASON.

Who cares? The NHL is also the only pro sport of the main four to allow fighting, to play on ice, and to allow every player to carry a potentially deadly weapon and wear two more on their feet. The NHL is also the only one to use points instead of winning percentage to determine playoff seeding, they've done so forever, and nobody had a problem with that. Baseball is the only sport of the main four to allow the field of play to vary from place to place and allow those variances to affect the outcome of the game. Lots of examples like that. That's a pretty weak argument.

how do you read that, though? think about it: TIES are allowed in the regular season but not when it's really important? shouldn't that tell you right there what a TIE is and what it does to the game--let alone what the nhl thinks of it?

if it's such a good thing and adds such integrity to the game, let it go for the playoffs, too. that it doesn't should raise a red flag about it.

I changed your post to apply to pre-lockout rules. It's still just as true. In context of this quote, nothing has changed really. The NHL didn't used to allow ties in the playoffs but did in the regular season. I mean, that's how you have to look at it if you really want to get down about complaining that they do it differently between the playoffs and regular season. After all, ties in the playoffs wouldn't affect much - how many series would you see go to 7 games and end up tied? So they'd just play an eighth game. Great for box office revenue.

look: it's simple: if you're a fan of the TIE, then back it up: the nhl should also be using it in the postseason. if you don't want to go that far, you're not a true supporter of the TIE.

Same principle.