• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Hockeytown0001

GDT
3/3 GDT : Blackhawks 2 at Red Wings 1 (SO)

Rate this topic

920 posts in this topic

I'm not just reacting to Kane and the shootout loss. I've always hated the it.

It's a terrible way to decide a game and by its artificial nature requires keeping the loser point. I'd much rather have ten minutes of 4 on 4 OT, then just call it a tie if no one scores and both teams get a point.

If someone does score then two points to the winner, no points for losing. Ever.

I grew up watching hockey in the 80s so there were ties. It really only got bad in the clutch and grab era. Watching a slow boring hockey game ending in a tie.

I like the finality of it personally. I would never accept it in a playoff game, but in the regular season, its fun. I really enjoy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

regarding the loser point....I would accept the rule IF the teams made it to a shootout, then the loser can have a point, but if a team loses in OT, there should be no point....

just to be clear, I am not for the loser point at all, or the shootout, but if there has to be a loser point it should only be awarded if you earned your way to the shootout...

I understand where you are going here but it would suck. It would be the most boring period of 5 minute shutdown hockey you have ever seen as they would all want the point. As it is it's more open and teams attack more to try and earn that extra point.

Best solution is 4 points for a regulation win, 3 points for OT win, 2 points for S/O win 1 point for OT or S/O loss.

As it is you get max points for winning a game in a shootout which to me is just wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if nobody deserves to win a particular game? Hence a tie.

Nothing wrong with that. Just means neither team was good enough to win.

Instead, we have to manufacture wins, just so casual morons at bars are entertained. Bring back the pre 1999 point scoring system.

I agree and disagree. I hate the shootout but I hate ties just a little more. The problem with pre 4 on 4 OT and shootouts were that they were useless. Teams played to not lose instead of to win. Most of the time you might as well have not even played the OT. Id rather they play the 4 on 4. If nobody scores go to 3 on 3. Now you figure the time it takes them to scrape the ice and then do the shootout is what maybe 10-15 minutes. Go straight to 3 on 3 and Id put money down on games not lasting more than 3 more minutes. And then it would still have a team aspect winning the game. Not a skills comp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree and disagree. I hate the shootout but I hate ties just a little more. The problem with pre 4 on 4 OT and shootouts were that they were useless. Teams played to not lose instead of to win. Most of the time you might as well have not even played the OT. Id rather they play the 4 on 4. If nobody scores go to 3 on 3. Now you figure the time it takes them to scrape the ice and then do the shootout is what maybe 10-15 minutes. Go straight to 3 on 3 and Id put money down on games not lasting more than 3 more minutes. And then it would still have a team aspect winning the game. Not a skills comp.

But like my last argument, that's not very realistic hockey either. 3 on 3 hardly ever happens. Why let it decide games.

I honestly remember plenty of OT goals being scored before shootouts, and for that matter, before 4 on 4 was introduced. Maybe it's my memory, but I saw nothing wrong with it. Good teams still went for wins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree!!!! these shootouts and points for losing in the 5 min OT have ruined NHL records--you cant compare the Blackhawks run with the 1980 Flyers, the Flyers had no shootouts and OT's and even in the beginning of the OT era (1983) you didnt get any points for losing in the OT.

The "ruining NHL records" is such an absurd argument against any rule change. There have been significant rule changes throughout the history of the sport - how far back do you want to go? Shall we eliminate the forward pass? Y'know, just so we can compare eras?

Regarding the game, its clear the Blackhawks are a very good team. Whether that means they'll be a very good team come playoff time, or they'll use up or their luck in the regular season remains to be seen.

For Detroit - Flip and Bert can't come back quick enough. Poor, poor Pavel :(

Nightfall likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "ruining NHL records" is such an absurd argument against any rule change. There have been significant rule changes throughout the history of the sport - how far back do you want to go? Shall we eliminate the forward pass? Y'know, just so we can compare eras?

Regarding the game, its clear the Blackhawks are a very good team. Whether that means they'll be a very good team come playoff time, or they'll use up or their luck in the regular season remains to be seen.

For Detroit - Flip and Bert can't come back quick enough. Poor, poor Pavel :(

Yeah, but those rule changes were good for the game. Shootouts still divide fans and make less sense than the "forward pass" as you say it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about keep going til someone wins just like the playoffs. The incentive to try to score is getting the extended time over with sooner.

esteef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about keep going til someone wins just like the playoffs. The incentive to try to score is getting the extended time over with sooner.

esteef

Nah. Players would be too tired for that. So would fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about keep going til someone wins just like the playoffs. The incentive to try to score is getting the extended time over with sooner.

esteef

The games potentially take too long and the players get worn out. It's special in playoffs and it should stay there.

Also living in Atlantic Canada the Western Coast games are absolutely brutal and aren't over till 1 or 130 AM at the earliest in the regular season

Edited by metalkorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Franzen has got to go... He made quite a few errors, and aside from hitting the post, he was rather worthless out there. This is how he's looked since returning from injury, and he hasn't done much outside of this to warrant keeping him around. At least healthy scratch him a few games and send a message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man what a bummer. With the team constructed as it is now that was OUR Stanley Cup for this season. I was pretty pissed at Big E and Kronwall for those pretty much inexcusable penalties but we have got to score more than 1 goal against Corey "The Dominator" Crawford. Changes really have to be made, a message has to be sent, but with our front office track record I don't see anything being done (we like our team, adding Helm and Bert is like making a blockbuster trade, etc etc). Hopefully Tatar gets promoted to the 2nd line after today. I've seen enough of Cleary not being able to handle Pavel's feeds and I've seen enough of Abs doing whatever the f*** he does. Abs has been playing on the 2nd line with Pavel how many games? And still has no goals? Even Cleary has managed to pot a couple. He brings nothing to the team that can't be replaced by any random 4th liner in the league. Pretty much a DMac that can't fight, no scoring touch, and no intangibles.


Oh and Franzen looked absolutely dreadful.

Edited by Number19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the finality of it personally. I would never accept it in a playoff game, but in the regular season, its fun. I really enjoy it.

Right, but you are giving out potential playoff spots to the results of a skills competition. It's as absurd as giving home field advantage in the world series to the winner of the all star game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waaaaah! The millionaires might have to play longer and get tired. Then put them in skirts. God forbid we give the fans value for their money.

esteef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missed the game, but sounds like Tatar got shafted by Babcock. Did he sleep with Babcock's wife or something? The treatment of him and Datsyuk is mind boggling.

b.shanafan14 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what happened but sometime during the 2nd we had Tootoo's line up against Hossa's line and needless to say the whole shift was spent in our zone. What the f*** was with the matchups.

Edited by Number19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know what happened but sometime during the 2nd we had Tootoo's line up against Hossa's line and needless to say the whole shift was spent in our zone. What the f*** was with the matchups.

Not sure why you quoted me on this but it looked like the Hawks simply changed on the fly while we were hemmed in.

esteef

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this is how I see this game:

* We were outplayed in the first 2 periods. Pretty badly. Very solid defense and Howard kept us in it.

* In the 3rd we woke up, took over the play, and really looked good. We scored. After that we backed away a little bit, but still created chances, and still played solid D.

* Then something happened.... I can't explain it.. Ericsson, amazing up until that point, made a really stupid, boneheaded play. It's one that every d-man does at one point or another. But it can't happen with 2-3 minutes left when you have a 1-0 lead in a big game.

* Chicago scored a rather flukey goal on the PP.

* OT was great, back and forth, wish it was longer. I personally think we would have won the game, IN OT, if Babcock had played Tatar instead of Cleary.

* Once it went to shootout, it's a coin-toss. A bit disappointed by Datsyuk's attempt, but Crawford had done his homework and didn't bite. Brunner was sooo close, just another example of the bad breaks we got against us this game. Kane had a nice one, he's a ******, but he's got hands.

* Zetterberg had a highly mediocre game and looked sluggish. Bad SO attempt too. But he still had a couple of really nice passes that could have led to goals.

* Brunner was one of our best guys offensively, along with Tatar who had a nice goal.

* Cleary and Abdelkader were terrible every time they were out on the ice. Honestly don't think either of them did one good thing all game. Not even joking. Filppula better return real soon because it seems obvious Babcock has decided to run with this line until he gets fired and committed to a mental asylum.

* One point is okay, but just like in the game against LA, this was a game where 2 points were very much within reach, and we just did something stupid, got scored against on the PK and bam, points lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, the Wings got a point out of a loss to a good team. Right now we need at least a point out of every game. I remember a time when the Red Wings looked just like the Hawks do right now and dominated the regular season. But guess what, we got eliminated first round in the playoffs. I don't give a flying F### about the regular season, just get in the playoffs, and right now even in losses we need to get a point. We got a good chance to get some points out of these upcoming games. Besides I'll laugh my ass off if the Hawks get lit up in the playoffs. The Cup isn't won by stupid regular season records just remember that.

Edited by Jericho613
haroldsnepsts likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hereby move that Jonathan Ericsson's NEW nickname be "Depends" until he finally stops pissing all over himself with the puck at crunch time. He did it in overtime too. Just layed the puck out for anyone behind his own net.

Do I hear a second?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Blackhawks haven't lost in OT. They have lost in SO three times.. So even if they were going against the Flyers run in 1980, they would have still gotten a point for getting through OT and it ending in a tie.

I understand that but the point is teams play differently now days when they know they have a secured point as opposed to 'going for it' in the last 5 mins of regulation time like they did back in the early 80's, back then teams went for the win, they didnt rag it the last 5 mins as much as teams do it in todays NHL.

If all games were worth 3 points now (regulation win =3 pts) dont you think more teams would play harder in the last 5 mins of a game to get ALL the points? it would defiantly change the strategy of todays games just like it was a different approach in the pre-1983 era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Missed the game, but sounds like Tatar got shafted by Babcock. Did he sleep with Babcock's wife or something? The treatment of him and Datsyuk is mind boggling.

Yeah this is getting rediculus!! Why is Tatar not with Pav? Bye bye Pav....back to Russia he goes.

I think Hawks are on PED's. (not kiddin)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now