Bring in the 3 point system. Making a regulation win more valuable will make teams want to win in regulation, rather than suck the life out of the game to try and guarantee a point and then take a gamble in a shootout. That combined with Holland's idea for OT would significantly reduce the amount of shootouts we see. My guess would be by over half.
Just get rid of the OT point. If there's no incentive to get to overtime, teams will stop strategizing with overtime in mind.
Teams play to win the game (or not lose) in the first 40 minutes. If it's tied or a one-goal game heading into the 3rd, the entire focus is getting the game to overtime. They will grind the game to a halt to ensure they get that point.
I don't like the idea of 3-on-3. I don't like the shootout because it's gimmicky and decides a hockey game with a skills competition. 3-on-3 isn't far off that. Just do away with the loser point and have a 10-minute 4-on-4 and I think there would be a tremendous decline in the number of games going to a shootout.
I never hated ties, I just hate that teams completely shut the game down to ensure they got the single point.
The addition of the loser point helped alleviate some of that, but then you had teams shutting the game down in the 3rd period to ensure they get to overtime. That's what you see nearly every game when it's tied in the 3rd period.
The solution is simple. Get rid of the loser point. It was introduced when there were still ties, but it serves no purpose today other than to reward losing.
People hate the shootout, but the real problem is that too many games get that far because far too many teams are happy to choke the life out of the game to ensure they get the OT point.
If you take away the incentive of getting to overtime, logic suggests teams may actually try to win a tied game in regulation.
I'm almost positive but someone may have to clarify this for me also; it's to my knowledge that the new CBA allows players to get called back up to the NHL without re-entry waivers. This move would give cap relief for the franchise while allowing them to use Tootoo as a 2-way contract(?). If they do want to re-use him now, they don't need to pass him through waivers again. Again, this is what I believe the new CBA allowed, but i'm not a CBA expert by any means. I do think that if he comes back up to the NHL though... he has to re-pass through waivers. THey must likely tried to move him over the past few weeks, got nothing and then decided to let him to go waivers in order to relieve cap space.
There's no longer re-entry waivers.
Under the new rules for players on one-way contracts in the AHL, teams get $925,000 in cap relief (pro rated) if they send down a player who makes more than that. The player continues to collect his full salary in the minors.
Oh yeah, for sure. I know you're a big Leafs guy Mack, are you happy with this deal?
It's fair. He's become one of the best players in the league. I think I heard only three players have more goals than him over the past three seasons (Stamkos, Perry, Ovechkin).
He's bought into Carlyle's challenge for him to play in his own zone. Obviously, he won't win any Selke's, but he's back there doing his part. He put up big numbers now that he has started collecting assists, so you have to pay the guy in that elite category.
Sundin lugged around dead weight for wingers for almost 13 years and still scored over 1,300 points. He took Jonas Hoglund, an absolute worthless sack of crap of a hockey player and got nearly 30 goals out of him.