hf101 Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 as per twitter: @TSNBobMcKenziePending B of G approval, NHL will go to 3-on-3 overtime for 5 minutes in regular season games next season.@TSNBobMcKenzieFor those asking, no 4-on-4 OT at all. Right to 3-on-3. 5 minutes sudden death. No goal, it goes to shootout. So what would be your teams top 3 on 3 OT line?For the Flyers I have Voracek, Giroux and a fast skating d-man like DZ if they get him signed. For the Wild I'd choose Parise, Granlund and Dumba then I'd like to see Spurgeron with Zucker and Coyle -- but hey I know Sutter would probably be on one of the lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBLightning1993 Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Lightning would have to be Stamkos, Palat and either Nikita Kucherov or Tyler Johnson. Most likely Johnson after the postseason he had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yave1964 Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 I like it. Better chance of ending without a shootout. Not quite hockey, I mean, how often do you actually see 3 on 3? once, twice a year for a typical team? But it is miles ahead of the shootout. And with that much ice available, the stars should really shine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Still no capes? Come on Bettmann, you know you want them wearing capes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samifan Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 I watched it in the AHL this season and found it very entertaining. It should definately help games from going to the skills contest, which is good for the Flyers! I recommend our top 3 on 3 pair be VLC, Umberger and Grossman. They should cover plenty of ice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 Karlsson, Stone, and Turris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I love it. As I've said before, and as anyone who has ever played in a 3-on-3 tourney can attest, it separates the wheat from the chaff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92WickedHockey Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Meh, I'd rather see OT scrapped entirely along with the loser point, make it W-L-T, 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss and 1 each for a tie. Would simplify the standings also with the elimination of the ROWS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Meh, I'd rather see OT scrapped entirely along with the loser point, make it W-L-T, 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss and 1 each for a tie. Would simplify the standings also with the elimination of the ROWS. I can go either way on having OT or not. The 4 on 4 has been fun, and I think the 3 on 3 will be too, but I'm okay with or without it. I do want to see the loser point scrapped, though, and the ROW thing is STUPID. I never saw anything wrong with a tie either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Knut Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 What the hell is this? Where the hell is this coming from? What the hell is the point of this? Why the side show antics? Why the hell can't they just friggin' play hockey? I have no idea what to do with this other than to turn off every non playoff game at the end of regulation from here on out. I just.Don't.Get it. Are they just trying to drive away existing hockey fans at this point? In baseball do 6 players take the field in the top of the 10th inning? Why is the NHL deciding it has to make it's Overtime even more ridiculous than the NFL Overtime? These are the questions that keep me up at night. Seriously though, if this gets approved, I'll never watch another OT or shootout ever again. It won't matter who gets the extra points to me. It will be entirely irrelevant and any playoff seeding that is determined because of 3 on 3 won points will just be an injustice IMHO. I can't believe this is happening. I just can't get my head around it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarsippius Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I share your sentiment, although I think the reasoning is to cut down on gimmicky shootouts....by using a gimmicky 3 on 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adamflyers Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I share your sentiment, although I think the reasoning is to cut down on gimmicky shootouts....by using a gimmicky 3 on 3I'd rather the gimmicky 3 on 3 than the 3 ring circus of shoot outs. Honestly, I would like nothing more than to go to 5 min of 4 on 4 OT and if no one wins, it is a tie. I'd even take 5 min of 3 on 3 OT and a tie. Anything to eliminate the shootout, but apparently that is not going anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podein25 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I've played hockey for 42 years and nothing about 3-on-3 strikes me as gimmicky. I don't understand this obsession. There are 3-on-3 tournaments and camps all over the place these days because it's the best way to work on both your individual offensive and defensive game. Give me a dozen prospects, put them in random groups of 3 and have them play a round robin tourney. At the end I could tell you easily which 3 prospects to take (not including goalies).I don't get you guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sekkes85 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I'm all for 3 on 3. Open ice for 5 minutes is really going to show case a lot of guys talents. Not to mention it will increase scoring during that 5 minute interval and cut down on shootouts. We're a border line playoff team now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OccamsRazor Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I'm all for it to end the game in some semblance of hockey instead of a shootout...let's try it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EDI-Flyer Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Question... So what happens if there is a penalty? Does it go to 3 on 2 or to 4 on 3? 3 on 2 doesn't make any kind of sense to me but what do I know?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 3 on 3 > Shoot out....any time, any where.Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murraycraven Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Why dont they just make them play cross-ice for Christ's sake... OIr maybe hire Sean Avery to jump around iin front of the goalie during extra time. another stupid gimmick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sekkes85 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 From what I understand, it will go to 4 on 3 in the event of a penalty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TropicalFruitGirl26 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I'm ok with 3 on 3 and I agree with most that if 3 on 3 helps reduce the number of shoot outs, then it is a welcome addition.That said, I STILL would have preferred the AHL's model, just tweaking it a bit so that OT starts 4 on 4 for 5 minutes....then there is a mandatory whistle at the 5:00 mark, at which point play will resume with a face off at center ice, but with 3 on 3 for another 5 minutes.IMO, with the skill level of NHL players, that much OT with less players on the ice will surely have games get to SO's less often.The AHL, with their model, have proven that they have a much lower % of games that made it to the SO stage.Besides all that, 4 on 4 followed by 3 on 3 (if necessary) gives the fans more actual hockey and a better feeling about a win or loss because it was settled on the ice by actually playing the game.I'd be ok too with a tie awarded if no one scores after the second 5 min session. But since I realize SO's are here to stay, I guess the SO can be done after 10 total min of reduced skater OT.Also, i would throw in that for the Bolts, I'd like to see The Triplets line start out any 3 on 3. Those guys have such chemistry, that it would be an absolute PLEASURE to see what they could do on a mostly open sheet of ice and the fact that each guy seems to know what the other is going to do before he does it.Sure, this may not be the most defensive of a 3 man unit, but if they click like I've seen them click on many occasions, they won't HAVE to play defense...they'll have this thing over before the time marker reaches two minutes....hehehe.For Minnesota, I'd like to see Zach Parise, Jason Zucker, and Jared Spurgeon (Matt Dumba in place of Spurgeon would work for me too).That 3-man unit would have a bit of everything: Good hard workmanlike attitude and net presence, along with a bit of defensive play from Parise, pure breakaway speed and sniping ability from Zucker, and solid defense, checking, and also, burst of speed and offensive hands from Spurgeon or Dumba attacking from the blue line. PS: Thank you Mr. Mod, whoever you were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottM Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 From what I understand, it will go to 4 on 3 in the event of a penalty That would almost certainly be right. If there's a two man advantage in the 4 on 4 overtime, they go to 5 on 3 instead of 4 on 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 So what would be your teams top 3 on 3 OT line? Crosby, Malkin & Letang. You need a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyercanuck Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Crosby, Malkin & Letang. You need a rocket scientist to figure that one out. More reason to hate 3 on 3 if you're not a Pens fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarsippius Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 I've played hockey for 42 years and nothing about 3-on-3 strikes me as gimmicky. I don't understand this obsession. There are 3-on-3 tournaments and camps all over the place these days because it's the best way to work on both your individual offensive and defensive game. Give me a dozen prospects, put them in random groups of 3 and have them play a round robin tourney. At the end I could tell you easily which 3 prospects to take (not including goalies).I don't get you guys.As I wise man once said here, Podes, I take whatever you say as gospel. But I think there is a difference between the points you raise and whether this is a good way to decide games. I will say that if the propsal was 3 on 3 OT for 10 minutes with a tie if no goal is scored, I'd be 100% behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadDevil Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 The real issue to me isn't the OT format, it's the point system. If you really want to cut down on shootouts, don't make them worth as much. Take away the loser point, make it 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an OT win, and 1 point for a shootout win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.