This has been suggested a few times now and I'm glad to see it getting more support. As much as some people hate 3v3 and/or the shootout I find them exciting enough for regular season and they provide a quick ending to the game which is a big reason why they were implemented. If anything maybe extend 3v3 up to 10 mins and shootouts will become very rare.
- Crisp

The fly in that ointment is that if the game goes to OT or a shootout, the team that loses in OT or the shootout did not lose the hockey game.

The fly in that ointment is that if the game goes to OT or a shootout, the team that loses in OT or the shootout did not lose the hockey game.
- MJL

Valid point but I don't see 3v3 going away. A 10 minute 5v5 OT would most likely avoid many shootouts under the suggested 2-2-1 point format as well.
I'm assuming you support ties and 1 point each awarded which is a fair system. It would be almost impossible for the NHL to get rid of OT though. I would personally hate to see it go.

Gary's owners won't like that...no beer or food sales for OT??

lol
- LordHumungous

Gary and the owners will do whatever Ek tells them to do. Ek was in touch with the league.

Valid point but I don't see 3v3 going away. A 10 minute 5v5 OT would most likely avoid many shootouts under the suggested 2-2-1 point format as well.
I'm assuming you support ties and 1 point each awarded which is a fair system. It would be almost impossible for the NHL to get rid of OT though. I would personally hate to see it go.
- Crisp

I don't support extending the OT period. I think ties suck. I have no issue with the 3 on 3 OT or the shootout. I think if a game is tied after regulation play, both team need to get points from that. I want every game to be worth the same amount of points in the standings. Not one game to be worth 2 points and another worth 3 points.

I think 3 points for a regulation win....OR....go back to the old format of 2 points for a win and 1 point each for a tie.....No overtime or shootouts

I don't support extending the OT period. I think ties suck. I have no issue with the 3 on 3 OT or the shootout. I think if a game is tied after regulation play, both team need to get points from that. I want every game to be worth the same amount of points in the standings. Not one game to be worth 2 points and another worth 3 points.
- MJL

Not sure what you're suggesting then. You want OT, each team getting a point, and all games worth 2 points? That means ties award a point apiece and you play OT for no points? Nobody will support that Lol.

The option I would put forth would be to have teams earn two points for a regulation win, and one point for an OT win. No shootout, no time limit on OT, play until you lose. This puts so much stress on earning the win in regulation, ditches the god awful shootout and gets rid of the pity point.

Not sure what you're suggesting then. You want OT, each team getting a point, and all games worth 2 points? That means ties award a point apiece and you play OT for no points? Nobody will support that Lol.
- Crisp

Regulation win 3 points
OT and shootout, winning team 2 points, losing team 1 point.

All games worth 3 points.

I think 3 points for a regulation win....OR....go back to the old format of 2 points for a win and 1 point each for a tie.....No overtime or shootouts
- weener1958

whats wrong with playing until there's a winner? except for the tv station that has to play the overtime, and it screws up their show allotment...

I don't support extending the OT period. I think ties suck. I have no issue with the 3 on 3 OT or the shootout. I think if a game is tied after regulation play, both team need to get points from that. I want every game to be worth the same amount of points in the standings. Not one game to be worth 2 points and another worth 3 points.
- MJL

Yes, both teams deserve a point if they play to a tie after regulation.

Yes, all games should be worth the same amount of points.

The current system sucks for anyone looking to make any sense out of it, except the obvious desire to create the illusion that more teams are in it for longer.

whats wrong with playing until there's a winner? except for the tv station that has to play the overtime, and it screws up their show allotment...
- 77emac77

You answered your own question.

Here's one...

What is wrong with a tie? It worked for decades. I don't think my enjoyment of watching a game went up when they brought in OT/SO

3 v 3 is fun. If we enjoy it so much, how long until 3 on 3 or 4 on 4 becomes the normal game also. Players are bigger and faster cover more space, hit harder etc. isn't it time we went to 4 on 4?

Yes, both teams deserve a point if they play to a tie after regulation.

Yes, all games should be worth the same amount of points.

The current system sucks for anyone looking to make any sense out of it, except the obvious desire to create the illusion that more teams are in it for longer.
- Aetherial

That is the entire reason for it. To create artificial parity. For example, the team I root for, the Flyers appear to still have a chance to make the playoffs when in reality they have little chance.

Where the heck is EK today? I get his beloved Flyers were playing today and the trademime has passed but that does not excuse him from posting. We the people need a good chuckle today, just like every other day he posts something whacky on here.

If the game is tied with 10 minutes left why wouldn't teams play for a tie/OT when they are garunteed a point? That's exactly what they do because it's the obvious strategy. The NHL needs to get rid of that mentality. 3 points for any W and 1 for an OT loss nerfs the loser point but won't change the team's mindset of playing for OT and getting the garunteed point. The point for losing must go. I don't think going back to ties would fix this either. Professional teams need to play to win, not tie.

If the game is tied with 10 minutes left why wouldn't teams play for a tie/OT when they are garunteed a point? That's exactly what they do because it's the obvious strategy. The NHL needs to get rid of that mentality. 3 points for any W and 1 for an OT loss nerfs the loser point but won't change the team's mindset of playing for OT and getting the garunteed point. The point for losing must go. I don't think going back to ties would fix this either. Professional teams need to play to win, not tie.
- Crisp

You clearly have never watched hockey. Do you have any stats to show that games that are tied with 10 minutes left in the third end up tied by the end of the third. You say "That's exactly what they do" yet you provide zero evidence.

10 minutes of hockey is a (frank) ton of hockey. If you wanted to say something like "teams that are tied in the last two minutes of the game are less likely to take big risks to make offensive plays" then that would be more reasonable. But you still couldn't declare "that's exactly what they do" without even attempting to provide facts to back this up.

There is no point for losing. There is a point for being tied after 60 minutes of hockey - which precedes some super fun skills competition OT and shootout.

Let's start calling the loser point the hockey point because that is what it is. I like the current system. If a change is deemed necessary than it should be 3 for a reg win. And 2 for ot win, 1 for ot loss. exactly three points given per game....

But I'm in favor of the current system. It does not create false parity at all. Parity creates parity and parity is real.

There are coaches on record stating this strategy. Google it.

There are coaches on record stating this strategy. Google it.
- Crisp

You are the one making claims that NHL teams play for ties with 10 minutes in the third, which is absurd...so you google that and share it with us. Or dont make the claim.

I dont need to google something stupid that was said online without any evidence. Now...I would expect a team with much lesser talent to play differently because of their lack of talent.

In Babcocks first year with the leafs we were corsi gods, but we had very little offensive talent...couldnt score worth poop...he probably did say...lets get pucks on net....

nowadays the Leafs are good and win games but they are corsi duds...but it makes more sense for talented players to hold onto the puck and find better scoring opportunities instead of flinging random rubber in the direction of a goalie

You are the one making claims that NHL teams play for ties with 10 minutes in the third, which is absurd...so you google that and share it with us. Or dont make the claim.

I dont need to google something stupid that was said online without any evidence. Now...I would expect a team with much lesser talent to play differently because of their lack of talent.

In Babcocks first year with the leafs we were corsi gods, but we had very little offensive talent(edit...also finished last)...couldnt score worth poop...he probably did say...lets get pucks on net....

nowadays the Leafs are good and win games but they are corsi duds...but it makes more sense for talented players to hold onto the puck and find better scoring opportunities instead of flinging random rubber in the direction of a goalie
- Njuice

Eklund: Fixing The NHL: 3 points for a regulation win or more Yes or No and Why?
- Eklund

I have brought this up with the NHL .....

Not sure if screaming at the NHL logo on your TV or phone really counts there Ek

I like reading about ideas, especially hockey ideas. Throw something out there, and let’s debate. Who are the great minds that get to decide that Ek or any blogger on here is “an idiot”? Everyone here hides behind an alias and picks on others because...they are hidden.

I do not know any of you, and I have no idea who Ek is, so I have no “dog in the fight” but could we keep this to a hockey discussion? In order to elevate yourselves, please bring thoughts, not put downs. Focus on the game. It is more enjoyable and productive and for all.

Respect, Peace and love.

I like reading about ideas, especially hockey ideas. Throw something out there, and let’s debate. Who are the great minds that get to decide that Ek or any blogger on here is “an idiot”? Everyone here hides behind an alias and picks on others because...they are hidden.

I do not know any of you, and I have no idea who Ek is, so I have no “dog in the fight” but could we keep this to a hockey discussion? In order to elevate yourselves, please bring thoughts, not put downs. Focus on the game. It is more enjoyable and productive and for all.

Respect, Peace and love.

I like reading about ideas, especially hockey ideas. Throw something out there, and let’s debate. Who are the great minds that get to decide that Ek or any blogger on here is “an idiot”? Everyone here hides behind an alias and picks on others because...they are hidden.

I do not know any of you, and I have no idea who Ek is, so I have no “dog in the fight” but could we keep this to a hockey discussion? In order to elevate yourselves, please bring thoughts, not put downs. Focus on the game. It is more enjoyable and productive and for all.

Respect, Peace and love.
- TC4145

Ek?

I like reading about ideas, especially hockey ideas. Throw something out there, and let’s debate. Who are the great minds that get to decide that Ek or any blogger on here is “an idiot”? Everyone here hides behind an alias and picks on others because...they are hidden.

I do not know any of you, and I have no idea who Ek is, so I have no “dog in the fight” but could we keep this to a hockey discussion? In order to elevate yourselves, please bring thoughts, not put downs. Focus on the game. It is more enjoyable and productive and for all.

Respect, Peace and love.
- TC4145

I get a kick out of people criticizing Ek while we all come on to his website that he probably makes a really good living off of. I wish I had the guts, smarts and ability to do what he has done and what he has created!

The fly in that ointment is that if the game goes to OT or a shootout, the team that loses in OT or the shootout did not lose the hockey game.
- MJL

Huh??. A loss in regulation or a loss in overtime or a loss in a shootout is what was said three times... A loss. You win or you lose. There should be no such thing as a tie. Maybe I'm a bit harsh but I do like the 2-2-1.... Sorry just my opinion lol

I get a kick out of people criticizing Ek while we all come on to his website that he probably makes a really good living off of. I wish I had the guts, smarts and ability to do what he has done and what he has created!

- MJL

He created a niche, which is great! It was needed for hockey fans. To think that people actually come here for rumors or internal hockey dealings is laughable. I personally have made some friends with people Ive actually met from this site, We have sat down and broken bread, many times. Id like to think that is more likely to happen then Ek actually getting a rumor correct