NHL Current +5 Draft : CHAT

[Nosferatu]

3 on 3 and the SO are just gimicks to end the game, they will not be used in the playoffs so in all honesty it's not part of the game it's just the best way they could think of to get rid of ties.

 

[UK Cowboy]

Max is gone UK

Thanks, re pick is in

 

[UK Cowboy]

@Pack 500

 

[Nosferatu]

I will text 500

 

[Mebert]

Sorry but you literally don't get it.

THE ONLY REASON WE HAVE 3 ON 3 is SO THE GAME ENDS.

There would never ever ever ever ever ever be 3 on 3 hockey deciding a game where one team outright is the loser.

In baseball extra innings does each team lose an infielder and outfielder?

Basketball go with out a PG?

Football with a 9 man defense?

The wild deserve their points because they are routinely in hockey games. And the only way to beat them is in a format that isn't actually hockey

I guess that is the major issue then, why have over time at all? they might as well just call it as time expires no matter what and then give 1 point to each team? if the whole process is arbitrary why have it?

 

[Nosferatu]

I guess that is the major issue then, why have over time at all? they might as well just call it as time expires no matter what and then give 1 point to each team? if the whole process is arbitrary why have it?

Because ties suck more.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

I guess that is the major issue then, why have over time at all? they might as well just call it as time expires no matter what and then give 1 point to each team? if the whole process is arbitrary why have it?

Basically because no one likes ties. So instead they are rewarding those teams(like you mentioned) that obtain good SO players and 3 on 3 players by giving them chance at an extra point.

So what you are arguing for is already in effect. The wild are in fact being penalized for sucking at 3 on 3......they have missed out on 10 pts because of it.

 

[Mebert]

Because ties suck more.

I would rather have a tie then waste everyone time.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Well I just had 3 guys I considered taking but didn't know how they would be viewed

turns out all 3 are long gone lol. Apparently that wouldnt have been an issue.

 

[Nosferatu]

I would rather have a tie then waste everyone time.

Most folks want a winner and a loser.

 

[Mebert]

Most folks want a winner and a loser.

They are not really getting that from the current system. Sure they claim a winner, but based on the scoring and the structure it is not really the case.

 

[Mebert]

Most folks want a winner and a loser.

If basketball went overtime and they awarded the win to whoever could eat the most apples in 10 minutes is there really a winner and a loser? If the answer is to have something so unrecognizable that you don't even want to call it Hockey what is the point? seems like a senseless risk to the players health to add no real value.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

If basketball went overtime and they awarded the win to whoever could eat the most apples in 10 minutes is there really a winner and a loser? If the answer is to have something so unrecognizable that you don't even want to call it Hockey what is the point? seems like a senseless risk to the players health to add no real value.

3 on 3 is reducing the risk lol

that again, is the whole point to it.

Some teams will just be good at it. The wild and stars have played 5 great games this year. Stars won 3 in OT all thanks to Benn/Seguin/Klingberg. Its to quickly end a game and reduce wear and tear while giving the fans the enjoyment they paid for, having a winner and partially rewarding the loser

hockey is different sport from the other 3. Far more frequent OT's and less chance to settle it because scoring is lower.

 

[Nosferatu]

If basketball went overtime and they awarded the win to whoever could eat the most apples in 10 minutes is there really a winner and a loser? If the answer is to have something so unrecognizable that you don't even want to call it Hockey what is the point? seems like a senseless risk to the players health to add no real value.

Lets think about how much more stressful it is on the body to play hockey for 25 minutes than it is basketball for 35 minutes and you'll have your answer. It isn't senseless because you still have a chance to pick up an additional point.

 

[Nosferatu]

I'm a bit surprised Johnny isn't calling for a skip...

 

[Mebert]

Lets think about how much more stressful it is on the body to play hockey for 25 minutes than it is basketball for 35 minutes and you'll have your answer. It isn't senseless because you still have a chance to pick up an additional point.

I guess we will agree to disagree on this. It is a part of the sport or it isn't, you will never get me to agree that a reward for a loss is a good idea.

I know hockey has more over times and is more stressful on the body, but either OT is a real part of the game, and you reward a win and not a loss, or it is not, and why bother? If the overtime becomes so fundamentally different from the actual sport that you need special point allowances you have a error in the basic structure of your system.

 

[Nosferatu]

I guess we will agree to disagree on this. It is a part of the sport or it isn't, you will never get me to agree that a reward for a loss is a good idea.

I know hockey has more over times and is more stressful on the body, but either OT is a real part of the game, and you reward a win and not a loss, or it is not, and why bother? If the overtime becomes so fundamentally different from the actual sport that you need special point allowances you have a error in the basic structure of your system.

The NHL came up with the best way to make sure there was a winner and loser without wearing out the players. The NFL doesn't use their regular season OT rules in the playoffs either and there are far less ties in the NFL.

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Dude you are being rewarded for a win. You get the extra point.

Once again, if things we're different and there was no awarding for a loss then every team would get 1 pt instead of 2. And the game wouldn't be 3 on 3.

Your gripe is basically the wild and the Aves and in realty it's the Wild being affected by the format. But I love it because it's good for the game even if not my team.

 

[broncosmitty]

I would rather have a tie then waste everyone time.

Who doesn't like overtime hockey?

 

[mr.hockey4242]

Who doesn't like overtime hockey?

Especially playoff hockey. And then it's 5 on 5. And many times they go on for an extra 20-40 minutes.

Which proves why for regular season 3 on 3 is needed. But a pt has to be awarded for losing