NHL Consider Rule changes for Overtime

[SabresBaltimore]

 

This is so dumb. I hate if we don't touch the puck in overtime..but that's on our players..not the rules. The circling back to your own end thing is kind of lame, but not nearly as bad as the "clog up the neutral zone" strategy in 5v5 a ton of teams employ. They going to add rules to "fix" that too?

Meanwhile we still have some games that are worth 2 points and some games that are worth 3. They should fix that first. Also get rid of the shootout. It's terrible.

[Marvin]

What was so wrong with 4 on 4 again?

[MattPie]

12 minutes ago, Marvin said:

What was so wrong with 4 on 4 again?

5 minutes of sludgy hockey that often doesn't accomplish anything is all I remember. People complained about the shootout, so the NHL made sure fewer games go to a shootout with 3-on-3.

[Pimlach]

20 minutes ago, SabresBaltimore said:

 

This is so dumb. I hate if we don't touch the puck in overtime..but that's on our players..not the rules. The circling back to your own end thing is kind of lame, but not nearly as bad as the "clog up the neutral zone" strategy in 5v5 a ton of teams employ. They going to add rules to "fix" that too?

Meanwhile we still have some games that are worth 2 points and some games that are worth 3. They should fix that first. Also get rid of the shootout. It's terrible.

Sounds like the NHL.  Take away advantages that come from talent and skill.  

[IKnowPhysics]

They wanted the increased offense that comes with the puck possession enabled by the more available space in 3-on-3.

Now they don't want the puck possession enabled by the more available space in 3-on-3.

[SabresBaltimore]

I say they either just extend 3 on 3 to 10 minutes or do 5 minutes of 4 on 4 again. If it's still tied, then go to 3 on 3 for another 5 minutes. Get rid of the shootout. Bring back ties.

 

I'd do:

 

Win in regulation: 3
Win in OT: 2
Lose in OT: 1
Tie in OT: 1

Edited November 14, 2023 by SabresBaltimore

[Taro T]

Considering they AREN'T going to get rid of SOs nor gimmicy OT, am ok with this rule change.  Will make OT closer to what they envisioned when they went to it.  They wanted to see teams trading chances w/ end to end rushes.  They didn't want to watch one team control the puck for 3 minutes swapping out their players until they finally get to a point where the fresh guys create a 1 on 0 chance vs the gassed guys on the other team.

It already is significantly different than regulation play (and thankfully from playoff OT), one more difference from them both isn't going to be the straw breaking the camel's back.  That camel's been in Stephen Hawking's wheelchair for years.

Edited November 14, 2023 by Taro T

[shrader]

Just now, Taro T said:

Considering they AREN'T going to get rid of SOs nor gimmicy OT, am ok with this rule change.  Will make OT closer to what they envisioned when they went to it.  They wanted to see teams trading chances w/ end to end rushes.  They didn't want to watch one team control the puck for 3 minutes swapping out their players until they finally get to a point where the fresh guys create a 1 on 0 chance vs the gassed guys on the other team.

It already is significantly different than regulation play (and thankfully from playoff OT), one more difference to them both isn't going to be the straw breaking the camel's back.  That camel's been in Stephen Hawking's wheelchair for years.

What change would they make to prevent this type of cycling though?  Anything I can think of is just going to make it more clunky and will lead to unnecessary whistles.

[Taro T]

Just now, shrader said:

What change would they make to prevent this type of cycling though?  Anything I can think of is just going to make it more clunky and will lead to unnecessary whistles.

Expecting they'd turn it into a lax-style over and back.  If, once you've brought the puck over the opponent's blue line, the puck goes back over the redline without the other team controlling it then the other team takes over at that point.  And playing the puck when you've lost control of it results in a 1 minute penalty.

Not sure if that should apply to missed slap shots as well or not.  Because expect we'd see a lot of intentional misses when a team wants to regroup if they can't just skate it out of danger.

[Mustache of God]

I like this, I hate when teams skate into the O-zone , cycle a bit and then back out to their zone. 

I've said it in the past but I've always liked the idea that you can't carry the puck back across more than 2 lines.

 

[Taro T]

And personally, because it's the NHL and almost nothing they do works out like they expect, would not be at all surprised to see the net result of this rule change being more games get to a SO, as both teams' skaters will be closer to the same level of exhaustion as the other througout more of the OT.  If that's the case, there'll be more scoring chances in OT but likely lesser quality than we currently see.

[shrader]

1 minute ago, Taro T said:

Expecting they'd turn it into a lax-style over and back.  If, once you've brought the puck over the opponent's blue line, the puck goes back over the redline without the other team controlling it then the other team takes over at that point.  And playing the puck when you've lost control of it results in a 1 minute penalty.

Not sure if that should apply to missed slap shots as well or not.  Because expect we'd see a lot of intentional misses when a team wants to regroup if they can't just skate it out of danger.

Any penalty makes me worry about adding in more stoppages in play.  I want less whistles.  I also worry about any change where an errant pass could somehow lead to a penalty. 

Expanding the offensive zone back to the red line after entry was my initial thought until I saw the part about wanting to lessen the circling back stuff.  I feel like it would happen just as much with that expanded zone.  We're right back to preventing the offensive team from cycling back even further, requiring a whistle or penalty.  I think they're stuck with what they have right now.  And is it really all that bad?  The five minutes are up in the blink of an eye.

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

And personally, because it's the NHL and almost nothing they do works out like they expect, would not be at all surprised to see the net result of this rule change being more games get to a SO, as both teams' skaters will be closer to the same level of exhaustion as the other througout more of the OT.  If that's the case, there'll be more scoring chances in OT but likely lesser quality than we currently see.

I saw this after posting.  Yep, my thoughts exactly.  Anything they do is just going to snowball into some new problem bigger than the last.

[Taro T]

5 minutes ago, shrader said:

Any penalty makes me worry about adding in more stoppages in play.  I want less whistles.  I also worry about any change where an errant pass could somehow lead to a penalty. 

Expanding the offensive zone back to the red line after entry was my initial thought until I saw the part about wanting to lessen the circling back stuff.  I feel like it would happen just as much with that expanded zone.  We're right back to preventing the offensive team from cycling back even further, requiring a whistle or penalty.  I think they're stuck with what they have right now.  And is it really all that bad?  The five minutes are up in the blink of an eye.

I saw this after posting.  Yep, my thoughts exactly.  Anything they do is just going to snowball into some new problem bigger than the last.

There is ONLY a penalty if the team that just let the puck get back over to its side of the red line continues to play it or shoots it down the ice to force the other team to start deep in it's own end.  Do it EXACTLY the way they do in lax.  It keeps the play flowing quickly.  

As mentioned above, not sure that an errant shot should result in that over and back as they don't want to discourace actual attempts to score; but if a shot can be regathered from the team's own side of the redline it will get used as a dump pass.

A team could take the puck back over the blue line without repercussion, but they'd need to be onsides to control it back in the zone and would lose the puck if it goes back over the red line.  That SHOULD result in more turnovers as will not being able to take the puck all the way back into a team's own D zone.

If you look at them making the rule to be similar to the lax rule it's much easier to wrap your head around it.

[Taro T]

And would hope that this would be another rule they experiment with in the AHL before bringing it full time into the NHL.  There certainly will be a lot of kinks to get ironed out.  Let the farm teams deal with learning how to work with it and then if the idea is workable, THEN try it in the NHL.

And again, would prefer they either simply do away with OT altogether or play 5v5 for 20 more minutes and if the game is still a tie, so be it.  But that ship sailed years ago and barring major transportation issues making missing a scheduled flight becoming a real concern we're never going back to the way the league modified play to keep teams getting onto their trains in time to get to the next city back during WWII.

[shrader]

2 hours ago, Taro T said:

There is ONLY a penalty if the team that just let the puck get back over to its side of the red line continues to play it or shoots it down the ice to force the other team to start deep in it's own end.  Do it EXACTLY the way they do in lax.  It keeps the play flowing quickly.  

As mentioned above, not sure that an errant shot should result in that over and back as they don't want to discourace actual attempts to score; but if a shot can be regathered from the team's own side of the redline it will get used as a dump pass.

A team could take the puck back over the blue line without repercussion, but they'd need to be onsides to control it back in the zone and would lose the puck if it goes back over the red line.  That SHOULD result in more turnovers as will not being able to take the puck all the way back into a team's own D zone.

If you look at them making the rule to be similar to the lax rule it's much easier to wrap your head around it.

I guess I'm not really aware of exactly how the lacrosse rule works.  So if a loose ball goes back across center, the offense can't touch it?  I'd be a little worried how that would translate over to the smaller surface of play and only 6 total skaters on the ice.

But then again, we already have these spots during the normal course of a game where a team essentially retreats in order to make a change.  How often do you see the defenseman just sitting behind his own net while everyone changes?  I'm not sure why we're fussing over 5 minutes of bonus hockey.  I enjoy most of those that I see.  Yeah, it's going to get lopsided sometimes, that's life.  It happens during regulation too.

[Thorner]

Please change it. 3 v 3 became as much a gimmick as the shootout years ago 

Horrendous “hockey” 

[matter2003]

What's next? A shot clock in OT?  

[LabattBlue]

I HATE the skate it out of the offensive zone while maintaining possession.  It should result in an immediate faceoff in the teams own end….or even more severe, a 2 min delay of game penalty. 
 

While they are it, make 3 on 3 10 min, and get rid of the shootout.  Any game still tied after 10 min is a tie. 

[thewookie1]

3 hours ago, SabresBaltimore said:

I say they either just extend 3 on 3 to 10 minutes or do 5 minutes of 4 on 4 again. If it's still tied, then go to 3 on 3 for another 5 minutes. Get rid of the shootout. Bring back ties.

 

I'd do:

 

Win in regulation: 3
Win in OT: 2
Lose in OT: 1
Tie in OT: 1

Never ties

[Thorner]

3 hours ago, SabresBaltimore said:

I say they either just extend 3 on 3 to 10 minutes or do 5 minutes of 4 on 4 again. If it's still tied, then go to 3 on 3 for another 5 minutes. Get rid of the shootout. Bring back ties.

 

I'd do:

 

Win in regulation: 3
Win in OT: 2
Lose in OT: 1
Tie in OT: 1

Wouldn’t mind ties after 60, tbh

we do we need a “winner” in game 43 of a regular season consisting of 82 games by which the games are a means to a total points accumulation

A tie is a result 

[North Buffalo]

Interesting