How do you feel about shootouts?

Truth be told, more my issue with the shootout/overtime rules is the loser getting a point.  If we want to keep a team getting one point for holding on until overtime than I really feel that the NHL needs to adopt the 3-2-1 system.  I get that it is a drastic change and would change the annals of history from a team points per year standpoint, but so what.  Teams who lose a game ten seconds into overtime should not make up points on other teams that lose with 5 seconds left.  And if this continues to happen, reward winning in regulation with three points.


ps.....As much of a slap in the face to traditional hockey it is....I kind of like them.  And I would argue that when it goes eight shooters it's even more entertaining.

Imagine if they adopted the IIHF rule where after the first three, the same guy can take every shot from that point on.  Some guys would have like 60 shootout chances a year.

I keep saying this and nobody seems to have a logical rebuttal.

4 on 4 for 5 minutes. If still tied, 3 on 3 until somebody scores.

If games generally take longer than 10 minutes of extra time I'll eat my hat....with marmite.

agree w/ this. someone would score and if not then just have a tie. no trophies for runner ups and no points for losers.

Having Frans Neilsen, the best Shoutout Scorer in NHL History, short history, yes, but it is what it is! the Back hand move is KILLER! And signed for 4 more years now............

IGWT!

Shootouts are done until October or later

Shootouts are fair and fun. Each team gets the same chances and it's fun to watch. Oh, and Pittsburgh is great at them. Speaking from experience, players are too depleted to play any longer. It's not like basesall where you just sit and stand around for hours.

I'd like slumppart2 to explain to me how the shootout allows the Coyotes to make the playoffs and not other teams.

The Devils won 12 games in a shootout for a boat load of extra points that helped them make the playoffs and the Panthers lost a ton of shootouts that those points helped them get into the playoffs.  

The rules in the books are the same for all 30 NHL teams. 

GET OVER IT PEOPLE!!!        

I found a website that actually took the NHL standing and modified them to
1) Count shootout wins/losses as ties instead.
2) Award no extra point for an OT loss.

h--p://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/20
12/04/09/making-sense-of-the-artifi
cial-nhl-standings/

As you can see the results...would be the same 16 teams making the playoffs. 
Not the biggest help to the argument for the shootouts being detrimental to a team making the playoffs or helping weak teams make it.  Yes Dallas would have been a lot closer to making it in the Western Conference but still fell short this year.  While in the Eastern Conference Buffalo would have missed out by a game instead of a game and a half.

With that said looking at those standings there would have been some changes to the playoff picture.

East 
1) Flyers jump Penguins by a point to be the 4 in the East, while the Pens become the road team at 5. 
2 Capitals overtake Panthers by 3pts to win the division and become the 3 seed while the Panthers would have fallen to the 7 slot,
Rangers, Bruins, Devils, and Senators would have the same seeds as they do now.

West
1) Blues would have won the Presidents trophy and been the 1 seed in the West over the Canucks who become the 2.
2) Kings flip with the Sharks by a point to become 7 instead of 8.
Coyotes, Predators, Red Wings and Blackhawks would have the same seeds as they do now.

So the West would look the same in the first round with the exception of which game was designated the 1v8 and which was the 2v7.  While in the East the only changes would be the Bruins and Devils trading opponents, and the Pens/Flyers series starting in Philly.

Yes I realize changing the point standings in retrospect like this doesn't go back in time and change the mindset of coaches whole were playing for the losers point at the end of the third period.  Still when you look at this I find it hard to argue that the shootout propelled teams like Phoenix into the playoffs when they would have won their division in this scenario as well.

Didn't the old system give 1 point for both team that tie anyways. So the only difference is that the SO winner gains a point.

I like shootouts for regular season. Fans aren't happy for a "tie". 

I think shootouts are great for the sport. Instead of having just non-stop OTs they go to a shootout. This makes it great, it draws a lot more viewers. I love seeing shootouts, the great dekes and moves are awesome. Besides, the players love it too.

The Hurricanes (my team) was the polar opposite of the Red Wings...they didnt win their first shootout this season until...game 81 over the last place Canadiens in the final home game. I dont like the shootouts cause why should a 2 point game played hard by two teams be decided on a 1 on 1 skills competition. I think the 3-2-1 concept would be the best way to go....sure it would cause the NHL record books to be changed but give 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for a overtime/so win and 1 point for a overtime shootout loss would be the best way to go. This would be really important at the end of the regular season where playoff positioning is so crucial and that team fighting for the final playoff spot would do anything to get the 3 points to pass that other team. Instead of having ROW (regulation and overtime wins) being so important, it would emphasize regulation wins under my plan...if a team is tied in the standings and they have more regulation wins, that would be the first tie breaker, then overtime wins and finally shootout losses. I would love to see the NHL do like the NFL when it comes to overtime and just play another full period until someone scores, then go to the shootout(it would be only 15 min longer to do so and the NHLPA would object). 

If its tied after OT just draw 2 names out of a hat one from each team and have them fight winner gets extra point.