April 11th, 2010. The Flyers were playing the Rangers in a game that was essentially a play-in game to get to the postseason. The two teams were tied with 86 points each going into the contest, essentially determining that the winner, regardless of how they won, would get to the playoffs.
In a hard-fought 60 minutes and overtime that amounted to a 1-1 tie, the team who would get the 8th seed in the conference was determined by the new addition to ending ties in the sport coming out of the 2005 lockout, the shootout.
In an epic showdown, the Flyers prevailed as Danny Briere scored in the first round and Claude Giroux in the third, with then goaltender Guy Boucher stopping Olli Jokinen to clinch the berth. It was the first time in NHL history that a shootout determined a playoff spot for the victor and sent home the loser.
One could look at this game and its result and say, wow. Everyone’s standing, it’s just the shooter and the goalie, and the heartbreak of defeat and delirium of victory hangs on every attempt. There are others, however, that critique the shootout, myself a little biased when you have Jimmy Howard as your shootout goalie. He himself among other players has called it a “skills competition”, and coach Mike Babcock compares it to baseball with the term “home run hitting contest.”
The shootout obviously has the biggest pro of ending ties and having a winner of the contest, but, having it happen less would make the “skills competition” that much more special. This is where 3-on-3 overtime comes into play.
A brainchild of Red Wings General Manager Ken Holland, 3-on-3 overtime has been a debated topic for years since it was brought up at the Annual General Managers’ Meetings in the past. This past week, the idea gained huge traction as it received massive approval across the board among the league’s general managers. Pending approval from the NHLPA, it will likely take effect starting next season.
“Obviously the consensus in the room, overwhelmingly, is we’re not getting rid of the shootout. It was how do you reduce the number of games that go to the shootout, keep the shootout special?”
-Commissioner Gary Bettman
The shootout is becoming more of a common occurrence, as 58% of games going to overtime end up going to the goalie-shooter duel. To experiment the idea of 3-on-3, the AHL has implemented the format of four-on-four for a minimum of four minutes, and after the first whistle, the last three minutes or less include three-on-three play. The Swedish Elite League has just gone to three-on-three for a full five minutes. The results have been quite dramatic.
Last season, 35% of AHL games that went to overtime finished off before the shootout. This season with the current format, that number has jumped to 77%. The Swedish league’s numbers have doubled according to this circumstance.
Pretty glaring, and thinking of what types of matchups could be possible, it seems like a win-win. The shootout would become more rare, and the league’s biggest stars would be on display in a high-octane environment. I mean, think of Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin, or Steven Stamkos with that open ice together with their defensive partners like Kris Letang, Mike Green, or Victor Hedman? The entertainment value would be immense with the various breakdowns and lead passes that could occur, and it would place that much more value on the regulation/overtime wins column.
Although the 2010 game in Philadelphia was classic as it was, having a game of that magnitude with a format like this would produce as many “season on the line” moments as if it was a game 7 overtime circumstance.
Another rule that passed under the radar to an extent came from Carolina Hurricanes General Manager Ron Francis, which involves offensive zone face-offs.
The current rule states that the defensive player has to put his stick down first on draws, no matter where the zone. The new rule would involve the defensive player putting his stick down first when face-offs are in that player’s zone.
“It’s just a little thing, but as a former center-man I feel there is a definite advantage going in second on draws.”
-Ron Francis
The goal of this seems to be another effort to increase offense that, as we all know, is very hard to come by these days.
The other big proposal among the overtime idea and new face-off regulation included the first real traction of a coach’s challenge.
Under the proposed rule, coaches could ask for a replay if they think a goal deemed a “good goal” should be washed out because of goalie interference or to see if a disallowed goal should count. After the replay, no penalty would be called.
Somewhere, Tomas Holmstrom is saying, “where was this when I was in my office?”
This season, only “a dozen” instances of the 140 in terms of goalie interference were deemed controversial according to Gary Bettman and the GMs. I could name quite a few with #96, but that’s another story.
“Of the dozen, maybe four or five should have been reversed,” Bettman said. “And there were probably two or three in last year’s playoffs that got a lot of attention.”
Much like Ken Holland was adamant about 3-on-3 overtime, Florida Panthers General Manager Dale Tallon was relieved when his idea became a big topic of discussion and eventually approval from his fellow general managers.
“I got voted down 28-2 four years ago. Today, it was 29-1 in favor.”
-Dale Tallon
With the coach’s challenge, it’s about making the better call with the technology available. Officials cannot see everything, and human error happens. This addition would be beneficial for everyone involved, especially the officiating crew.
All in all, with the ideas of 3-on-3, offensive zone faceoff advantage, and a coach’s challenge, the 2015 General Managers’ Meetings brought some interesting possibilities for the years to come. Now, it’s up to what the players think.
Main Photo:
Quotes courtesy of USA Today and News Observer
