clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Poll: 3-on-3 Overtime Aims To Get Rid Of The Shootout: Pass or Fail?

New, comments

No one likes a shootout, it seems. Is it better to drag out the overtime with three a side play?

Scott Rovak-USA TODAY Sports

The general managers have heard the fans' (or read the fans') carping about how much the shootout sucks. No one wants a tight, well-played game decided based upon a skills competition exercise. Even fans of the winning team complain about it.

So sure, T.J. Oshie and Vladimir Tarasenko are shootout clutch performers. Wouldn't you have more fun watching the STL like during an extra 3-on-3 overtime period playing against the opposition's fastest and speediest line?

"We’re trying to make a move to a format that we think is going to decide more games in overtime," said Detroit Red Wings GM Ken Holland, who has been pushing for overtime reform for a long time. "We’re not looking to eliminate shootout. We think the fans like the shootout. But we think the fans will enjoy 3-on-3."

"At the end of the day, we’re happy as a group here going either way," Holland said. "We think both are good solutions. Now we’ll go to the competition committee. That’s the recommendation of the general managers’ group, that we make a change and we’ve got a couple of changes to consider and we’re happy with either change."

Of course, if you go 4-on-4 to 3-on-3, that's extra ice time for your best guys, which means that they're more tired which means there's a bigger chance of injury. You win some, you lose some.