Click Here!
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 57
Like Tree70Likes

Thread: 3v3 OT

  1. #1
    1st Scoring Line KopiFan11's Avatar




    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,130
    Liked
    979 times
    Karma
    69693237
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    233 Post(s)

    Default 3v3 OT

    After getting to see a full 2 minutes of 3 on 3 OT last night I thought this would be a perfect opportunity to open a discussion on this, since there has been talks of possibly implementing some type of OT system that would include this.

    I noticed a couple things that I'm wondering that anyone else saw which kind of made me think this wouldn't be the best idea.

    1) It did open up the game a little. There seemed to be a faster back and forth pace on the ice which did get intense and excited. However, it seemed to me that once the teams got in the zone not much was really able to be done. I noticed one play where doughty got the puck at the point and I almost felt like his instinct was to pass it across to blue line like he would typically do, but there obviously was no one there.

    2) Lack of men on ice seemed to make it hard to create a dangerous chances. When there was a chance there was no one to pick up the rebound because of the coverage, or there was lack of any decent traffic to create some chances. I saw doughty get his stick on a shot but it didn't really seem dangerous to me. I also saw a rebound and a wide open net where a player would normally be on a 4v4.

    3) I don't know if this is just NJs playing style that played a part in this but the man on man coverage seemed really tight once the kings got in the zone (I think it was about the same vice versa). My thought on this was perhaps knowing there's only 3 guys on the ice you can play each guy a little tighter knowing there's more open ice so the chance of a second guy coming in to help is less likely?

    Probably need to see more of this type of hockey in the pro leagues to get a better grasp on how it could work out but I don't know if this is an effective solution to a shootout. Any thoughts?
    aragorn likes this.

  2. #2
    1st Scoring Line EB924's Avatar




    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Posts
    1,091
    Liked
    120 times
    Karma
    1020600
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    56 Post(s)

    Default

    I thought it was terrible. Like you said, once they got into the zone there was no one to pass to. The only real chance at anything resembling a scoring play would be to fling the puck at the net from somewhere along the blue line and hope the guy in front can somehow get a deflection. It was boring hockey and didn't do anything to create the kind of pretty plays you would want from more open ice. I really hope they never implement anything like this in the future.
    jom and Stormy2213 like this.

  3. #3
    It's all good man Bogey's Avatar




    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    25,926
    Liked
    5035 times
    Karma
    40025000
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1457 Post(s)

    Default

    I thought it was heart-stopping action the whole time.

    In the zone everyone gets covered?
    Well, it doesn't take much for someone to get away from being covered.

    I thought it was damn great, until Kopitar made that ****-ass pass at the end of it.

  4. #4
    No Kool-Aid needed!!! AllenA07's Avatar




    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,877
    Liked
    449 times
    Karma
    3010000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    100 Post(s)

    Default

    I enjoyed it! There was so much open ice to work that it really was a skills show for the fans. I'll tell you this much, I would much rather have a 3 on 3 OT period then a shootout!

  5. #5
    Concussed Villain Mondo Blando's Avatar




    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    8,000
    Liked
    2677 times
    Karma
    1286346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    771 Post(s)

    Default

    ANYTHING is better than the shootout. I would prefer ties to the shootout.

    3 on 3 is one mistake away from a terrific scoring opportunity, and I was a little surprised that neither team went with two forwards.
    Kubrick, Vargsmal, Bogey and 6 others like this.

  6. #6
    jom
    jom is offline
    Dorkus Malorkus jom's Avatar




    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    6,461
    Liked
    812 times
    Karma
    1050864
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    140 Post(s)

    Default

    A couple of weeks ago Mike Babcock was talking about this. It was his own GM (Holland) who has suggested a 3 on 3 OT (after 5 min) instead of the SO. Babcock didn't agree...he thought they just should play the game as it is. The new rules after the 2005 lockout should have taken care of the problem. Naturally if you open up the game as a whole more games will be won in OT. That was the problem before so if you indeed really did "fix" the game with the new rules (no red line, call holding etc) in 2005 there should have been NO need to change the OT at all, let alone add the shoot out.

    To me if they want to extend OT to 10 min then just do it. If they want 4 on 4 fine but I'd prefer 5 on 5 and after 10 min call it a tie since I think the 3 point game is terrible and artificially condenses the standings.

    jom
    SLOTT, eddieshack23 and dicenerd like this.

  7. #7
    Concussed Villain Mondo Blando's Avatar




    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    8,000
    Liked
    2677 times
    Karma
    1286346
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    771 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AllenA07 View Post
    I enjoyed it! There was so much open ice to work that it really was a skills show for the fans. I'll tell you this much, I would much rather have a 3 on 3 OT period then a shootout!
    Game skills were on display, not just a slam dunk contest. I thought it was pretty cool.
    Christhn likes this.

  8. #8
    I don't rattle, kid. Kubrick's Avatar




    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    15,771
    Liked
    1855 times
    Karma
    1153900
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    467 Post(s)

    Default



    That was a great ending to a hard fought 60 minutes. I'd love to see more of this in the regular season.

  9. #9
    No Kool-Aid needed!!! AllenA07's Avatar




    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,877
    Liked
    449 times
    Karma
    3010000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    100 Post(s)

    Default

    In my perfect world I think I would do a 10 minute OT, with 5 minutes being 4 on 4 and then 5 minutes being 3 on 3. If that doesn't get it done, call it a tie and give each team a point. As said above, I hate the idea of a 3 point game and would love to see it go away.
    Christhn likes this.

  10. #10
    3rd Line Role Player kotonk's Avatar




    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    182
    Liked
    111 times
    Karma
    1015000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    4 Post(s)

    Default

    I say take away the incentive to get the games to OT. No more 3-point games, period. Ties are a point each and winners in OT get 2 and the losers zero.

    All this garbage about deciding a winner on a skills contest after the game cheapens hockey, imho.

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84