Mike Machnik write:
 
>Folks who were around last summer may recall that I posted a
>questionnaire dealing with the then-proposed shootout and presented
>the results to Hockey East.  The sentiment at that time was heavily
>against the shootout as proposed, with many respondents indicating
>that they had no problem with games ending in ties.
 
I voted against the shootout in that poll as well.
 
>The league adopted the measure anyways, but I can tell you that the
>results were indeed reviewed by the commissioner.
 
Did you provide them to him or did he pull them of Hockey-l?
 
>We shouldn't expect that any poll will affect policy as such.  But
>this doesn't mean that the concerns were ignored.
 
I can understand them going ahead with the experiment, however I would think
the same poll this year would carry more weight, if indeed they covet opinions
expressed in polls such as this.  You try something folks react to it, you
decide to keep it or trash it.  The problem with my poll is that it's limited
the those who take the time to reply and it only represents a small number of
fans.  Also as others have noted the poll I'm taking doesn't offer alternative
solutions.  In other words it's only a bitching poll, no substance.
 
>I am inclined to think chances are good that the shootout will not be
>around next year.  I have no inside info and the league has not actually
>gotten together and discussed the issue, but it seems that a majority
>of coaches, at least, may favor getting rid of it.  I wouldn't put it
>past them to come up with something different, but that is only my
>opinion and I'm not sure what it could be.  One possibility I have
>thought of is to encourage fewer ties by awarding points to OT losers.
>This could involve each game being worth 4 pts: 4 for a regulation
>in, 3 for an OT win, 2 for a tie, 1 for an OT loss, and 0 for a
>regulation loss.  I will admit that I'm not convinced that even this
>would result in more teams trying to win a game in regulation or in OT.
 
I hope your right and they dump it!  I don't think teams play for a tie. Then
again if a team can set on a lead by clogging the neutral zone, or playing a
neutral zone trap, then I guess they could play for a tie if it was all that
was needed to secure a position in the standings.  However, the same could be
said for the shootout.  I expected Maine would have been the best in league
at shootouts and that Walsh would have made sure of this... then if you play
for the tie you do it to get the shootout points.  This would have been a
good strategy before the point system was changed... now the win is clearly
worth more then the OT with shootout win.  Under the old 2-1 system I think
both teams are more then motivated to play for the win... in most all cases.
 
Regards,
        Nick