The Hockey East season is still young, but it is not too soon to see the good news/bad news of the new shoot-out format. The good news is that they are fun and really get the fans pumped up. While they never should be used for playoff or championship games (which should be decided by TEAMS not individuals), at least somebody goes home happy. But the bad news is that HE's method of scoring these stunts devalues real victories, be they of the 60 minute or sudden death variety. It won't take long before the coaches and fans start to figure this out. Let me describe three different scenarios to make the point. SCENARIO ONE Northeastern plays UNH home and one and wins both in traditional fashion. BC plays UNH the next weekend, can manage only a tie each time, but is able to win both shoot-outs. According to HE rules both Northeastern and BC end up with four points. Do we really think that those two teams had equivalent weekends with UNH? (Eagles fans should try this mind experiment with neutral teams.) It gets worse. SCENARIO TWO UMass-Lowell goes up to Orono, wins the first night and loses the next. It gets 2 hard earned points for its troubles. UMass-Amherst makes the same trip, has a hot goalie, and gets two ties. As luck would have it, UMass wins one of the shoot-outs and loses the other. It gets 3 points! Since when are two ties better than one win? Let's up the ante. SCENARIO THREE We're a couple of weeks into the season: Podunk is off to a good start, winning three of its first four games. East Overshoe, by contrast, is winless in four attempts. But check the standings: East Overshoe 0 wins 0 loses 4 ties 4 SO 8 points Podunk 3 wins 1 lose 0 ties 0 SO 6 points Do we really believe that four ties are better than 3 wins? I doubt it, but that's what HE's scoring system implies. The punch line: Pretty soon, coaches (and fans) whose TEAMS have won real games will cease to be amused when they see that competitors who have amassed shoot-out points are ahead of them in the standings, and there will be an immediate backlash against the experiment. The problem, however, is not with shoot-outs, but with the scoring system. Here's an alternative: A. Give FIVE points to a team that wins in regulation or overtime. B. Give TWO points to any team that ties. C. Give an EXTRA (or third) point to the team that wins the shoot-out. Thus the total amount of points awarded in a tie are the same as in an outright victory. This solves the "grade inflation problem." Thus in SCENARIO ONE, the team that goes 2-0-0 would have 10 points, as opposed to the team that tied two but won both shoot-outs (6 points). That is much better balance. Ditto for SCENARIO TWO, where the team that goes 1-1-0 gets 5 points, just as does the team that gets two ties and splits the shoot-outs. Finally, in SCENARIO THREE, the team that is 3-1-0 would have an appropriately comfortable lead of 15 points in the standing to 12 for the team with four ties and four shoot-out victories. Depending on how you feel about ties, you can play with the weights, but the simple fact is that if ties generate more points than victories, you undermine the value of genuine wins.