|
 |
|
|
December 10, 2004
Blogger Feedback
Yesterday, I gave my buddy Ben Wright a friendly nudge saying he had inadvertently made a case for adopting the shootout as a way to decide OT hockey games in the postseason. So he decided to think on it a little more: [I was] 14 years old when I watched Peter Forsberg beat Corey Hirsch in the shootout to decide the gold medalist in the 1994 Winter Olympics and I can honestly say it was the most exciting hockey moment in my life up to that point and remains the only significant hockey I've ever watched with my mother. She ate it up . . . Let's review this: In his original post, Ben said that goals scored at the end of multiple OT games were often boring. And, while he has a philosophical problem with the shootout, the one time he did watch one it provided, "the most exciting hockey moment in my life," -- one that even hooked a casual fan like his mother. What's not to like? I should also credit Costa Tsiokos for his important contribution to the debate both in terms of the business and entertainment end of the question. For more, click here for what a Soccer shootout is like. And one last time (until I choose to bring it up again) -- Here's the Off Wing plan for OT reform: If a game is tied at the end of regulation time in the playoffs, the two teams will play overtime. The overtime will be played 4-on-4, in two ten minute sudden death periods. If the game is still tied at the end of the first sudden death period, a second ten minute period will be played. If the game is still tied at the end of the second OT period, the game will be decided by a shootout. Over at Capitol Punishment, Chris Needham took me to task for an admittedly snarky comment I made at the close of a post on the future of baseball blogging. As I wrote: Shaikin also addresses some of the limitations of arm chair GMs:While many blogs tend to use sabermetric tools in analysis and commentary - and often make compelling points in doing so - the best bloggers understand that decisions are not made in a statistical vacuum. After the Dodgers-Marlins trade July 30, I read blogs in which DePodesta was crowned as the winner of the trade on the basis of VORP alone. But there are many other factors that even DePodesta would tell you he would consider - salaries in current and future seasons, eligibility for salary arbitration, minor league depth at various positions, the upcoming class of free agents, etc. that statistics alone do not tell the story. To which Chris responded, in part: From what I've read on the various Nats blogs, I haven't really seen that problem. In fact, the issues other than basic statistics, have been EXACTLY the reason why Bowden has been criticized so roundly for his signings to this point . . . Point taken, and I'm sorry if anyone took offense, especially because I've worked pretty hard to defend Sabermetrics against some incredibly thoughtless attacks. Suffice to say, I thought the tone of some of the posts out there was getting a little shrill, especially since the team had yet to take the field. Which is probably what I should have wrote in the first place.
Eric
12:38 PM
Trackback PingsTrackBack URL for this entry: CommentsI guess the issue is whether or not the most exciting way is the most worthy way of deciding a hockey game. It might win more fans but does that make it right? From an entertainment standpoint yes- from a competitive, sporting standpoint, maybe not. Think of it as a hockey fight. They don't really contribute much to the outcome of the game and philosophically they don't really belong in this day and age but how many people do you see staying in their seats when one breaks out at a game? They're as entertaining and exciting as can be (like a shootout) but they don't necessarily have a place in the game. This coming from a guy that loves a good fight. Of any of the proposed OT reform proposals out there the Offwing plan is probably my favourite that includes a shootout. Posted by: at December 10, 2004 04:18 PM Re: Nats The team has taken the field, as the Expos, for 30-plus years now, i.e. everyone already knows its a sh*tty team with not enough youth. Posted by: at December 10, 2004 05:23 PM The thing is, if you increase scoring in the NHL, statistically that would mean fewer ties. The league should be able to kill two birds here fairly easily — create a more exciting on-ice produce and also eliminate ties — all they need to do is get more pucks going in. At its best, hockey is a 5-4 game. And I hear you... shootouts scare me too. As exciting as they sound for some matchups, how would you like to see Scott Walker plodding in on Alex Auld? Posted by: at December 10, 2004 07:37 PM As a hockey traditionalist yet at the same time a fan bored by interminable playoff overtimes I would settle for a shootout after a second o/t since by then the teams have played themselves into exhaustion. The o/t's should be the standard 20 minute periods played 5 aside. This allows ample time for a hero to emerge and if one doesn't there is always the shoot-out an exciting but isolated aspect of hockey. Posted by: at December 10, 2004 11:26 PM What is VORP? Posted by: at December 10, 2004 11:28 PM I've seen shootouts in the minor leagues and the impress me as a bore. Same with penalty shots for that matter. Posted by: at December 11, 2004 07:35 PM Post a commentThanks for signing in, . (If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.) |