Nah. If you don’t protect the puck with an extra man, you should lose your PP.

​@@PawpiChoolo penalty is because a player did something wrong it's not just an extra man

@@spikeey228then keep the player in the box and still go back to even strength

Yeah I agree with you

Same here

fck no…if it aint broke dont fix it

Nah, overtime is the most fun time of the game. Same with shootout

I think that that makes it too confusing

They do this already in the european chl. A 2 is a full 2 even if you score too. Penalty shots is with an added 2 for the foul.

In all european top leagues basically north america is the only place where thay use 2-1-0

Wym?!?!? They still have a player advantage as long as they don't give up a shorty which isn't that much to ask I think it's a great idea

I’m in favor of the change. It obviously removes the advantage…you also just got scored on so the team needs to fix it. It encourages more aggression from both teams.

@@thezachster1234 it doesn't remove any advantage the team still has an extra man as long as they don't get scored on

literally how does it remove the advantage

what

my hope is all NHL teams to get their own sister team, that would be legit!

No more expansions are needed. Each side has 16. It’s perfect.

@@9The0Unknown7 The PWHL has 6 teams.

@@19DannyBoy65 there will never be enough interest to expand any further than they already are.. watched a game, very boring

@@shootstraight91 I would prefer they grow their league and their revenue. The NBA has the whole sister team thing, they make WAY more money than the NHL, and the NBA has to spend so much money propping up their sister league. We should not be starting leagues paired to already successful ones. They can get advertising free maybe from them, but the minute that successful team is bankrolling their expenses before they've seen how the league will perform, thats how you end up with the WNBA where some players feel they deserve to be paid more, but they aren't bringing in that money. The NBA affiliate is paying the salary. That model won't work with the NHL. They need to start small, grow their own league, and push for it to be successful without relying on NHL teams to bankroll it.

I did the math in the east and the Leafs and Flyers would drop out of the playoffs and the Redwings and Lightning get bumped into the top 8. The other 6 top teams stay the same but the seedings changed for every team other than Carolina which is 4th in both systems. So its not drastic but it would alter things (according to my quick math).

I'm pretty sure he didn't apply it, but I posted it on his discord as well as in the comments under a few of his videos where he's mentioned it. The one thing that's not factored in (and can't be) by doing the numbers after the fact is it changing how teams play late in tie games. With the current system a team isn't willing to take risks late and would rather lock up 1 point before playing for the 2nd. With the 3-2-1 system you can no longer get the maximum amount of points once overtime starts so teams are incentivized to try to score the winner in regulation. Likewise with a purely win/loss standings, teams might not have the added incentive of lost points at the start of OT but they don't have the incentive of guaranteed points for making it there...instead their decision of how to play would be based on if they think they have a better chance of winning in OT/SO vs in regulation. I still have the full numbers from the 21-22 season... The only change in the playoffs, outside of home ice advantage in various rounds, is from swapping the wildcard teams in the west so COL vs DAL, CGY vs NSH instead of COL vs NSH, CGY vs DAL. Final standings, 3-2-1 (regulation win/OT or SO win/OT or SO loss): COL: 165 -> up 1 (home ice cup final vs FLA) C1 FLA: 164 -> down 1 (road cup final vs COL) A1 CAR: 163 -> M1 TOR: 160 -> A2 CGY: 155 -> up 1 (home ice conference final vs MIN) P1 NYR: 154 -> up 1 (home ice cup final vs MIN) M2 STL: 152 -> up 2 (home ice 1st round vs MIN, cup final vs TBL) C2 MIN: 150 -> down 3 (road 1st round vs STL, road conference final vs CGY, road cup final vs NYR) C3 TBL: 149 -> down 1 (road cup final vs STL) A3 BOS: 147 -> EWC1 EDM: 142 -> P2 PIT: 140 -> M3 WSH: 135 -> EWC2 LAK: 134 -> P2 NSH: 132 -> up 1, WWC1 (play CGY instead of COL) DAL: 129 -> down 1, WWC2 (play COL instead of CGY) VGK: 128 -> still miss playoffs VAN: 124 WPG: 121 NYI: 118 CBJ: 107 BUF: 100 -> up 2 OTT: 99 -> up 3 SJS: 99 -> down 2 ANA: 98 -> down 2 DET: 95 CHI: 84 SEA: 83 -> up 2 NJD: 82 -> down 1 PHI: 81 -> down 1 ARI: 75 MON: 71 From a purely win/loss standings, aside from home ice, BOS jumps into the 3rd spot in the Atlantic so they play TOR in the first round and TBL falls to the top wildcard and plays CAR. Purely win/loss standings: FLA: 58-24 -> A1 COL: 56-26 -> C1 CAR: 54-28 -> M1 TOR: 54-28 -> A2 MIN: 53-29 -> C2 NYR: 52-30 -> up 1 (home ice in cup final vs CGY) M2 BOS: 51-31 -> up 3 (A3 instead of EWC1, play TOR in the 1st round instead of CAR, home ice in ECF vs TBL or STL, home ice cup final vs BOS) TBL: 51-31 -> up 1 (EWC1 instead of A3, play CAR in 1st round instead of TOR, road vs BOS in ECF, home ice in cup final vs CGY) CGY: 50-32 -> down 1 (road in cup final vs NYR, BOS, or TBL) P1 STL: 49-33 -> down 1 (road in cup final vs BOS) EDM: 49-33 -> P2 PIT: 46-36 -> M3 DAL: 46-36 -> up 2 (home ice vs LA in 2nd round or WSH in cup final) WWC1 NSH: 45-37 -> up 2 (home ice vs LA in WCF or WSH in cup final) WWC2 LAK: 44-38 -> (home ice cup final vs WSH, road vs NSH in WCF, road vs DAL in 2nd round) WSH: 44-38 -> down 2 (road in cup final vs LAK or DAL) VGK: 43-39 -> 1st team missing playoffs VAN: 40-42 WPG: 39-43 NYI: 37-45 CBJ: 37-45 OTT: 33-49 -> up 4 BUF: 32-50 -> up 1 SJS: 32-50 -> down 2 DET: 32-50 ANA: 31-51 -> down 3 CHI: 28-54 SEA: 27-55 -> up 2 NJD: 27-55 -> down 1 PHI: 25-57 -> down 1 ARI: 25-57 MON: 22-60

Nah cuz u need to get penalized for a penalty, just scoring on its own is a reward but they should stick out the penalty. I think maybe they could switch the time in the box to 1:30 but idk

@@jacklettuce_99maybe an alternative would be to end the penalty and the advantage but let the player sit for the rest of the penalty

@@jacklettuce_99 I see your point and honestly can’t disagree. But in the other way it would lead to having more strategy and more goals on both side since playing more offensively in 4vs5 would lead to pressure breaking and more change-ups which would lead to more dynamic for both side of the powerplay. Taking 30 seconds from a 2 minutes and 1:15 from a 5 from non misconduct penalties seems to be fair to me.

@@bestbyngthats actually a good idea, ending the deficit but keeping the individual punishment

​@@alexalmostfamouslaft2543everything u jusst said is braindead, u just made everyone who read that alot dumber. Thanx alot

Yes, but in the NHL it also means players take a ton more liberties with opposing players, aren't as careful, more injuries, star players get head hunted and so on. It isnt a rule that will work for the NHL. A penalty is meant to be a punishment stopping a team from trying to drive offense, not a "score and you get off free" rule

Yeah also in Germany

It is used in all of europe I think

I've run the numbers a few times at the end of seasons and it really makes minimal differences in the standings when doing it after the fact. Of course the major difference would be how teams play when tied late in a game. Right now once you reach OT you're guaranteed a point and still have a chance at getting the maximum number (2) of points. If the rule was changed, teams would likely be more willing to take risks since they know once it reaches OT they can no longer get all 3 points.

THANK YOU! It’s about time more than ten fans including players parents show up to a game. Women’s hockey isn’t respected enough.

What do you mean? The wild card is pretty simple

The shorthanded goal one is kinda dumb but the points one isn't bad

The short handed one is stupid and gives the team who received a penalty a bonus for no reason

How does the shorthanded ruke make sense

​@@destro9753how does it reward them? What bonus do they get? Playing with 4 players instead of 5? It just ends the penalty quicker, which is deserved if you can score shorthanded.

@@rosshugecaulk the team that got penalized doesn’t have to deal with the penalty that they got by doing something against the rules. It’d be like letting someone who robbed a store off with a warning as long as they already sold the items they stole. They’re getting a bonus by scoring and the rule that they broke is getting undone as well.

Yeah that’s definitely a fair rule change if it were to happen in the future

why’s that you don’t know them

The NHLPA would never agree to that. Extra play with no additional pay.

They already are. They changed amount of games per season, got rid of ties, 3 on 3 overtime, shootouts, etc.

The only real benefit of the 3-2-1 system is it gives teams tied late in games incentive to try to win in regulation rather than play it safe to lock up the loser point. I've run the numbers a few times at the end of seasons and the changes in the standings were minimal, with the obvious note that it can't factor in teams changing how they'd play if I'm doing it after the fact.

The difference in the standings from changing to the 3-2-1 system or a pure win-loss system is fairly negligible, with the major caveat that it's based on changing the system after the fact and doesn't factor in teams changing how they play late in games (if you're tied late now there's incentive to play prevent defense for the last few minutes, lock up the loser point, and then play for the second point once OT starts, but that would be reduced if you could no longer get the full amount of points once OT starts).

Not to be rude but i do think thats the entire point of implementing it

There are only 2 benefits I see to the 3-2-1 system. The first is that all games will be worth the same number of points (3) regardless of when they end. The second is teams that are tied late will have an incentive to finish out the game in regulation as opposed to avoiding risks to lock up the loser point. Applying the 3-2-1 system to existing seasons after the fact, not factoring in teams changing play style to close out games in regulation, the changes in the standings are actually pretty negligible.

You're misunderstanding. That's still the same in pretty much all leagues. This rule change is that if you go to the box for a minor penalty and your team scores a shorthanded goal, you get out of the box.