Should the NHL expand 3-on-3 overtime to 10 minutes?
The opening game of the 4 Nations Face-Off was an instant classic.
Canada and Sweden went at it in a game with multiple storylines, culminating with an exciting overtime winner from Canadian forward Mitch Marner that helped the home team grab a 4-3 victory.
The OT period was different from what hockey fans have grown accustomed to in North America. Unlike the NHL, the 3-on-3 overtime was 10 minutes, something the league seems to be experimenting with the extended extra frame. It led to more scoring chances, more back-and-forth play, and a few more players seeing the ice than they would in a typical five-minute overtime.
With the league having had a shootout decide games for 20 seasons, fans have started to grow weary of a skills competition deciding contests.
That leads to Thursday’s edition of Daily Faceoff LIVE, where Frank Seravalli and Tyler Yaremchuk discuss whether the NHL should adopt a 10-minute, 3-on-3 overtime during the regular season.
Frank Servalli: 10 years ago, I wrote something advocating for 10-minute overtime just from a math perspective…if you were to increase it just to nine minutes, that would have at least, according to the math, 93 percent of games end in OT. This one took seven…it would’ve gone to a shootout had it just been five minutes. I think, as much as the stars are taxed, what this should do from a strategic perspective is your thinking all season-long is, you play further into the hands of this game ending because coaches should have to increase the number of players going out.
Tyler Yaremchuk: It will reward depth.
Frank: Forcing you to come up with different solutions so you’re not taxing players in back-to-back situations. That should also increase scoring when you’re going further down your lineup. I’m all for it. I think it’s a worthy change. Anything we can do to eliminate or decrease the number of shootouts that we see is what we should all be advocating for.
You can watch the full segment and entire episode here…