Puck Daddy - NHL

Puck Daddy

Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:00 pm EST

Yes, in fact penalized players have won shootouts before

By Greg Wyshynski

Earlier today, we blogged about the shootout and how players who are serving a penalty when the 4-on-4 overtime ends should have some form of sanction for the shootout. In the post, reader Cory S. thought it "would be interesting to see just how many penalized players with time remaining to serve have then gone out to score in the shoot out."

Puck Buddy Will, a.k.a. "hockeymaster4789" (sounds like a cyborg Lou Lamoriello unleashes to make players with fat contracts disappear) decided to waste the better part of a morning to meet that challenge, a least for the last two seasons.

What he found are a couple of examples in which a player in the penalty box at the end of the 4-on-4 helped win the game for his team in the shootout; and yes, one of those examples is a certain goaltender for the Dallas Stars pictured here.

Here's what Will found for the 2009-10 season:

When the winning team ended the game a man down:

October 31: Florida 6, Dallas 5 - Bryan McCabe(notes) for elbowing, Rostislav Olesz(notes) wins it.

When the losing team ended the game a man down:

November 21: Nashville 4, CLB 3 - Rick Nash(notes) for hooking, David Legwand(notes) wins it.
November 12: DAL 3, San Jose 2 - Kent Huskins(notes) for hooking, Stephane Robidas(notes) wins it.
November 11: Chicago 3, Colorado 2 - Wojtek Wolski(notes) for cross checking, Patrick Sharp(notes) wins it.
October 30: Pittsburgh 4, CLB 3 - Jakub Voracek(notes) for hooking, Sidney Crosby(notes) wins it.
October 24: Boston 4, Ottawa 3 - Anton Volchenkov(notes) for tripping, Patrice Bergeron(notes) wins it.
October 20: Montreal 2, Atlanta 1 - Slava Kozlov(notes), 5-min major for checking from behind, Scott Gomez(notes) wins it.
October 6: Carolina 2, Tampa Bay 1 - David Hale(notes) for tripping, Sergei Samsonov(notes) wins it.

For 2008-09:

When the winning team ended the game a man down:

April 11: PHX 5, ANA 4 - Shane Doan(notes) for holding (actually, Andrew Ebbett(notes) was already in the box for tripping, so it would have been 3-on-3), Viktor Tikhonov(notes) wins it.
April 8: CBJ 4, CHI 3 - Fedor Tyutin(notes) for hooking, Fedor Tyutin wins it.
March 24: TOR 3, WSH 2 - Pavel Kubina(notes) for hooking, Jeff Hamilton(notes) wins it.
March 19: ANA 3, PHX 2 - Chris Pronger(notes) for holding, Bobby Ryan(notes) wins it.
February 24: LAK 2, MIN 1 - Sean O'Donnell(notes) for slashing, Drew Doughty(notes) wins it.
February 16: DAL 3, CBJ 2 - Marty Turco(notes) for tripping, James Neal(notes) wins it, Marty Turco in net.
January 21: BOS 4, TOR 3 - Martin St. Pierre(notes) for tripping, Michael Ryder(notes) wins it.
December 11: PHI 6, CAR 5 - Philadelphia bench minor for too many men, Simon Gagne(notes) wins it.
November 18: MIN 2, PIT 1 - Brent Burns(notes) for high-sticking, Marek Zidlicky(notes) wins it.
November 8: PIT 4, NYI 3 - Mike Zigomanis(notes) for high-sticking (double minor), Petr Sykora(notes) wins it.
October 21: BUF 3, BOS 2 - Teppo Numminen(notes) for hooking, Thomas Vanek(notes) wins it.
October 20: PIT 2, BOS 1 - Jordan Staal(notes) for slashing (Marc Savard(notes) was already in the box for hooking, so it would have been 3-on-3), Evgeni Malkin(notes) wins it.
October 10: BUF 2, MTL 1 - Jaroslav Spacek(notes) for tripping, Ales Kotalik(notes) wins it.

When the losing team ended the game a man down:

April 9: NSH 4, DET 3 - Henrik Zetterberg(notes) for hooking, Jason Arnott(notes) wins it.
February 14: EDM 3, LAK 2 - Jack Johnson(notes) for hooking, Sam Gagner(notes) wins it.
February 13: BUF 6, SJS 5 - Christian Ehrhoff(notes) for kneeing AND Marc-Edouard Vlasic(notes) for slashing, Derek Roy(notes) wins it.
February 10: LAK 4, NYI 3 - Bill Guerin(notes) for hooking, Jack Johnson wins it.
November 18: CHI 3, PHX 2 - Ed Jovanovski(notes) for high-sticking, Jonathan Toews(notes) wins it.
November 12: COL 2, VAN 1 - Alexander Edler(notes) for hooking, Marek Svatos(notes) wins it.
November 7: CBJ 4, MTL 3 - Tomas Plekanec(notes) for hooking, Kristian Huselius(notes) wins it.
October 18: MIN 1, TBL 0 - Andrej Meszaros(notes) for hooking, Antti Mietten wins it.
October 17: NYR 1, TOR 0 - Mikhail Grabovski(notes) for hooking, Fredrik Sjostrom(notes) wins it.
October 13: STL 5, TOR 4 - Pavel Kubina for tripping, Brad Boyes(notes) wins it.

If penalties carried over to the shootout, there would have been some pretty good players that wouldn't have been options in the skills competition. Zetterberg, like Nash on Saturday, had his shootout attempt against Pekka Rinne(notes) and the Nashville Predators despite the penalty (though he was unsuccessful).

On the other hand, it appears the majority of the penalized players were defensemen, and ones that aren't exactly known for their shootout prowess. (No disrespect intended to Sean O'Donnell.)

Thanks to Will for his quick (and god-willing, accurate) research. The bottom line: Close the loophole on this shootout oversight. That this situation played out 23 times last seasonis reason enough to address it.

digg delicious
more

27 Comments

Post a Comment
  1. tenvd27
    1. Posted by tenvd27 Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:17 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    What about the question of how many times the penalized player participated in the shootout, they may not have won it but if they still shot, it amounts to the same thing.
    I can't imagine that there are too many nights when CBJ doesn't have Nash shooting, or Wolski for COL
  2. j0ehoe
    2. Posted by j0ehoe Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:18 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    You had better be sending a half chewed cigar to your minion for a job well done, me thinks. That loop hole should definitely be fixed.
  3. Joe E-Devils onslaught
    3. Posted by Joe E-Devils onslaught Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:27 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Another NHL brainfart.
  4. Gabe L
    4. Posted by Gabe L Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:27 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    That Turco penalty would have been interesting under the theoretical "stay-seated" shootout rule; imagine Tobias Stephan or Matt Climie coming off the bench cold to stare down Nash and Co.
  5. Chris
    5. Posted by Chris Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:32 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    I think in regards to the goalies, that is not an issue as the goalies don't server their minors during regulation either. You can't make them "serve" the penalty in a shoot out but not apply that rule in regulation.
    However, whomever is in the box serving for them should not be allowed to shoot.
  6. Jon A
    6. Posted by Jon A Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:33 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see how this research is relevant in all instances. The question is whether the man serving the penalty shot in the shootout, particularly if he scored in the shootout. The fact that a SH team won/lost the shootout is, by itself, irrelevant.
  7. hockeymaster4789
    7. Posted by hockeymaster4789 Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:34 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    The NHL.com site did not specify who participated in the shootout, but only named the scorer of the Game Deciding Goal. I'm sure further investigation into those specific games would show who participated. I can get back to that later on, now that I have the specific games.
    And thanks for the kudos, Wysh.
  8. Tacks
    8. Posted by Tacks Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:34 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    at some point the rulebook is going to look like the tax code if we keep adopting all these ideas
  9. Professor Farnsworth
    9. Posted by Professor Farnsworth Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:37 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Well lets take a step back from our usually reactionary response to this situation and try to use a little foresight.
    Your a coach and your in overtime, if a player you usually use in a shootout takes a penalty in the final two minutes of overtime they would become unavailable in the shootout. Then why would you play your best shootout guys in the last two minutes of the overtime period? Fifty percent of OT games go to Shootouts and i'm willing to bet that an even higher percentage go to shootout if no one has scored in first three minutes. You have to make sure your team is not at any disadvantage going into the shootout, no?
    So its reasonable to suggest you could see a reduction of skilled players on the ice in the later half of OT. If i were coaching I might make sure my shootout guys are on the bench with two minutes to go and play specifically for the shootout, to avoid the chance i would be put at a disadvantage in the shootout with one of them taking a penalty (Oh and i can imagine the complaining when a team loses in the shootout when their best guy got put in the box on a phantom call).
    Is this the can of worms we want to open by closing a loophole that seems to have been an issue ONCE (heck ill even give you a handful of times because according to the data a few guys could have had attempts in the SO just not netted the winner) between this young season and last? (When was the last time a goaltender put into the box? Using Turco as an example is ridiculous and proves how much of a stretch it is to make this case.)
  10. Jon A
    10. Posted by Jon A Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:45 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    hockeymaster #7 - that would be a more interesting study to me, whether the penalized player was involved/instrumental in the event his team won in the shootout.
  11. MTL_WINGS
    11. Posted by MTL_WINGS Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:00 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    The goalie thing is irrelevant. If a goalie doesn't have to sit during a game, why during a shootout?
    you wanna get tough and make things interesting, just limit a team to two shooters if they have a man in the box when overtime ends. Ain't no half steppin here.
  12. MTL_WINGS
    12. Posted by MTL_WINGS Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:02 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    The goalie thing is irrelevant. If a goalie doesn't have to sit during a game, why during a shootout?
    you wanna get tough and make things interesting, just limit a team to two shooters if they have a man in the box when overtime ends. Ain't no half steppin here.
  13. MTL_WINGS
    13. Posted by MTL_WINGS Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:03 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Stupid Yahoo Comment thing. Wachowski, when you gonna get the Great Gazoo to fix this damn thing.
  14. Sara
    14. Posted by Sara Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:13 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    For the record - the game this season against Montreal where Kozlov took the 5-min major ... he was NOT allowed to participate in the shoot-out.
  15. Justin K
    15. Posted by Justin K Mon Nov 23, 2009 4:55 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    If we've already missed it 23 times, and we are only now noticing it, is it really that big of a deal?
  16. Steve
    16. Posted by Steve Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:05 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    16. Justin K.:
    For a while, a lot of people didn't know Hitler was committing genocide. Is it really that big a deal?
  17. D F
    17. Posted by D F Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:18 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    I really just fail to see how this is such a big deal. I have actually thought about that fact every time it has come up in the games I have watched since the shootout came into being, but even when it was someone shooting for the other team I didn't care. The shootout is not a game-like situation, why should we be worried about making all of the rules fall in line? I agree with Professor Farnsworth when he talked about coaches benching shootout shooters in the last 2 minutes. To expand on that idea, sometimes the coach cannot afford to sit a player for 2 minutes (Top players like Nash, Zetterberg, Ovechkin, etc.), but they could stop taking any chances, and then the game might as well end with 2 minutes left in overtime. It looks like only one time in the last 1 1/4 years that the player in the box scored the winner was when Fedor Tyutin beat Chicago last year... Would Hitchcock have had a problem deciding to have someone else go up in Tyutin couldn't? Even if you wait until after the initial 3 shooters, most teams have 5 or so shooters they use often, so you just push that person back. I say leave well enough alone.
  18. Hans Gruber
    18. Posted by Hans Gruber Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:25 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    How about have a old fashioned western shoot out between the two goaltenders. That way we may never have to watch Marty Turco again.
  19. bizkit 510
    19. Posted by bizkit 510 Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:38 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    STEVE- comparing hockey to Hitler might just be a little over the top, don't you think? I agree with one of the bloggers from the earlier post. His opinion was to not let the penalized player participate until the first 3 shooters have gone. I think it represents what a penalty would take to complete. It is at least another alternative. I don't like the stupid shoot out anyway, so maybe the NHL should spend their energy's fixing that instead.
    GO JACKETS!!!
  20. Andrew B
    20. Posted by Andrew B Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:49 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    The CCHA has a rule forbiding a player in the box at the end of OT to participate in the shootout. However, it has failed in one particular case where UNO lost in a shootout to Bowling Green when a penalized player was allowed to participate. It was not overturned by the CCHA or NCAA.
    http://omaha.com/article/20091031/SPORTS03/710319745
  21. Chuck
    21. Posted by Chuck Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:51 pm EST

    Report Abuse

    Hey if you cant score on a 4 on 3 you deserve to have the guy in the box come back to haunt you in the shootout...
  22. ganja_thief
    22. Posted by ganja_thief Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:19 am EST

    Report Abuse

    I think you guys definitely misinterpreted the question this guy was asking. It seems like he meant whoever is in the box at the end of OT with time left to serve shouldn't be allowed to participate in the shootout, not that the offending team should have a whole shot taken away making it 2 for the offenders and 3 for the other. This article doesn't make much sense. As well it opens up another can of worms as to how to decide if the shootout goes extra. Would the offenders have to score twice. Sorry to the guy who wasted his time and effort, but.....FAIL.
  23. 5 4 fighting
    23. Posted by 5 4 fighting Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:43 am EST

    Report Abuse

    There is no reason for a player to be penalized twice for one infraction. Regulation play and O/T is one thing and a shootout is totally different. The shootout is no longer a team oriented event but an event that is determined on individual competition. With those thoughts the player should be allowed to participate.
  24. Alain
    24. Posted by Alain Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:28 am EST

    Report Abuse

    Since when does the NHL do anything logical? LMAO! Let's award 3 points if they go into OT when all other games are worth 2. D'uhhhhh!
  25. Lone Wolf
    25. Posted by Lone Wolf Tue Nov 24, 2009 10:24 am EST

    Report Abuse

    Doesnt it defeat the whole purpose of penalties? thats like allowing a player only a 1 minute penalty because their down a goal and only 2 minutes left and they really need to score. Sit in the box and feel shame for 2 minutes already.

Puck Daddy

Add to My Yahoo! RSS

Teams

Customize to follow news and rumors on your favorite teams. [ Sign in ]

Related Photo Gallery

More NHL Photos »

Y! Sports Blogs

Puck Daddy Recent Readers

(provided by MyBlogLog)

Watch Live Hockey Online with GameCenter Live™