Hermantown Taking the Penalty Time Over a Penalty Shot

jeffpv · Post by **jeffpv** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:30 pm

I'm not sure I understand the reasoning for Hermantown taking the penalty time over the penalty shot. They have a bevvy of snipers, and they would still have had the power play from the first minor...right? Surprising.

Goldy Gopher · Post by **Goldy Gopher** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:34 pm

Playing devil's advocate, if you take the penalty shot you only get one shot (obviously). If you can generate more than one shot because you have a two man advantage...it's worth it?

Hermhawkey · Post by **Hermhawkey** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:37 pm

If we score in 1:32 we still have a power play. Potentially 2 goals.

HappyHockeyFan · Post by **HappyHockeyFan** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:38 pm

I like the decision , rather than put all the pressure on one guy it puts it on the whole team. If they score soon enough they will still have a 5 on 4 for another goal opportunity.

Goldy Gopher · Post by **Goldy Gopher** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:38 pm

Hermhawkey wrote:If we score in 1:32 we still have a power play. Potentially 2 goals.

Are you on the team? Posting from the locker room in between periods?

Hermhawkey · Post by **Hermhawkey** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:38 pm

If we score in 1:32 we still have a power play. Potentially 2 goals.

Goldy Gopher · Post by **Goldy Gopher** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:39 pm

Hermhawkey wrote:If we score in 1:32 we still have a power play. Potentially 2 goals.

Great point. Almost as great as the first time you posted it.

Minn_Hockey · Post by **Minn_Hockey** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:42 pm

Hermhawkey wrote:If we score in 1:32 we still have a power play. Potentially 2 goals.

If you score on the penalty shot you're still on the PP also. So potentially two goals. Plus you would have more PP time than if you scored late in the 5 on 3.

Hermhawkey · Post by **Hermhawkey** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:47 pm

No idea how it posted twice.

Hermhawkey · Post by **Hermhawkey** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:58 pm

Goldy Gopher wrote:
Hermhawkey wrote:If we score in 1:32 we still have a power play. Potentially 2 goals.
Are you on the team? Posting from the locker room in between periods?

Yep. We all get ipads in our locker room stalls.

Goldy Gopher · Post by **Goldy Gopher** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:58 pm

Hermhawkey wrote:
Goldy Gopher wrote:
Hermhawkey wrote:If we score in 1:32 we still have a power play. Potentially 2 goals.
Are you on the team? Posting from the locker room in between periods?
Yep. We all get ipads in our locker room stalls.

I assumed as much with your use of "we."

slacsap · Post by **slacsap** » Fri Mar 10, 2017 7:09 pm

I don't know the exact percentages, but the odds on a penalty shot favor the goalie. I believe in the NHL, the conversion rate on penalty shots is around 30-35%. The best shootout performers in the NHL convert 40%. I can certainly see circumstances where taking a 2:00 power play over a penalty shot would be better. What do people think about making it where if the penalty shot is not converted, the player who committed the infraction serves two minutes? Penalty shots are supposed to be a harsh consequence. If you got the power play when you did not score on the penalty shot, that would be in keeping with the spirit of the rules.

woodstickguy · Post by **woodstickguy** » Sat Mar 11, 2017 9:58 am

A wise man twice told me that if we score in 1:32, we still have a power play. Potentially 2 goals so I am going with that theory!