OT rule changes, face-off clarity discussed at GM meetings

TORONTO -- In an ongoing quest to enhance excitement on the ice, the NHL general managers spent part of their meeting Tuesday discussing potential improvements to specific areas of the game, including 3-on-3 overtime.

The conversations will continue with deeper, data-driven discussions when the GMs meet again for three days in March.

But Colin Campbell, the NHL senior executive vice president of hockey operations, said there is a growing concern about the regroup in 3-on-3 overtime, when teams cross the blue line with possession but pull it back out into the neutral zone to reset and retain possession.

Campbell said the strategy in overtime has evolved into being possession-based, but the GMs talked about the possibility that it is taking away from the excitement and chaos that 3-on-3 brought to the game when it was implemented for the 2015-16 season.

"There's two sides to look at it and I can fight on both sides; one is that it creates more offense and the other one, well, you don't attack enough," Arizona Coyotes GM Bill Armstrong said. "But when you do attack, you do attack with speed. You can play both sides of that argument."

Campbell said the talking points about overtime included potentially eliminating the ability to pull the puck out of the attacking zone once you cross the blue line and even about the possibility of adding a shot clock in overtime once a team has possession.

However, the question then becomes what is the consequence?

"We don't want to stop play," Campbell said. "We don't want to have face-offs. Unintended circumstances are always considered with these things."

Campbell said the GMs have not discussed the length of overtime or the potential of getting rid of the shootout because the 3-on-3 format is still working for what it was intended to do; end more games before the shootout.

Since 3-on-3 was instituted, 65.5 percent of the games that extend beyond regulation have ended in overtime as opposed to 43.2 percent from 2005-15.

"We don't mind the format," Campbell said.

The bigger question is, does the data, including shot attempts, scoring chances and possession changes support keeping things status quo, or should there be changes made?

"That's what you're looking at, delay and keeping the puck versus what would possession changes do if you were forced to have to attack, and does that create more excitement?" Buffalo Sabres GM Kevyn Adams said. "I think that's the conversation. It was more conversation-based today and probably it'll go deeper in March when you have more time at these meetings, when you have a few days. It's interesting for sure."

The GMs also talked about face-offs and if there needs to be more clarity from the officials to the players about what is allowed and reasons why someone is kicked out of the face-off circle.

"I think the face-offs conversation is going to be interesting in March," Adams said. "What exactly is being enforced or being focused on? Why is a player kicked out of a face-off circle and what's the standard?"

Stephen Walkom, the NHL director of officiating, said sometimes what happens is the player set to take a face-off is not listening to the instructions from the linesman.

"You'll often see on a face-off, a linesman talking in between commercials and at the start of a period with a center and explaining, 'I told you to put your stick down, I can't stand here forever,'" Walkom said.

But because of how critical face-offs can be, it's an issue that likely will be continually discussed.

"It's an important part of the game," Adams said. "You're talking about a puck possession battle to start right out of a whistle. I do think it's something that we'll want to focus a little bit more on."

Similarly, they will likely talk more in March about reverse hits and the potential dangers associated and reasons why a player is making a reverse hit, slashing to the stick versus slashing to the hands, and cross checking in front of the net versus boxing out, among other things.

What is acceptable? What is not?

"We're trying to make the game better, that's the biggest thing," Armstrong said. "Those are always great meetings for us go in there and get a feel for just the trends that are happening in the NHL on the ice, how could the game be improved and what are everybody's thoughts around that."