I've talked a couple times about the Red Wings not deserving some of the points they've gotten this year. Games where they just happened to "turn it on" for long enough to get a couple goals and pull out a win or force OT. Had Saturday night's game ended with a Detroit victory, I think that might have been another one of those times.
Supposedly the reason for introducing the shootout in the NHL was that the fans demand to see a winner and a loser in every game. Ties apparently leave everyone feeling unsatisfied. What happens, though, when neither team deserves to win?
The Red Wings were awful (no matter what I think of the officiating) in the first period against Colorado. The Avalanche were horrible for the rest of the game. Why should either of these teams be awarded with an extra point?
If the shootout is for entertainment, have one every game. Have two or three, maybe at the start of each period to get the goalies warmed up. I have nothing against them as entertainment, they're very fun to watch.
My problem is what happened on Saturday (and what has happened other nights this season in Detroit's favor). If a team can turn in one good period and coast to a win from there, good for them. The same if a team can bounce back from a bad period, play the rest of the game well, and get the win. I just think that if you try to do that and don't win, you don't deserve the extra chance the shootout offers.