Do you think the NHL should adopt the shootout in the regular season if games are still tied after five minutes of 4-on-4 OT?
	No	23 (77 percent)
	Yes	7 (23 percent)

Anaheim: Petr Sykora: - No
"To be honest, I think the 4-on-4 hockey brings out a lot of excitement already, so I don't know. To be honest, I don't really care. I think for the fans, to make it more exciting, the 4-on-4 hockey is great. It's up-and-down hockey, a lot of scoring chances, a lot of overtime goals. It's up to them. I don't necessarily think we should do it or we have to do it, to add more excitement. I think the 4-on-4 hockey is enough excitement, but whatever they decide, they decide. I'm just here to play hockey."

Atlanta: Slava Kozlov - Yes
"I like that idea. I think we're playing for the fans. It's going to bring some people. Overtime is fun. People are waiting until the last minute for something to happen. I know a couple GMs are from the old school like Pat Quinn and Brian Burke. They said no. But I think it's a good idea. It's more fun. Each team has skilled players. It worked great in the All-Star Game."

	Subscribe at thehockeynews.com.

Boston: Glen Murray - No
"I don't think so. It changes the game too much. I think you should get one point for going to overtime and if you win, then you'd get the second one."

Buffalo: Taylor Pyatt - Yes
"Yes. I think it would be more exciting as long as teams still had one point at the end of regulation. You could go to the five minutes and, if it's not decided, why not go to a shootout? It's more exciting, more entertaining for the fans. It makes for more exciting hockey."

Calgary: Martin Gelinas - Yes
"Don't put me in there, but I think it would be exciting for the fans and for the teams and so on. I could just see, an important game -- Edmonton-Calgary -- being in a shootout, the crowd would go crazy. I think it would be more exciting, put a little more zip into it. It would keep your interest until the end and you would have a winner at the end. I think it would be good."

Carolina: Jan Hlavac - Yes
"Yep. People will like it for sure. They did it in the Euro Super League, with the shootout when it was tied after overtime, and it was pretty cool."

Chicago: Anonymous - No

Colorado: Rob Blake - No
"I don't think so. I don't think it's a good way to end a hockey game. For the All-Star Game, it's fun, but that's it."

Columbus: Andrew Cassels - No
"For fun, sure, but not for points in the standings. Hockey's not a 1-on-1 game. There's a lot more to it than a guy skating in on a goalie."

Dallas: Claude Lemieux - Yes
"Absolutely. I thought (the All-Star Game) was great. I'm sure the goalies don't like it, but it was pretty awesome."

	Shanahan

Detroit: Brendan Shanahan - No
"I would have to see it in exhibition first. I would want to see if teams start playing conservatively the last five, 10 minutes of the game simply because they have a couple great breakaway guys. That would be my fear, that teams stop playing hockey. I know that there are certain teams ­ probably us included ­ that feel in the last two minutes of a game, that if we can just get it to overtime, we stand a good chance 4-on-4 with our skaters. I'd hate to see some team with five Pavel Datsyuks sit back with five minutes to go just to get to a shootout."

Edmonton: Anonymous - No

Florida: Kristian Huselius - No

Los Angeles: Anonymous - No

Minnesota: Wes Walz - No
"No. Individuals shouldn't decide a team game. I think you would get to a situation where the top teams would really sit back late in games and in overtime just hoping to get the shootout. I know the fans would like it, but I just don't think it would be good to have games decided like that."

Montreal: Craig Rivet - No
"Definitely not. Just like you don't take a quarterback and make him throw between tubes or slam-dunk a basketball, it shouldn't take a deke to decide a game. This is a team sport. Penalty shots are an individual skill."

Nashville: Tomas Vokoun - Yes
"Obviously it's up for discussion ... From my personal standpoint, the most exciting part of the game is the overtime, there's lots of chances both ways. It's probably something that should be up to the fans. That's why we're all here, to entertain the fans. So the fans can decide ... Me, personally, I like the 4-on-4 but I wouldn't mind the breakaways. If you're a goalie who's good against breakaways you could steal a lot of points for your team. It might not be fair, but this game's not always fair as it is."

	Brodeur

New Jersey: Martin Brodeur - No
"No. For entertainment purposes it would be awesome. To decide a playoff spot or winning the conference or something would not be right. Hockey is a team sport, so I don't think using the shootout is right. You work hard all game as a team and then can lose it in a shootout. Besides, we're not in Europe."

N.Y. Islanders: Roman Hamrlik - No

N.Y. Rangers: Bobby Holik - No
"The shootout is not an appropriate way to decide a hockey game; an All-Star Game, maybe, but not a game that counts. If there is going to be any change, I'd like to see a 10-minute overtime, 4-on-4, no points to the loser. If you lose a game, you should not be rewarded. That's the way I feel."

Ottawa: Anonymous - No
"It's fine for an all-star game, but not a way to settle an important regular season game. Yes, it's exciting, but it's a pretty dumb way to lose."

Philadelphia: Mark Recchi - No
"No, the season is too long and I think it's too hard. It's great for the fans, but I think it's too hard on the goaltenders. You're asking a lot. You play 15-20 overtime games a year. And it's a cheap way to end it. I had it in the minors, it's fun, but it's a tough way to lose a game."

Phoenix: Tony Amonte - No
"No. I love the shootout, it's one of the most exciting things I think we can have in a game, but no way nobody's going to vote for it, even if we do it just in the regular season."

Pittsburgh: Mario Lemieux - No
"I don't think a game should be decided on a lucky bounce or a bad break. It's just fine the way it is."

San Jose: Mike Ricci - No
"Points mean so much these days nowadays it's hard to just say yes. It's more of a fun thing for the crowd. It's a good thing for the fans, and a fun thing to watch, but every point matters so much that I would have to say no."

St. Louis: Martin Rucinsky - No
"No, I wouldn't do that. It would probably be very exciting, but I like it the way it is with the five-minute overtime. I wouldn't switch it to penalty shots. It's sort of like if you take it to penalty shots it's letting one part of the game decide who wins, it takes it away from the team. That I wouldn't do."

Tampa Bay: Anonymous - No

Toronto: Anonymous - No
"No. I know the fans liked it in the All-Star Game, but I don't think that's the right way to decide a game."

Vancouver: Brendan Morrison - No
"No. It's working fine. To be, or not be, in the playoffs based on a shootout is absurd."

Washington: Bruce Cassidy - Yes
"Yes, the fans love it."

Material from The Hockey News.
To subscribe, visit The Hockey News web site at: http://www.thehockeynews.com