Buftex Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 I have always hated that in the NHL, a team that loses in OT/SO is still awarded a point. I guess I am not the only one who thinks the point system should be revised...Pierre Lebrun is advocating a system where a team get 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an OT/SO win, and 1 point for a OT/SO loss. I could live with that. What do you think? http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/15321/three-point-debate-change-the-standings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EDinRTP Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I would like to see a change as well. Just doesn't seem right for a team that wins in regulation and a team to win in a skills competition to both get 2 points. The shootout is popular, so I'd keep it, but give a team more incentive to win the regulation or overtime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I have always hated that in the NHL, a team that loses in OT/SO is still awarded a point. I guess I am not the only one who thinks the point system should be revised...Pierre Lebrun is advocating a system where a team get 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for an OT/SO win, and 1 point for a OT/SO loss. I could live with that. What do you think? http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/15321/three-point-debate-change-the-standings I've been suggesting this as a compromise for a long time. The ideal situation, of course, is the simplest - a win/loss record like every other sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 I've been suggesting this as a compromise for a long time. The ideal situation, of course, is the simplest - a win/loss record like every other sport. Completely agree on this...but for whatever reason, that is not an option. I just hate when my team (Sabres) is trying to make their annual scramble for a playoff spot, trying to catch two or three other teams...two of them play, an OT game, one gets 2 pts on us, while the other gets one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) Completely agree on this...but for whatever reason, that is not an option. I just hate when my team (Sabres) is trying to make their annual scramble for a playoff spot, trying to catch two or three other teams...two of them play, an OT game, one gets 2 pts on us, while the other gets one. It should be frustrating for any statistically minded person. Essentially, the NHL standings value games that go to overtime 50% more than regulation games...for absolutely no reason. At least the system isn't unfair. Every team has to live with the idiocy. There's every chance the Capitals will miss the playoffs because they have 5 OT losses and their intradivisional rivals Florida have 12. Edited March 5, 2012 by SageAgainstTheMachine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Eh, good back to the good old days. 2 for a win, 1 for a tie, and eh....something for a loss. Something like a butt sandwich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 W L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 It should be frustrating for any statistically minded person. Essentially, the NHL standings value games that go to overtime 50% more than regulation games...for absolutely no reason. At least the system isn't unfair. Every team has to live with the idiocy. There's every chance the Capitals will miss the playoffs because they have 5 OT losses and their intradivisional rivals Florida have 12. Right! I don't know if it has happened yet, since they started doing the shoot-out, but, eventually, a team is going to win a playoff spot over another team, who has more wins, but not as many overtime losses as another. It is just silly. Keeping in mind that teams play 3-5 games a week for 6 months of regular season, then another 2 months of playoffs...seeing all the marathon OT games in the playoffs, I assume this is why the NHL will never go to a sudden death format. Teams would be exhausted. I love hockey, though I never played the game. So, I am not a purist...the shootout can be kind of cool (though the novelty has worn off some), and I appreciate that it did away with the dreaded (and all too common) tie game...but just give the winner the points, and the loser gets nothing...in fact, you wouldn't need the damn point system at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) plain and simple why they will not change....take a big gues...why yes its money! 3 point games keep the standings close, means more fans of more teams think their teams have a shot, meam more fannies in the seats, especiaaly in the "non traditional" markets , in February and March. In a league where ticket sales are still so crucial, that aint changing anytime soon. Also partially why the trade deadline getting sllower, no one thinks they wre really out of it ceptin Columbus But i did her a stat the other day that the same perentage of games going to overtime now than before the 3 point rule. I would have thought much higher nw as it looks like teams play for the point. Be interesting to know that correlates pre overtime.. Edited March 5, 2012 by plenzmd1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) plain and simple why they will not change....take a big gues...why yes its money! 3 point games keep the standings close, means more fans of more teams think their teams have a shot, meam more fannies in the seats, especiaaly in the "non traditional" markets , in February and March. In a league where ticket sales are still so crucial, that aint changing anytime soon. Also partially why the trade deadline getting sllower, no one thinks they wre really out of it ceptin Columbus But i did her a stat the other day that the same perentage of games going to overtime now than before the 3 point rule. I would have thought much higher nw as it looks like teams play for the point. Be interesting to know that correlates pre overtime.. Yeah, I can't remember earlier in the season (on Versus/NBC Sports NHL Overtime show), they talked about revising the point syestem a little...they converted the (then) current standings, to a new point scoring system, and as I recall, the divisional standings remained the same as the current scoring system, except the bottom two teams in the East flip-flopped. So, their conclusion was, it doesen't really make a difference how you do the point system. Of course, they never mention the option of straight up wins vs losses. Back in the late 90's, early 2000's, before the shootout was introduced to the game, I made it a habit to try to attend a Sabres and/or Bills game, every time I went home for the holidays, or for any other reason. I went a horrible streak of going to 4 Sabres games in a row that all ended up in ties...it sucked. I had half a season tickets from 1979-87 for the Sabres, and nothing was more anti-climactic than a friggin' tie. So, the shootout, to me, was a better solution than a tie...but giving that damn point to the loser just rubs me wrong! Edited March 5, 2012 by Buftex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I agree. The current system makes certain games worth "more" points than others. All games should award the same number of points. I'm fine with 3 for a regulation win, and the 2/1 split for OT games. This puts more emphasis on regulation wins, and not just "getting to OT." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I've been suggesting this as a compromise for a long time. The ideal situation, of course, is the simplest - a win/loss record like every other sport. Is this Donovan Mcnabb? NFL has ties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 It should be frustrating for any statistically minded person. Essentially, the NHL standings value games that go to overtime 50% more than regulation games...for absolutely no reason. At least the system isn't unfair. Every team has to live with the idiocy. There's every chance the Capitals will miss the playoffs because they have 5 OT losses and their intradivisional rivals Florida have 12. But is the free point given to that shoot out loser or is it given to the team that wins the shootout? Take away the glorified skills competition and those games are ties. What you don't see by looking at the standings is how many games each team won in a shootout and were given that extra point. Here's what I want and I've said it a million times over on the Sabres board. Either bring back ties or eliminate the loser point and go to continuous overtime. If baseball players can play those marathon games on their 164 game schedule, hockey can do it. If you don't want the hassle of playing a long game while staring at a late night flight to a new city in the face, push to score that extra goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts