Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Is there a better way to sort teams in the NHL standings?


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 02:35 PM

If the Wings are 19-18-0 and the Blackhawks are 20-21-0, the Blackhawks will be listed ahead of the Wings. Yet if the Tigers are 19-18 and the White Sox are 20-21, the Tigers would be listed ahead of the White Sox.

Also, let's say the Wings are 20-10-0 and the Blackhawks are 21-10-0. The Blackhawks will be listed ahead of the Wings. If the Blackhawks lose three games while the Wings don't play, the Blackhawks (21-13-0) will still be listed ahead of the Wings (20-10-0).

Now let's say the Tigers are 20-10 and the White Sox are 21-10. The White Sox will be listed ahead of the Tigers. If the White Sox lose three straight games (to become 21-13) while the Tigers don't play, the Tigers (20-10) will move ahead of the White Sox (21-13).

Perhaps I'm missing something, but why does the NHL do it this way?

#2 haroldsnepsts

haroldsnepsts

    "Classy"

  • HoF Booster Mod
  • 17,299 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 02:41 PM

I'd like to give props to norrisnick for being the first one to call that WingsFan2007 is actually our old stat-obsessed friend Rimouski Oceanic.

http://www.letsgowin...h...st&p=953065

clap.gif


stopping by once a year to make your pointless thread about standings Rimouski?

#3 Draper4$1

Draper4$1

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 40 posts
  • Location:Winnipeg

Posted 08 February 2007 - 02:42 PM

First off, the Blackhawks will never be 21-10-0..... tongue.gif

The NHL standings are based on a points earned system (2 per win, 1 per OT/shoot out loss). Baseball does not use a points system. So if the wings are 21-10-1-1, they have a total of 44 points. The team with more points is listed ahead, regardless of the number of games played.

#4 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 02:45 PM

QUOTE(Draper4$1 @ February 8, 2007 - 02:42PM) View Post

First off, the Blackhawks will never be 21-10-0..... tongue.gif

The NHL standings are based on a points earned system (2 per win, 1 per OT/shoot out loss). Baseball does not use a points system. So if the wings are 21-10-1-1, they have a total of 44 points. The team with more points is listed ahead, regardless of the number of games played.

Yes, the Blackhawks would never be 21-10-0 dry.gif
When I ask why the NHL does it this way, what I'm really getting at is why they use points to sort teams when the method used in baseball seems to be a more viable option.



#5 betterREDthandead

betterREDthandead

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,744 posts
  • Location:GPP, MI

Posted 08 February 2007 - 02:46 PM

Kind of a pointless way to put things because baseball teams never have more than a day off between games, except for the All-Star break. So there will never be more than about a two-game difference in games played.

But this is pretty simple. The NHL uses points instead of percentages because ties used to be common, and percentages are too wacky (and can actually be calculated different ways to come up with different numbers) when large numbers of ties are involved.
Posted Image
"Before Detroit games, the meetings are always longer." - Nashville's Paul Kariya

#6 haroldsnepsts

haroldsnepsts

    "Classy"

  • HoF Booster Mod
  • 17,299 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 02:48 PM

Just so you guys know, in case you've missed Rimouski's threads from a while back.

It's not about actually answering his question or arriving at a point, he just loves to hear himself talk.


#7 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 03:00 PM

QUOTE(betterREDthandead @ February 8, 2007 - 02:46PM) View Post

Kind of a pointless way to put things because baseball teams never have more than a day off between games, except for the All-Star break. So there will never be more than about a two-game difference in games played.

But this is pretty simple. The NHL uses points instead of percentages because ties used to be common, and percentages are too wacky (and can actually be calculated different ways to come up with different numbers) when large numbers of ties are involved.

As a tie (or now OTL) is the net equivalent of half a win and half a loss, the presence of ties can't be the reason the NHL uses a points system instead of the more viable games behind or winning percentage system used in baseball.

Take for example the Red Wings record of 35-14-6, which is 76 points in 55 games. If we take those 6 OTLs and disperse them half among wins and half among losses, we get 38-17-0, which is also 76 points in 55 games. The winning percentage can be figured from there, which will be the same as points percentage.

#8 wingslogo19

wingslogo19

    Legend

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,234 posts
  • Location:Victoria BC Canada

Posted 08 February 2007 - 03:08 PM

QUOTE(haroldsnepsts @ February 8, 2007 - 11:48AM) View Post

Just so you guys know, in case you've missed Rimouski's threads from a while back.

It's not about actually answering his question or arriving at a point, he just loves to hear himself talk.

Ahhh ok thanks for clearing that up, i was confused here huh.gif
IPB Image

#9 GordieSid&Ted

GordieSid&Ted

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,384 posts
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 08 February 2007 - 03:27 PM

QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 03:00PM) View Post

As a tie (or now OTL) is the net equivalent of half a win and half a loss, the presence of ties can't be the reason the NHL uses a points system instead of the more viable games behind or winning percentage system used in baseball.

Take for example the Red Wings record of 35-14-6, which is 76 points in 55 games. If we take those 6 OTLs and disperse them half among wins and half among losses, we get 38-17-0, which is also 76 points in 55 games. The winning percentage can be figured from there, which will be the same as points percentage.


Actually the NHL does it this way simply to annoy you. And by you I mean YOU personally. Nobody else really cares but they new that you did so they just wanted to make sure they could annoy somebody.

The second reason why they do it, and this is a doozy, i'm not going to tell you. Most people know why but its sort of like a secret handshake kind of thing. You are either part of the in crowd or you're not. And per Fight Club rule #27b, I cannot tell you for that would jeopardize my standing within the secret, mow-mow, pooh-pooh, society of I know s*** that you don't know so bite me club.

Have a great one.
Being a mod doesn't make you special.

#10 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 03:42 PM

QUOTE(GordieSid&Ted @ February 8, 2007 - 03:27PM) View Post

Actually the NHL does it this way simply to annoy you. And by you I mean YOU personally. Nobody else really cares but they new that you did so they just wanted to make sure they could annoy somebody.

The points system was in place long before I was even born. Therefore, they couldn't have done it this way specifically to annoy me.

QUOTE
The second reason why they do it, and this is a doozy, i'm not going to tell you. Most people know why but its sort of like a secret handshake kind of thing. You are either part of the in crowd or you're not. And per Fight Club rule #27b, I cannot tell you for that would jeopardize my standing within the secret, mow-mow, pooh-pooh, society of I know s*** that you don't know so bite me club.

Have a great one.

I'm guessing there is either a conspiracy here to not look back into the history and try to get an answer to my question or there is something painful about talking about it.

#11 StaticWithABeat

StaticWithABeat

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,385 posts
  • Location:Troy, MI

Posted 08 February 2007 - 03:49 PM

QUOTE(haroldsnepsts @ February 8, 2007 - 02:48PM) View Post

Just so you guys know, in case you've missed Rimouski's threads from a while back.

It's not about actually answering his question or arriving at a point, he just loves to hear himself talk.


I'll never forget the thread during the lockout that consisted of several pages of increasingly-irritated people trying to explain the concept of a game-winning goal to him. Truly a LGW classic. Edit: Oh that's what the link is...nicely done

I did enjoy those little games he used to post about trying to guess the player by listing the teams he played for.

Edited by StaticWithABeat, 08 February 2007 - 03:56 PM.


#12 betterREDthandead

betterREDthandead

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 7,744 posts
  • Location:GPP, MI

Posted 08 February 2007 - 03:50 PM

QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 12:42PM) View Post

The points system was in place long before I was even born. Therefore, they couldn't have done it this way specifically to annoy me.
I'm guessing there is either a conspiracy here to not look back into the history and try to get an answer to my question or there is something painful about talking about it.

Bingo. It's painful. You ignoring the part where I explained to you that there are several different ways to calculate the winning percentages with ties, and then explaining to me as if I were a two-year old the "correct" way to do it makes this a very painful discussion.

For example, you can do it the way you patronizingly explained to me. Or you can throw ties out altogether and count only wins and losses. Or you can do it the easy way, which is to assign point values. Which is why the NHL went to the point system. There. Your question is answered. Any more speaking in this thread from you, other than a "thank you very much for answering my question," is nothing more than an exercise to try and prove to the world you are smarter than the rest of us. Which I figure was probably the entire point in starting the thread in the first place, but whatever; your question is answered.
Posted Image
"Before Detroit games, the meetings are always longer." - Nashville's Paul Kariya

#13 Winged Scooter

Winged Scooter

    Future NFL Hall-of-Famer!

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,103 posts
  • Location:Wolverine Lake, MI

Posted 08 February 2007 - 03:52 PM

I simply thought that it was an easier way to keep track of standings due to the high number of ties in the "old days", doesn't pro soccer use a point based system as well? Have no fear though, the point system is a "tradition" of the NHL, which means that Bettman will do away with it soon enough! tongue.gif
"Aw, you cheap sonofab@#$h. Are you crazy? Those guys are RETARDS!!" -- Reggie Dunlop
"I got a good deal on those boys, scout said they showed a lot of promise." -- Joe McGrath
"They brought their F$%&@*# TOYS with them!!" -- RD
"Well, I'd rather have them playing with their toys, than playing with themselves." -- JM

#14 toby91_ca

toby91_ca

    Legend

  • Gold Booster
  • 8,524 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 03:53 PM

Who cares? This isn't baseball, why would the NHL want to follow how baseball presents their standings?

If you look at the year end standings, regardless of how you arrange the teams, winning percentage, points, etc., they will always be in the same order.....who cares what the order is throughout the year?

The points system allows for discussions about games in hand. Yes, we're 4 points down, but we have 3 games in hand. If you don't win those 3 games, you are still 4 points down, if you do, you move ahead. Putting the standings together assuming you are going to win future games based on previous games you have won doesn't necessarily make sense either.

#15 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 04:15 PM

QUOTE(betterREDthandead @ February 8, 2007 - 03:50PM) View Post

Bingo. It's painful. You ignoring the part where I explained to you that there are several different ways to calculate the winning percentages with ties, and then explaining to me as if I were a two-year old the "correct" way to do it makes this a very painful discussion.

For example, you can do it the way you patronizingly explained to me. Or you can throw ties out altogether and count only wins and losses. Or you can do it the easy way, which is to assign point values. Which is why the NHL went to the point system. There. Your question is answered. Any more speaking in this thread from you, other than a "thank you very much for answering my question," is nothing more than an exercise to try and prove to the world you are smarter than the rest of us. Which I figure was probably the entire point in starting the thread in the first place, but whatever; your question is answered.

The point system that the NHL uses to sort teams causes a loss to have the same effect as not playing. Perhaps that's what I should have asked at the onset, as that's what I really want to know. Why does the NHL use a method for sorting the teams in the standings in which a loss is precisely the same as not playing - when a much more viable alternative, like that used in baseball, is available and has been used with success in many sports?

I feel I made a very good example with the 21-10 team losing three straight and falling to 21-13. In one sport, they lose a position to the 20-10 team, while in the other sport they don't.


QUOTE(Winged Scooter @ February 8, 2007 - 03:52PM) View Post

I simply thought that it was an easier way to keep track of standings due to the high number of ties in the "old days", doesn't pro soccer use a point based system as well? Have no fear though, the point system is a "tradition" of the NHL, which means that Bettman will do away with it soon enough! tongue.gif

This is along the lines of what I suspect to be true. That the NHL had a lot of ties in the old days and was quite removed from the mainstream sports such as MLB. Perhaps in the early days of the NHL, all teams played on the same days, meaning there was never a discrepancy in games played. When there is never a discrepancy in games played, points earned works well. It's when you get discrepancies that is gets misleading. Take 20-10-0 vs. 21-13-0 for example.

While the NHL is very tradition based, I can't imagine that's the sole reason the NHL hasn't switched over to the baseball model for sorting teams. Tradition was violated when the NHL adopted the point for an overtime loss, when the league expanded from six teams and when they started having the home team wear the colored jerseys.

QUOTE(toby91_ca @ February 8, 2007 - 03:53PM) View Post

Who cares? This isn't baseball, why would the NHL want to follow how baseball presents their standings?

If you look at the year end standings, regardless of how you arrange the teams, winning percentage, points, etc., they will always be in the same order.....who cares what the order is throughout the year?

The points system allows for discussions about games in hand. Yes, we're 4 points down, but we have 3 games in hand. If you don't win those 3 games, you are still 4 points down, if you do, you move ahead. Putting the standings together assuming you are going to win future games based on previous games you have won doesn't necessarily make sense either.

That's part of the advantage of a games behind or percentage sorted system. No need to use games in hand.


QUOTE(StaticWithABeat @ February 8, 2007 - 03:49PM) View Post

I'll never forget the thread during the lockout that consisted of several pages of increasingly-irritated people trying to explain the concept of a game-winning goal to him. Truly a LGW classic. Edit: Oh that's what the link is...nicely done

I did enjoy those little games he used to post about trying to guess the player by listing the teams he played for.

Sounds like a good idea.


#16 GordieSid&Ted

GordieSid&Ted

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,384 posts
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 08 February 2007 - 04:22 PM

QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 04:15PM) View Post

The point system that the NHL uses to sort teams causes a loss to have the same effect as not playing. Perhaps that's what I should have asked at the onset, as that's what I really want to know. Why does the NHL use a method for sorting the teams in the standings in which a loss is precisely the same as not playing - when a much more viable alternative, like that used in baseball, is available and has been used with success in many sports?

I feel I made a very good example with the 21-10 team losing three straight and falling to 21-13. In one sport, they lose a position to the 20-10 team, while in the other sport they don't.
This is along the lines of what I suspect to be true. That the NHL had a lot of ties in the old days and was quite removed from the mainstream sports such as MLB. Perhaps in the early days of the NHL, all teams played on the same days, meaning there was never a discrepancy in games played. When there is never a discrepancy in games played, points earned works well. It's when you get discrepancies that is gets misleading. Take 20-10-0 vs. 21-13-0 for example.

While the NHL is very tradition based, I can't imagine that's the sole reason the NHL hasn't switched over to the baseball model for sorting teams. Tradition was violated when the NHL adopted the point for an overtime loss, when the league expanded from six teams and when they started having the home team wear the colored jerseys.
That's part of the advantage of a games behind or percentage sorted system. No need to use games in hand.
Sounds like a good idea.



Why is water wet? And why does my 2 year old constantly say "no" to me no matter what the hell i'm saying.

sit down: "no"
eat: "no"
stop hitting your sister: "no"
do you want ice cream: "no"
do you not want ice cream: "no"
you hate the Predators, right?: "no"
can you explain the points system to wingfan2007: "hell no, that guy is an *******"

oh well blush.gif
Being a mod doesn't make you special.

#17 Winged Scooter

Winged Scooter

    Future NFL Hall-of-Famer!

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,103 posts
  • Location:Wolverine Lake, MI

Posted 08 February 2007 - 04:23 PM

Tradition was violated when the NHL adopted the point for an overtime loss, when the league expanded from six teams and when they started having the home team wear the colored jerseys.

Actually if I'm not mistaken , dating back to the O6 teams, the home team always wore dark jerseys, I don't know if that changed in the 60's , 70's or 80's but was just recently changed BACK a few years ago....
"Aw, you cheap sonofab@#$h. Are you crazy? Those guys are RETARDS!!" -- Reggie Dunlop
"I got a good deal on those boys, scout said they showed a lot of promise." -- Joe McGrath
"They brought their F$%&@*# TOYS with them!!" -- RD
"Well, I'd rather have them playing with their toys, than playing with themselves." -- JM

#18 toby91_ca

toby91_ca

    Legend

  • Gold Booster
  • 8,524 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 04:25 PM

QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 04:15PM) View Post


That's part of the advantage of a games behind or percentage sorted system. No need to use games in hand.
Sounds like a good idea.

You completely missed my point.

If my team is 23-30 and your team is 10-0, in my opinion, there is no reason your team should be ahead of mine in the standings. There is no guarantee you will win anymore games, while my team is already guaranteed of having at least 23 wins. It comes down to pretty much being as simple as that.

If baseball wants to assume you will continue winning at the same rate, that is their prerogative.

#19 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 04:40 PM

QUOTE(Winged Scooter @ February 8, 2007 - 04:23PM) View Post

Tradition was violated when the NHL adopted the point for an overtime loss, when the league expanded from six teams and when they started having the home team wear the colored jerseys.

Actually if I'm not mistaken , dating back to the O6 teams, the home team always wore dark jerseys, I don't know if that changed in the 60's , 70's or 80's but was just recently changed BACK a few years ago....

I could be wrong. I don't know much about the history of uniforms going back before the '60s. But throughout the 60's & '70s & '80s, the home team always wore white (except for the Kings - yellow and the Golden Seals - also yellow).

QUOTE(toby91_ca @ February 8, 2007 - 04:25PM) View Post

You completely missed my point.

If my team is 23-30 and your team is 10-0, in my opinion, there is no reason your team should be ahead of mine in the standings. There is no guarantee you will win anymore games, while my team is already guaranteed of having at least 23 wins. It comes down to pretty much being as simple as that.

If baseball wants to assume you will continue winning at the same rate, that is their prerogative.

But your team is also guaranteed of having at least 30 losses. Your guarantee of losses is seven greater than your guarantee of wins, while my guarantee of losses is ten less than my guarantee of wins. Thus, I am 10 games above .500, while you're 7 games below .500.

#20 YzermanForever

YzermanForever

    Top Prospect

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 95 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 04:43 PM

QUOTE(toby91_ca @ February 8, 2007 - 04:25PM) View Post

You completely missed my point.

If my team is 23-30 and your team is 10-0, in my opinion, there is no reason your team should be ahead of mine in the standings. There is no guarantee you will win anymore games, while my team is already guaranteed of having at least 23 wins. It comes down to pretty much being as simple as that.

If baseball wants to assume you will continue winning at the same rate, that is their prerogative.

I think you are right on with this.

But also: standings provide absolutely nothing to a team until all games have been played. So whether a 23-30 team is higher or lower in the standings than a 10-0 is completely irrelevant until both teams have played all there games. My point: no matter what system is in use... WHO CARES?





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users