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

#21 Winged Scooter

Winged Scooter

    Future NFL Hall-of-Famer!

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

Posted 08 February 2007 - 04:45 PM

QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 04:38PM) View Post

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).

Yeah, I'm not THAT old, laugh.gif but I seem to remember when the changed to dark at home, Mickey Redmond saying during one the broadcasts that it was just like how it used to be....
"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

#22 toby91_ca

toby91_ca

    Legend

  • Gold Booster
  • 8,490 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 05:21 PM

QUOTE(YzermanForever @ February 8, 2007 - 04:43PM) View Post

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?

I agree, I do not care, but I already tried that argument and it didn't get across effectively.

QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 04:40PM) View Post

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.

Are you that intellectually challenged?

You simply dismissed my reasoning and went back and said..."but my winning percentage is higher", which I already explained to be meaningless since there is no guarantee you will maintain the same winning percentage in the future.

#23 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 06:00 PM

QUOTE(toby91_ca @ February 8, 2007 - 05:21PM) View Post

You simply dismissed my reasoning and went back and said..."but my winning percentage is higher", which I already explained to be meaningless since there is no guarantee you will maintain the same winning percentage in the future.

By that logic, points earned is meaningless, as there is no guarantee you will maintain the same number of points in the future. hehe.gif

Winning percentage or points percentage have nothing to do with the future and aren't meant to suggest that you'll continue at that pace in the future. They're meant to show what you've done to date.




#24 toby91_ca

toby91_ca

    Legend

  • Gold Booster
  • 8,490 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 06:08 PM

QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 06:00PM) View Post

By that logic, points earned is meaningless, as there is no guarantee you will maintain the same number of points in the future. hehe.gif

Winning percentage or points percentage have nothing to do with the future and aren't meant to suggest that you'll continue at that pace in the future. They're meant to show what you've done to date.

riiiiiigggghhht.... rolleyes.gif

I'm done....give up

#25 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 06:29 PM

QUOTE(toby91_ca @ February 8, 2007 - 06:08PM) View Post

riiiiiigggghhht.... rolleyes.gif

I'm done....give up

I gather you disagree with me.

Let's say the Wings have a 7-3-5 record in January. That's a .633 points percentage. In what way is it meant to show anything above and beyond what they've done during that 15 game stretch?

#26 SouthernWingsFan

SouthernWingsFan

    Legend

  • HoF Booster
  • 24,609 posts
  • Location:Mandeville, Louisiana (Greater New Orleans area)

Posted 08 February 2007 - 08:14 PM

IPB Image

#27 mackel

mackel

    Bring Back Vernie

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 498 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 08:38 PM

The one quirk of the NHL standings that drives me wild is the ranking by division... this means a team with fewer points can be ranked higher than a non division leading team with more points.

Case and point:

1. Nashville 77
2. Anaheim 74
3. Calgary 65 <----
4. Detroit 76
5. San Jose 71
6. Dallas 66
7. Vancouver 64
8. Minnesota 62

Some people will say that this is because some divisions are stronger than others... personally I think that's BS... you have to win the games if not then you didn't its that simple.... Calgary should by all rights be 6th in the conference.

#28 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 09:34 PM

QUOTE(mackel @ February 8, 2007 - 08:38PM) View Post

The one quirk of the NHL standings that drives me wild is the ranking by division... this means a team with fewer points can be ranked higher than a non division leading team with more points.

Case and point:

1. Nashville 77
2. Anaheim 74
3. Calgary 65 <----
4. Detroit 76
5. San Jose 71
6. Dallas 66
7. Vancouver 64
8. Minnesota 62

Some people will say that this is because some divisions are stronger than others... personally I think that's BS... you have to win the games if not then you didn't its that simple.... Calgary should by all rights be 6th in the conference.

Take a look at http://nhl.jzap.com/standings

1. Nashville 77
2. Anaheim 74
3. Calgary 65 <----
4. Detroit 76
5. San Jose 71
6. Dallas 66
7. Vancouver 64
8. Minnesota 62

I agree with you that it's a little skewed that the leader of the Northwest is guaranteed at least a third seed. Perhaps this is one of those things that should be changed.

Another thing you don't take into consideration in your list is games played. Without knowing games played, points earned doesn't provide any information on a team's loss total.



#29 YzermanForever

YzermanForever

    Top Prospect

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 95 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 09:41 PM

QUOTE(toby91_ca @ February 8, 2007 - 05:21PM) View Post

I agree, I do not care, but I already tried that argument and it didn't get across effectively.

Wasn't intended to be a shot against you, just against this topic in general.

#30 TheLegend19

TheLegend19

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,614 posts
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 08 February 2007 - 09:41 PM

QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 02:45PM) View Post

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.

Because baseball doesn't have OT losses or ties like the NHL does (and used to).
stevienewjo4.gif

#31 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 10:16 PM

QUOTE(Manny4Prez @ February 8, 2007 - 09:41PM) View Post

Because baseball doesn't have OT losses or ties like the NHL does (and used to).

Those can't be the reasons the NHL needs to use the points system, as an OTL (or used to be a tie) is the net equivalent of half a win and half a regulation loss. Take the OTLs and disperse them half to the W column and half to the L column and you'll get the same PE and GP. Therefore, the NHL is effectively just a win/loss league.

#32 eva unit zero

eva unit zero

    Save the Princess...Save the World

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,734 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 10:29 PM

QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 10:16PM) View Post

Those can't be the reasons the NHL needs to use the points system, as an OTL (or used to be a tie) is the net equivalent of half a win and half a regulation loss. Take the OTLs and disperse them half to the W column and half to the L column and you'll get the same PE and GP. Therefore, the NHL is effectively just a win/loss league.




The NHL uses points for one simple reason:



The All-Star game coaches are decided by what team has the most points at a certain time in the season. Without a point system, every team's coach is the coach of the team with the most points.


"I've never seen a warlock do that without his magic."
"I once devoured a monk's soul. It tasted like chocolate."

#33 T-Ruff

T-Ruff

    BAMF

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,727 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 08 February 2007 - 11:09 PM

Look what I came across on the Leafs' forums laugh.gif :
QUOTE(Motor České Budějovice @ Feb 5 2007, 04:40 PM) View Post

If the Leafs are 19-18-0 and the Bruins are 20-21-0, the Bruins will be listed ahead of the Leafs. Yet if the Blue Jays are 19-18 and the Red Sox are 20-21, the Blue Jays would be listed ahead of the Red Sox.

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

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

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

Compare to:
QUOTE(WingsFan2007 @ February 8, 2007 - 02:35PM) View Post

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?

clap.gif laugh.gif

#34 haroldsnepsts

haroldsnepsts

    "Classy"

  • HoF Booster Mod
  • 17,015 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 11:11 PM

QUOTE(T-Ruff @ February 8, 2007 - 08:09PM) View Post

Look what I came across on the Leafs' forums laugh.gif :

Compare to:

clap.gif laugh.gif

Busted again!!! laugh.gif

Like I said previously, he just likes to make ridiculous discussions for the sake of making them.

It's not even to make a point.

EDIT: Someone registered on the Leaf's site should spread the word of what's going on here. wink.gif

Edited by haroldsnepsts, 08 February 2007 - 11:12 PM.


#35 stevie for president

stevie for president

    Red Blings

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 624 posts

Posted 08 February 2007 - 11:18 PM

if im not mistaken, total points only matter twice. once in december for the all star coach, which is no big deal. and 2, in april when playoff standings are made, and the one day in april when points actually matter,every team played 82 games, so total points and win percentage give the same results.

#36 T-Ruff

T-Ruff

    BAMF

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,727 posts
  • Location:Ontario

Posted 08 February 2007 - 11:52 PM

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

Busted again!!! laugh.gif

Like I said previously, he just likes to make ridiculous discussions for the sake of making them.

It's not even to make a point.

EDIT: Someone registered on the Leaf's site should spread the word of what's going on here. wink.gif


Done and Done...... cool.gif

#37 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 09 February 2007 - 12:46 AM

QUOTE(T-Ruff @ February 8, 2007 - 11:09PM) View Post

Look what I came across on the Leafs' forums laugh.gif :

Compare to:

clap.gif laugh.gif

Well, we will find out who is smarter, Leafs fans or Wings fans. Should be interesting. If you read some of the nonsense one of the participants on the Leafs board is going on about, I would give the nod to Wings fans for now.

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

Busted again!!! laugh.gif

Like I said previously, he just likes to make ridiculous discussions for the sake of making them.

It's not even to make a point.

EDIT: Someone registered on the Leaf's site should spread the word of what's going on here. wink.gif

These aren't ridiculous discussions. If you don't like them or you have no interest in the topic, you're free to not participate. The game winning goal is a common stat in the NHL and if you read my first post in the GWG thread, and some of the responses, you'll see that I'm raising a very good point about what appears to be a very flawed and useless statistic.

Points earned has long been the way the NHL sorts teams in the standings, but since losses are the equivalent of not playing in a points earned sort, i'm raising the question of why not use the baseball model of games back or winning percentage - both of which could be easily used in the NHL. This is a very viable and meaningful topic of discussion in a hockey forum. It's not like I'm a baseball junkie who is trying to get hockey to replace the puck with a baseball!

QUOTE(stevie for president @ February 8, 2007 - 11:18PM) View Post

if im not mistaken, total points only matter twice. once in december for the all star coach, which is no big deal. and 2, in april when playoff standings are made, and the one day in april when points actually matter,every team played 82 games, so total points and win percentage give the same results.

If that's the only time when points earned matters, then why does virtually every major newspaper in the USA and Canada publish the NHL standings - sorted by points earned - on a daily basis during the season?

If the selection of the All Star coach is based on points, what if one team has had the benefit of playing a greater number of games? For example, let's say the Wings have 45 points in 30 games while the Predators have 46 points in 33 games. Wings have a better points pct, but do you still give the coaching job to the Preds coach?

#38 Inultus

Inultus

    Slush ****

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 885 posts
  • Location:Lansing, MI

Posted 09 February 2007 - 11:09 AM

QUOTE(mackel @ February 8, 2007 - 08:38PM) View Post

The one quirk of the NHL standings that drives me wild is the ranking by division... this means a team with fewer points can be ranked higher than a non division leading team with more points.

Some people will say that this is because some divisions are stronger than others... personally I think that's BS... you have to win the games if not then you didn't its that simple.... Calgary should by all rights be 6th in the conference.


I agree it's BS, in fact when I saw those standings I wasn't even sure why a team with less points was ranked above us...

"It's been six years since we won the Cup. That's too long." -Nick Lidstrom

"my message is simple: The next time anyone runs any of our guys in a way that shouldn't be done, then a message will be sent. I'm not going to go out and run your skill guys, your superstars. I'm going to go right to the guy (who did it), and fair justice is fair justice." -Downey

#39 WingsFan2007

WingsFan2007

    Prospect

  • Member
  • 49 posts

Posted 09 February 2007 - 01:34 PM

QUOTE(Inultus @ February 9, 2007 - 11:09AM) View Post

I agree it's BS, in fact when I saw those standings I wasn't even sure why a team with less points was ranked above us...

If all the teams in one conference were going to be ranked together, then shouldn't the schedule be a little more balanced and each team plays each other team in the conference the same number of times.

#40 Inultus

Inultus

    Slush ****

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 885 posts
  • Location:Lansing, MI

Posted 09 February 2007 - 01:46 PM

Yes.
"It's been six years since we won the Cup. That's too long." -Nick Lidstrom

"my message is simple: The next time anyone runs any of our guys in a way that shouldn't be done, then a message will be sent. I'm not going to go out and run your skill guys, your superstars. I'm going to go right to the guy (who did it), and fair justice is fair justice." -Downey





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users