MTU_Huskies963 398 Report post Posted December 16, 2008 I have a solution that will fix the point system GET RID OF THE SHOOTOUT. There is nothing wrong with a tie. 1 haroldsnepsts reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 Just to add to this - I really geeked out and did the math, now it's not drastic, but enough to change seedings, drafting, etc - Look at last year alone, this NEEDS to happen, it better separates and is a MUCH better indication of the standings... Last year under the 2 pt system: Team GP W L OTL PTS EAST Washington 82 48 23 11 107 Philadelphia 82 47 23 12 106 Boston 82 46 25 11 103 Pittsburgh 82 49 25 8 106 Tampa Bay 82 46 25 11 103 Montréal 82 44 30 8 96 Buffalo 82 43 29 10 96 NY Rangers 82 44 33 5 93 --OUT OF PLAYOFFS-- Carolina 82 40 31 11 91 Toronto 82 37 34 11 85 New Jersey 82 38 39 5 81 Atlanta 82 34 36 12 80 Ottawa 82 32 40 10 74 NY Islanders 82 30 39 13 73 Florida 82 30 40 12 72 WEST Vancouver 82 54 19 9 117 San Jose 82 48 25 9 105 Detroit 82 47 25 10 104 Anaheim 82 47 30 5 99 Nashville 82 44 27 11 99 Phoenix 82 43 26 13 99 Los Angeles 82 46 30 6 98 Chicago 82 44 29 9 97 --OUT OF PLAYOFFS-- Dallas 82 42 29 11 95 Calgary 82 41 29 12 94 St Louis 82 38 33 11 87 Minnesota 82 39 35 8 86 Columbus 82 34 35 13 81 Colorado 82 30 44 8 68 Edmonton 82 25 45 12 62 Last year under the 3 pt system: TEAM GP W L SOW SOL PTS EAST Philadelphia 82 44 28 3 7 145 Washington 82 43 28 5 6 145 Boston 82 44 30 2 6 142 Pittsburgh 82 39 30 10 3 140 Tampa Bay 82 40 30 6 6 138 Montréal 82 41 35 3 3 132 NY Rangers 82 35 35 9 3 126 Buffalo 82 38 38 5 1 125 --OUT OF PLAYOFFS-- Carolina 82 35 37 5 5 120 New Jersey 82 35 42 3 2 113 Toronto 82 32 39 5 6 112 Atlanta 82 29 41 5 7 104 Ottawa 82 30 45 2 5 99 Florida 82 26 45 4 7 93 NY Islanders 82 26 46 4 6 92 WEST Vancouver 82 50 23 4 5 163 San Jose 82 43 29 5 5 144 Detroit 82 43 31 4 4 141 Anaheim 82 43 33 4 2 139 Phoenix 82 38 33 5 6 130 Nashville 82 38 34 6 4 130 Los Angeles 82 36 34 10 2 130 Chicago 82 38 33 6 5 131 --OUT OF PLAYOFFS-- Dallas 82 37 33 5 7 128 Calgary 82 32 34 9 7 121 Minnesota 82 36 38 3 5 119 St Louis 82 34 38 4 6 116 Columbus 82 29 40 5 8 105 Colorado 82 24 51 6 1 85 Edmonton 82 23 48 2 9 82 1 Zeowingsfan reacted to this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
P. Marlowe 748 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 I think a big reason for why NHL hasn't changed it is because the league loves traditions. You wouldn't be able to compare teams' seasons now for what happened say in the 1970's. Although the OTL point already changed that but there's still the old idea that only great teams get 100 points in a season. Three point system would make the comparing impossible in an obvious way. I think NHL being such an old league with many traditions can be seen often in the way how long it takes for rules to evolve. The rink is still small, the icing is still no-touch, players still won't cover their necks. I'm fine with this, I'm just saying that I can see NHL slowly following other leagues in the world in development. They just want to think about everything long and hard. Then there's also the stuff like "trapezoid" which breaks up my theory as the rule looks like it was invented and implemented in five minutes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nev 1,085 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 Its not going to change because it artificially compresses the standings and makes almost every game, right up to the end of the regular season, worth something. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kass 7 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 I'm down for a three point system and a 10 minute OT, but I don't think whatever system gets adopted should punish teams who win in OT. Maybe if they win in the shootout, but not OT. It's not really fair to take points from a team for not being able to break a deadlock until after regulation. The shootout is fine too, since its one of those things that gets non-fans excited and keeps draws, which are cancerous for popular interest, out of the game. These kinds of systems don't really compress the standings that much either. Soccer leagues around the world use the three point system and a lot of them still have very close races for first/playoffs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragonballgtz 273 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 Just to add to this - I really geeked out and did the math, now it's not drastic, but enough to change seedings, drafting, etc - Look at last year alone, this NEEDS to happen, it better separates and is a MUCH better indication of the standings... Last year under the 2 pt system: Team GP W L OTL PTS EAST Washington 82 48 23 11 107 Philadelphia 82 47 23 12 106 Boston 82 46 25 11 103 Pittsburgh 82 49 25 8 106 Tampa Bay 82 46 25 11 103 Montréal 82 44 30 8 96 Buffalo 82 43 29 10 96 NY Rangers 82 44 33 5 93 --OUT OF PLAYOFFS-- Carolina 82 40 31 11 91 Toronto 82 37 34 11 85 New Jersey 82 38 39 5 81 Atlanta 82 34 36 12 80 Ottawa 82 32 40 10 74 NY Islanders 82 30 39 13 73 Florida 82 30 40 12 72 WEST Vancouver 82 54 19 9 117 San Jose 82 48 25 9 105 Detroit 82 47 25 10 104 Anaheim 82 47 30 5 99 Nashville 82 44 27 11 99 Phoenix 82 43 26 13 99 Los Angeles 82 46 30 6 98 Chicago 82 44 29 9 97 --OUT OF PLAYOFFS-- Dallas 82 42 29 11 95 Calgary 82 41 29 12 94 St Louis 82 38 33 11 87 Minnesota 82 39 35 8 86 Columbus 82 34 35 13 81 Colorado 82 30 44 8 68 Edmonton 82 25 45 12 62 Last year under the 3 pt system: TEAM GP W L SOW SOL PTS EAST Philadelphia 82 44 28 3 7 145 Washington 82 43 28 5 6 145 Boston 82 44 30 2 6 142 Pittsburgh 82 39 30 10 3 140 Tampa Bay 82 40 30 6 6 138 Montréal 82 41 35 3 3 132 NY Rangers 82 35 35 9 3 126 Buffalo 82 38 38 5 1 125 --OUT OF PLAYOFFS-- Carolina 82 35 37 5 5 120 New Jersey 82 35 42 3 2 113 Toronto 82 32 39 5 6 112 Atlanta 82 29 41 5 7 104 Ottawa 82 30 45 2 5 99 Florida 82 26 45 4 7 93 NY Islanders 82 26 46 4 6 92 WEST Vancouver 82 50 23 4 5 163 San Jose 82 43 29 5 5 144 Detroit 82 43 31 4 4 141 Anaheim 82 43 33 4 2 139 Phoenix 82 38 33 5 6 130 Nashville 82 38 34 6 4 130 Los Angeles 82 36 34 10 2 130 Chicago 82 38 33 6 5 131 --OUT OF PLAYOFFS-- Dallas 82 37 33 5 7 128 Calgary 82 32 34 9 7 121 Minnesota 82 36 38 3 5 119 St Louis 82 34 38 4 6 116 Columbus 82 29 40 5 8 105 Colorado 82 24 51 6 1 85 Edmonton 82 23 48 2 9 82 Looks about the same same to me, so I don't think a 3 point system is the answer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
thedisappearer 291 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 I think a big reason for why NHL hasn't changed it is because the league loves traditions. How can you say that with a straight face whn we play in the Central Division of the Western Conference? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chunkylover 26 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 I think we fans, and the league, need to be a lot more cautious than we were during the lockout and really consider the effects of what a rules change will produce. Everyone thought the new system was a good idea, but as we've seen, there have been a lot of unintended consequences of the changes made since the lockout. Indeed, the response of the competition committee and owners during the CBA discussion was in response to the unintended consequences from previous decisions and innovations. For instance, on it's own, the current three-point game with the loser getting a point might not have affected the standings as much if it didn't coincide with the salary cap and the introduction of parity. Don't think there won't be problems if we bring back ties or add three point games. Try to figure out what problems will come and then appreciate what we have. You'll enjoy the game a lot more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 <!--quoteo(post=1500364:date=December 15, 2008 - 06:05PM:name=steveyzerman)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (steveyzerman @ December 15, 2008 - 06:05PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1500364"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Win in regulation: 2 points Win after regulation: 1 point Lose: 0 points <b>I don't understand why the loser is rewarded.</b><!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> For parity... it makes the standings closer causing more "excitement" in the playoff race at the end of the season... though the skill between teams may be distant, it does not appear that way on paper this way... that means the fans of the teams that aren't quite as good still feel good about their team because they are competing in the standings instead of being so far behind the league leaders... those who pay a lot more in depth attention will still know which teams are clearly better than others, but for the casual fan it doesn't look that way and that means more fans coming out to see and root for more teams... the end result is more money for more teams... keep arguing that the point system should be changed, but you're fighting a losing battle I don't like the loser point but you're exactly right. It's forced parity, because it's so hard to put distance between teams when they're handing out points in losses. So late in the season a lot more teams are in contention and the games are still meaningful. Which means more ticket sales and tv ratings, in theory. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 I still say every game should only have 2 points on the line. Either one team gets both points, or they each get a point (a tie). The OT loss and shootout points need to go away. Basically, get rid of the shootout. Handing out 3 points for a win will just balloon everyone's point totals some more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Crashnburnluder 385 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) My biggest problem with the new system was the fact they added the overtime point so teams would take chances to get the extra point in OT. The problem that caused was teams just tried to get to OT instead of worrying about losing one late so they at least get a point. I don't think teams try to make it to the shootout but they for sure try to make it to OT. The system I think they need to start using is simple. Since there is no such thing as a tie anymore... 2 points for a win, 0 points for a loss. Forget the loser pity point its not necessary. All the 3 point for a win, 2 if its in OT 1 if you loss in the shootout 0 if you lose in Overtime is dumb i think. It too much complicated. We already have a new section in the NHL Standings for Regulation wins because they don't want it to rely on a shoot out win, but why should it matter. A win is a win and a loss is a loss. 2 points for a win (no matter if its in the 3rd or a 15 round shootout) 0 points for a loss. just cause you lose 35 games in overtime. doesn't mean you should get 35 extra points. You lose the game plain and simple. Edited December 3, 2011 by Crashnburnluder Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Electrophile 3,554 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 3 pts = win 2 pts = OT win 1 pt each = tie after OT OT = 20 min. period; 5 on 5 for the first 10 minutes, 4 on 4 for the last 10 minutes; no icing Get rid of the ******* shootout, and you get no points if you lose. Also, no guaranteed points going into OT, either. It's like a consolation prize ribbon in your 3rd grade Science Fair. One of those, "Thanks for participating!" pieces of crap. You have to play to earn your points, not just show up. Getting rid of the shootout will also force teams to play harder in OT. I mean, why go all out if you know you have great shooters (like Pavs), who can score goals in a shootout? Total disincentive to not phone it in. Shootouts belong in the ASG Skills Contest and nowhere else. You don't see games decided by Hardest Slap-shot, do you? Or who can hit the most targets in a net? How about skating around those little traffic cones? First one down the ice and back up again wins for their team. If you can't tell, I really, really, really hate shootouts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
etr102 0 Report post Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) As people have already stated, the current system of 2 total points being awarded in some games (regulation) and 3 total points being awarded (OT or Shootout) completely throws the balance of the standings off. There should be a predetermined amount of points up for grabs for all games, not 2 for some and 3 for others. And on that note, I say get rid of the point system all together. The only reason NHL has a 'points' system is that historically, there had always been the possibility of a tie and those ties needed some value associated with them for the standings to 'make sense.' Now that a tie is no longer possible, why do we even have "points"? A Win should be a Win, and a Loss should be a Loss, regardless of how the game was decided. At the end of the season, just go by winning percentage to decide the standings, just like MLB. I also don't agree with the shootout. Is a baseball game decided by a homerun derby? No, that would be equally ridiculous. I have been a proponent of 20 minute periods until a goal is scored (as is done in the playoffs). The fact that the rules/structure of the game is completely different in the playoffs than it is in the regular season has always seemed silly to me. I think that's a topic for a different thread though as I think this is supposed to purely be about point allotment. Edited December 3, 2011 by etr102 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kass 7 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 They should keep the shootout but lengthen the OT to ten minutes. Having ties kills a lot of casual interest, and I can't really imagine why anyone would rather have them over the shootout as long as losing team ends up with what they would have gotten under a tie system. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stevkrause 1,247 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 They should keep the shootout but lengthen the OT to ten minutes. Having ties kills a lot of casual interest, and I can't really imagine why anyone would rather have them over the shootout as long as losing team ends up with what they would have gotten under a tie system. Exactly. With that said, shootout wins should not be worth the same a s a TEAM win, so all the people saying, 2 for W, 0 for L - this is stupid. The 3 pt system is a no brainer and in this case, pursits be damned, who cares about the rediculous "100" pt benchmark, it's irrelevant anyway... please remove head. And those saying it didn't make enough difference, tell that to Philly and to teams whose seedings would have been completely different last year, PLUS those teams who drafted lower than they should have... Any argument against this is baseless other than a foot stomp of "I don't like it mommy" ALL GAMES SHOULD HAVE EQUAL TOTAL ACCUMULATIVE VALUE. PERIOD. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GMRwings1983 8,794 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 3 pts = win 2 pts = OT win 1 pt each = tie after OT OT = 20 min. period; 5 on 5 for the first 10 minutes, 4 on 4 for the last 10 minutes; no icing Get rid of the ******* shootout, and you get no points if you lose. Also, no guaranteed points going into OT, either. It's like a consolation prize ribbon in your 3rd grade Science Fair. One of those, "Thanks for participating!" pieces of crap. You have to play to earn your points, not just show up. Getting rid of the shootout will also force teams to play harder in OT. I mean, why go all out if you know you have great shooters (like Pavs), who can score goals in a shootout? Total disincentive to not phone it in. Shootouts belong in the ASG Skills Contest and nowhere else. You don't see games decided by Hardest Slap-shot, do you? Or who can hit the most targets in a net? How about skating around those little traffic cones? First one down the ice and back up again wins for their team. If you can't tell, I really, really, really hate shootouts. Here's what I don't like about these 3 point/2 point system for wins. Why should a regulation win count for more points than an OT win? Winning in OT means you score a goal, hence you outscore the opposition to win the game. For instance, in the playoffs, regulation wins don't mean any more than OT wins. Makes no sense to me. A win is a win. We shouldn't differentiate between those two by handing the points out differently. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Electrophile 3,554 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 The incentive should be to win in regulation. If you can't, you get a point deducted if you win in OT. If you don't win in OT, you get another point deducted for tying. No team gets any points until the end of the game, be it regulation or OT. You'll either leave with 3, 2, or 1, depending on the circumstances, but none of those points are assured. Absolutely no points will be awarded for losses. The system needs to be reformed, because in it's current state, it's a ******* mess. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
haroldsnepsts 4,826 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 Here's what I don't like about these 3 point/2 point system for wins. Why should a regulation win count for more points than an OT win? Winning in OT means you score a goal, hence you outscore the opposition to win the game. For instance, in the playoffs, regulation wins don't mean any more than OT wins. Makes no sense to me. A win is a win. We shouldn't differentiate between those two by handing the points out differently. That's a really good point when you put it that way. What about 10 minute 4 on 4 in OT, then the shootout. 2 points if you win in regulation or OT. 1 point if you win in the shootout. No points for losing (I know it's a radical concept in the NHL these days). So that way the shootout can get you a point, but not what you would've earned in regulation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Crashnburnluder 385 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 The incentive should be to win in regulation. If you can't, you get a point deducted if you win in OT. If you don't win in OT, you get another point deducted for tying. No team gets any points until the end of the game, be it regulation or OT. You'll either leave with 3, 2, or 1, depending on the circumstances, but none of those points are assured. Absolutely no points will be awarded for losses. The system needs to be reformed, because in it's current state, it's a ******* mess. I disagree, the incentive should be to Win, no matter how you get it done. Should a team get an extra point if the win the game 7-0? No. So why should they get penalized if they only win 3-2 in OT? Just go to a 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss system. This whole 3 points for a win, 2 for an OT win, 1 for a shootout win, 0 for a loss is just too much and just makes it harder to understand as a casual fan. A casual fan has no idea that at the end of a season only the regulation wins count towards a tie breaker and all of that stuff. Simplicity is a beautiful thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wingsfan4795 552 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 How about this: Regulation win: 2pts Regulation loss: 0pts Ot/ shootout win: 2pts Ot/ shootout loss: 1pt As you can see this would be a MAJOR change and require a big adjustment for teams:) What about 10 minute 4 on 4 in OT, then the shootout. 2 points if you win in regulation or OT. 1 point if you win in the shootout. No points for losing (I know it's a radical concept in the NHL these days). that's actually pretty good. But I have no problem with the system they have now Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Crashnburnluder 385 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 How about this: Regulation win: 2pts Regulation loss: 0pts Ot/ shootout win: 2pts Ot/ shootout loss: 1pt As you can see this would be a MAJOR change and require a big adjustment for teams:) that's actually pretty good. But I have no problem with the system they have now I Love this idea but I could have sworn I have seen this systems used somewhere before lol Take off the 1 point for the OT/shootout loss and I'm a fan haha Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Electrophile 3,554 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 No points for losses. You lost. You get nothing. Doesn't matter if you lose in regulation or in OT. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Echolalia 2,961 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 One point for a win, zero for a loss. End of story. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SouthernWingsFan 854 Report post Posted December 4, 2011 3 points for a win in regulation 2 points for a win in overtime 1 point for a shootout win 0 points for a loss Sorry if this has been repeated, haven't read the whole topic thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted December 5, 2011 Either: 1) Bring back the regulation-time tie game or 2) Play overtime until there's a winner; five-on-five. Save the shootout for the ASG. You'd be surprised how quickly the millionaires will want to end the games ASAP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
