Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

ROW vs Point based system


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 StayClassy

StayClassy

    Babcock's Doormat

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 63 posts
  • Location:Columbus,OH

Posted 13 April 2014 - 11:26 PM

Going to a three point system has been mulled over for years. I think switching the qualifications to make the playoffs should be changed to the teams that have the most ROW. This eliminates the shootout as any kind of deciding factor for teams to get in, and has no effect on standings until a tie. Points would be a good secondary tiebreaker. I always thought GF was a bad tiebreaker, does't seem fair to defensive teams. I would be fine with the season series used as a tiebreaker, or even goal differential. 

 

For the record, I personally think shootout is better than a tie. Changing to ROW would keep anti shootout people happy, and keep the shootout in the game with less weight. 


Edited by StayClassy, 13 April 2014 - 11:28 PM.

"Let him live."


#2 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 12:19 AM

 

Going to a three point system has been mulled over for years. I think switching the qualifications to make the playoffs should be changed to the teams that have the most ROW. This eliminates the shootout as any kind of deciding factor for teams to get in, and has no effect on standings until a tie. Points would be a good secondary tiebreaker. I always thought GF was a bad tiebreaker, does't seem fair to defensive teams. I would be fine with the season series used as a tiebreaker, or even goal differential. 

 

For the record, I personally think shootout is better than a tie. Changing to ROW would keep anti shootout people happy, and keep the shootout in the game with less weight. 

I don't think ROW alone is good enough. I think you need to account for R/OT ties as well. (Or even better, just go back to having ties...)

 

Also, season series is the second tiebreaker, goal differential is the third. GF is not a tiebreaker at all.



#3 toby91_ca

toby91_ca

    Legend

  • Gold Booster
  • 8,458 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 07:59 AM

Had that been applied this year, the Wings don't make the playoffs.  The rest of the top 8 in the east stays the same except for TB and MTL flipping spots.


Edited by toby91_ca, 14 April 2014 - 07:59 AM.


#4 Wings_Toledo

Wings_Toledo

    Seeing Red

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 788 posts
  • Location:Cincinnati, OH

Posted 14 April 2014 - 11:02 AM

Had that been applied this year, the Wings don't make the playoffs.  The rest of the top 8 in the east stays the same except for TB and MTL flipping spots.


True, but it's kind of dumb that we got in with only 38 wins anyway. I like this ROW idea going forward, though I'm not sure what the league would think of it.

#5 Richdg

Richdg

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,938 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 05:07 PM

Better yet, just go with w-l record. Every game has a winner and a loser. Why keep wasting time with points/OTL/ROW etc....... BTW get rid of OT all together and go straight to the SO to settle things. Easier on the players. 



#6 Internet.Unknown

Internet.Unknown

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 231 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 05:43 PM

Just say no to a skills competition deciding hockey GAMES.



#7 LAWings

LAWings

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 138 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 05:56 PM

True, but it's kind of dumb that we got in with only 38 wins anyway. I like this ROW idea going forward, though I'm not sure what the league would think of it.

 

Actually we got in with 34 ROW and 93 points.  New Jersey had 35 with 88 points and didn't make it.  Carolina had 34 ROW and 83 points.  Washington 28 ROW and 90 points! 

 

This points system rewards losers and is terribly broken.

 

Every year 1-2 teams get screwed by the new points system (this year Nashville 36 ROW, Minn 35 ROW...Trotz fired for not making playoffs). 

 

Unfortunately our Wings are this year's usurpers of a playoff berth.  Jersey should be in, Wings should be out.  I know that's going to rankle some cankles in here, but statistically, we aren't the better team then Jersey and are on par with Carolina.



#8 GMRwings1983

GMRwings1983

    The Killer is Me

  • Silver Booster
  • 20,713 posts
  • Location:Jerkwater, USA

Posted 14 April 2014 - 07:58 PM

Get rid of shootouts.

5 on 5 OT (if there's no winner, each team gets a point.  Zero points for an OT loss).  

 

Basically, go back to the system pre 1999-2000


According to my profile, my reputation is excellent. LOL.

#9 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 08:34 PM

 

Actually we got in with 34 ROW and 93 points.  New Jersey had 35 with 88 points and didn't make it.  Carolina had 34 ROW and 83 points.  Washington 28 ROW and 90 points! 

 

This points system rewards losers and is terribly broken.

 

Every year 1-2 teams get screwed by the new points system (this year Nashville 36 ROW, Minn 35 ROW...Trotz fired for not making playoffs). 

 

Unfortunately our Wings are this year's usurpers of a playoff berth.  Jersey should be in, Wings should be out.  I know that's going to rankle some cankles in here, but statistically, we aren't the better team then Jersey and are on par with Carolina.

I think you're over-simplifying a bit. You're basically counting a SO win as a loss.

 

NJ does have one more ROW than us, but they also have one more regulation loss. Carolina has the same ROW, but 7 more regulation losses and you say we're even. If we go regulation/OT losses, it puts NJ at 35-34, us at 34-34, Car at 34-42.

 

You can still make the case that NJ (and Nashville -- 36-35 vs Dallas 36-37) got screwed. As a counterpoint, I'd say the shootout has been around for 9 seasons now. Not like it's sneaking up on anyone. Shouldn't be too hard to get a few guys that can score on a PS when you know you need them. Also, let's not pretend that the SO is the only example of individual skill. There are numerous examples of goals being scored (or denied) on the efforts of an individual. And finally, if the shootout was taken out, how might that change how teams play?

 

Everyone's playing by the same rules, so no one has cause to whine about it.



#10 joesuffP

joesuffP

    Hall-of-Famer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,932 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 09:14 PM

Better yet, just go with w-l record. Every game has a winner and a loser. Why keep wasting time with points/OTL/ROW etc....... BTW get rid of OT all together and go straight to the SO to settle things. Easier on the players. 


The f***?

#11 LAWings

LAWings

    Rookie

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 138 posts

Posted 14 April 2014 - 11:52 PM

I think you're over-simplifying a bit. You're basically counting a SO win as a loss.

 

NJ does have one more ROW than us, but they also have one more regulation loss. Carolina has the same ROW, but 7 more regulation losses and you say we're even. If we go regulation/OT losses, it puts NJ at 35-34, us at 34-34, Car at 34-42.

 

You can still make the case that NJ (and Nashville -- 36-35 vs Dallas 36-37) got screwed. As a counterpoint, I'd say the shootout has been around for 9 seasons now. Not like it's sneaking up on anyone. Shouldn't be too hard to get a few guys that can score on a PS when you know you need them. Also, let's not pretend that the SO is the only example of individual skill. There are numerous examples of goals being scored (or denied) on the efforts of an individual. And finally, if the shootout was taken out, how might that change how teams play?

 

Everyone's playing by the same rules, so no one has cause to whine about it.

 

Hi.  I think the point people (like myself) are trying to make is that there is too much value put into the shootout, and unfairly so, as a magical one point appears especially if you lose.  I'm not counting the SO win as a loss, but there shouldn't be 3 points awarded in the shootout.  Have you ever tried explaining to a non hockey person (one who is an other sports fan) the NHL point system?  I've gotten looks like I'm retarded and don't know what I'm talking about... that magical 3rd points is ridiculous.  The ROW is a guide of what happens after 65 minutes of play...

 

The point system needs to be altered so that Regulation wins mean more then a shootout win. And you can't count regulation losses, that doesn't make sense when you are looking at regulation and overtime wins.  Who cares about regulation losses, no league in any sport factors in regulation losses, it's inconsequential, it's about the wins.

 

I like the Olympic point system (it's not perfect, but magic points don't appear, and there's always 3 points to play for in a game): 3 points for a regulation time win, 2 points for an overtime or shootout win, 1 point for an overtime or shootout defeat, 0 points for a regulation time defeat.  It keeps it honest.

 

It will make regulation play that much more meaningful and balance out the standings more appropriately.


Edited by LAWings, 14 April 2014 - 11:55 PM.


#12 Buppy

Buppy

    1st Line All-Star

  • Silver Booster
  • 1,980 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 11:12 AM

 

Hi.  I think the point people (like myself) are trying to make is that there is too much value put into the shootout, and unfairly so, as a magical one point appears especially if you lose.  I'm not counting the SO win as a loss, but there shouldn't be 3 points awarded in the shootout.  Have you ever tried explaining to a non hockey person (one who is an other sports fan) the NHL point system?  I've gotten looks like I'm retarded and don't know what I'm talking about... that magical 3rd points is ridiculous.  The ROW is a guide of what happens after 65 minutes of play...

 

The point system needs to be altered so that Regulation wins mean more then a shootout win. And you can't count regulation losses, that doesn't make sense when you are looking at regulation and overtime wins.  Who cares about regulation losses, no league in any sport factors in regulation losses, it's inconsequential, it's about the wins.

 

I like the Olympic point system (it's not perfect, but magic points don't appear, and there's always 3 points to play for in a game): 3 points for a regulation time win, 2 points for an overtime or shootout win, 1 point for an overtime or shootout defeat, 0 points for a regulation time defeat.  It keeps it honest.

 

It will make regulation play that much more meaningful and balance out the standings more appropriately.

I agree a 3 point system would be better, but that's not what was originally suggested.

 

For the record, in the Olympic system:

Det: 30-9-15-28 = 123 points

NJ: 26-9-18-29 = 114 points

 

If you go 3 for ROW - 2 SOW - 1 SOL - 0 ROL:

Det: 34-5-9-34 = 121 points

NJ: 35-0-13-34 = 118 points

 

If, as you originally proposed, you only count ROW then everything that is not a ROW counts as a loss. That would be fine if every game was actually a ROW or ROL. But we have games that are tied after OT. Those should be considered. When you do, you see NJ didn't actually get screwed like you originally claimed.



#13 StayClassy

StayClassy

    Babcock's Doormat

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 63 posts
  • Location:Columbus,OH

Posted 15 April 2014 - 11:37 AM

The main thing I am for is taking power away from the shootout. I do agree giving less credit for losing in overtime is troubling, but I am fine with that.  Should we let team A get in who won more 3 more in overtime? Or is Team B better because they happened to make it to overtime more times than team A, even if it resulted in a loss. Taking out some of the reward just for getting to OT or SO, will result in less teams trying to trap the game up if a W has more meaning. I feel like too many team may look at OT and SO "extra points time" when it should just be deciding who gets the W.  This should result in more exciting hockey IMO. 

 

I do like the 3 point system you proposed however. 


Edited by StayClassy, 15 April 2014 - 11:42 AM.

"Let him live."


#14 nawein

nawein

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 337 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 06:02 PM

2 points for a win, 0 for a loss and play hockey until the game ends. They're professional athletes; if you're that worried about them getting tired go to a ten minute ot and give each team a point for being tied at the end.

Shootouts are stupid. NBA doesn't end with a dunk competition, NFL doesn't end with a longest pass or field goal competition, MLB doesn't end with a home run derby. The shootout is a gimmick and takes away from the actual game. Play the sport until the game ends.

#15 sjr2012

sjr2012

    1st Line All-Star

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,058 posts
  • Location:Croswell,MI

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:02 PM

better yet just do 5 on 5 for 5 than 4 on 4 if nothing after those two than call atie


try to get something by me i dare you

 

 

:goalie:


#16 StayClassy

StayClassy

    Babcock's Doormat

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 63 posts
  • Location:Columbus,OH

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:08 PM

Maybe they can just do a best of three between shootout, hardest shot, and accuracy. That seems like the most fair right?


"Let him live."


#17 nawein

nawein

    4th Line Grinder

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 337 posts

Posted 15 April 2014 - 09:16 PM

Maybe they can just do a best of three between shootout, hardest shot, and accuracy. That seems like the most fair right?


Might as well throw fastest skater in too.





Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users