Why does the NHL sort teams by points and not percentage or games behind like in the NBA or MLB?

[kalaco 0]

Here's another thing about hockey which I've never understood. Why does the NHL sort teams in the standings using points and not something more balanced such as points percentage or perhaps games above/below .500 as is used in the NBA and MLB?

As points treats a regulation loss precisely the same as not playing, it doesn't consider the detriment of a regulation loss the way the percentage & games behind systems do in MLB and the NBA.

For example, let's say the Rangers are 23-11-0 (46 pts) and the Bruins are 22-11-0 (44 pts). The Rangers have a better percentage and better games above/below .500 than the Bruins. The Rangers then lose two games while the Bruins don't play. Now the Rangers are 23-13-0 (46 pts) and the Bruins are 22-11-0 (44 pts). Now the Bruins have a better percentage and a better games above/below .500 than the Rangers, but the Rangers would still be listed ahead of the Bruins. If the Yankees were 23-11 and the Red Sox were 22-11 and the Yankees lost two in a row while the Red Sox didn't play, the Yankees (now 23-13) would fall behind the Red Sox (still 22-11).

We know the reason isn't the presence of overtime losses (or one point games), as an overtime loss is the net equivalent of half a win and half a regulation loss. So what is the reason the NHL doesn't use points percentage or games behind like is used in the NBA and MLB?

 

[Z and D for the C 712]

Because points are the only thing that matters at the end of the season.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

THe NBA and MLB cannot end games in ties, so a point system is meaningless since all games are either won or lost. Hence, a team's win/loss record is used.

NFL games can end in ties, but it's rare, And since the league only plays 16 games a season, a points system is unnecessary.

The NHL plays an 82 game season where games can end in ties, Also, games can give out the teams who played in it 0, 1, or 2 points, depending on the outcome. That's why a Point System is necessary for seeding.

Does that answer your question?

Edited September 30, 2018 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[kalaco 0]

29 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

THe NBA and MLB cannot end games in ties, so a point system is meaningless since all games are either won or lost. Hence, a team's win/loss record is used.

NFL games can end in ties, but it's rare, And since the league only plays 16 games a season, a points system is unnecessary.

The NHL plays an 82 game season where games can end in ties, Also, games can give out the teams who played in it 0, 1, or 2 points, depending on the outcome. That's why a Point System is necessary for seeding.

Does that answer your question?

Thanks for the response, but it doesn't answer the question.  As indicated in the OP, since a tie is the net equivalent of half a win and half a loss, we know the reason can't be due to the presence of ties (or 1 point games).  Perhaps you have some other ideas.

3 hours ago, Z and D for the C said:

Because points are the only thing that matters at the end of the season.

Seeding teams by points pct or games above/below .500 would yield the same seedings as points.  Unlike points, percentage or games above/below .500 would not treat a regulation loss as the same as not playing.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Ever heard of Points Earned Numerically In Shots?

[Buppy 1,720]

I suspected you might be that guy. This question seems to pop up almost every year. The answer remains the same: "Because they want to".

The only time the standings matter is at the end of the season, when everyone has played an equal number of games. And as you already know, at that time points give the same result as percentage. 

If mid-season standings bother you, don't look at them. 

And for Neo, 2004 was a long time ago. You should check out some post-lockout hockey.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

10 minutes ago, Buppy said:

I suspected you might be that guy. This question seems to pop up almost every year. The answer remains the same: "Because they want to".

The only time the standings matter is at the end of the season, when everyone has played an equal number of games. And as you already know, at that time points give the same result as percentage. 

If mid-season standings bother you, don't look at them. 

And for Neo, 2004 was a long time ago. You should check out some post-lockout hockey.

Yeah but GWG is BS

[toby91_ca 620]

12 hours ago, Buppy said:

I suspected you might be that guy. This question seems to pop up almost every year. The answer remains the same: "Because they want to".

The only time the standings matter is at the end of the season, when everyone has played an equal number of games. And as you already know, at that time points give the same result as percentage. 

If mid-season standings bother you, don't look at them. 

And for Neo, 2004 was a long time ago. You should check out some post-lockout hockey.

This exactly.  Why does anyone care what the standings look like at any point during the season other than after every team has played 82 games?  It has to the be the way it in a points system standings though.  If a team has more points than another team, they have to be ahead of them in the standings....doesn't matter of their winning record is currently worse.  They've earned points that the other team hasn't earned yet....winning record is just as meaningless at looking at mid-year standings.

I challenge anyone to provide a logical reason for "in season" standings to have any meaning or use.

[krsmith17 7,191]

47 minutes ago, toby91_ca said:

This exactly.  Why does anyone care what the standings look like at any point during the season other than after every team has played 82 games?  It has to the be the way it in a points system standings though.  If a team has more points than another team, they have to be ahead of them in the standings....doesn't matter of their winning record is currently worse.  They've earned points that the other team hasn't earned yet....winning record is just as meaningless at looking at mid-year standings.

I challenge anyone to provide a logical reason for "in season" standings to have any meaning or use.

I'm not sure if you're serious... Standings during the season absolutely do matter. Most teams have a board in their dressing room with league standings listed on it all season. Standings matter to fans, players, coaches and management. I have no idea why you think they're "meaningless" during the season...

Here's just one of many logical reasons for "in season" standings to have meaning / use. It's mid February and your team has played 49 games. You have a 26-19-4 record. Are you going to buy, sell or stand pat at the Trade Deadline? It might depend on where you sit in the standings, would it not?...

We always hear that teams that are in / out of a playoff spot by US Thanksgiving, have a high probability of making / missing the playoffs. It's obviously not a forgone conclusion at that point, but standings DO matter.

They don't matter as much in the first few weeks, but they do still serve a purpose, even that early in the season.

As for the OP, I don't think it matters much how the standings are listed, as long as you know how to interpret them, which is pretty straight forward whether it's total points or point percentage...

[Buppy 1,720]

4 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

I'm not sure if you're serious... Standings during the season absolutely do matter. Most teams have a board in their dressing room with league standings listed on it all season. Standings matter to fans, players, coaches and management. I have no idea why you think they're "meaningless" during the season...

Here's just one of many logical reasons for "in season" standings to have meaning / use. It's mid February and your team has played 49 games. You have a 26-19-4 record. Are you going to buy, sell or stand pat at the Trade Deadline? It might depend on where you sit in the standings, would it not?...

We always hear that teams that are in / out of a playoff spot by US Thanksgiving, have a high probability of making / missing the playoffs. It's obviously not a forgone conclusion at that point, but standings DO matter.

They don't matter as much in the first few weeks, but they do still serve a purpose, even that early in the season.

As for the OP, I don't think it matters much how the standings are listed, as long as you know how to interpret them, which is pretty straight forward whether it's total points or point percentage...

What I, and I assume Toby, meant by "standings don't matter" is that they aren't used for anything. e.g. There's no prize for being in 1st place in December. Obviously a team's record always matters, but only because it's part of the final record, not because of where they're ranked on some website at some arbitrary time. Teams don't sell because they're in 12th place in February, they sell because they think they'll still be in 12th place in April. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

ESPN Power Rankings > NHL Standings

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

If we're only going to use common sense, then every North American league should follow European soccer and hand out the championship to the team with the most points.  I mean, if you have the best record after 82 freaking games, shouldn't that count for something?  Why have to prove yourself again in a silly gimmick tournament, where your only advantage is having one more home game than your opponent, providing it goes 7 games?

I'm not saying I want this, because I love the NHL playoffs, but when you think about it, the entire North American playoff format doesn't make much sense.  The regular season is meaningless providing you just qualify for the playoffs.  

Edited October 2, 2018 by GMRwings1983

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

11 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

If we're only going to use common sense, then every North American league should follow European soccer and hand out the championship to the team with the most points.  I mean, if you have the best record after 82 freaking games, shouldn't that count for something?  Why have to prove yourself again in a silly gimmick tournament, where your only advantage is having one more home game than your opponent, providing it goes 7 games?

I'm not saying I want this, because I love the NHL playoffs, but when you think about it, the entire North American playoff format doesn't make much sense.  The regular season is meaningless providing you just qualify for the playoffs.  

It does. They give you an awesome, meaningless trophy.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

7 hours ago, GMRwings1983 said:

If we're only going to use common sense, then every North American league should follow European soccer and hand out the championship to the team with the most points.  I mean, if you have the best record after 82 freaking games, shouldn't that count for something?  Why have to prove yourself again in a silly gimmick tournament, where your only advantage is having one more home game than your opponent, providing it goes 7 games?

I'm not saying I want this, because I love the NHL playoffs, but when you think about it, the entire North American playoff format doesn't make much sense.  The regular season is meaningless providing you just qualify for the playoffs.  

Europe is trash

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

On 9/30/2018 at 11:21 PM, Buppy said:

I suspected you might be that guy. This question seems to pop up almost every year. The answer remains the same: "Because they want to".

The only time the standings matter is at the end of the season, when everyone has played an equal number of games. And as you already know, at that time points give the same result as percentage. 

If mid-season standings bother you, don't look at them. 

And for Neo, 2004 was a long time ago. You should check out some post-lockout hockey.

Ya got me. Yes, the 3rd column in the standings is OTL now and no longer ties. Ooops. Good job. 

[toby91_ca 620]

On 10/1/2018 at 1:32 PM, krsmith17 said:

I'm not sure if you're serious... Standings during the season absolutely do matter. Most teams have a board in their dressing room with league standings listed on it all season. Standings matter to fans, players, coaches and management. I have no idea why you think they're "meaningless" during the season...

Here's just one of many logical reasons for "in season" standings to have meaning / use. It's mid February and your team has played 49 games. You have a 26-19-4 record. Are you going to buy, sell or stand pat at the Trade Deadline? It might depend on where you sit in the standings, would it not?...

We always hear that teams that are in / out of a playoff spot by US Thanksgiving, have a high probability of making / missing the playoffs. It's obviously not a forgone conclusion at that point, but standings DO matter.

They don't matter as much in the first few weeks, but they do still serve a purpose, even that early in the season.

As for the OP, I don't think it matters much how the standings are listed, as long as you know how to interpret them, which is pretty straight forward whether it's total points or point percentage...

Dead serious.  The only reason teams (players, coaches, management, etc.) look at standings during the year is to see their record and everyone else's in their division and against the conference.  They look at the standings because that's where the info exists.....but the "standings" that shows who is 1st, 2nd, etc.....they don't look at that because it is absolutely meaningless other than on the final day of the season when all teams have played all 82 games.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

59 minutes ago, toby91_ca said:

Dead serious.  The only reason teams (players, coaches, management, etc.) look at standings during the year is to see their record and everyone else's in their division and against the conference.  They look at the standings because that's where the info exists.....but the "standings" that shows who is 1st, 2nd, etc.....they don't look at that because it is absolutely meaningless other than on the final day of the season when all teams have played all 82 games.

They look at them but they also dont look at them. Word. 

[krsmith17 7,191]

1 hour ago, toby91_ca said:

Dead serious.  The only reason teams (players, coaches, management, etc.) look at standings during the year is to see their record and everyone else's in their division and against the conference.  They look at the standings because that's where the info exists.....but the "standings" that shows who is 1st, 2nd, etc.....they don't look at that because it is absolutely meaningless other than on the final day of the season when all teams have played all 82 games.

Sooooo... you're saying that the standings do serve a purpose, and they're not completely meaningless?...

[Buppy 1,720]

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

Sooooo... you're saying that the standings do serve a purpose, and they're not completely meaningless?...

No, he's saying records matter, but how they're displayed on a web page doesn't.

[krsmith17 7,191]

43 minutes ago, Buppy said:

No, he's saying records matter, but how they're displayed on a web page doesn't.

No, that's not what he "said". That's maybe what he meant, but what he said was "I challenge anyone to provide a logical reason for "in season" standings to have any meaning or use." ,

They do have a use, it's just a matter of how people interpret them.

[Buppy 1,720]

1 hour ago, krsmith17 said:

No, that's not what he "said". That's maybe what he meant, but what he said was "I challenge anyone to provide a logical reason for "in season" standings to have any meaning or use." ,

They do have a use, it's just a matter of how people interpret them.

Depends on how you want to define "standings" I guess. Pretty clear from his response that he's talking about how the teams are ranked. The fact that the displayed standings require any "interpretation" kind of proves the point. 

[Dabura 12,207]

The standings system is set up so that Chad pundits can remind the plebs that teams who are outside of the playoff picture at the end of November probably aren't going to make the playoffs. Basically, it's an institutionalized mechanism for demoralizing the Edmonton Oilers.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, Dabura said:

The standings system is set up so that Chad pundits can remind the plebs that teams who are outside of the playoff picture at the end of November probably aren't going to make the playoffs. Basically, it's an institutionalized mechanism for demoralizing the Edmonton Oilers.

CHADS

This forum is going to dark places

[kalaco 0]

On 9/30/2018 at 9:21 PM, Buppy said:

I suspected you might be that guy. This question seems to pop up almost every year. The answer remains the same: "Because they want to".

The only time the standings matter is at the end of the season, when everyone has played an equal number of games. And as you already know, at that time points give the same result as percentage. 

If mid-season standings bother you, don't look at them. 

And for Neo, 2004 was a long time ago. You should check out some post-lockout hockey.

You are correct that the standings don't matter until the end of the season. But if you are going to list the standings during the season, does it make more sense to use a method to sort the teams which:
A) treats regulation losses the same as not playing
B) differentiates regulation losses from not playing

On 10/1/2018 at 9:39 AM, toby91_ca said:

This exactly.  Why does anyone care what the standings look like at any point during the season other than after every team has played 82 games?  It has to the be the way it in a points system standings though.  If a team has more points than another team, they have to be ahead of them in the standings....doesn't matter of their winning record is currently worse.  They've earned points that the other team hasn't earned yet....winning record is just as meaningless at looking at mid-year standings.

I challenge anyone to provide a logical reason for "in season" standings to have any meaning or use.

You are correct that the standings don't matter until the end of the season. But if you are going to list the standings during the season, does it make more sense to use a method to sort the teams which:
A) treats regulation losses the same as not playing
B) differentiates regulation losses from not playing

Using points pct or GA500 would yield the same seedings at the end of the season and wouldn't treat a regulation loss the same as not playing.

On 10/1/2018 at 10:32 AM, krsmith17 said:

I'm not sure if you're serious... Standings during the season absolutely do matter. Most teams have a board in their dressing room with league standings listed on it all season. Standings matter to fans, players, coaches and management. I have no idea why you think they're "meaningless" during the season...

Here's just one of many logical reasons for "in season" standings to have meaning / use. It's mid February and your team has played 49 games. You have a 26-19-4 record. Are you going to buy, sell or stand pat at the Trade Deadline? It might depend on where you sit in the standings, would it not?...

We always hear that teams that are in / out of a playoff spot by US Thanksgiving, have a high probability of making / missing the playoffs. It's obviously not a forgone conclusion at that point, but standings DO matter.

They don't matter as much in the first few weeks, but they do still serve a purpose, even that early in the season.

As for the OP, I don't think it matters much how the standings are listed, as long as you know how to interpret them, which is pretty straight forward whether it's total points or point percentage...

If you are going to list the standings during the season, does it make more sense to use a method to sort the teams which:
A) treats regulation losses the same as not playing
B) differentiates regulation losses from not playing

Edited October 3, 2018 by kalaco

[kalaco 0]

On 10/1/2018 at 3:18 PM, Buppy said:

What I, and I assume Toby, meant by "standings don't matter" is that they aren't used for anything. e.g. There's no prize for being in 1st place in December. Obviously a team's record always matters, but only because it's part of the final record, not because of where they're ranked on some website at some arbitrary time. Teams don't sell because they're in 12th place in February, they sell because they think they'll still be in 12th place in April. 

Buppy, how would you go about determining under which goaltender your team performed better:

Goaltender A: 20-25-5 (50 pts)

Goaltender B: 20-0-0 (40 pts)

Think about it and let me know how you arrived at your conclusion.

9 hours ago, toby91_ca said:

Dead serious.  The only reason teams (players, coaches, management, etc.) look at standings during the year is to see their record and everyone else's in their division and against the conference.  They look at the standings because that's where the info exists.....but the "standings" that shows who is 1st, 2nd, etc.....they don't look at that because it is absolutely meaningless other than on the final day of the season when all teams have played all 82 games.

Toby - help myself and others understand why it would make more sense to list a 20-21 team ahead of a 19-18 team.