If there are no ties, why use points?

[davemess]

And please refrain from using any examples that include ties

Thats kinda tricky since only american sports believe that ties are the spawn of satan and are to be killed on sight.


Rugby is probably the best example since ties are generally very rare.

 

[colonel_korn]

Thats not what a table is to me..... a table should provide all the required information with as few figures as is possible.

Just about every other league in every other sport in the world uses a point based system without people getting confused over who has the best record.

Actually I don't think basketball, baseball or football use point systems at all. Soccer does. Key point: the first three sports don't have ties (aside from CFL football, but they still don't use points and ties are really rare). Soccer does have ties, frequently, so they use a points system.

If the NHL eliminates ties and no longer rewards teams for OT losses then there isn't really any reason to keep a points system aside from tradition. It really makes points meaningless, I mean why two points for a win, you could have 1, or 3, or 17, it doesn't matter if wins and losses are the only possible outcomes.

 

[Tawnos]

Because they have won more games at that point?

With a Points system teams start and zero and progress forward with every win.

With a Games behind system teams start at 100% and progress backwards with every loss.

Yes, they may have won more games at that point, but they also lost just as many if not more.

Games behind is not a system, it's a way of measuring a system. And that system is a winning percentage system. In a winning percentage system, teams start at zero and fluctuate based on performance.

 

[davemess]

Actually I don't think basketball, baseball or football use point systems at all. Soccer does. Key point: the first three sports don't have ties (aside from CFL football, but they still don't use points and ties are really rare). Soccer does have ties, frequently, so they use a points system.

I was refering to sports outside the USA, i should have said "the rest of the world".


Please refer to my ties comments above.

 

[Fighter of Foo]

Actually I don't think basketball, baseball or football use point systems at all. Soccer does. Key point: the first three sports don't have ties (aside from CFL football, but they still don't use points and ties are really rare). Soccer does have ties, frequently, so they use a points system.

Actually...the NFL uses ties...it happens every now and then, but if no one scores in OT, the game ends in a tie. Just look at the good ol' standings on espn if you don't believe me.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/standings

 

[reckoning]

I absolutely hate ties. I would love if the NHL adopted an MLB rule. Keep playing until someone wins. I know this will probably never happen but they use it in the playoffs and who doesn't love seeing a goal in triple OT.I think it is one of the most exciting moments in sports.

The difference is most of the time in baseball the game the next day is in the same city while in hockey back-to-back games are in different cities. It`s unreasonable to have a game go `til 2:00 AM when the players have to fly to another city for a game the next night. Not to mention that hockey is a "little" more physically demanding than baseball.

 

[Tawnos]

Thats kinda tricky since only american sports believe that ties are the spawn of satan and are to be killed on sight.


Rugby is probably the best example since ties are generally very rare.

Rugby... the teams generally have all played the same amount of games at any given moment. Points is fine for that because it eliminates a column. There are no discrepancies.

 

[HockeyCritter]

Baseball also has a "curfew†---- after a certain hour games are suspended until the next day.

 

[Captain Ron]

The difference is most of the time in baseball the game the next day is in the same city while in hockey back-to-back games are in different cities. It`s unreasonable to have a game go `til 2:00 AM when the players have to fly to another city for a game the next night. Not to mention that hockey is a "little" more physically demanding than baseball.

You are right but for a league trying to regain viewers it sure would add some excitement. Isn't there an off day between most games though. I know there are back to back games but aren't they usually with teams within a reasonable distance.

 

[ColoradoHockeyFan]

At the end of a season would the team with fewer points beat the team with more points? No, as long as all wins count the same and all losses count the same and there are no ties. Therefore, why should the team with fewer points be ahead of a team with more points in the middle of the season?

I guess it comes down to which you prefer. Going on the assumption that they will have only wins and losses, all counting the same, no ties, consider this example:

Team A has a record of 30-29.
Team B has a record of 31-36.

Which team should be ahead in the standings? By the points system, Team B would be ahead. By the winning percentage/games-back system, Team A would be ahead.

My personal preference would be for Team A to be ahead in the standings. This also has the advantage of being more familiar to the casual fan (and general sports fan), since sports like MLB, etc. use winning % and games back.

 

[Captain Ron]

Baseball also has a "curfew†---- after a certain hour games are suspended until the next day.

But how often is that implemented?

 

[colonel_korn]

Actually...the NFL uses ties...it happens every now and then, but if no one scores in OT, the game ends in a tie. Just look at the good ol' standings on espn if you don't believe me.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/standings

Hm, I didn't know that. I guess it's not a huge issue since ties are so rare. Still though, in their system, how do you determine which is better, a 9-7 team or a 8-6-2 team? Would they have the same winning percentage, and then you'd use normal tiebreakers to rank them?

 

[davemess]

Rugby... the teams generally have all played the same amount of games at any given moment. Points is fine for that because it eliminates a column. There are no discrepancies.

Not always true, with European games and domestic cup competions teams can fall behind the normal pace of games.

Hockey is not a sport where teams will end up huge amount of games behind.




I dont understand the huge urge to make hockey just like baseball.

 

[jamiebez]

I think using Wins/Losses/Games Back is a great idea. Simple is good.

Plus, this way I can figure out a team's "magic number" to clinch a playoff spot without a calculator

 

[ATLANTARANGER*]

I'm sure Gary has concerns for the traditions of the sport!

The latest rumour has the NHL awarding two points for any type of win (regular time, overtime, shootout) and no points for OTL/SOL, and of course no ties.

So...... do newspapers start using Wins/Loss/GBL (Games behind leader) instead, like they do in baseball and basketball? Why have points if they are just WinsX2?

Not! Only from the mind of Bettman could such a lameass concept come forth.
Hopefully the NHLPA is holding out for his canning as part of the CBA. Please bring in someone who understands the game. I'll take someone who actually went to a hockey game before they were offered the job as commissioner.

 

[kdb209]

Thats not what a table is to me..... a table should provide all the required information with as few figures as is possible.

Just about every other league in every other sport in the world uses a point based system without people getting confused over who has the best record.

Every other sport?

You mean like:

the NFL - winning %-age
the NBA - winning %-age
MLB - Games Behind

 

[666]

Hm, I didn't know that. I guess it's not a huge issue since ties are so rare. Still though, in their system, how do you determine which is better, a 9-7 team or a 8-6-2 team? Would they have the same winning percentage, and then you'd use normal tiebreakers to rank them?

You can think of a tie as half of a win (and half a loss). In this case 9-7-0 is 9/16=.5625 and 8-6-2 is 8.5/16=.53125

The 8-6-2 team is half a game back.

 

[futurcorerock]

All the statistics in all the record books are measured in points. Every newspaper, website and hockey database in the world has everything set up to measure points, not games back or winning percentage.

It's for sanity, continuity, and simplicity.

Points is better than Games Back anyhow.

 

[kdb209]

You can think of a tie as half of a win (and half a loss). In this case 9-7-0 is 9/16=.5625 and 8-6-2 is 8.5/16=.53125

The 8-6-2 team is half a game back.

Actually, the 8-6-2 team has TWO ties (@ 1/2 a win each), so both teams have effectively the same record (9 wins). This would be dealt with in the tiebreaker rules (IIRC, head-to-head and then most wins), just like in the NHL.

 

[colonel_korn]

Actually, the 8-6-2 team has TWO ties (@ 1/2 a win each), so both teams have effectively the same record (9 wins). This would be dealt with in the tiebreaker rules (IIRC, head-to-head and then most wins), just like in the NHL.

So effectively the NFL has a points system with wins worth twice as much as ties, it's just that ties are extremely rare and they express it in terms of winning percentage instead of points.

 

[666]

Actually, the 8-6-2 team has TWO ties (@ 1/2 a win each), so both teams have effectively the same record (9 wins). This would be dealt with in the tiebreaker rules (IIRC, head-to-head and then most wins), just like in the NHL.

Oops, silly me I missed that. Sorry.

 

[Seachd]

Because the pace is more pertinent than the actual number. Simply put, at the end of the year in terms of standings, does the team with the .515 win% beat the team with the .500 win%? Yes, as long as all wins count the same and all losses count the same and there are no ties. Therefore, why should the team with a .500 win% be ahead of the team with a .515 win% in the middle of the season?

At the end of the year, yes. But "pace" in the middle of the season isn't very relevant, because part of it's hypothetical. Points have actually been attained, and so should be given priority.

Meh, I have no problem with ties in the first place, so I think this whole thing is ridiculous.

 

[Tawnos]

I dont understand the huge urge to make hockey just like baseball.

And here we find the root of your logic. Seriously, this has nothing to do with that. To me, a points system in a system that awards all wins equally and does not have ties is completely illogical.

 

[davemess]

Every other sport?

You mean like:

the NFL - winning %-age
the NBA - winning %-age
MLB - Games Behind

Did you miss this post?

I was refering to sports outside the USA, i should have said "the rest of the world".

 

[davemess]

To me, a points system in a system that awards all wins equally and does not have ties is completely illogical.

Thats because your american, you are used to the winning percentage method.


Both systems are reasonable, its mostly a case of personal preference.