Adjust the standings system

DL44

Status quo
Sep 26, 2006
17,894
3,801
Location: Location:
Those dreadful games still happen by the truckload in the final 10-15 minutes of regulation time, both teams are content with letting the clock run out in the third period without trying to win the game in regulation time and have it decided. The current point system rewards you if you can take games to overtime, it explains the increase in games going to overtine after the OTL is implemented, something that you completely ignored from the article for whatever reason

But you know the level of play is about to ramp up in the OT... unlike when ties were around. You probably missed my edit... the wings finished a season with a 0-0-15 OT record. 3rd overall team in the league... Just content to bank those points to the end of of the game. Imagine being a fan in the arena for that. Sitting hoping that game is one game where the 5% chance of seeing your team with a OT winner...

Current system is superior to any we've had before.
 

pabst blue ribbon

🇺🇦🤝🇵🇱
Oct 26, 2015
3,240
1,965
PG
But you know the level of play is about to ramp up in the OT... unlike when ties were around. You probably missed my edit... the wings finished a season with a 0-0-15 OT record. 3rd overall team in the league... Just content to bank those points to the end of of the game.

Current system is superior to any we've had before.
The tradeoff is that you make actual hockey (5v5) boring and have it decided by arbitrary gimmicks that give out arbitrary results for the winner and loser, it's a stupid way too evaluate the quality of a hockey team and dimishes the product by awarding teams by playing a boring 3rd period, the 3v3 gimmick isn't worth it
 

El Travo

Why are we still here? Just to suffer?
Aug 11, 2015
14,156
17,501
Can we stop keeping track of points and wins so everyone can have a good time?
 

DL44

Status quo
Sep 26, 2006
17,894
3,801
Location: Location:
The tradeoff is that you make actual hockey (5v5) boring and have it decided by arbitrary gimmicks that give out arbitrary results for the winner and loser, it's a stupid way too evaluate the quality of a hockey team and dimishes the product by awarding teams by playing a boring 3rd period, the 3v3 gimmick isn't worth it

OK.. But it's way more entertaining. I'll take the entertainment... afterall, that's why I watch in the first place.

There hasn't been a better alternative system presented than the current one.
 

pabst blue ribbon

🇺🇦🤝🇵🇱
Oct 26, 2015
3,240
1,965
PG
OK.. But it's way more entertaining. I'll take the entertainment... afterall, that's why I watch in the first place.

There hasn't been a better alternative system presented than the current one.
You could easily maintain entertainment in overtime if you incentivize winning without rewarding teams for reaching that point
 

Sanchise90

Registered User
Sep 6, 2019
307
243
The NHL very obviously needs to change the standing system, but only if it fixes the ridiculous way it decides regular season winners:

1) The NHL is the only major sport that literally has the potential to be 3 separate contests in one. It goes from 5 v 5 in regulation to 3 v 3 in OT to essentially 1 v 1 in a SO. What other sport plays 3 different types of formats in 1 game? It would be like if the NBA went from 5 on 5 to 3 v 3 and then a 3 point contest. It's stupid and that needs to change.

2) It's also the only sport that has a completely different way from deciding a winner in OT in the regular season and the postseason.

If we get rid of the gimmick that is overtimes in the regular season, the standings would to change and I am more than OK with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 93LEAFS

Uncle Scrooge

Hockey Bettor
Nov 14, 2011
13,479
8,022
Helsinki
I can't be the only one that hates when the score is tied at the end of the third period, and both teams start playing defensively to protect the score and make sure they secure a point. They should be fighting, whey should play to win the game.

What if we change the point system so that a Regulation win gets you 3 points, an OT/SO win gets you 2 points, an OT/SO loss gets you 1 point and a Regulation loss gets you no point?

Would that make the teams fight more on the ice? Would that be viable? What would be the downsides?

I do not think teams start playing more defensively at the start of 3rd period just to get a point out of a game. It's a myth people think because they've seen it happen on occasion.

I bet OT's regularly and can say with confidence i've seen hundreds if not thousands of games tied in the 3rd, im biting my nails hoping it stays tied but more often than not there's a goal scored so im hoping the other team can tie it up.

It's only natural that things can tighten up when then next mistake is magnified. Players are thinking about winning the game, and contrary to popular belief, it doesn't always mean pushing extra hard for offense. It can also mean waiting for your chances and limiting your mistakes.

Hockey doesn't look any different in leagues where there's a 3 point system. In the playoffs you can see things tightening up towards the end as well. I've never heard a player say they went out there in the start of 3rd to secure a point.

It's something that can happen in the last shifts of a game but really it's not a thing. I understand why you'd feel that way, but yeah.. If teams always just waited it out for the OT i'd be a rich man.
 

pabst blue ribbon

🇺🇦🤝🇵🇱
Oct 26, 2015
3,240
1,965
PG
I do not think teams start playing more defensively at the start of 3rd period just to get a point out of a game. It's a myth people think because they've seen it happen on occasion.

I bet OT's regularly and can say with confidence i've seen hundreds if not thousands of games tied in the 3rd, im biting my nails hoping it stays tied but more often than not there's a goal scored so im hoping the other team can tie it up.

It's only natural that things can tighten up when then next mistake is magnified. Players are thinking about winning the game, and contrary to popular belief, it doesn't always mean pushing extra hard for offense. It can also mean waiting for your chances and limiting your mistakes.

Hockey doesn't look any different in leagues where there's a 3 point system. In the playoffs you can see things tightening up towards the end as well. I've never heard a player say they went out there in the start of 3rd to secure a point.

It's something that can happen in the last shifts of a game but really it's not a thing. I understand why you'd feel that way, but yeah.. If teams always just waited it out for the OT i'd be a rich man.
It's not a myth, it's 100% real for tied games

To Make The Playoffs, Hockey Teams Play Not To Win
 

Uncle Scrooge

Hockey Bettor
Nov 14, 2011
13,479
8,022
Helsinki
It's not a myth, it's 100% real for tied games

To Make The Playoffs, Hockey Teams Play Not To Win

I was confused at first but yeah the last minutes of a tied game is a different story. For some reason i thought the OP was talking about games tied after 2.

Still though, there’s plenty of games out there that see plenty of chances until the end even in a tied game. It’s often dictated by how heated/competitive the game is. If it’s a game between cross conference teams or teams where the better team doesn't give a crap about the other team i feel like those are always a bit different.
 
Last edited:

TurboLemon

Registered User
Mar 11, 2013
120
55
However you want to word it, the losing team should go home with 0 points.
3:2:1 Is fair and does not favor offensive or defensive teams.
1:2:0 Encourages offensive teams.
2:2:1 Encourages defensive teams. - What we have now. Encourages parity as shit teams can trap. There's team defense, but team offense can't score consistantly without skill.
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,441
14,715
Victoria
I'm fine with the suggestion of 3-2-1 to encourage more aggressive play. I'm fine with the idea of letting ties be ties. I think both of those solutions would result in a better product.

I'm not fine with any system which equates a loss via a different form of the sport with a loss in regulation. They are not the same, and there is no precedent for doing this in any other league.

I don't like that the NHL treats their points system as sacred, but I do like that they acknowledge the difference between losing at a gimmick and losing a hockey game.
 

SheldonJPlankton

Registered User
Sponsor
Oct 30, 2006
2,561
1,453
2 points for a win. Zero points for a loss. Play continuous periods of 5x5 overtime until a winner is decided. Just like they do in the playoffs.

If you're worried about the chance of two teams locked into a marathon game of multiple periods and games lasting 4 plus hours when a team plays on back-to-back days...there is an easy fix. Force players and coaches to come up with strategies to win quickly...if it's necessary.
 

Papplebeast

Registered User
Jun 14, 2019
5
3
My solution is no point system. Just wins and losses. A team who is 20-13-7 is really 20-20, which is how it should be. Baseball, basketball and football do it, why not hockey? Do we really need a point system?
That's not how other sports do it. Other sports don't treat a tie the same as a loss. 20-13-7 is really 20-13. It's the same as not having played the game.

If we wanted to create a points system that was similar to how MLB standings are calculated, then a win = 1 pt, a tie = 0 pt, a loss = -1 pt. Points would then be equal to your number of games "over .500".
 

Ducks in a row

Go Ducks Quack Quack
Dec 17, 2013
18,004
4,356
U.S.A.
I see many still call the one point a "loser point"

It is NOT a loser point. If you "lose" after regulation, you are NOT credited with a loss in the standings.

That 1 point is the point for TYING after 60 minutes.

The NHL merely got people to believe ties went away. Great marketing gimmick

Ties did go away because no game ends in a tie someone gets a W for 2 points.

2 points for a win. Zero points for a loss. Play continuous periods of 5x5 overtime until a winner is decided. Just like they do in the playoffs.

If you're worried about the chance of two teams locked into a marathon game of multiple periods and games lasting 4 plus hours when a team plays on back-to-back days...there is an easy fix. Force players and coaches to come up with strategies to win quickly...if it's necessary.

Will never ever happen.

No strategies exist that allows for a team to quickly win in overtime and none will ever exist. Only way to be sure for a game to end quickly is if a team wants the game to end so they let the other team win.
 

Phrazer

Registered User
Apr 2, 2008
4,115
123
Cairns
For me. Abolish Points as the main standings determination.

Make standings based on ROW.

1st Tiebreaker is a points category built of of accrued points for Overtime Losses (1pt), Shootout wins(2pt), Shootout Losses (1pt).

Winning a game in regulation and overtime is what impacts the standings, and an overtime win is still a "full win" this is important to me, becuase winning a game in overtime is a great feeling I wou;dn't want to take away from.

And if two teams are tied at the end of the season in regulation and overtime wins, the teams that were in more close games, or could bolster this stat in skills competition at end during a shootout (still gives it some meaning without overpowering it) are ranked ahead of the others they are tied with in ROW at the end.
 

dortt

Registered User
Sep 21, 2018
5,297
2,656
Houston, TX
Ties did go away because no game ends in a tie someone gets a W for 2 points.



Will never ever happen.

No strategies exist that allows for a team to quickly win in overtime and none will ever exist. Only way to be sure for a game to end quickly is if a team wants the game to end so they let the other team win.

You just made my point. Great marketing by the NHL

But if a team gets a point for a TIE after 60 minutes, ties NEVER went away
 

Ducks in a row

Go Ducks Quack Quack
Dec 17, 2013
18,004
4,356
U.S.A.
You just made my point. Great marketing by the NHL

But if a team gets a point for a TIE after 60 minutes, ties NEVER went away

Getting a point for being tied after 60 mins doesn't mean ties still exist. Ties only exist with a game ending in a tie with overtime and shootouts a team gets a win and more points then if a game ended in a tie like before.
 

majormajor

Registered User
Jun 23, 2018
24,179
28,651
I can't be the only one that hates when the score is tied at the end of the third period, and both teams start playing defensively to protect the score and make sure they secure a point. They should be fighting, whey should play to win the game.

Maybe it's just early season sloppiness, but so far this season I've seen a lot of late third goals and end to end action when clubs are tied.
 

StoneHands

Registered User
Feb 26, 2013
6,608
3,674
Millionth time this has been mentioned, The Bettman point will never go away as it produces artificial parity thus making more money for the owners. They really don't care about the integrity of the game.
The 3-2-1 system really doesn't make a huge difference in the standings though. Every year someone brings it up towards the end of the season because they think they're team is getting screwed and there are always a couple teams that would move up or down a few places in the standings but for the most part the standings look pretty similar. The point system isn't what causes parity, it's the Cap you can thank for that.
 

StoneHands

Registered User
Feb 26, 2013
6,608
3,674
The best thing would be 5 points for a regulation win, 4 points for a overtime win, 3 points for a shoot out win, 2 points for a shoot out loss, 1 point for a overtime loss and 0 points for a regulation loss. That way teams would be extra motivated with the big 5 point price for winning a game in regulation.
This is a great idea but I'd like to tweak something. Teams get an extra points for goal differential in wins. So in a 2-1 win they would earn the team 5 points as you mentioned, but in a 3-1 win they get 6 points, 4-1 they get 7 and so on. Teams would be motivated to score as many goals as possible and teams are never out of the playoffs. Sitting in 12th place, 13 points behind the 8 spot with 1 game left? Not a problem, just grind out a 10-0 win and secure that last playoff spot.
 

Seachd

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
24,937
8,946
I really dislike the idea of an overtime win being worth less than a regulation win.

I guess maybe because that’s not how it works in the playoffs.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->