Alternate Standings Approaches

[Kane One]

Can you do one like win-loss but with regulation/OT wins being counted first and then SO wins being the tie breaker?

Here you go:

http://www.hockeystandings.info/?page=other&p=winloss2

 

[Hire Sather]

I really don't understand these "what if" threads

If the rules were different (no matter what they are), teams would have played the games differently late in the game.

 

[Kane One]

I really don't understand these "what if" threads

If the rules were different (no matter what they are), teams would have played the games differently late in the game.

I don't think anyone's trying to pass it off as what the standings would definitely look like, and your argument is obvious reason why. I just think it's interesting to see.

 

[Mosby]

Simplified Standings: Winning % and Games Behind

The NHL 'loser point' is the hockey equivalent of the participation trophy. Despite the league-wide parity that occurs under the current system, we've seen quite a few fans who want to rework the NHL standings to a three-point system, bring back ties, etc.

This idea goes one step further in that it uses a straight Win-Loss and Winning Percentage system like the other 3 American major leagues, and also includes Games Behind as in MLB and NBA.

Using the current NHL standings, where OT/shootout losses are combined with regulation losses, we have:

Notice that there are only a few small changes from the current system:

- Chicago and Colorado switches places in the Central
- Columbus overtakes Detroit for the 2nd wildcard in the East
- Winnipeg overtakes Dallas for the 2nd wildcard in the West
- The bottom 5 teams remain the same, with NYI dropping to 3rd last (BUF, EDM, NYI, FLA, CGY)


If the changes in the standings are this few/minor, I have to think this style of system would be something worth considering.

 

[Marshall Eriksen]

Classic Schmosby.

 

[castle]

I think you made your own counter argument. If things don't change much, them why bother.

 

[Mosby]

I think it makes the standings a helluva lot easier to understand. The fewer columns, the better. I can imagine a hockey newcomer looking at the standings and being lost at the meaning of a 'ROW'. I think there is some benefit with having a similar system to the other popular American sports leagues.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

I think there is some benefit with having a similar system to the other popular American sports leagues.

Hockey isn't like other American sports.

- In basketball, it's easy to break a tie because they score on every other play.
- In baseball, playing extra innings deep into the night isn't a big deal because the game isn't as taxing on the body, it's a lot of standing around.
- The NFL has ties.

You can't just play hockey all night until there is a winner. There are too many games throughout the season for that to happen.

 

[jmart21]

If the standings are for the most part unchanged, what's wrong with the way they are?

 

[bleedblue1223]

Need to make shootout wins and loses into ties like before the lockout, but I do enjoy seeing Chicago fall like that lol.

 

[Mosby]

You can't just play hockey all night until there is a winner. There are too many games throughout the season for that to happen.

I'm not proposing to get rid of the shootout. I'm just saying get rid of the shootout column. If you win the shootout, it's a win, if you lose the shootout, it's a loss. Same with overtime.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

No thanks. Shootouts aren't hockey.

 

[fastvoteman]

In my opinion any Shootout game is basically a tie game. You need a 3rd column.

 

[MNNumbers]

Quick add here:

As we are finding out, comparisons between various systems seem to have negligible effect, especially this year.

The exception to all that is in the playoff bubble in the East, which is so tight anyway that you could introduce a "whichever team has a player with the lowest resting heart rate" column worth .5 points, and it would change things - that's how tight it is.

So, maybe it really doesn't matter.

Since most hate shootouts, it seems a couple things might be possible:

1 - change the weighting in OT games to be (Win in OT - 2 pts. Lose in OT - 0 pts. Game goes to SO, then each team gets .5 pts, and the SO winner gets 1 pt). In this way, each game is still worth 2 pts.

2 - Change the scoring like this: Don't score the SO in the standings, but use it for a tie breaker. Thus, all games are W, L, T (use OT if you want, but count W, L, T). Keep a separate column for Shootouts. Then, if 2 teams are tied at the end of the year, SO wins is the first tie break. That way, fans get to see the SO, but it has only a very small effect on the standings.