Better Points Format For The NHL

[Dellstrom]

I agree that a loss should be a loss... Regulation/OT/Shootout. They're not getting rid of the shootout for time being so it's not worth it to even talk about ties.

Regulation/OT win (5 min 4v4, 5 min 3v3) - 2 points
SO win - 1 point
Loss - 0 points

It would boost the excitement of games and end playing for ties.

 

[Jean_Jacket41]

I agree that a loss should be a loss... Regulation/OT/Shootout. They're not getting rid of the shootout for time being so it's not worth it to even talk about ties.

Regulation/OT win (5 min 4v4, 5 min 3v3) - 2 points
SO win - 1 point
Loss - 0 points

It would boost the excitement of games and end playing for ties.

How can you give 0pt to a team because they "lost" in a gimmick after a tied game?

 

[talkinaway]

There are two camps:

A) A loss is a loss - 0 points, no soup for you.
B) Symmetry is important. Every game should be worth x points.

I'm firmly in camp B. I don't mind the fact that, in the IIHF system (3-0 split for a game that ends in regulation, 2-1 split for a game that ends in OT/SO) that you're awarded a tiny morsel for making it 60 minutes without outright losing. I'd have no objections to making it a 3-0 split in regulation/OT, and a 2-1 split for the SO; either way is fine by me. In fact, I'd have a slight preference to this way. It essentially means that before a shootout, the teams get 1 point apiece for the "tie", and then play a 1 point shootout - devaluing the shootout, which is ALWAYS good.

I just really like the fact that, in the IIHF point system, every game has 3 points up for grabs. It's necessary to make fine distinctions among regulation wins, OT wins, and SO wins in the IIHF, because they have relatively short tournaments. It may be less necessary in the NHL regular season.

My ideal scoring system, however, would be a 2-0 split for regulation/OT, and a 1-1 split for a tie game. That'll never happen, because shootouts are allegedly great.

 

[Jdavidev]

There are two camps:

A) A loss is a loss - 0 points, no soup for you.
B) Symmetry is important. Every game should be worth x points.

I'm firmly in camp B. I don't mind the fact that, in the IIHF system (3-0 split for a game that ends in regulation, 2-1 split for a game that ends in OT/SO) that you're awarded a tiny morsel for making it 60 minutes without outright losing. I'd have no objections to making it a 3-0 split in regulation/OT, and a 2-1 split for the SO; either way is fine by me. In fact, I'd have a slight preference to this way. It essentially means that before a shootout, the teams get 1 point apiece for the "tie", and then play a 1 point shootout - devaluing the shootout, which is ALWAYS good.

I just really like the fact that, in the IIHF point system, every game has 3 points up for grabs. It's necessary to make fine distinctions among regulation wins, OT wins, and SO wins in the IIHF, because they have relatively short tournaments. It may be less necessary in the NHL regular season.

My ideal scoring system, however, would be a 2-0 split for regulation/OT, and a 1-1 split for a tie game. That'll never happen, because shootouts are allegedly great.

Yeah, it's silly games now are not worth 3 points for reg or OT.

I would prefer to ditch the shootout, but 3x3 is just as stupid. 4x4 is fine because that actually happens in a regular game, but 3x3 never happens. I think just extending 4x4 for 10 minutes would prevent most games from ending in a tie or SO. Especially as Clode's 3F and 1D system catches on.

 

[corpfan1]

The only thing with this, is teams will still play for overtime when tied with a couple minutes left if they are tired or on their heels. I want everyone to GO FOR IT in all situations.

I'd tweak it a bit
3 points for regulation win
3 points for overtime win
2 points for shootout win
1 point for shootout loss
0 points for overtime loss
0 points for regulation loss.

There'd be 3 points awarded for every game in every scenario. You get a point for making it through regulation and overtime without losing, and then the shootout get's you an extra point. No bonus for making it to overtime, and a shootout win is worth less than a hockey win.

 

[wetcamelfood]

The only thing with this, is teams will still play for overtime when tied with a couple minutes left if they are tired or on their heels. I want everyone to GO FOR IT in all situations.

Yes, this is why I don't like points for Ties because then you have teams holding on to make it a tie to get points because they are afraid of losing and not getting anything for a loss and zero points for losses and ties doesn't gain them anything but it's less embarrassing for them to end in a tie instead of a loss so they try to hang on to save face.

If you have 2 points for a reg W, that makes them go for it in regulation since that will maximize their points. 1 point for OT win so they get something if they don't win in reg but it makes them go for it since they know if there are no loser points on the table, might as well. If both teams lose a point for a tie, they know that will hurt them so it will make them go for it in OT, but this would get rid of any "hanging on for..." scenarios.

 

[amazingcrwns]

I don't want teams playing for the shoot out to get one point.

3 points regulation win.
2/1 for OT/Shootout
4 on 4 then 3 on 3 then shootout

It just doesn't make sense that OT games have more points available. The 3 point regulation win is the big no brainer.

I think teams would be fighting until the last whistle to get 3 points for the win instead of hoping to get 1 or 2 in a shootout. Make OT 10 minutes of 5 on 5 instead of 4 on 4.

I'd prefer to do away with the shootout as well, go back to the 2 pts for a win, 1 for a tie, 0 for a loss, but I don't think that'll happen.

I don't like giving a point for an overtime loss.

 

[amazingcrwns]

The only thing with this, is teams will still play for overtime when tied with a couple minutes left if they are tired or on their heels. I want everyone to GO FOR IT in all situations.

I don't think you can prevent a team from trying to hold on at the end of a game if they've got tired legs. I find that to be the nature of sports, you use your energy to try to hold off a loss and hope for a mistake from the other team to capitalize on.

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

The only thing with this, is teams will still play for overtime when tied with a couple minutes left if they are tired or on their heels. I want everyone to GO FOR IT in all situations.

I disagree. Not winning in regulation then puts the team into a position where they may only walk away with one point instead of three. Sacrificing two points.

Losing in the shootout isn't something I'd consider an actual loss. And one can make a point either way when it comes to the 4-4 overtime.

Three points on the line every game will make winning in regulation more appealing than winning in the shootout and lead to more exciting games within the 60 minutes. As it stands right now, there is motivation to hold out if you feel your team has a better chance in the skills competition than in the team game... And the reward is pretty much the same.

 

[OutspokenMinority*]

whatever you do, do not change the 4 on 4 OT. that one is a huge success.

i do NOT want to watch another 10 minutes of grinding 5 on 5 at that point. i say this as someone who actually enjoys grinding hockey otherwise.

 

[kcmdux88]

I don't have a problem with the shoot out if it's December, who cares. How about after the trade deadline, playoff rules apply for the rest of the season, except 4 on 4 instead of 5 on 5. Better than missing the playoffs because of a shoot out.

 

[PlaceboFan]

I think that the system used in European soccer leagues would work well in hockey as well. 3 points for win, 1 point for tie, 0 for loss. Maybe add a 10 minute OT, I don't really care. I just want the shootout gone.

 

[EverettMike]

All games worth three points. Regulation win is three, OT/Shootout win two, OT/Shootout loss one.

Make OT eight minutes.

 

[Dellstrom]

How can you give 0pt to a team because they "lost" in a gimmick after a tied game?

Because a loss is a loss.

 

[Braunbaer]

No shootout - bring back the tie!

Tie - 1 point each.

Regulation win - 2 points.

Overtime win - 3 points.

Then you'd really see teams going for the win in overtime, and not playing it safe. (in most cases).

And you'd see every team scoring 5 own goals against bottom feeders at the end of the game to tie it up since you get more points for an OT win.

No disrepect, but this is the stupiedest suggestion I've ever heard with regard to the ponts format in the NHL.



What I acutally hate most about the shootout is the fact that teams blowing huge leads (like Ottawa yesterday) are still able to get 100% of the points because of the shootout.
It's even more ridicilous against teams form the other divisions. Who cares if they get an extra point ...


10 min OT 4on4 (no 3on3 crap ...)

win: 2 points
tie: 1 point
loss: 0 points

 

[Braunbaer]

I think that the system used in European soccer leagues would work well in hockey as well. 3 points for win, 1 point for tie, 0 for loss. Maybe add a 10 minute OT, I don't really care. I just want the shootout gone.

That would work as well since that system got implemented to punish teams for sitting back.
Tied games should yield less points ... not more points like in the NHL.

 

[Jean_Jacket41]

This is the actual standings: http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?type=WC#&navid=nav-stn-conf

If you remove the false winning point (shouthout win) for what is a tie game, you get this:

Habs 84
TB 86
Wingz 82

Isles 83
NYR 84
Pitt 83

WC Wsh 79
WC Bruins 74

Flo 65
Ott 67
Phi 66
NJ 62
Clb 54
Tor 55
Car 53
Buf 36

Both the Isles (7 wins) and the Habs (6 wins) are currently leading their division because they have been good at a gimmick that won't be there in the playoffs. With tie games, TB and NYR would actually be in 1st places and will likely end there too as they are better teams than those two. Florida (7 wins) is also keeping hope for a WC spot because of the gimmick point.

 

[Jean_Jacket41]

With the good old system (win=2pts, loss=0pt, tie= 1pt), this would be the actual standing:

TB 84
NYR 82
NYI 82
Mtl 81
Det 80
Pit 79
Wsh 73
Bruins 71

Ott 62
Flo 61
Phi 60
NJ 58
Clb 52
Tor 52
Car 51
Buf 34

 

[BearAttack]

3 points for a win, no overtime. 1 point for a tie. If three points are on the line vs 1 point you will see no teams "playing for a tie".

 

[Jean_Jacket41]

3 points for a win, no overtime. 1 point for a tie. If three points are on the line vs 1 point you will see no teams "playing for a tie".

The problem with the actual point system is that they give the same number of point for a real win and a gimmick "win" that is actually a tie game.

If they don't want to give me back my tie games and want to keep on the Mickey Mouse ending that casual fans like, then you have to make it a 3 pts games:

Regular time win: 3pts
OT or Mickey Mouse win: 2pts
Ot or Mickey Mouse loss: 1pt

This would be the standing with this system:

TB 125
Mtl 122
NYI 120
NYR 119
Pit 115
Det 113
Wsh 111
Bos 99

Ott 94
Flo 93
Phi 89
NJ 89
Tor 79
Clb 78
Car 77
Buf 54

Not much change in the standings beside TB/Mtl, Flo/Ott and Clb/Tor swaping places. So there is maybe why they are keeping the actual point format even if flawed...

Still, the best way would be going back to the good old format (win=2pts, loss=0pt, tie=1pt). That is the best way to see what team is actually good at playing hockey and not who is the best to have a better ranking because they are good at a Mickey Mouse gimmick ending.

 

[nycpunk1]

Sorry, but if "a loss is a loss", then "a win is a win". The only legitimate way to have all losses equal is if you actually make them equal. That means bringing W-L-T back-- 60 minutes of hockey played under the normal rules. No more bonus hockey

Hockey games aren't decided with 3 or 4 skaters, 1-on-1, or as first-to-score-wins. As soon as you add overtime, you've created two sets of losers-- those who lost under the normal rules of hockey, and those who lost in other circumstances. You also create two sets of winners-- the ones who beat their opponents in regular time, and the ones who couldn't get it done in 60 minutes. The points should reflect that.

3 points for winning, one point for tying, zero points for losing THE HOCKEY GAME. Ties will be followed by a sudden-death contest for a single point, played 4-on-4 for 10 minutes. I don't really care how they resolve it after that. Frankly, beating a team in a shootout isn't more/less pathetic than beating a team who played a 90-minute overtime slugfest the night before.

 

[TCL40]

whatever you do, do not change the 4 on 4 OT. that one is a huge success.

i do NOT want to watch another 10 minutes of grinding 5 on 5 at that point. i say this as someone who actually enjoys grinding hockey otherwise.

For regular season I'm fine with 4 on 4 and would like to see them go 7 or 10 minutes and midway switch too 3 on 3 in hopes of avoiding the shoot out.

 

[TCL40]

The problem with the actual point system is that they give the same number of point for a real win and a gimmick "win" that is actually a tie game.

If they don't want to give me back my tie games and want to keep on the Mickey Mouse ending that casual fans like, then you have to make it a 3 pts games:

Regular time win: 3pts
OT or Mickey Mouse win: 2pts
Ot or Mickey Mouse loss: 1pt

This would be the standing with this system:

TB 125
Mtl 122
NYI 120
NYR 119
Pit 115
Det 113
Wsh 111
Bos 99

Ott 94
Flo 93
Phi 89
NJ 89
Tor 79
Clb 78
Car 77
Buf 54

Not much change in the standings beside TB/Mtl, Flo/Ott and Clb/Tor swaping places. So there is maybe why they are keeping the actual point format even if flawed...

Still, the best way would be going back to the good old format (win=2pts, loss=0pt, tie=1pt). That is the best way to see what team is actually good at playing hockey and not who is the best to have a better ranking because they are good at a Mickey Mouse gimmick ending.

The lesson to be learned is good teams will be at the top no matter what the point system is but Hagar or marginal team's have the illusion of being,,good if they are able to spin Inc the shootout.

 

[JAD]

3 points regulation win
2 points overtime win first 5 minute 4 on 4
1 point overtime win second 5 minutes 3 on 3
0 points for a tie or a loss
No shoot out ( gimmick )
Make teams play to win rather than play it safe for the point.

 

[Strange Universe]

The problem with the actual point system is that they give the same number of point for a real win and a gimmick "win" that is actually a tie game.

If they don't want to give me back my tie games and want to keep on the Mickey Mouse ending that casual fans like, then you have to make it a 3 pts games:

Regular time win: 3pts
OT or Mickey Mouse win: 2pts
Ot or Mickey Mouse loss: 1pt

This would be the standing with this system:

TB 125
Mtl 122
NYI 120
NYR 119
Pit 115
Det 113
Wsh 111
Bos 99

Ott 94
Flo 93
Phi 89
NJ 89
Tor 79
Clb 78
Car 77
Buf 54

Not much change in the standings beside TB/Mtl, Flo/Ott and Clb/Tor swaping places. So there is maybe why they are keeping the actual point format even if flawed...

Still, the best way would be going back to the good old format (win=2pts, loss=0pt, tie=1pt). That is the best way to see what team is actually good at playing hockey and not who is the best to have a better ranking because they are good at a Mickey Mouse gimmick ending.

I agree with you Rick Middleton with the point system.
The good old format worked prior and still would work just great today.

BTW, great job with all the stats and comparisons.

As far as the OT format, I would rather see a 4 on 4 for the 1st 5 minutes and if it is still tied there is another 5 minutes but 3 on 3.
Still tied, then stays as a tie.
Absolutely no shoot outs.