It is time for a new points format. 3 points for Regulation win.

[KingsFan7824]

There is more at stake. When a game is tied late, current system provides less incentives for teams to take risks (more D) in order to win in regulation.

With all the complaining that goes on about how conservative coaches are, you don't think they would be even more conservative in that situation if losing meant 3 points goes to the other team, while you get nothing?

Every season this topic appears a few times.

I've been preaching this for many years (and I'll add I'm a statistician).
The current points system is very gimmicky as some games are worth 50% more than others.

What's ironic if not comical, is that supposedly most fans didn't like ties and wanted a decisive result for all games. Yet the present system makes games that end in a regulation tie worth 50% more?! In effect tied in regulation games are now more important than before when every game was worth 2 pts. I might quibble w/you on the OT. I think the present format is fine. Most teams struggle too much as it is on b2b's. Adding 5 minutes will make it worse.


Macho Man, this is true. I did a modest study of this some years ago. No surprise that on average, it's the weaker teams that benefit from 3 pt games. Therefore (and it's more of an illusion) it makes it look they're "in the playoff hunt" deeper into the season, keeping more fans hopes up.

While some games might be worth more than others, all games are potentially worth 3 points. If only the worst teams in the league could play in 3 point games to catch up in the standings, or if only certain games were potentially worth 3 points, then it would be an issue. Since the 1st and 31st overall teams can possibly play in games worth 3 points from game 1 to game 82, it all cancels out more or less over 82 games. What every team still wants to do, is win in regulation. If you do that, you don't have to worry about what any other team does. There are 164 possible points to get, for every team. Go get them.

True, OT wins are not gimmicks, and SOW don't count in the ROW tiebreaker (which I agree with). However this doesn't "solve the problem".

What is gimmicky is that regulation games are worth 2 pts and games that end in a ties are worth 3 pts. The owners like it b/c it tends to subsidize the weaker teams more thus making it look like the weaker teams are still "in it". What fans don't realize is if a team is out of the playoffs as the season is winding down, if this team starts jelling and playing better it's hard to make up ground quickly in the current system.

The suddenly hot team that was weaker early in the season can only earn 2 pts per game, while a fading team that's trying to hang on to a playoff spot can still earn 1 pt in an OTL or even 2 pts in an OTW. What if that hot team that wasn't good earlier in the season could pick up 3 pts for a reg win?!

If you had a 3-2-1 system, how does that change?

It's a sample size of 82 games. If you're crap in the 1st half, but great in the 2nd, and miss the playoffs, well there's no crying in baseball. Every team knows the rules at the start of the season. The league doesn't go back and give teams extra points when it's over. Win in regulation, and you're good to go. If you rely on a gimmick, you take your chances. Be a good team in the 60 minute sample size.

Play playoff style hockey all season. Two points for the win, zero points for a loss. Overtime is sudden death played exactly as regulation is played. To the extent that games will need to be decided due to fatigue, scheduling, or other factors, leave it to the coaching and players to decide how to strategize winning without playing on for hours...or let them play on for hours...if that is the desire of coaching and the players. That is what works in the playoffs...and it creates some of the best, most exciting, and marathon-like epic hockey games.

Sometimes the best solution has been sitting in front of us all along.

The PA would never agree to that.

Outside of the true 3 point system which to me is clearly the best system possible, I guess something else that could be worth considering would be removing loser points and only giving 1 point to the winner for a SO win instead of 2 points.

They do only give the SO winner 1 point. It's a winner point, not a loser point. Teams split 2 points at the end of regulation if the game is tied. Just like it's always been if the game was tied at the end. The league knows 3v3 OT and the SO are gimmicks. That's why they guarantee both teams a point for being tied at the end of the 60 minute sample size of a game.

 

[Pookie]

Isn't it a little strange that we have come to accept ties in hockey as the norm whereas other sports can play till there is a winner?

Why should hockey be any different? Yes, players would get tired. That's how the game would be decided.

They all have private charters now. No one will miss a flight.

 

[542365]

I hate the idea of points entirely. You get a win for a win and a loss for a loss regardless how it’s acheived. Increase OT to 10 minutes of 3 on 3 to make shootouts even rarer. If there is a tie in the standings at the end of the season ROW can still be used as a tie breaker to diminish a shootout win. This is how every other professional sport outside of soccer does it.

Doesn’t really change the standings too much. Last season Tampa would’ve been the 8 seed in the East and Edmonton would’ve won the division.

It makes more sense to the casual fan and all games are worth the same.

If we’re going to keep the point system(and we almost definitely are), please rank teams by point percentage in the standings rather than gross points. It’s how they determine waiver wire order anyway. I’ve seen media and fans saying the Blues have the best record in the league while that simply isn’t true. Tampa has the best record. Stop treating fans like idiots. We understand percentages.

 

[Chimpradamus]

Isn't it a little strange that we have come to accept ties in hockey as the norm whereas other sports can play till there is a winner?

Why should hockey be any different? Yes, players would get tired. That's how the game would be decided.

They all have private charters now. No one will miss a flight.

It's only in the NA draws in sports are some sort of paria. There is no problem with draws in sports in the rest of the world.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Midget AAA in Quebec has such a system, works well in a developmental league where all teams make the playoffs with limited travel, no 3 games in 4 nights scheduling, no long road trips across time zones.

Games end faster with offence being the focus in tight games.

Problem in the NHL is that teams - 15 are excluded from the playoffs so 3 point games become a factor.

 

[Bedards Dad]

Isn't it a little strange that we have come to accept ties in hockey as the norm whereas other sports can play till there is a winner?

Why should hockey be any different? Yes, players would get tired. That's how the game would be decided.

They all have private charters now. No one will miss a flight.

How many NBA games or NFL games go into double OT vs how many went to shoot put prior to 3v3. Hell I bet there are still more shootouts with 3v3 vs a 2nd OT in the NBA or NFL.

 

[BruinLVGA]

So whats the point in making a change?

Giving 3 points in regulation is an incentive to play hard for those 3 points (= more offensive hockey). As things stand now, the incentive is to reach OT because no matter what, you get 1 point.
You should know this: that's how you made the playoffs last year, courtesy of the loser points.

Last but not least, the whole planet outside NA switched to 3 points and it works perfectly.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Isn't it a little strange that we have come to accept ties in hockey as the norm whereas other sports can play till there is a winner?

Why should hockey be any different? Yes, players would get tired. That's how the game would be decided.

They all have private charters now. No one will miss a flight.

In soccer, a sport that is the biggest in the world by far, ties are perfectly OK and still happening.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Isn't it a little strange that we have come to accept ties in hockey as the norm whereas other sports can play till there is a winner?

Why should hockey be any different? Yes, players would get tired. That's how the game would be decided.

They all have private charters now. No one will miss a flight.

Come to accept? It's always been normal. When haven't there been ties in hockey?

To me, the reason for ties is because you only get 1 goal per shot. In the NBA, you get different amounts of points because of some arbitrary line. There are 1, 2, 3, and 6 point plays in the NFL. You can score up to 4 runs on a single hit in baseball. If the NHL found some way to do something like that, maybe ties wouldn't be as big of a factor.

 

[Cyclones Rock]

I love the current OT format. 3 on 3 pond hockey is a blast to watch. Sure it's gimmicky, but it's very entertaining, which at the end of the day,is what spectator sports are all about. IIRC, 70%+ of the games are being resolved with the 5 minute format. I've become accustomed to the 3 chance shootout, but prefer the 5 chance-more shoot out chances = more entertaining one-on-one moves.

I do see a weakness with the 3 points for a regulation win idea. As the season wound down, teams on the outside of the playoffs would always be gunning for the 3 points. Coaches would pull goalies when their team was tied in the final few minutes. Games would become "gimmicky" during regulation as a result because teams that were tied during the final minutes would end up scoring empty net goals and essentially getting the "extra point" that now is gained in OT.

I think the current system allows for a compression of standings which generates plenty of late season excitement for the bottom few playoff spots. I'm good with the status quo.

 

[tony d]

I agree that the points system needs some changes but not 3 pts. for a regulation win. To me it should be 2 points for a win- no matter the format. 1 point for a shootout loss and no points for an overtime or regulation loss.

 

[Phil McKraken]

How about 1 point for a win and no points for a loss. Get rid of this loser point stuff.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Why do people always have to complicate things? Just use winning percentage and seed playoffs based on that.

Tampa Bay	23	16	0.696
Columbus	24	15	0.625
NY Islanders	23	14	0.609
Toronto	25	15	0.600
New Jersey	24	14	0.583
Washington	25	14	0.560
NY Rangers	24	13	0.542
Pittsburgh	26	13	0.500
Boston	22	10	0.455
Carolina	22	10	0.455
Detroit	24	10	0.417
Montréal	25	10	0.400
Florida	23	9	0.391
Ottawa	22	8	0.364
Philadelphia	24	8	0.333
Buffalo	24	6	0.250
St. Louis	24	17	0.708
Vegas	22	15	0.682
Winnipeg	24	15	0.625
Nashville	23	14	0.609
Calgary	23	13	0.565
San Jose	22	12	0.545
Los Angeles	24	13	0.542
Chicago	23	12	0.522
Dallas	23	12	0.522
Colorado	22	11	0.500
Vancouver	24	11	0.458
Minnesota	24	11	0.458
Anaheim	24	10	0.417
Edmonton	24	9	0.375
Arizona	26	6	0.231

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[MapleLeafistan]

I'd rather they just go to the NBA model...W and L. None of this OTL nonsense. It'll make for a much more heart-wrenching overtimes.

 

[SheldonJPlankton]

The PA would never agree to that.

Easy solution...sell it to the PA by a slight increase of team roster size to accommodate the few extra minutes the players will play each season. The PA is a union, and like all unions, it values membership. Creating more NHL players boosts PA membership.

 

[Fear the Wushu]

The NHL should use the soccer scoring system, it creates large gaps between teams and allows the best teams to 'truly' separate themselves from the rest of the pack. Their is nothing wrong with a draw if neither team deserves to win or does not take a risk to break the draw. The loser point has always been and will always be for losers.

Or just have W-L's with extended overtime (3v3) These are easy changes to make.

 

[inthewings]

The best version of the NHL is 2 points for a win, 0 for a loss, and 1 for a tie.

If the idea of a tie is abhorrent to people, 3 vs. 3 OT until someone scores.

 

[inthewings]

What's wrong with 2 for a win and 0 for a loss? No game ends in tie.

Why give a reward for playing a trap to get to OT to collect a point?

This would force teams to play for a win. No rewards for anything other than a win

Because the shootout is a terrible way to decide the outcome of a hockey game.

 

[SotasicA]

15 pts for regulation win
5 pts for OT win
4 pts for SO win
3 pts for SO loss
2 pt for OT loss
0 pts for regulation loss

Make regulation wins great again.

 

[golfortennis]

NHL won't do it because it would screw up historical records. But you could just scale everything down by multiplying every number by 2/3 which then results in 2, 1.33333..., 0.66666..., 0 but they won't do that understandably because everyone hates fractional numbers. I could see 2, 1.5, 0.5, 0 being a decent compromise, still fractional numbers but it's half points which most people can comprehend.

Historical records? Really? Like how Martin Brodeur was able to pile up a number of extra wins because instead of ties in a certain batch of games, every game has a winner now? Or how the goalies in the 80s got an extra shot at wins when overtime was introduced in the regular season?

Have to go to 3 point games for the simple fact there needs to be incentive to go for the win in regulation. Otherwise coaches just have their team clam up. It's why soccer went to that system. Teams played for draws. So make wins more valuable.

 

[Butch 19]

The PA would never agree to that.

The PA would never agree to that??

Neither would the owners and networks/broadcasters.

 

[Cup or Bust]

They will never change it. I do not agree with those that claim the extra points keep teams in the hunt, it actually does not. Only naive fans think their team is still in the hunt. I am an Oilers fan for example and I see Oilers fans posting that the Oilers are only 6 points out of a playoff spot, which is very misleading. The current pace in the West to be in a playoff spot is 4 games over .500. The teams ahead of them could go .500 for the next 8 games and the Oilers could win 8 in a row and that would put them just in the race for a wildcard spot. They are not even close to a playoff spot as of now. It fools fans into thinking their team is closer then reality.

 

[Cup or Bust]

Regulation and OT win = 2 points
SO win = 1 point
Any type of loss = 0 points

Stop rewarding teams for losing.

The point system doesn't reward teams for losing. It rewards teams for winning a skills competition and gimmicks, instead of an actual hockey game. The NHL is so desperate to force a team to win each game they use 3 on 3 and shootouts to make sure someone wins no matter what. No other major North American pro sport stoops to such desperation to force a team to win a game.

 

[Ingvar]

The NHL should use the soccer scoring system, it creates large gaps between teams and allows the best teams to 'truly' separate themselves from the rest of the pack. Their is nothing wrong with a draw if neither team deserves to win or does not take a risk to break the draw. The loser point has always been and will always be for losers.

Or just have W-L's with extended overtime (3v3) These are easy changes to make.

Football (soccer) system is the best because it give incentives to win instead of taking the draw. Original NHL system is worse because it simply splits points fairly. Current NHL system is the worst since it promotes finishing the game in a tie as it gives a guaranteed point.

3-2-1-0 system would be between football system and original because it does give incentives to win but still gives equal amount of points in a game.

 

[stampedingviking]

League's true best teams aren't given a chance to separate themselves from the pack.

Three points should be given out every game.

3 points for regulation win.
2 points for overtime/shootout win.
1 point for overtime/shootout loss.
0 points for regulation loss.

Not to mention the overtime format should be changed to 10 minute overtime. 4 on 4 until 6:00 remaining - next whistle it goes to 3 on 3. Shootout after this if no goal is scored. NHLPA won't like it, but fans will love it. Shootout has to stay for the "casual" fan because they often go to games and hope for a shootout.

Yes, but the NHL dinosaurs won't go for it.