NHL Point system

[Juxta Position]

Which do you prefer? or would like to see the NHL adopt?

Click to read more...

 

[Buck Naked]

3-2-1 without a doubt. You should be rewarded for winning in regulation over OT or PS.

 

[norrisnick]

3-2-1 without a doubt. You should be rewarded for winning in regulation over OT or PS.

Yup. And similarly you should be rewarded with the OT/Shootout win vs just making it to the end of regulation time.

The 3-2-1 system makes the most sense. Every game is worth 3 points.

 

[AvStock]

3-2-1 defeats the purpose of loser point though. So if that’s why you want to get rid of it then fine but it won’t fix anything (ie just make loser team in ot/so get no points under current system)

 

[frisco]

Winner and a loser. Want more exciting OT and shootouts, then winner take all. Plus, the 3-2-1 reeks of soccer...

My Best-Carey

 

[Legend123]

3-2-1 defeats the purpose of loser point though. So if that’s why you want to get rid of it then fine but it won’t fix anything (ie just make loser team in ot/so get no points under current system)

It gives a better indication of who's winning their games in a more playoff setting

 

[norrisnick]

3-2-1 defeats the purpose of loser point though. So if that’s why you want to get rid of it then fine but it won’t fix anything (ie just make loser team in ot/so get no points under current system)

How so? OT/Shootout winner gets 2 loser gets 1. Vs Regulation winner gets 3 vs loser gets 0. You still get credit for making it to the end of regulation.

And the true point of this system is to differentiate regulation wins from OT/Shootout wins. And that every game is worth the same amount of points. Not all these 3pt games muddying up the standings.

 

[WarriorOfGandhi]

the point system is stupid, a win is a win and a loss is a loss. If an NHL team misses the playoffs despite having more regulation wins then another, too bad, they had 82 games to make up the difference.

 

[MasterofGrond]

I'm fine with 2-0 or 3-2-1-0 or even something wild like 5-4-3-2-1-0

but you gotta have all games worth the same number of points

 

[Clamshells]

It doesn't matter at all. The spread only affects bubble teams. The top contenders are always going to make the playoffs regardless of the point system. No one cares if your team would have had a better playoff match up in a different point system.

 

[Dr Pepper]

Two points for a win, regardless of when it happens.

Zero points for a loss, regardless of when it happens.

The way it should've always been.

 

[Wierzbowski426]

3 for a win, 1 for a tie, and bring back ties.

 

[TheBeastCoast]

Having games worth different amount of points is one of the dumbest things the NHL does. I have always though a 3-2-1 system makes the most sense. But either make all games worth 3 points or 2 but not some 3 and some 2 lol

 

[Golden_Jet]

Which do you prefer? or would like to see the NHL adopt?

2 points regulation win
1.5 OT/So win
0.5 loss

Then at least standings will be similar, instead of a 160 points

 

[Juxta Position]

I'm surprised it's this lopsided. to me the system that makes the most sense when you have a league with no ties, it the straight games back system. why even have points when there is absolutely no possibility of a tie? it's pure win loss record (regardless of how those wins and losses happen) based on number of "games back" from the division leader.

it's the most accurate way to truly decide the standings.

 

[ninetyeight]

Anything but the current system. It makes no sense that an extra point just magically appears from nowhere. Divisional rivals suffer because two other teams can't get it done in regulation.

3 for regulation win, 2 for ot/so win, 1 for ot/so loss, is the best and is already being used in european leagues as well as other sports. But even just 2pts for winner and 0 for loser (however the game ends) is better than what we have. I also wouldn't mind 1-1 split ties after OT.

 

[Kingfan1967]

3 teams current system (assume 2 OT wins each)
first goes 5-0-5 = 15 points (10-0-5)
second goes 6-1-3 = 15 points (12-0-3)
third goes 7-2-1 = 15 points (14-0-1)
these teams are not equal but in the standings they are the same .

3-2-1 system ( assume 2 OT wins each )
first 3-2-0-5 = 18 points (9-4-0-5)
second 4-2-1-3 = 19 points ( 12-4-0-3)
third 5-2-2-1 = 20 points (15-4-0-1)

 

[HBK27]

3 teams current system (assume 2 OT wins each)
first goes 5-0-5 = 15 points (10-0-5)
second goes 6-1-3 = 15 points (12-0-3)
third goes 7-2-1 = 15 points (14-0-1)
these teams are not equal but in the standings they are the same .

3-2-1 system ( assume 2 OT wins each )
first 3-2-0-5 = 18 points (9-4-0-5)
second 4-2-1-3 = 19 points ( 12-4-0-3)
third 5-2-2-1 = 20 points (15-4-0-1)

 

[ole ole]

Two points for a win, regardless of when it happens.

Zero points for a loss, regardless of when it happens.

The way it should've always been.

If a weaker team can hold off a better team and squeak out a point Good for them.
I would rather have ties but since some like the gimmick i could live with the 3-2-1 point system.

 

[Video Nasty]

Do away with the point system. Do straight wins and losses. I don’t care if a team ties, loses in overtime, loses in the shootout, etc. It’s not a win so no points.

Such a system would destroy the illusion of regular season parity and teams being “.500”, so it would never be adopted.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

3-2-1 without a doubt. You should be rewarded for winning in regulation over OT or PS.

Or go with 2 points for regulation win, 1 point for OT/SO win.

The team that loses gets zero points regardless of when they lost.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Do away with the point system. Do straight wins and losses. I don’t care if a team ties, loses in overtime, loses in the shootout, etc. It’s not a win so no points.

Such a system would destroy the illusion of regular season parity and teams being “.500”, so it would never be adopted.

Ties still get you at 500, with a point apiece.
Not issuing a point each for a game played would actually make a 500 record equivalent lower

 

[BLNY]

None of the above.

Win - 2 points
Loss - 0 points
Tie - 1 point

No loser point. Stop coddling teams and keeping them "in contention" longer than the loser point allows. It's transparent, despite what the league thinks.

 

[Stephen]

I'll just take the contrarian position here and say the NHL isn't a W-L league, so the point system inflation caused by OTL's and SOL's is what it is. The opposition couldn't beat you in regulation. And that's worth 1 point, with some fine print.

 

[Stephen]

None of the above.

Win - 2 points
Loss - 0 points
Tie - 1 point

No loser point. Stop coddling teams and keeping them "in contention" longer than the loser point allows. It's transparent, despite what the league thinks.

Going back to 2005, the intent wasn't to 'coddle' teams but encourage them to take risks in OT to win the second point as opposed to shelling up and both teams play to a 1 point tie, making the OT boring.