Three points for a regulation win

[Inflict]

I don't agree with this at all. The current system creates parity in the league which is a good thing for the league whether you like it or not. It may not be as fair as a 3 point system, but it works well and makes the playoff race much more exciting.

 

[Soble]

I don't agree with this at all. The current system creates parity in the league which is a good thing for the league whether you like it or not. It may not be as fair as a 3 point system, but it works well and makes the playoff race much more exciting.

I completely (but respectfully) disagree with the statement "The current system creates parity in the league." what it does is create the illusion of parity. Under the proposed system (3pts in all games), teams will be more spread out in points, yes; however with 3 points for a 'clean' win, it is easier to catch teams. The systems are equal in terms of 'parity'. Unequal in terms of fairness.

We hear these conflicting statements all the time:
"the current points system keeps the teams bunched up and close, and creates parity" and
"the current points system makes it difficult if not impossible to catch teams ahead of you"
Well, which is it?

 

[castle]

Can you create this table with 3 points for a regulation win, 2 pts for overtime win, 1 point for shootout win and nothing for a loss?

this is it... but doesn't look very table like

current 3 point standings, the previous table did not have the right number of regulation wins or ot wins, and seemed to have shootout wins listed as ot wins.

GP reg otw sow otl points
NY Rangers 69 34 7 3 7 129
Boston 69 31 2 7 3 114
Florida 69 28 1 4 13 107
Pittsburgh 68 31 2 9 5 120
Philadelphia 69 32 5 3 7 119
New Jersey 70 26 4 10 5 111
Ottawa 71 27 4 5 10 109
Washington 70 27 7 2 6 105
Winnipeg 70 26 3 4 8 100
Buffalo 71 22 4 7 9 97
Tampa Bay 69 22 8 2 7 93
Toronto 70 23 4 3 8 91
Carolina 70 23 3 0 15 90
Montreal 71 21 2 5 11 88
NY Islanders 70 20 3 5 11 87

The only change worth noting is that Winnipeg would be ahead of Buffalo. Otherwise... no big diff

edit: under this system, two regulation wins puts Winnipeg clear ahead of Washington. Rather than 2 wins just getting them tied, with the ROW tiebreaker going to Washington. In that case, there really is a difference.

 

[DarthMonty]

I would prefer a 5 point total - 5 for the outright win, 4 points for OT win/1 point for the OT loss, and 3 points for the shootout win/2 points for the shootout loss.

If the NHL is going to keep shootouts, then at least award the loser the extra point for getting to the SO.

 

[cheswick]

I don't agree with this at all. The current system creates parity in the league which is a good thing for the league whether you like it or not. It may not be as fair as a 3 point system, but it works well and makes the playoff race much more exciting.

Creating artifical parity is a good thing?

How bout this. If you win by 3 goals or less each team only gets 1 point each. If you win by greater than 3 goals the winning team gets 2 points loser gets nothing. I can guarantee you the teams would be a lot closer in the standings. It would create unparalleled parity. It's still horse crap, just like the current system.

 

[cheswick]

I would prefer a 5 point total - 5 for the outright win, 4 points for OT win/1 point for the OT loss, and 3 points for the shootout win/2 points for the shootout loss.

If the NHL is going to keep shootouts, then at least award the loser the extra point for getting to the SO.

I like the inherant "fairness" to this system. The St. Louis Blues would be leading the league with 229 points and the Jets would be 20th overall with 166 points (12 points behind Washington for 8th in the conference.

Use: http://hockey.nesbot.com/mynhl to see the standings with your prefered point system

 

[Inflict]

Creating artifical parity is a good thing?

Yes.

How bout this. If you win by 3 goals or less each team only gets 1 point each. If you win by greater than 3 goals the winning team gets 2 points loser gets nothing. I can guarantee you the teams would be a lot closer in the standings. It would create unparalleled parity. It's still horse crap, just like the current system.

I can make random stuff up out of thin air too. It doesn't prove your point. The current system is not about creating the most parity, it is just an unintended consequence.

 

[peg]

If the NHL asked me I would have 3 points for a clean win; 2 points for a win and 1 for a loss in a 10 minute overtime; and 1 point for each team if overtime solved nothing.

The shootout would be eliminated.

There would be a real motivation to try to win in regulation instead of overtime to get the extra point.

There would be huge motivation to win in overtime if tied after 60 minutes, as both teams would lose out if no one scored in OT. The last minutes of overtime could become ridiculously exciting as both teams try to get that extra point.

 

[Inflict]

I completely (but respectfully) disagree with the statement "The current system creates parity in the league." what it does is create the illusion of parity. Under the proposed system (3pts in all games), teams will be more spread out in points, yes; however with 3 points for a 'clean' win, it is easier to catch teams. The systems are equal in terms of 'parity'. Unequal in terms of fairness.

I never said the current format was a fair system. A team just needs to distinguish themselves from the pack. You need a really good team, not an average team, otherwise you are fighting for your playoff lives down the stretch. This makes things much more exciting for the fans and the league.

We hear these conflicting statements all the time:
"the current points system keeps the teams bunched up and close, and creates parity" and
"the current points system makes it difficult if not impossible to catch teams ahead of you"
Well, which is it?

The former.

 

[videofarmer]

Two points for a win
One point for a tie

OT 5 min 4-4
5 min 3-3
After ten OT a tie is given.

Shoot outs are a joke

That's what I've alway said.
Actually, I've always said a couple of 4 minute OT periods, but even if the game went all the way to the end of two 5 minute periods, it still wouldn't last any longer than games that go to a shootout currently last. I'd also consider giving each team an additional time out to use during OT.

 

[cheswick]

I can make random stuff up out of thin air too. It doesn't prove your point. The current system is not about creating the most parity, it is just an unintended consequence.

Right, but your saying artifical parity is a good thing. So creating even more parity with hair brained point systems would make the playoff races down the stretch even more exciting. Imagine a system where every team has a shot at the playoffs with one game left. That would be amazing.

 

[Grind]

Right, but your saying artifical parity is a good thing. So creating even more parity with hair brained point systems would make the playoff races down the stretch even more exciting. Imagine a system where every team has a shot at the playoffs with one game left. That would be amazing.

if were giving every team a shot with "one game left" why are we playing an 82 game season?

Furthermore, with this idea, your going ot have more teams getting in on tie breakers ie: all those weird extra points become redundant because the team with the most "clean" wins ends up getting in anyway

Finally, continuing the train of thought from ties, your going to end up going past the initial two tie breaking equations, which really makes the whole point a lot less meaningful as your taking pretty big stetch's in logic to determine who's the "best" of statistically equal teams. Eventually it becomes 2 teams are for sure out of the playoffs(toronto and the other worst team in the league, depending ont he season), 6 teams are in(division leaders), and the remainders might as well just challenge each other to a game of dice for the last 10 spots.

 

[leer2006]

Here's a hairbrain idea. Get rid of the points system all together. Lets see if we can come up with something completely different. Like some type of lottery system where a win gets you a number. there are 2460 games in the regular season. Each game gets you the what ever number the game you play is on the NHL schedule. At the end of the year they pull 16 numbers for the playoffs. Once a team's number is pulled, they are in. The remainder of there numbers are then voided. This means even the worst team could be in. It also means the best team with most wins and most numbers could theoretically not have any of there numbers pulled. Different but would make for an exciting night when everyone tunes in to see if there team get's in......

 

[videofarmer]

4 out of 8 NHL games went to the SO last night and were decided by an individual skills competition at the end of the game instead of by the teams, and 4 extra points were generated from nowhere. It's time to do something about it. If they won't follow 4 on 4 play in OT with 3 on 3, they should at least switch ends of the ice during OT so the players have to make the long change to increase the chance someone scores.

 

[grgftrs]

What would the standings look like today if points were awarded as follows:

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

Can anyone do the math?

George

 

[YWGinYYZ]

What would the standings look like today if points were awarded as follows:

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

Can anyone do the math?

George

I'm lazy, so I just use this site: http://hockeystandings.info/?page=threepoints&year=2015&view=wild

It's updated automatically, and it's a web app created by an HFboards member. End result? Pretty much no change in the standings. It DOES increase the spread in points though, which makes things look as though there's less parity. I think the NHL likes it this way - makes the standings look closer than they are.

 

[Zhamnov5GoalGame]

4 out of 8 NHL games went to the SO last night and were decided by an individual skills competition at the end of the game instead of by the teams, and 4 extra points were generated from nowhere. It's time to do something about it. If they won't follow 4 on 4 play in OT with 3 on 3, they should at least switch ends of the ice during OT so the players have to make the long change to increase the chance someone scores.

They already made this change.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

They already made this change.

This is a three year old thread bump.

 

[Ducky10]

Agree, agree, agree, I've been advocating this for quite awhile, it's overdue.

 

[YWGinYYZ]

Agree, agree, agree, I've been advocating this for quite awhile, it's overdue.

It makes little to no difference in the standings though, and removes some of the tension of an artificially close race. I'm not disagreeing with you, but I don't think the NHL would be keen to reduce the drama.

 

[ryerockarola]

Here's a hairbrain idea. Get rid of the points system all together. Lets see if we can come up with something completely different. Like some type of lottery system where a win gets you a number. there are 2460 games in the regular season. Each game gets you the what ever number the game you play is on the NHL schedule. At the end of the year they pull 16 numbers for the playoffs. Once a team's number is pulled, they are in. The remainder of there numbers are then voided. This means even the worst team could be in. It also means the best team with most wins and most numbers could theoretically not have any of there numbers pulled. Different but would make for an exciting night when everyone tunes in to see if there team get's in......

hahaha, nice!

3 points for regulation win is the way to go... and shootouts are a joke

 

[YWGinYYZ]

3 points for regulation win is the way to go... and shootouts are a joke

Why, though? I don't like shootouts, but I ask - if it makes no change in the standings, why make the change?

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

I'm lazy, so I just use this site: http://hockeystandings.info/?page=threepoints&year=2015&view=wild

It's updated automatically, and it's a web app created by an HFboards member. End result? Pretty much no change in the standings. It DOES increase the spread in points though, which makes things look as though there's less parity. I think the NHL likes it this way - makes the standings look closer than they are.

It's been tracked multiple years and no difference has been found in the teams that make it to the playoffs (I believe)

 

[Ducky10]

It makes little to no difference in the standings though, and removes some of the tension of an artificially close race. I'm not disagreeing with you, but I don't think the NHL would be keen to reduce the drama.

Agreed on that point, they are unlikely to do it.

 

[SIV]

Why, though? I don't like shootouts, but I ask - if it makes no change in the standings, why make the change?

Why wouldn't it make a difference in the standings? In close games, teams would be trying a lot harder to get the 3 points instead of only 1, or 2. If the playoffs are on the line overtime points are not going to be enough.