What About 3 pts for a Regulation Win?

[GordonGecko]

Here's how it would work:

Regulation game: Winner 3 pts, Loser 0 pts
Overtime game: Winner 2 pts, Loser 1 pt

The idea here is to crank up the incentive to win in regulation and stop teams from coasting to the free point and eventually in the shootout. Teams who make the effort would be putting distance in the standings forcing the slackers to try harder to make up ground.

Just putting it out there, don't know myself yet if I think it would be a good idea

Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[LateFirstRounder]

Pretty good, and we should use the AHL overtime format.

 

[AnomX]

I'm not sure why this isn't the format the NHL has now. Been asking myself this for a long time.

 

[GordonGecko]

or heck, you can even make an OT win 3 points, and only do the 2-1 split for the shootout

 

[Joannie9]

Great idea. Don't know why this isn't already the case.

 

[cgf]

Rewarding teams for accomplishing the tougher (and usually more exciting) achievement like they should be? Madness.

 

[cgf]

Great idea. Don't know why this isn't already the case.

Because less teams would still be in the race. The current system is great for making it hard to fall out of the playoff race. Whether you deserve to be part of the race or not.

 

[SmCurse]

Yes, that's how it is in Europe.

 

[AnomX]

Because less teams would still be in the race. The current system is great for making it hard to fall out of the playoff race. Whether you deserve to be part of the race or not.

In my opinion as long as there are teams with internal salary caps this will never be introduced as the point system. Would create less parity around the league.

Internal cap teams would rarely keep up and it would create the same problem that brought us to the salary cap era to begin with.

Teams should increase their internal cap or GTFO -- on to Canada

 

[strongbad]

NHL GM and owners don't want this. It had been discussed years ago, and they preferred the current method as it encouraged parity. They preferred that the teams stay closer in the standings, so that fans would continue to see the live games and so that the playoff races are closer.

 

[Mad Brills*]

Maybe a better option is due remove the loser point from shootouts.

 

[scotian1]

Because less teams would still be in the race. The current system is great for making it hard to fall out of the playoff race. Whether you deserve to be part of the race or not.

That is what it is all about, providing more revenue for teams as a result of the bottleneck for playoff spots.
The Premier League has it right, 3 points for a win and 1 for a tie. No overtime or shootouts.

 

[cgf]

That is what it is all about, providing more revenue for teams as a result of the bottleneck for playoff spots.
The Premier League has it right, 3 points for a win and 1 for a tie. No overtime or shootouts.

Yeah. I'd prefer a football style point system, but I also prefer ties since I believe a win is something a team needs to earn, not something that should be given to one club by default. So clearly my opinions are not in line with the NHL's.

 

[member 147413]

Always thought 3 points was better than our current system.

 

[eklunds source]

The idea here is to crank up the incentive to win in regulation and stop teams from coasting to the free point and eventually in the shootout. Teams who make the effort would be putting distance in the standings forcing the slackers to try harder to make up ground.

Does that actually happen though? Do teams "coast" in the final few minutes of a tie game? How "hard" do they coast -- are goals slightly less frequent or far less frequent? What if goal scoring late a tie game is actually way up, will this unfairly penalize or impact some teams? What if, even after making this change, it doesn't really change the NHL standings?

 

[GordonGecko]

Does that actually happen though? Do teams "coast" in the final few minutes of a tie game? How "hard" do they coast -- are goals slightly less frequent or far less frequent? What if goal scoring late a tie game is actually way up, will this unfairly penalize or impact some teams? What if, even after making this change, it doesn't really change the NHL standings?

My sense is there's a fair amount of teams that coast in the second half of the third, playing for the point. Instead of taking chances on scoring they just dump the puck and block shots until the horn sounds then open up a bit more in OT

 

[Beer League Sniper]

My biggest problem with the current system is that OT games are "worth" more. Games that end in regulation are worth a total of 2 points, whereas games that end in OT are worth 3 points. 50% more just for going to OT. It's ridiculous. The 3-point system is the most fair method, IMO.

 

[CraigsList]

There should definitely be a 3-2-1-0 point system.

 

[eklunds source]

My sense is there's a fair amount of teams that coast in the second half of the third, playing for the point. Instead of taking chances on scoring they just dump the puck and block shots until the horn sounds then open up a bit more in OT

Is it factually true though? Is goal scoring actually down in the final 10 minutes of tie games, or is it just a hunch? Do teams demonstrably take/allow less scoring chances?

If it IS true, is it definitely because teams are playing for OT? Is it because players are tired late in the game?

I wouldn't be surprised if it was true (NHL Coach + Loss Aversion = safe hockey), but you should do the legwork before throwing out rule change suggestions to fix a problem that might not exist..

 

[GordonGecko]

but you should do the legwork before throwing out rule change suggestions to fix a problem that might not exist..

IMO the problem is that games going to OT are manufacturing 50% more points (3 vs 2) which is unfair to the other teams in the league, especially those that make the bigger effort to close the deal in regulation.

The other problem is the shootout which isn't a legitimate hockey format to decide a game

 

[HockeyThoughts]

The part where it says:

Loser, 1pt irks me.

In an 82GP season there is no reason to be rewarding a loss. Whether you lost in regulation or after an extra 0:01-5:00 minutes the fact of the matter is you still lost. It makes absolutely no sense to be handing out points to the loser. I'm fairly certain the NHL is the only professional league to have this system.

I would propose like many others before me:
2pts for win in regulation or OT
1pt for win in SO
0pts for losing

5minute 4on4, 5minute 3on3, shootout

 

[radapex]

or heck, you can even make an OT win 3 points, and only do the 2-1 split for the shootout

OT and SO are already distinguished by the tie breaking rules, so making a regulation win worth 3 distinguishes it from an OT win.


Reg. Win - 3 points + counts in tiebreaker
OT Win - 2 points + counts in tiebreaker
SO Win - 2 points
SO/OT Loss - 1 point
Reg. Loss - 0 points


The later you win a game, the less valuable it becomes

 

[Blood On The Ice]

There should definitely be a 3-2-1-0 point system.

The most equitable and rational manner

3 pts for a regulation win
2 pts for an OT win
1 pt for a shootout win

Loser do not get any point ever. Having a point and moving up the in the standings while losing a game makes no sense to me.

 

[roboninja]

Here's how it would work:

Regulation game: Winner 3 pts, Loser 0 pts
Overtime game: Winner 2 pts, Loser 1 pt

The idea here is to crank up the incentive to win in regulation and stop teams from coasting to the free point and eventually in the shootout. Teams who make the effort would be putting distance in the standings forcing the slackers to try harder to make up ground.

Just putting it out there, don't know myself yet if I think it would be a good idea

Thoughts?

It's the only idea that makes sense while still keeping the OT/shootout. You need to have known outcomes for games. You cannot arbitrarily make some games worth 2 points and some worth 3 and still have valid standings. The NHL system has been a joke for some time now.

 

[Burner Account]

3 pts for regulation win
2 pts for overtime win
0 pts for loss of any kind