What if the NHL did away with the overtime ‘loser’ point?
One subject that circles around the world of NHL hockey is the discussion of how points are calculated in the standings. As you know, currently 2 points are doled out for wins…a single point if you lose in overtime or the shootout. This formula comes from the past when games ending in a tie score remained so without the need for overtime or the shootout to break it. As such, two points were given for wins and one for each team in games that end in a draw. When the league pushed to insure all games have a declared “winner”, they kept the extra point for teams that lost in extra time…as they would have gained that point in the “old way” of calculating the standings.
However, this point awarded for simply getting the game into overtime before eventually losing is what I call the consolation “loser point”.
Many I’ve spoken to about this cite the inequity of having some games worth 2 points, those that end in regulation…and some games being worth three, such as with any overtime games. To make things more fair, some argue for a three point standard where 3 points are awarded to winners in regulation and doing the 2/1 split when it goes to OT. To be honest…I would prefer this to the current system.
Alex Ovechkin and the Capitals would still be atop the Eastern Conference if only wins and losses counted in the standings...but would that lead be as comfortable? (AP Photo/Jeff Roberson)
However, another argument is that if the league is going to insist that each game has a “winner”, then each game must simply have a “loser”…and as such, simply do away with the consolation “loser point”, then go with Ws and Ls. Nothing more, nothing less.
But if the league adopted such a change, would it make much of a difference in the way the standing look today with the current points system?
Well… let’s take a look, shall we, by reviewing theNHL division and conference standings as it looks now that we’ve reached the Olympic break.
In the east, the division leaders…and top-three playoff seeds…are Washington, (90 points)… New Jersey, (77)… and Ottawa, (76). The teams currently holding the wild card positions are Pittsburgh, (76)… Buffalo, (75)… Philadelphia, (67)… Boston, (65)…and Montreal (64). Those on the outside looking in are Tampa Bay, (63)… NY Rangers (63)…Atlanta, (62)…Florida, (58)…NY Islanders, (58)…Carolina, (55)…and Toronto (49).
Out west, it’s San Jose, (89 points), Chicago, (87) and Vancouver, (76) as the division leaders and top-three seeds. The wild card teams are Phoenix, (79)…Los Angeles, (78)…Colorado, (76)…Nashville, (71)…and Calgary (69). Those below the playoff line are Dallas, (68)…Detroit, (68)…Anaheim, (67)…St. Louis, (65)…Minnesota, (64)…Columbus, (60)…and Edmonton, (44).
Now…let’s see how the standings would take shape if only Ws and Ls were taken into consideration. Overtime losses are the same as regulation losses…you know, just like overtimes wins are just like regulation wins.
In this system, the standings would resemble those of Major League Baseball or the NBA…wins, losses and winning percentages are all that matters. Then, there is a calculation of “games behind” for all those who are not in first place.
EASTERN CONFERENCE
Atlantic Division
Team W L Win % GB
New Jersey 37 24 .607 —
Pittsburgh 36 26 .581 1.5
Philadelphia 32 28 .533 4.5
NY Rangers 28 34 .452 9.5
NY Islanders 25 37 .403 12.5
Northeast Division
Team W L Win % GB
Ottawa 36 27 .571 —
Buffalo 33 27 .550 1.5
Montreal 29 34 .460 7.0
Boston 27 33 .450 7.5
Toronto 19 42 .311 16.0
Southeast Division
Team W L Win % GB
Washington 41 21 .661 —
Atlanta 26 34 .433 14.0
Tampa Bay 26 35 .426 14.5
Florida 24 37 .393 16.5
Carolina 24 37 .393 16.5
Eastern Conference Playoff Standings – Division Leaders
Team W L Win % GB
1. Washington 41 21 .661 —
2. New Jersey 37 24 .607 —
3. Ottawa 36 27 .571 —
Eastern Conference Playoff Standings – Wild Card
Team W L Win% GB
4. Pittsburgh 36 26 .581 —
5. Buffalo 33 27 .550 2.0
6. Philadelphia 32 28 .533 3.0
7. Montreal 29 34 .460 7.5
8. NY Rangers 28 34 .452 8.0
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – -
9. Boston 27 33 .450 8.0
10. Atlanta 26 34 .433 9.0
11. Tampa Bay 26 35 .426 9.5
12. NY Islanders 25 37 .403 11.0
13. Florida 24 37 .393 11.5
14. Carolina 24 37 .393 11.5
15. Toronto 19 42 .311 16.5
WESTERN CONFERENCE
Central Division
Team W L Win % GB
Chicago 41 20 .672 —
Nashville 33 28 .541 8.0
Detroit 28 33 .459 13.0
St. Louis 28 34 .452 13.5
Columbus 25 38 .397 17.0
Northwest Division
Team W L Win% GB
Vancouver 37 24 .607 —
Colorado 35 25 .574 2.0
Minnesota 30 31 .492 7.0
Calgary 30 32 .484 7.5
Edmonton 19 42 .311 18.0
Pacific Division
Team W L Win% GB
San Jose 40 22 .645 —
Los Angeles 37 24 .607 2.5
Phoenix 37 26 .587 3.5
Anaheim 30 32 .484 10.0
Dallas 28 33 .459 11.5
Western Conference Playoff Standings – Division Leaders
Team W L Win % GB
1. Chicago 41 20 .672 —
2. San Jose 40 22 .645 —
3. Vancouver 37 24 .607 —
Western Conference Playoff Standings – Wild Card
Team W L Win% GB
4. Los Angeles 37 24 .607 —
5. Phoenix 37 26 .587 1.0
6. Colorado 35 25 .574 1.5
7. Nashville 33 28 .541 4.0
8. Minnesota 30 31 .492 7.0
- – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - – - -
9. Anaheim 30 32 .484 7.5
10. Calgary 30 32 .484 7.5
11. Detroit 28 33 .459 9.0
12. Dallas 28 33 .459 9.0
13. St. Louis 28 34 .452 9.5
14. Columbus 25 38 .397 12.0
15. Edmonton 19 42 .311 18.0
As you can see, there is no change in regards to the teams that lead the six divisions. However, out west, Chicago would be the top seed…San Jose would be the second. It’s the opposite using today’s NHL point system method.
New Jersey would still be the number two seed in the east, but would trail first-seed Washington by just three games for the top spot in the conference. Right now, they trail the Caps by 13 points. This is because the Devils have just 3 overtime losses…the fewest in the NHL… while the Capitals have eight.
Also, there are some changes in division positioning…case in point, the Thrashers would be in second place in the Southeast and the Lighting would be third. They would also be in 10th place in the conference instead of 11th and just one game out of the final playoff spot.
The Rangers and Flyers also would switch places as would Boston and Montreal, LA and Phoenix as well as Dallas and Anaheim.
In the conference standings, Montreal would move from the eighth and final spot in the east up on notch to seventh…while Boston would fall from 7th to 9th and out of a playoff spot altogether. In their place would go the NY Rangers.
Martin Havlat, Guillaume Latendresse and the Minnesota Wild would benefit most in a Ws & Ls only environment (AP Photo/Tom Olmscheid)
Out west, Minnesota would move all the way up from 13th to 8th, while Calgary would lose it’s playoff spot, going from 8th to 10th. The Wild only have 4 overtime losses, the Flames have 9.
The Dallas Stars and Detroit Red Wings are benefiting most from the current points system given they each have 12 overtime losses. This is why they are but 1 point removed from the playoffs. With just Ws and Ls considered, they drop to the 11th and 12th spots in the Western Conference…but still just 2 games out.
Also worth noting is how Carolina would not be alone in the southeast cellar…they would actually be tied with Florida. The Panthers currently posses 10 “loser” points while the Hurricanes have just 7.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
175 comments Add your comment
Viking
February 16th, 2010
12:25 pm
Stroz, it is tame in our eyes, but again, the perception of the US is not the same around the world. I do not think we would enjoy to see a North Korean display anything that remotely could be interpreted as anti-american either.
Smoothie
February 16th, 2010
12:30 pm
“My point is when you’re a rich guy flush with cash, you spend the excess money on luxury items. And if the guy is a huge hockey fan, he would be willing to eat losses to bring his town a team and own an NHL club. You also have the appreciation of the asset over time. That’s what I’ve always hoped for here, one rich guy to own the club who loved hockey and wouldn’t run the club off it’s balance sheet and income statement, but would run the team out of love of the game, and to win.”
Bob, can’t really argue with this point either. Sports as a whole were better off when extremely rich owners with cash to burn started franchises as hobbies and for the love of the game. It’s such big business now that it is harder for newer teams to compete just like it’s harder to penetrate markets now as a new business without some competitive advantage. The only competitive advantage Winnipeg would have is a dedicated, loyal and extremely wealthy SINGLE owner. But don’t you think Bettman won’t try to steer him in the direction of Phoenix if he’s willing to pay more than $140 M (Ice Edge Holdings or whatever they’re called doesn’t seem like the most viable solution) for a franchise? We can only hope that Bettman will come to the rescue and steer new investors / owners in the right direction.
Hockey CAN BE SUCCESSFUL in this market. First, with better ownership. Second, with better marketing of US and Canadian born players (sorry Ilya & Kari), more advertising, community involvement in terms of growing youth hockey etc. Third, a bigger investment in the product not only in terms of players, but capital re-investment in the arena, better pay for low-end employees and more affordable tickets in the form of price-point adjustments for weekdays versus weekends, less attractive opponents and the like. In fact, NHL re-allignment in which Atlanta isn’t stuck with the other SE Division teams 6 times each per year would go a long way. Can you imagine how much better attendance would be if there were only 2 divisions and Atlanta played Buffalo, Montreal, Boston, Toronto and Carolina 6 or 8 times a year instead?
Bill – sorry for hi-jacking this thread, but I get bored with the NHL point distribution argument. Of all the things needing changing in the league, I think this will be towards the bottom of the agenda list for Mr. Bettman. They need to deal with stricter punishment for head-shots, flying elbows to blind-side receivers (see Salmela vs Carter), and hits to prone players along the board. Start levying mandatory fines and suspensions for certain types of hits and I bet you see the number of injuries decrease as well as the silly fights that erupt after someone delivers a solid, legal hit to a star player.
TommyT4
February 16th, 2010
12:37 pm
I would be in favor of a system that makes the records look reasonable when you look at them. In other words, something much closer to just wins and losses. I am further in favor of anything that extends the 4 on 4 OT period in length as I think that is the most exciting thing in hockey. Recognizing that the League is not likely to forego the shootout for the reasons that others have correctly deduced, I would offer the following: 2 points for a regulation or OT or SO win (OT would be 4 on 4 for a full 20 minute period, sudden death). If still tied after OT, there is a 3 round SO. Loser of OT or SO is SOL (i.e. no charity point). If still tied after 3 rounds of SO, both teams earn a point for the tie. This method would make ties quite rare, so as to avoid for the most part the complaints of the “kissing the sister” crowd. This also avoids the confusing 3/2/1 method that would change all of the record books as noted by another, and would require too much mathematical analysis to determine how your team is faring. Further, records would look reaonable in that teams might have records of something like 32-20-1 rather than 21-20-12 which looks assinine and can be read as an “over .500 record” or as “a crappy team that is way under a .500 team” dependent on your viewpoint (as we can attest with our hometown Thrash). I think this would work and encourages teams to go hard throughout regulation and OT.
kracker
February 16th, 2010
12:39 pm
Smoothie – “Oh how I would love a showdown with the “Kovy-led” Devils.”
Roger that!
Someone asked a week or so ago if the Thrash somehow finish higher than the Devils, do we still swap 2nd round picks (the Kovalchuk trade)? That would really be funny if Lou didn’t make it conditional on NJ having the better record!
World Be Free
February 16th, 2010
12:48 pm
Viking-most of the people that are offended by “Support our Troops” have at one time been saved by our troops. The guy is not dressing in fatigues or anything; you don’t notice it unless you zoom in on his helmet.
If we are going to stop these messages, then we need to initiate dress codes and strict regulations of what people say and do. No more victory laps draped in flags of any country, It should start and end with American goalies.
Propaganda-The Eastern Bloc nations used the Olympics as propaganda tools to further their ideology for decades. They had to pay their “amateur” athletes or give them bogus jobs in the respective governments. In contrast, our amateur athletes struggled to pay their bills; the AOC was funded by donations. As an American fencer once said- “there’s too much month at the end of my money”.
And finally, the Russian hockey players for decades played for “Central Red Army” which was never considered propaganda? And all one of our guys wants to say is support our troops.
Too many of us have lost family members who stormed beaches or jumped from airplanes in foreign countries to be too concerned about offending people who won’t pickup a gun to save themselves. Viking-I don’t disrespect your opinion, I just see a different angle.
TableHockey
February 16th, 2010
12:50 pm
Well whatever these Winnipeg rumors are – we will apparently know soon. Lots of buzz about a March 4th presser out there.
Generally I’m pretty dismissive about these types of rumors but I am a little concerned given the recent news about Phillips trying to get out of their agreement with the arena.
Of course recent comments from Bettman made it seem like he was bent on keeping hockey in ATL.
World Be Free
February 16th, 2010
12:52 pm
Smoothie-keep hammering my friend
Stroz-“Smash the Diaperheads” is a classic. Can we get those shirts for the March home games?
Brendan
February 16th, 2010
12:57 pm
Again, I think the points-based system is totally unnecessary, once you adopt the shootout. That’s where we are right now–the NHL has a shootout. In my view, points should have disappeared after the Lockout. If you ditch the shootout, then points come back into play. I definitely would prefer a game to have a decided outcome, in lieu of a tie. But I’d rather have the tie than the awarding of points for losing. Losing shouldn’t result in any points. A tie can result in a point, since it’s not a LOSS. I’m perfectly fine with one-point being awarded for a tie.
If the NHL asked me for a solution, here’s what I’d say. We ditch the shootout and we resurface the ice after 60 minutes, with a 7-10 intermission. The next 20 minutes of “sudden death” overtime play would be 4-on-4, until there is a winner. If there still isn’t a winner, we resurface the ice with a 7 minute intermission, teams remain on their respective benches. Then we put up another 20-minutes on the clock, playing 3-on-3 hockey. I really don’t think it would ever come to that. And, gasp, if 3-on-3 doesn’t produce a winner, after 20 minutes, then we introduce the shootout. But we WILL HAVE winners and losers for every game, with a W-L, pct., Games Up-Games Back type of legend for standings.
This whole notion of “trying real hard” is rediculous. Every team, in theory, tries really hard. But if the “really trying hard” team loses … they LOSE. That’s it. Period, the end. The notion of dispensing “points for effort” is laugh-out-loudable. The points, if points must be maintained, should be for actual results. I don’t favor the 3-2-1-0 approach. It’s too convoluted. The value of a game shouldn’t be measured in points. The value of a game should be the GAME, itself, representing 1/82nd of a season.
lilibeter
February 16th, 2010
12:58 pm
I am a huge believer in fairness, and the system as it exists today does not seem at all fair to me. I find nothing fair in the fact that teams who win in regulation are awarded the same number of points as teams who go to overtime or to the shootout. For that matter, I absolutely do not believe the shootout is a valid decision-making mechanism for deciding which team should win a tied game. As a perfect example, look at our shootout loss to the Blackhawks on Friday night – we played them hard from beginning to end, but because our newly minted goalie doesn’t have much shootout experience yet and because we didn’t happen to have any snipers or shootout specialists in the lineup, we lost the game. I simply don’t believe there was anything fair about that loss.
Without crunching a bunch of numbers or examining all sorts of statistics, to appease my sense of fairness, here is what I would do to fix the current system. Teams should have 2 points…and only 2 points…on the table. Let the teams play until one team wins and the other team loses. I hear FIF reminiscing pretty often about the “Easter Classic” in which there was no shootout or 5-minute overtime (although I do believe that one was a post-season game). For “overtime” though, the Isles had to play period after period after period until one team won the game. To me, fairness dictates that, if the teams are tied after three regulation periods, then let them play it out in full-period increments until somebody wins and somebody loses. Get rid of the loser point, get rid of the 5-minute overtime and get rid of the shootout altogether – the winner gets 2 points, and the loser gets none. Period.
The realistic part of me does realize that the league will never get rid of the “loser point” or the shootout now that they have been instituted though. Without going to a “winner gets 2 points/loser gets none” system within this format, I don’t know how to fix it. Giving 3 points to the regulation winner, 2 points to the overtime winner, 1 point to the overtime loser, and 0 points to the regulation loser still doesn’t seem fair to me. My primary gripe being that losing teams who don’t make it past the 5-minute overtime get the same 1 point that losing teams who make it all the way to the shootout get. I simply just cannot see a way to make that point system appease my sense of fairness.
Brendan
February 16th, 2010
12:59 pm
Whoever buys the team has to keep it here until 2019. If not, the buyer will go bankrupt moving the team. And what RICH person desires to be insolvent? I want some names. Right. They don’t. They won’t. And they can’t. The team is here until 2019.
kracker
February 16th, 2010
1:01 pm
I understand the feeling to extend the OT period to 10 minutes (20 has also been suggested) but it will make the games too long, especially the weekday games for working people and those with school children or teens attending the games. I already don’t go to many weekday games. Getting home following an OT game, trying to unwind and get to sleep and make it to work by 7AM…well I’m pretty much an exhausted zombie the next day. So extending OT 5 or more minutes plus adding 2 more SO rounds is not good for many people.
More importantly, it puts more wear and tear on the players. The season is already long and physically and mentally grueling. I don’t favor unnecessarily heaping more of a daily grind on an already taxing schedule.
Brendan
February 16th, 2010
1:01 pm
Again, I think the points-based system is totally unnecessary, once you adopt the shootout. That’s where we are right now–the NHL has a shootout. In my view, points should have disappeared after the Lockout. If you ditch the shootout, then points come back into play. I definitely would prefer a game to have a decided outcome, in lieu of a tie. But I’d rather have the tie than the awarding of points for losing. Losing shouldn’t result in any points. A tie can result in a point, since it’s not a LOSS. I’m perfectly fine with one-point being awarded for a tie.
If the NHL asked me for a solution, here’s what I’d say. We ditch the shootout and we resurface the ice after 60 minutes, with a 7-10 intermission. The next 20 minutes of “sudden death” overtime play would be 4-on-4, until there is a winner. If there still isn’t a winner, we resurface the ice with a 7 minute intermission, teams remain on their respective benches. Then we put up another 20-minutes on the clock, playing 3-on-3 hockey. I really don’t think it would ever come to that. And, gasp, if 3-on-3 doesn’t produce a winner, after 20 minutes, then we introduce the shootout. But we WILL HAVE winners and losers for every game, with a W-L, pct., Games Up-Games Back type of legend for standings.
Smoothie
February 16th, 2010
1:06 pm
Stroz – I indeed chuckled out loud when I read that. Now people will think I’m racist, but whatta ya gonna do?
T-shirt for the playoff “run”, well at least when Pavs is in net:
“You betta Czech yoself before you wrech yoself!”
Can I get an Amen?!
BTW – speaking of T-shirts for the playoff run, have y’all seen the latest team promo running on the team website featuring Marty, Zach & Kane (along with cameos by Pevs & Slates)? Now that is a marketing campaign that makes sense! Let’s hope some of that makes its way onto SportSouth and local TV networks.
Brendan
February 16th, 2010
1:12 pm
Zoomo, you’re quite welcome. I, too, hope for a more symbiotic relationship between the AJC and the Offices of the Atlanta Thrashers. But, Atlanta is going to have to start behaving like a pro sports franchise a whole lot more.
Midfield
February 16th, 2010
1:14 pm
Brendan, your format will make game schedule quite a tool. Imagine playing back-to-back game after one of those 3-hour outings.
kracker
February 16th, 2010
1:16 pm
Good luck Brendan getting the NHL and NHLPA to approve a format that will routinely result in games that are 3 or 4 hours long. It’s necessary in the playoffs but you just can’t do that throughout the long season. I’m figuring you’re not a working person
Viking
February 16th, 2010
1:21 pm
About the Olympic messages;
The message and what lies behind it is irrelevant. I had a feeling I would stir up things with my comments.
It would be an impossible task for the “Olympic Message Police” to guard against violations of the “Olympic spirit” in the dress code without a strict rule against any personal message whether it is of commercial or any other nature.
R. Stroz
February 16th, 2010
1:32 pm
Viking – If a North Korean athlete wanted to adorn the equivalent of “Support Our Troops”, although I would think the athlete is misguided, I wouldn’t have a problem with it.
Now, if the North Korean athlete wanted to adorn the following:
“Kim Jong-il is god, and not only that, but he is the worlds greatest golfer and has tapped more backside than Tiger Woods, without ever losing an endorsemenr dollar from a state owned Korean company.”
Well that’s would be another story.
World Be Free
February 16th, 2010
1:43 pm
Viking-my issue is with the inconsistencies of the IOC, not with supporting our troops or anything like that. The subject could have been something other than troops and I’d still have a problem with the IOC.
Bob
February 16th, 2010
1:55 pm
“Generally I’m pretty dismissive about these types of rumors but I am a little concerned given the recent news about Phillips trying to get out of their agreement with the arena.”
Ditto, I have been firmly in the camp of “b/s, they can’t move them because of the naming rights”. But now hearing that Phillips wants out of the deal and the bright light came on that if the Spirit is losing that much money on the team every year, that they’d prefer to get the cash from a sale now and plus the losses, it may be a net gain for them to give up the $9m per year Phillips owes until 2019 and take the cash now and stop losing money every year on the Thrashers. Plus, I’m sure they could sell the naming rights to someone else for $3m? per year. Couple that with the cash purge we’ve seen of not signing Kovy to a long term deal and then the rush to dump Lehtonen, and there’s a lot of smoke here. Oh, there was smoke coming out of Kovy’s camp as well with rumors that he was concerned about the franchise moving out of Atlanta. There’s a lot of smoke here, we need our crack reporter to get on it, Rawhide!
Alan R.
February 16th, 2010
1:55 pm
“Kim Jong-il is god, and not only that, but he is the worlds greatest golfer and has tapped more backside than Tiger Woods, without ever losing an endorsemenr dollar from a state owned Korean company.”
Stroz, I’d love to see them fit that on a goalie mask.
That said, I wouldn’t have a problem with that message, either.
Viking
February 16th, 2010
1:58 pm
World be free, I do not know what the IOC rules are when it comes to the Olympic dress code, but I hope it is not anything else than a “no personal messages” rule.
achmed abbdul da butcher
February 16th, 2010
2:29 pm
What if Iraq’s goalie had “Osama Bin Ladin rules” on his mask? Nevermind, his mask is a scarf, it would have to be embroidered on it. Anyway, its off to ShawarmaKing for a flalaffal…..
Bob
February 16th, 2010
2:41 pm
Hey, here’s some more smoke on the fire. Has anyone been contacted by a ticket rep recently to sign up for season tickets for next year and get playoff priority tickets for this year? The club is in reach of the playoffs, and it’s not a Mora Moment to talk about them, why aren’t they out there pushing tickets? I got pushed hard last year since I was on the former season ticket holder list, but no one this year has called at all. Anyone else getting calls? Mabye I just pissed them off last year when I said “call me back up when you fire Waddell?” and they’ve got me on the list to call when they actually do get rid of him. But anyone else getting pushed tickets for playoffs and/or next year?
BlueSpark
February 16th, 2010
2:47 pm
There is only one logical points system if you have OT and SO. Since there are 6 possible outcomes for a team, there should up to 5 points available:
W in regulation – 5
W in OT – 4
W in SO – 3
L in SO – 2
L in OT – 1
L in regulation – 0
This rewards teams for winning “earlier” but still provides an incentive for a team to keep playing in all phases of the game (regulation, OT, SO). Also, every game is worth 5 points and all 5 points are awarded.
The problem is it’s too damn complicated.
Tim
February 16th, 2010
3:32 pm
The only option that I favor it’s either the status quo or the option provided by Bill. Now, one can argue that we could get rid of the SO and end the OT with a point each in case of tie. But common fan love SO, it will be hard to think that NHL will just get rid of SO. And the “loser” point is there to make OT more interesting. Back in the old day, when game end with a tie, OT is just horrrible to watch because no team will try and risk to get out of OT with 0 pts. Both team will rather just sit back and help to that “point”, unless if they are in a playoff spot race near the end of the season. It also hard for a team to come out of SO without a single point in the Standing since it’s a individual contest.
Now, the three points system is definitly fair, but it will make playoff race less exciting. Most likely, for most of the time, playoff team will be set by this time of the year already, save for maybe the last two spot, which would be set with another week or two, hence the reason why I favor status quo. If you hate loser point, then just make sure you win in regulation.
Russ
February 16th, 2010
3:35 pm
Blue Spark – I think the casual fan would be turned off by records such as 24-6-10-3-11-28.
I don’t have a strong feeling one way or another with the point system. My preference would probably be what they had in place just before the lockout: 2 for a win, 1 for a tie or OT loss and no shootout. But I have no problem with the way it is or all games being worth 3 points. I had suggested before, and I think someone on here suggested the same, 3 for a win in regulation, 2 for an OT win, 1 for a SO win, and 0 for any kind of loss. This would encourage teams to finish off the opposition ASAP and would probably minimize the number of shootouts, which most hockey purists are against. Like Blue Sparks idea, you would end up with records that look like combinations to detonate weapons of mass destruction, but whatever.
jt
February 16th, 2010
3:41 pm
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Eklund/SourceNHL-will-make-it-7-possibly-8-Winnipeg-Quebec-or-Toronto/1/26358 I still refuse to believe this.
Viking
February 16th, 2010
3:44 pm
Tim, “If you hate loser point, then just make sure you win in regulation.”
The worst part of the current system is what is happening in the games your team is not a part of. You might have a great record of regulation wins down the stretch, but your worst enemies in the standings keep on getting these additional points… Extra troublesome is when two of your enemies play each other.
Rawhide
February 16th, 2010
3:48 pm
Don Waddell refutes the Thrashers to Winnipeg rumor.
Dwayne
February 16th, 2010
3:55 pm
If Don says it. I believe it.
Brendan
February 16th, 2010
4:06 pm
Team USA 3, Switzerland 0, 2nd period.
Lee
February 16th, 2010
4:09 pm
Don’s like Ilya Koalchuk, he lies. Watch the Thrashers move.
Don Waddell
February 16th, 2010
4:10 pm
Facilitated return of hockey franchise to Canada.
Doesn’t that sound like a good way to spin this on my resume?
Brendan
February 16th, 2010
4:13 pm
Well then, maybe the shootout, for the benefit of the “conservation of time” is the way to go? Otherwise, the games would go on and on and on. But I do really like the idea of 20-minutes, 4-on-4, to decide a game, before venturing into the shootout.
But, I suppose, it’s just not a workable plan.
Bob
February 16th, 2010
4:17 pm
Hoo boy. If Don The Spinner Waddell says there’s nothing to it, you best start packing your bags now, boys
Tim
February 16th, 2010
4:18 pm
Viking, again, if you win in regulation you get 2 points. Your ennemy lose on OT and SO and get 1 points so you’re still 1 points ahead. If you play against you ennemie and you win in regulation, they get 0. I don;t think Washington or San Jose cared about other team getting the “loser point” do they?
fes
February 16th, 2010
4:50 pm
3-1
R. Stroz
February 16th, 2010
5:07 pm
I predict the U.S. hockey team will win their first game 3 to 1.
Brendan – I wouldn’t want to disappoint you with my clairvoyant powers.
Brendan
February 16th, 2010
5:38 pm
R.Stroz, you’ve done it again! You are like, amazingly pyschic. I’ve never seen anything like it. Now, you did also say the Thrashers are staying in Atlanta, right?
Red Light
February 16th, 2010
6:00 pm
24 teams. Two 12 team conferences. No divisions. Knock regular season down to 68 games, four against teams from your own conference and a home-and-home against the other conference. That way, every team in your conference plays the exact same schedule making it more equitable for all to decide a true playoff team. Top four in each conference get a first-round bye, while the bottom eight in each conference play a three-game series (if necessary) at the higher seeds building, which clearly gives an advantage to seeds No. 5 through No. 8. Then, the top four teams get home-ice advantage and at least four days of rest while the first round winds up.
Everyone gets a shot at the playoffs rendering the BS bonus points useless during the season. Yes, no one wants ties, but no one wants false points just for enduring 65 minutes.
With a shorter regular season all games mean that much more, including those in October. You ask any NHL player, and they will fully admit some guys or teams don’t start playing until January.
kracker
February 16th, 2010
6:27 pm
Red Light, I think your plan leaves my city with no team. No, thanks.
Dwayne
February 16th, 2010
6:35 pm
At the end of regulation, the 2 captains meet at center ice and play paper, rock, scissors. Winner gets 2 points, loser gets nothing.
HookyBob
February 16th, 2010
7:03 pm
Were Don’s lips moving when he said “no truth” to the rumors?
Watching Olympics on CNBC,…curling. Winter’s version of golf (those Scots had their games down).
HookyBob
February 16th, 2010
7:31 pm
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB20001424052748703382904575059823465872254-lMyQjAyMTAwMDEwNjExNDYyWj.html
Must read for anyone who ever “Took a Christian to the arenea.” 50 .ago the,…….. 1st US hockey gold.
Darren
February 16th, 2010
7:57 pm
I respectfully disagree with both arguments that extending OT from 5 minutes to 10 is so much more taxing on players and fans than 5 minutes of overtime. Those players are professional athletes in top condition; they can handle an extra 3 shifts per night.
Also, I can’t believe adding 5 measly minutes onto overtime would be the breaking point for people not to go. If folks are worried about being up late, just skip it and watch from the comfort of home.
Besides, keep in mind the whole intent of changing the point structure would be to incentivize teams to try to end games earlier, not make them later.
LAC
February 16th, 2010
8:08 pm
Ted would most likely move the BB Team to Bozeman, nearer his home near Livingston, just east of the pass… Great area !
World Be Free
February 16th, 2010
8:42 pm
Vikings-what’s your thoughts on Sweden in Vancouver?
I think Canada and Russia are 1 and 1a, interchangable
Sweden #3 and USA #4 at best, maybe lower.
USA will be lucky to medal, unless the troops are playing for USA (ha,ha)
Thoughts?
Hockey Biltong
February 16th, 2010
9:07 pm
Oh man, can’t wait till the season starts again…..
Alan R.
February 16th, 2010
9:18 pm
100th.