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
Bob
February 17th, 2010
2:33 pm
“I was told that playoff ticket sales as well as STH renewals will go out in the next couple of weeks…end of February/beginning of March.”
Hmmm, rumor was March 4th announcement. I don’t see why they wouldn’t be trying to lock people up early with the team in the mix for the playoffs, ticket sales are so bad, just another piece that has my curiosity piqued.
Badger Bob
February 17th, 2010
2:47 pm
Smoothie, I’m with you on seeing Kane play in Sochi. I just hope the NHL figures out that having the players there is good for the game, otherwise the Olys return to being the joke the World Championships are. Not sure all the Vancouverites were cheering Iggy – they remember him burning their Nucks in some playoff games.
R. Stroz
February 17th, 2010
2:49 pm
For those of you with inquiring minds, take a look at the benefits and STH discount pricing for the Nashville Preds:
http://predators.nhl.com/club/page.htm?bcid=30432
LAC
February 17th, 2010
3:33 pm
Please remember todd white is SIGNED through next season !
Alan R.
February 17th, 2010
3:36 pm
The Bulin Wall cited for DUI.
R. Stroz
February 17th, 2010
3:39 pm
Todd White will be “bought out” if he isn’t claimed off waivers, which isn’y very likely. Then again, maybe, some GM will be stupid enough to take him off our hands for a 8th round draft pick in 2020.
Jameson
February 17th, 2010
3:58 pm
I think I’m currently in favor of 2 points for a win, 1 point for a shootout loss, 0 points for anything else. Splitting the points in the shootout, but no where else makes since to me since as Brendan usually states it’s an individual skills competition being used to decide the winner of a team game.
R. Stroz
February 17th, 2010
4:09 pm
I kind of like the idea that someone else had one having five shooters vs. three, and, if they are still tied, then use extra shooters to decide the outcome. Also, to add a little flavor, the five shooters must consist of three forwards and two defensemen.
That shootout format makes it more of a team sport.
Russ
February 17th, 2010
4:26 pm
Jameson – If you give one point for a SO loss, but none for an OT loss, overtimes would become unbelievably boring. Both teams would play extremely conservatively to assure they at least get to the shootout and then take their chances to get the bonus point.
Smoothie
February 17th, 2010
4:34 pm
Just goes to show that the regular participants on this blog probably only make up a minute fraction of the actual paid STH-base. I would estimate somewhere in the neighborhood of .5% to 1% of STH. My tkt rep called me the day after Kovy was traded to make sure I wasn’t suicidal.
As if. Bergfors is better!
R. Stroz
February 17th, 2010
4:43 pm
Bob – Received a return call from my sales rep today concerning next season.
He said the “STH Package” should arrive on, or before, March 1.
Smoothie
February 17th, 2010
5:07 pm
Based on the new marketing campaign on the website, I’m fully expecting a call from Evander Kane, Rich Peverley or Jimbo Slater about my STH renewal and the “march to the playoffs!” Oh yeah eh?!
Viking
February 17th, 2010
6:22 pm
There have been quite a few proponents of a status quo or status quo with a twist in the later posts.
But tell us why is this format is better than a 3 point system!
World Be Free
February 17th, 2010
7:32 pm
I am for maintaining the current system. I just have not seen enough arguments to sway me toward any change
Brendan
February 17th, 2010
11:44 pm
Viking, the three (3) point system convolutes the “value” of a game. As in, why should the value sometimes be three, sometimes two, and other times one-point for the winner? Shouldn’t the value of the game be 1/82nd of the season? That’s my argument. That’s why I favor straight up wins and losses.
It’s not as if the bottom 10 teams in the NHL are abysmal at shootouts. They’re probably something comparable to the shootout records of the Top 10 teams. In my mind, you play every game to win it. It shouldn’t matter WHEN you win it, so much as that you win it.
Do you follow my argument? A team wins the game whenever and however it does (regulation time, Overtime, or shootout). And the “value” of the game … is one game out of 82 on the schedule. Is there anything “complicated” about that? In my mind, there isn’t. If the outcome of the game cannot be decided in 60 minutes, we have overtime, 4-on-4, for five minutes. If still no outcome is rendered, for the “constraints of time,” our beloved team game is reduced to an “individual skills competition.”
Uhhh, because people work and go to school in the morning. If they didn’t have to do those things, I’d much rather see a full 20-minutes of 4-on-4 overtime, before resorting to the shootout. That will, apparently, never happen. Which is a shame. Because for the integrity of the game, I think it’d be a big improvement over 5-minutes of 4-on-4 overtime. Oh well. Such is life.
If a 3-point system were ever implemented, all previously existing point records would decimated, even by our Thrashers. The NHL record book would be filled with asteriks and explanatory notes. In my view of things, there really isn’t any need for a points-based system in hockey. We can make an argument that, if ties were permitted, that points is a logical way to proceed. But the NFL allows ties, without a points-based system. Why can’t hockey? Other than, “because of tradition.” What would life be without the statement, “we got 2 big points tonight.” Well, my answer would be, “We got the win. And the win was huge.”
Tim
February 18th, 2010
12:58 am
Brendan, I agree with you there. Each game should worth the same number of points and a record of win/loss is the best way to do it. However, where I disagree is a loss based on shootout alone. I would have no problem if we getting rid of the shootout and play OT until we have a winner. Only problem is that Game could last forever in OT just like some games we saw in PO. However, I do believe that it tends to get shorter when it’s 4 vs 4 instead of 5 vs 5. Win/Loss record until we get a winner with 4 on 4 OT and I’ll be happy.
Tim
February 18th, 2010
1:01 am
Viking, because it’s make interesting PO race like we have since lockout
Viking
February 18th, 2010
3:54 am
While I would prefer a 3 point format, I think a 2 point system would be fine too.
But this current 2 or 3 point version is just plain awful.
Viking
February 18th, 2010
4:15 am
Ooops, I stated my position without a why…
Strictly 3 OR 2 points awarded in all games is fair toward the other teams not involved. Being used to soccer, I am perfectly fine with a tie as the result of a game. All or nothing is fine too.
But the fact that an extra point may be awarded in the current system and in a sense benefit both teams in a game is what can not stand.
Viking
February 18th, 2010
4:42 am
Another way to express my position against the current format would be:
“It should hurt both teams to tie in regulation”.
jerry
February 18th, 2010
7:20 am
I am going to propose something radical that will never be adopted. Instead of a shootout, each team will have a 2 on 1 happening simultaneously on each end of the ice and the 1st to score wins the game. That would somewhat keep the team concept in play.
Pittsburgh Pirate Fan
February 18th, 2010
7:33 am
Jerry, as long as we can put int he rules that Todd White cannot be on the ice for4 ATL when this occurs!
Rawhide
February 18th, 2010
9:34 am
Jerry – Fascinating idea…I like it. It waould be a heckuva lot of fun to watch, that’s for sure.
OK kids…here’s a new blog to have some fun with.
Brendan
February 18th, 2010
2:31 pm
Tim, I definitely agree with you. I’m much rather not see a team get tagged with a loss, from a shootout. Likewise, I’d prefer that a team not get a win from the shootout. But, due to the constraints of time, the shootout is, ostensibly, the fastest way to arrive at an outcome.
Brian
February 21st, 2010
2:48 pm
I still like the idea of 3-2-1-0, which I have felt strongly about since the shootout arrived in the NHL. A compromise might be 3 for regulation win, 2 for OT win, 1 for OT loss, and only 1 point for a shootout win (0 for loss). This keeps the incentive for a regulation win, letting you claim all 3 points. It gives a team an incentive to NOT play for the shootout, as they then face getting no points at all. The extra strategy involved could be lots of fun. If you have to keep the shootout in the game, it should never be worth the same in the standings as a 10-0 regulation win. A team that wins more games in regulation should see that reflected in the standings.