• Who's Chatting

    There are no users currently in the chat room

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
AEWHistory

Change point structure for W-L-T

43 posts in this topic

So I was reading an article bemoaning the huge rise in overtime games in each of the last few years and one argument is that this is a result of the regular season point structure that rewards playing toward a tie and going to shootout. I am not sure I accept the argument that it is so difficult to change gears for the playoffs and get out of the regular season mindset, but I guess I can see it. What I absolutely do believe is that the current system doesn't work. This is what I would propose:

Ties would be brought back.

Shootouts would be relegated to the history bins.

A win would be worth three (3) points.

Overtime would last 10 minutes.

If there was no winner at the end of ten minutes you would have a tie.

A tie would give each team only one (1) point.*

OT could also be done as a five-minute four-on-four with the same point structure.

*= this for me is the central element of this system. It makes playing toward a tie very unattractive since both teams come away short.

Games would once again be decided by actually playing hockey instead of a series of staged breakaways. Not sure if I have missed anything or if this tweak would have the desired result, but I would love to find out. It would certainly be a low risk/high reward type of experiment from what I can see and might make the game more exciting. Perhaps this has been proposed before, but I have never seen it. Let me know if you have any thoughts.

In the meantime, back to our regularly scheduled butt-whooping of the Phailures.

Edited by AEWHistory

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the way it is right now. Didn't someone recently do another point system which did not include shootout points and the standings were almost exactly the same this year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the way it is right now. Didn't someone recently do another point system which did not include shootout points and the standings were almost exactly the same this year?

Yes, it basically proves that shootouts don't effect the standings much at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of shootouts at all, but they're not going anywhere, so it's pointless to even propose a system that calls for them to be eliminated (though I'd be in favor of it).

My problem with the current system is the number of three-point games...all of the games that go to OT or SO. I think if there's three points up for grabs in some games, there should be three points available in ALL games. So here's what I would propose:

Games decided in regulation:

3 points for the winner, none for the loser.

Games decided in OT or SO (no change here):

2 points for the winner, one for the loser. Continue to tally regulation + OT wins, so teams that bloat their win totals via the shootout could lose a tiebreaker vs. a team that has accumulated more regulation and OT wins.

You now have a much higher premium placed on winning in regulation, and each game in the standings is worth three points, regardless of the outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I was reading an article bemoaning the huge rise in overtime games in each of the last few years and one argument is that this is a result of the regular season point structure that rewards playing toward a tie and going to shootout. I am not sure I accept the argument that it is so difficult to change gears for the playoffs and get out of the regular season mindset, but I guess I can see it. What I absolutely do believe is that the current system doesn't work. This is what I would propose:

Ties would be brought back.

Shootouts would be relegated to the history bins.

A win would be worth three (3) points.

Overtime would last 10 minutes.

If there was no winner at the end of ten minutes you would have a tie.

A tie would give each team only one (1) point.*

OT could also be done as a five-minute four-on-four with the same point structure.

*= this for me is the central element of this system. It makes playing toward a tie very unattractive since both teams come away short.

Games would once again be decided by actually playing hockey instead of a series of staged breakaways. Not sure if I have missed anything or if this tweak would have the desired result, but I would love to find out. It would certainly be a low risk/high reward type of experiment from what I can see and might make the game more exciting. Perhaps this has been proposed before, but I have never seen it. Let me know if you have any thoughts.

In the meantime, back to our regularly scheduled butt-whooping of the Phailures.

I like the idea of ties. I mean if it was a good close game, just end it that way. why does there HAVE to be a winner every game outside playoffs? a short OT was fine if you wanted to try to break the tie, but a skills competition is kind of dumb despite how "exciting it is for fans"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based simply on my own personal interactions with other fans, most like the shootout.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems shootouts are good for the casual fans, and I agree with CR1976

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who enjoys seeing the shootout? I love seeing our skill players be skill players. Since it doesn't make much of a difference in the end, what's so wrong with watching (and, oh by the way, dominating) the skills contest after the game? If you'd rather see the games end in a tie, turn the TV off after 5 minutes of overtime and don't watch the highlights in the morning. There's your nostalgia.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who enjoys seeing the shootout? I love seeing our skill players be skill players. Since it doesn't make much of a difference in the end, what's so wrong with watching (and, oh by the way, dominating) the skills contest after the game? If you'd rather see the games end in a tie, turn the TV off after 5 minutes of overtime and don't watch the highlights in the morning. There's your nostalgia.

I agree with this. I understand that shootouts can end up counting for too much, but the fans want to see a winner at every game. Alternatively, they could just go with an overtime system similar to the playoffs, but that would be way too much for a regular season game. I just don't like the idea of ending in a tie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it the way it is but I don't think you should get any points for a loss. In other words you do not get a point simply for going to overtime because it makes teams that are tied in the 3rd play just to get to OT.

Keep the 4 on 4 five minute OT followed by the shootout if necessary.

So basically I guess you just get a point for any win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who enjoys seeing the shootout? I love seeing our skill players be skill players. Since it doesn't make much of a difference in the end, what's so wrong with watching (and, oh by the way, dominating) the skills contest after the game? If you'd rather see the games end in a tie, turn the TV off after 5 minutes of overtime and don't watch the highlights in the morning. There's your nostalgia.

I like shootouts too. In hockey (and baseball, for that matter), I'm not a fan of clinging to the past for the sake of clinging to the past. The shootout makes the game more exciting.

What really annoys me is people saying the shootout is a gimmick, and then suggest 3-on-3 OT. Because 3-on-3 isn't a gimmick? The game would go from being decided by a breakaway contest to a 2-on-1 odd-man rush contest. Neither one is "real" hockey.

I've long been a proponent of what CR76 suggested. Make all games worth 3 points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like shootouts too. In hockey (and baseball, for that matter), I'm not a fan of clinging to the past for the sake of clinging to the past. The shootout makes the game more exciting.

What really annoys me is people saying the shootout is a gimmick, and then suggest 3-on-3 OT. Because 3-on-3 isn't a gimmick? The game would go from being decided by a breakaway contest to a 2-on-1 odd-man rush contest. Neither one is "real" hockey.

I've long been a proponent of what CR76 suggested. Make all games worth 3 points.

On shootouts: I'm not a big fan. I'm not saying this is the case with you, but I suspect if the Devils weren't the very best in the NHL at the shootout since its implementation, less Devils fans would be a proponent of it. We're lucky to be one of the teams that hasn't been God-awful at it (like Florida).

But yeah, not even worth arguing its merits, as it's here to stay, so no point in debating that. The fact is some people would welcome back ties, but several others would be upset about shootouts being eliminated. It's simply not possible to please everyone, so the NHL might as well not try to.

Yeah, no thanks to 3-on-3. Keep the 5 minute 4-on-4 OT and the shootout. But something has to be done to give regulation victories more weight, and adding the extra point is the only way that makes sense to me. Can't have 2-point games and 3-point games...the current system is flawed by that standpoint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, no thanks to 3-on-3. Keep the 5 minute 4-on-4 OT and the shootout. But something has to be done to give regulation victories more weight, and adding the extra point is the only way that makes sense to me. Can't have 2-point games and 3-point games...the current system is flawed by that standpoint.

I agree that the current system is flawed. A 3-2-1-0 system would be a better way to award points than the 2-2-1-0 system we have now. I just can't seem to care as much as I used to, since we see that the standings rarely change under different point systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like shootouts too. In hockey (and baseball, for that matter), I'm not a fan of clinging to the past for the sake of clinging to the past. The shootout makes the game more exciting.

What really annoys me is people saying the shootout is a gimmick, and then suggest 3-on-3 OT. Because 3-on-3 isn't a gimmick? The game would go from being decided by a breakaway contest to a 2-on-1 odd-man rush contest. Neither one is "real" hockey.

I've long been a proponent of what CR76 suggested. Make all games worth 3 points.

Hell I argue that the shootout is more a game situation since penalty shots happen a hell of a lot more then 3 on 3 even with 4 on 4 OT.

In the end I'm not passionate about the points system other then wins and losses since winning and losing in a shootout (especially a shootout) and getting nothing feels cheap. Also ties are the thing of Satan. Unsatisfying and leaving you confused and wondering what was the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On shootouts: I'm not a big fan. I'm not saying this is the case with you, but I suspect if the Devils weren't the very best in the NHL at the shootout since its implementation, less Devils fans would be a proponent of it. We're lucky to be one of the teams that hasn't been God-awful at it (like Florida).

That's certainly a fair point to raise. I'd like to think that if the Devils weren't so successful at shootouts, I'd dislike our ineptitude rather than dislike the entire institution. Hard to say for sure, though, since they've been so good since its inception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's certainly a fair point to raise. I'd like to think that if the Devils weren't so successful at shootouts, I'd dislike our ineptitude rather than dislike the entire institution. Hard to say for sure, though, since they've been so good since its inception.

Some would see it that way (Devils suck, not the shootout itself) if the Devils fared poorly in them, but I'm guessing the majority of Devils fans would call shootouts unfair, gimmicky, lucky, etc.

The issue with them is that as a GM, you can't build a team that's good at them, the way you can build a good offense, good defense, etc...for most teams the shootout is going to come up 10-15 times a year. As a GM, you're never going to shortchange some other part of your team's game for shootouts. Anyone who gives Lou credit for the Devils being so good at it is wrong...I doubt that even enters Lou's mind when he's building his team. We've just been incredibly blessed that a number of Devils players happen to be successful at it.

The NHL has done the right thing with using regulation and OT win totals to break ties, but it's not enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here was my original post, showing that there were very small differences:

http://www.njdevs.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=120510&st=0&p=1105494entry1105494

If we count all the games that went to a shootout as "ties", and only counted regulation and OT wins, with the consolation point for OT losses:

1. NYR 103 Pts

2. BOS 92 Pts

3. WSH 84 Pts

4. PHI 97 Pts

5. PIT 96 Pts

6. NJD 88 Pts

7. FLA 81 Pts

8. OTT 80 Pts

9. BUF 78 Pts

Pretty interesting that the playoff teams didn't change, but we'd be playing Washington instead of Florida. The point totals are a lot less inflated. Also, Philly would have home ice over Pitt.

In the West, now that all games are complete:

1. STL 104

2. VAN 101

3. PHO 88

4. NSH 96

5. DET 90 (39 W)

6. CHI 90 (38 W)

7. LAK 83

8. SJS 82

9. DAL 91

Not much different...actually all the matchups are the same (STL/SJ is the 1/8 instead of the 2/7 matchup; VAN/LA is the 2/7 instead of the 1/8).

That being said, shootouts are going NOWHERE. Buttman has said so. Plus it does help the casual fan come back when they see something they perceive as exciting. Ties aren't putting casual fans back in the seats.

Edited by Z-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who enjoys seeing the shootout? I love seeing our skill players be skill players. Since it doesn't make much of a difference in the end, what's so wrong with watching (and, oh by the way, dominating) the skills contest after the game? If you'd rather see the games end in a tie, turn the TV off after 5 minutes of overtime and don't watch the highlights in the morning. There's your nostalgia.

Amen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shootouts should be eliminated. Please bring back ties! That little skills competition after OT has nothing to do with the game that proceeded it. It's RIDICULOUS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What i dont like about that system is that losers points counts no matter what and that win in SO doesnt count in tiebreakers... Its dumb you can get penalized by winning more in SO than losing if youre tie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been an advocate of this format for years now, and I would go a step further and say that overtime should be five on five. No need to completely change the sport being played just to artificially decide a winner by making it 4 on 4 or even worse a shootout. I can't believe how unpopular ties are, if the game ends in a tie then oh well both teams played an even game. It has nothing to do with holding onto the past, it has everything to do with making sure teams that are good at hockey are the teams that are rewarded, not just teams that have players with good shots or dekes. Shootouts are such a joke and in my opinion the integrity of the game is sacrificed when winners are decided by artificial penalty shots. The first game I went to was a tie and I still had a blast, and by making overtime ten minutes long instead of five, and making a win worth 3 points and a tie only 1, there would be less ties anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate the shoot out and wish they still had ties. I'm also not a fan of the loser point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What i dont like about that system is that losers points counts no matter what and that win in SO doesnt count in tiebreakers... Its dumb you can get penalized by winning more in SO than losing if youre tie

Re: the SO, well, yeah, that's kind of the point...by not counting the SO wins towards tiebreaker win totals, they're the least significant wins, which I agree with. A team that bloats its overall win total in shootouts shouldn't be treated the same as a team that won more regulation and OT games.

And as for some other ideas that have been brought up: ties aren't coming back, and shootouts aren't going away. I didn't have a problem with ties either, and I'll never be a shootout guy, but like I've said, to me it seems pointless to debate these ideas when there's no chance of ties being reinstated and shootouts getting dumped. So might as well find ways to tweak the CURRENT system to make more sense.

I'm OK with the charity loser point in a 3-2-1-0 system, because at least the charity point is now much of less of a reward in relation to a regulation win than it is in the current system. This is where the main flaw is the current system lies: regulation wins are simply not given enough importance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter how the NHL decides to handle this, half the people wont be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0