Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LGR4GM

Around the NHL: 2015-2016

Recommended Posts

How come on a penalty shot if you miss, you don't then get the 2 minute pp?

because they are giving the penalty shot in place of a 2 minute penalty. The goalie making the save would be the equivalent of the short handed team killing off a 2 minute penalty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The overtime I would like to see. Hard stop at the end of the 3rd. 1 minute time-out. Drop puck 4-4 for 4 minutes. Hard Stop. 1 minute time out. 3 minutes 3-3.

No shootout. Allow the tie.

Why bother? Eliminate OT entirely if you're going to introduce a tie result again. Force them to play hard during regulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why bother? Eliminate OT entirely if you're going to introduce a tie result again. Force them to play hard during regulation.

I simply think that the tie would be (and should be) rather rare. If it finishes in a tie, it's a tie. 

But I think that overtime format would be a lot of fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I simply think that the tie would be (and should be) rather rare. If it finishes in a tie, it's a tie. 

But I think that overtime format would be a lot of fun. 

 

I guess the last few years of watching soccer have made me realize I don't have an issue with a tie. College hockey did this to me too. I've seen plenty of college hockey games end in ties. It doesn't rustle my jimmies. To me it's a sign that two teams played a very close game. That's not a bad thing. 

 

I feel like overtime should be saved for the playoffs. That would make it more special. I find the OT hype during the regular season just kind of silly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Additionally I think if you want to keep using a points structure you have to set it up to make a win or a loss the most desirable outcome. So do this. No OT. Reintroduce the Tie result. And then make the points:

 

2 for a win.

 

1 for a loss.

 

0 for a tie.

 

Teams are already using overtime as an excuse to get a free point, so let's just give it out automatically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like limiting OT to the playoffs.

What about making one point available in each game and awarding it to the winner?

Lose or tie and you go home with nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like limiting OT to the playoffs.

What about making one point available in each game and awarding it to the winner?

Lose or tie and you go home with nothing.

That could work too. In fact it's even better. Eliminate the reward for everything but a win. The way it should be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Additionally I think if you want to keep using a points structure you have to set it up to make a win or a loss the most desirable outcome. So do this. No OT. Reintroduce the Tie result. And then make the points:

 

2 for a win.

 

1 for a loss.

 

0 for a tie.

 

Teams are already using overtime as an excuse to get a free point, so let's just give it out automatically.

 

That's what it always was before there was OT.  

 

3-1-0 might work, too.  Provide an incentive for winning, like in soccer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what it always was before there was OT.  

 

3-1-0 might work, too.  Provide an incentive for winning, like in soccer.

 

I just don't like seeing an incentive for losing. I don't think losing a game should allow you to gain a position in the standings. But here we are, with teams taking games to OT in order to get a point and improve their position. I think that's garbage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just taking a quick glance at last season's standings, the results would be exactly the same if we eliminated OT and the loser point in favor of a pure all or nothing points system. OT and the points system essentially over complicates things for no reason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't like seeing an incentive for losing. I don't think losing a game should allow you to gain a position in the standings. But here we are, with teams taking games to OT in order to get a point and improve their position. I think that's garbage. 

Agree, instead of the old days of playing for a tie, teams now play for OT...Play a 10 minute 4 on 4...the extra 5 minutes should create more opportunities for scoring and penalties....winning team gets 2 points, losing team 0....after 10 minutes of no scoring game is a tie 1 point each.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sabres have between $10M-$11M to make up to get to the floor. Not an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what it always was before there was OT.  

 

3-1-0 might work, too.  Provide an incentive for winning, like in soccer.

 

 

I just don't like seeing an incentive for losing. I don't think losing a game should allow you to gain a position in the standings. But here we are, with teams taking games to OT in order to get a point and improve their position. I think that's garbage. 

 

I think I may have misunderstood your prior post.  Are you advocating a point for a loss?  I'm thinking 3 win, 1 tie, 0 loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason for the point for losing in OT is because you didn't lose in regulation time. They are rewarding teams with a point for not losing a game after the 60 minutes of game time in the rules. The ot/shootout is to determine who will get the point for winning the extra time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sabres have between $10M-$11M to make up to get to the floor. Not an issue.

And yet, we're going to get post after post about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet, we're going to get post after post about it.

But, if used as a metric, those posts can be useful. ;)

 

I'd've expected an analytics guy, such as yourself, to see that value. :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I may have misunderstood your prior post. Are you advocating a point for a loss? I'm thinking 3 win, 1 tie, 0 loss.

I'm on two different tracks at the moment. One is where no points are awarded for anything but a win. That other post is as intended though. If you give a point for a loss but not for a tie, then you encourage teams to play for anything but a tie, meaning crazy finishes in order to at least try to come away with one point rather than no points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on two different tracks at the moment. One is where no points are awarded for anything but a win. That other post is as intended though. If you give a point for a loss but not for a tie, then you encourage teams to play for anything but a tie, meaning crazy finishes in order to at least try to come away with one point rather than no points.

 

I'm confused. Wouldn't that set up a situation where teams would be encouraged to score own-goals when it suited them? Or, even if they tried to legislate against it, a team would give up a softie in the last 20 seconds?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm confused. Wouldn't that set up a situation where teams would be encouraged to score own-goals when it suited them? Or, even if they tried to legislate against it, a team would give up a softie in the last 20 seconds?

 

Probably. Is that any worse than playing for the loser point? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably. Is that any worse than playing for the loser point?

Yea, I think you're way way off here.

 

Loser points suck. But the point of them is to keep the standings close. Would we rather have no loser point or closer battles at the end of the season?

 

I think the 4 on 4 for 4 minutes, 3 on 3 for 3 minutes and then a shootout is the best avenue.

2 points for regulation win. 0 for regulation loss. 2 for OT win. 1 for OT loss. 1 for SO win. 0 for SO loss.

Edited by Hoss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, I think you're way way off here.

 

Loser points suck. But the point of them is to keep the standings close. Would we rather have no loser point or closer battles at the end of the season?

 

I think the 4 on 4 for 4 minutes, 3 on 3 for 3 minutes and then a shootout is the best avenue.

2 points for regulation win. 0 for regulation loss. 2 for OT win. 1 for OT loss. 1 for SO win. 0 for SO loss.

The standings are exactly the same. The loser point adds nothing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The standings are exactly the same. The loser point adds nothing.

 

It keeps the points close.  Makes fans think their team still has a chance.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...