Hoss Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 The standings are exactly the same. The loser point adds nothing. With the loser point: the Kings miss the playoffs by 2 points. Without it they miss the playoffs by 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 With the loser point: the Kings miss the playoffs by 2 points. Without it they miss the playoffs by 10. Hey...nobody said you were supposed to actually look at the standings and do the math! :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Hey...nobody said you were supposed to actually look at the standings and do the math! :lol: D4rk is correct, the standings don't change. The amount teams are out of contention does though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darksabre Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 It keeps the points close. Makes fans think their team still has a chance. Which is hilarious and dumb. With the loser point: the Kings miss the playoffs by 2 points. Without it they miss the playoffs by 10. Good. They shouldn't be 8 points closer than they actually are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Which is hilarious and dumb. It's really damned brilliant if your job is to keep interest high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 I go back and forth on the issue, but I'd rather keep the playoff races interesting. Maybe some heavier research would reveal if the loser point really does keep it close. Either way I think changing overtime is a good start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnkirishone Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 If you eliminate the loser point you just make the last 10 minutes of the 3rd and the ot boring. Could try a 3/2/1 with no loser point. Guessing some teams would just aim for the 1 point shootout win still Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 We can all look at the standings and say this is how the season would have panned out if................... But that season wasn't played under a theoretical points sytem that wasn't in play. If there were a 3-2-1 system teams would have played a different game and more often wouldn't have settled for an OT point if 3 points were awarded for a regulation win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 We can all look at the standings and say this is how the season would have panned out if................... But that season wasn't played under a theoretical points sytem that wasn't in play. If there were a 3-2-1 system teams would have played a different game and more often wouldn't have settled for an OT point if 3 points were awarded for a regulation win. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 23, 2015 Report Share Posted June 23, 2015 Theoretical................. hypothetical.............. you get the point. :bag: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 McKenzie: Pending B of G approval, NHL will go to 3-on-3 overtime for 5 minutes in regular season games next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 McKenzie: Pending B of G approval, NHL will go to 3-on-3 overtime for 5 minutes in regular season games next season. Would really like to see them go back to taking 2 players off the ice for offsetting minors when already at 5v4 or 4v4 during regulation. THAT was fun to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 (edited) @TSNBobMcKenzie: Speaking of 3on3, NHL may consider - nothing firm yet by any means - re-formatted NHL All-Star Game that could be multi-team 3-on-3 tourney. This would be fun Edited June 24, 2015 by BRAWNDO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 Brought to you by Barnum & Bailey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 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 You're giving me way too much credit ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 I've never liked thinking of this so called loser point as the bonus point that is handed out. These games are tied at the end of regulation and that is the actual result and like the old days, each team gets a point. The real bonus point is the one handed to whoever "wins" in overtime/shoot out. 2 points are up for grabs during the portion of the game played under normal rules. I'll throw this suggestion out there that has come to mind recently. If they really think that the fans need to see a conclusion, then by all means keep going with the overtime and shootout. The change here though is to only count them as a tie in the standings. Use the shootout (or maybe any overtime result) only as a tie breaker in the standings. They kind of do this already with the regulation wins column that is the first step to break ties. I say they make that regulation wins column be the one they actually use to calculate your points total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoPre Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 (edited) I'm up for the 3 on 3 overtime, but why not go w/ a 3-2-1 scoring system? 3 for regulation win, 2 for overtime win and 1for overtime loss? Gives reason to play hard in the finals minutes of a 3rd period. Edited June 24, 2015 by Thanes16 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 I'm up for the 3 on 3 overtime, but why not go w/ a 3-2-1 scoring system? 3 for regulation win, 2 for overtime win and 1for overtime loss? Gives reason to play hard in the finals minutes of a 3rd period. Agreed. I assume it isn't done as it would open up the standings more - which would be a good thing because then there would be real buyers and sellers at the deadline, rather than have every team bar like 3 thinking they have a shot at the post season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 I genuinely don't understand why this topic gets so much play. The best teams will get into the playoffs no matter what system is used, and maybe a few 8ish teams will swap if the point system was changed,… maybe. Who cares? The current point system gives teams with skill (shooters and goalies) a little extra edge to make the playoffs. That's it. The NHL wants them in for obvious reasons. Good teams will still get and and bad teams won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trettioåtta Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 I genuinely don't understand why this topic gets so much play. The best teams will get into the playoffs no matter what system is used, and maybe a few 8ish teams will swap if the point system was changed,… maybe. Who cares? The current point system gives teams with skill (shooters and goalies) a little extra edge to make the playoffs. That's it. The NHL wants them in for obvious reasons. Good teams will still get and and bad teams won't. You're missing the point. The issue is not who gets in and who doesn't - I agree, that for the most part that wouldn't change. The issue is that in a tied game with 5 minutes to go, both teams basically just dump the puck and play very defensive hockey, pushing for overtime so they can get at least 1, maybe 2 points. The 3-2-1 point system makes teams have something to gain by taking more chances late in the game. Especially if they are behind in the playoff hunt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 I genuinely don't understand why this topic gets so much play. The best teams will get into the playoffs no matter what system is used, and maybe a few 8ish teams will swap if the point system was changed,… maybe. Who cares? The current point system gives teams with skill (shooters and goalies) a little extra edge to make the playoffs. That's it. The NHL wants them in for obvious reasons. Good teams will still get and and bad teams won't. You're missing the point. The issue is not who gets in and who doesn't - I agree, that for the most part that wouldn't change. The issue is that in a tied game with 5 minutes to go, both teams basically just dump the puck and play very defensive hockey, pushing for overtime so they can get at least 1, maybe 2 points. The 3-2-1 point system makes teams have something to gain by taking more chances late in the game. Especially if they are behind in the playoff hunt Exactly, it's about entertainment level. Personally, I cannot stand a tie, it's one of the main reasons I won't watch regular season soccer. I didn't go to a game, or spend 3 hours watching it, to feel indifferent about the outcome. Get rid of the loser point, and do 4-4 to 3-3 to a shootout. The AHL study with 3-3 showed a significant decline in shootouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 You're missing the point. The issue is not who gets in and who doesn't - I agree, that for the most part that wouldn't change. The issue is that in a tied game with 5 minutes to go, both teams basically just dump the puck and play very defensive hockey, pushing for overtime so they can get at least 1, maybe 2 points. The 3-2-1 point system makes teams have something to gain by taking more chances late in the game. Especially if they are behind in the playoff hunt I know everyone keeps saying that, I'm just not sure it's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 Next step is to settle ties with a game of mini-sticks in Sabretooth's hut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 @Mackey_Trib: Penguins team source confirms they plan to sign Russian winger Sergei Plotnikov on July 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted June 24, 2015 Report Share Posted June 24, 2015 I genuinely don't understand why this topic gets so much play. The best teams will get into the playoffs no matter what system is used, and maybe a few 8ish teams will swap if the point system was changed,… maybe. Who cares? The current point system gives teams with skill (shooters and goalies) a little extra edge to make the playoffs. That's it. The NHL wants them in for obvious reasons. Good teams will still get and and bad teams won't. I actually think it's the opposite: the current points system gives less talented teams a better chance. They can clutch and grab their way to OT for the point, and if they can hold on for 5 minutes, they get to the shootout which is basically a coin flip statistically. It's rare, but teams like Florida two years ago when divisions based on OT losses and teams like this year's Kings miss the playoffs due to bad shootout luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts