With NHL general managers getting together this week to discuss possible rule changes, and talk about changing the rules on fighting getting some mainstream media attention (including a rare lengthy discussion on ESPN Radio this morning), a deeper discussion will take place regarding the league's standings.Ever since the NHL introduced the rule of giving a point to the loser in overtime (and, later, a shootout), there has been talk about the inequity of some games being worth two points while others are worth three. It's led to some bizarre moments, including one that comes to mind in which Buffalo celebrated clinching a playoff spot with an overtime point -- before the extra session began. But should the NHL overhaul its system completely?
One of the more radical solutions would be borrowed from the world of soccer, as a win in regulation would be worth three points, an overtime or shootout win worth two points, and an overtime or shootout loss would still be worth one.
The reasoning behind this is that regulation wins should be worth more than a win in overtime or shootout, and teams would be less likely to be patient towards the end of regulation and settle for a point when they could add an extra point by finishing their opponent off in 60 minutes.
While this certainly would allow teams to obliterate points records (and also change the value of a win for the first time in league history), the league in the last few years has already seen some of its wins-based records fall, and Martin Brodeur will be crowned the new all-time leader in wins by a goaltender -- with the help of a couple dozen shootout victories that would have been ties otherwise.
So, how much different would the standings look with the revised system? Not that much.
The biggest change in the Eastern Conference playoff race would be a flip of the Devils and Capitals for the second and third seed in the conference, as New Jersey currently has 13 of their 42 wins in the extra session or shootout, while Washington only has eight in the extra session, meaning the Caps would hold a 118 to 116 point lead. The other change would involve the Rangers, who would fall out of the playoff picture into a ninth-place tie with Buffalo thanks to their 12 overtime/shootout wins, allowing Carolina to take the seventh seed and knocking the Penguins down to eighth.
Though incredibly tight, there would be zero change in the Western Conference playoff seeds, with the only change being Minnesota and Dallas flipping spots at nine and 10, but the top eight would remain exactly the same.
As for the President's Trophy Race, the Bruins would hold 132 points as of Monday morning (which would equal the NHL's best points mark with a month to go in the season), with a two-point edge over San Jose and three over Detroit.
So while the concept may seem a radical change, outside the points records, it really wouldn't alter the game that much to go to a three-point system, and perhaps would add some extra spice to the last couple of minutes where teams now just are content to play for the extra point rather than looking to end the game in regulation.
It's got little chance of passing, but probably is an idea whose time has come and could introduce some more exciting regulation finishes, encouraging teams to wrap games up in 60 minutes or less.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-09-2009 @ 5:01PM
dferre5587 said...
this is a stupid idea. the teams should get 2 points for a win, and none for a loss. over time loss = no points. shoot out loss= no points. thats why its called a LOSS. thats it plain and dry. no more stats of over time wins and losses, just wins and losses. DOESNT GET ANY EASIER THAT THAT BETTMAN. STOP TRYING TO SCREW UP A GREAT GAME .
Reply
3-09-2009 @ 5:41PM
Colonial said...
Agreed.
The day that the league decided that no game would end in a tie is the day we should have dropped the whole point system. Playoff seeding should be based on Win totals and it shouldn't matter if the win came in regulation, overtime, or a shootout. 1 Win for the winner, 1 Loss for the loser. Easy.
Also, I can't be the only one that gets upset when a team that is say, 12-12-5 calls themselves a ".500 team". No, you are 5 games under .500 because those 5 overtime losses are LOSSES, not ties.
Reply
3-09-2009 @ 7:26PM
Josh said...
I think it should switch to something like this:
Win: 3 points
Overtime Win: 2 points
Overtime Loss: 1 point
Loss: 0 Points
Either that or go to a win loss system like the NBA has it. It works great in the NBA and makes for some interesting games down the stretch.
Reply
3-15-2009 @ 7:51PM
ericp331 said...
Regulation/OT win = 3 points
Regulation/OT loss = 0 points
Shootout win = 2 points
Shootout loss = 1 point
3-10-2009 @ 12:58AM
pladd said...
1. Revert back to the old 2-1-0 points system.
2. Extend OT to 10 minutes (with the same rulebook used in regulation).
3. Scrap the shootout (games should not be decided in a skills competition).
4. Scrap fighting (automatic ejection for first one, one-game suspension for first offnse, double for each one after that.)
Result: far fewer fights, fewer OT games, no reward for losses, better hockey.
Reply
3-10-2009 @ 9:18AM
Sully said...
Ever since the NHL went to the current point system, it has created a lot of excitement down the stretch as there are a number of teams vying for a spot in the playoffs and it makes the games more intense. Right now in the East, there are six teams playing for the last four spots, and these teams play each other a lot down the stretch, which makes it even better. I disagree that teams take it easy and will settle for one point knowing they are going into overtime, for the players don't want to play the extra session, especially if they have another game the next night, and why give a team you are playing at least one point when it may come back to haunt you later. The current system has worked out great, so leave it alone. Oh and by the way, fighting has been a part of the game since the league was born. Leave it in. Who ever gets really hurt in a fight anyway? The players want it and most of the fans love it. You have to protect the players, otherwise more "cheap shots" will be taken, especially on the best players, and if other players cannot fight to protect them, it will lead to some ugly hockey!
The game is at its height! Leave it alone!
Reply
3-10-2009 @ 3:49PM
Katshockey said...
I've done an extensive analysis of the point system(s), current, 3-pt and the throwback to the old system prior to the loser point using a program to simulate the standings at any point in any season. Changing it to a three point system (or reverting back) doesn't change anything in regards to playoff race, or the final standings. It doesn't make a difference and from the owners perspective, this is current system is the most equitable throughout the NHL.
Reply
3-11-2009 @ 4:44PM
jordonez009 said...
I agree with Josh; "3-2-1-or none" is the best point system...by far. It's more equitable and as a fan, you can truly tell which teams are the strongest in their division by this system. It's also easier to follow and easier to explain to the "passive" hockey fans that Bettman wants to grab.
It makes so much sense, there's no way Bettman would ever go for it.
Reply