Bacchus Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story/?ID=197041&hubname=nhl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 to a large degree the shutout system was designed to simplify the standings tables, changing to a 3 pt system would nullify that advantage. I have to imagine that was a large consideration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMMR Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I would be shocked if they did make the change. The current way ensures that more team will be in the playoff hunt later in the season increasing the likleyhood of selling tickets in weak hockey markets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I wouldnt mind it. A win in regulation should be worth more than a garbage shootout win. It would promote more aggressive play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Isn't that what the overtime point was supposed to do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Isn't that what the overtime point was supposed to do? No, the OT loss point was to reflect the fact that it was unfair for a team to play a hard 60 minute tie but then walk with nothing because they lost in a novelty 4v4 or shootout format. No OT loss point was ok for a 5 minute 5v5 OT which is just basically an extension of the normal game. The OT loss point has rewarded teams too much for playing for the tie. Teams that know they are good at 4v4 or shootout can go for it and know they have a pretty good chance of getting the 2 points. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Gee, I could have sworn that party line was, "Well, teams are settling for the point for a tie, so they're not really playing to win in overtime, just playing not to lose. Now, with the guaranteed point for overtime, teams will really be playing more offensively for those extra five minutes." And yet, it never happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Harry Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 Gee, I could have sworn that party line was, "Well, teams are settling for the point for a tie, so they're not really playing to win in overtime, just playing not to lose. Now, with the guaranteed point for overtime, teams will really be playing more offensively for those extra five minutes." And yet, it never happened. Well, one team might be, but the other team might realize "hey we're 7-2 in shootouts and these guys are 1-4", we just need to slow things down for 5 minutes and the good odds are that we get the easy extra point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 Well, one team might be, but the other team might realize "hey we're 7-2 in shootouts and these guys are 1-4", we just need to slow things down for 5 minutes and the good odds are that we get the easy extra point. The shootout has nothing to do with it. This has been the case long before the shootout was adopted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir_Boagalott Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 This would be queerer than a 3 point victory. Oh, wait. I'd have to put this idea right up there with increasing net size as 1 of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. Why dont they stop giving out points for loosing? I know I shouldnt really bitch because the Habs have gotten quite a few points for loosing, but I still think its ridiculous. In the new NHL you either Win, or you Loose, there is no bloody tie!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted February 24, 2007 Share Posted February 24, 2007 This would be queerer than a 3 point victory. Oh, wait. I'd have to put this idea right up there with increasing net size as 1 of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. Why dont they stop giving out points for loosing? I know I shouldnt really bitch because the Habs have gotten quite a few points for loosing, but I still think its ridiculous. In the new NHL you either Win, or you Loose, there is no bloody tie!!! If you gonna eliminate the point for losing, and there's no ties, why bother giving points for wins? Montreal has only gotten 6 points for OT and SO losses, while Atlanta has 10 (and two more points in the standings with one less win), as does Pacific-leading Anaheim (compared to second-place San Jose with 1) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ch_nl Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 I like the 3-point system. Every game is worth 3 point. If it's a tie after full time both teams get a point. And the sudden death and shotout is just for the extra point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted February 27, 2007 Share Posted February 27, 2007 I like the 3-point system. Every game is worth 3 point. If it's a tie after full time both teams get a point. And the sudden death and shotout is just for the extra point. Every game is worth 3 points, that is true. But not every win is worth 3 points. That's just plain idiotic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 well if you really want 'radical' Have more points awarded to teams who win with regulation then who win in OT and then in Shootout haha that would be crazy. Or better yet just turn it into nascar lol you play the game you get a point. you win the game without going to OT you get 5 points win in OT 4 points win in Shootout 3 points lose in OT 2 points lose in shootout 1 point so you would be guaranteed 1 point but the longer the game went on the more points you would lose. lololol or here's a radical idea just ditch the point system all together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 well if you really want 'radical' Have more points awarded to teams who win with regulation then who win in OT and then in Shootout haha that would be crazy. Or better yet just turn it into nascar lol you play the game you get a point. you win the game without going to OT you get 5 points win in OT 4 points win in Shootout 3 points lose in OT 2 points lose in shootout 1 point so you would be guaranteed 1 point but the longer the game went on the more points you would lose. lololol or here's a radical idea just ditch the point system all together. Bob? Bob McGown? Is that you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 why who's Bob McGown? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRock Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 why who's Bob McGown? He does a radio show on the FAN590 in TO, but it aired in the States and on TV in Canada. You can also get it on podcast, where I usually get it. A couple of weeks ago, he brought up a 4-3-2-1 point system. 4 for reg win 3 for OT win 2 for SO win 1 for OT/SO loss You're only the second person I've seen mention it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.