Lexrst Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 Some on this message board and in the media contiue to misunderstand how the NHL records a loss and an overtime tie. The habs did not lose to the Penguins last night. Crosby did not sink or kill the habs, Crosby got an extra point for his team - end of story. The Habs tied the game and received a point for it. The Penguins received an extra point by winning the shootout. They are still undefeated on the road and have only 3 losses on the season. Great. I'm happy with a point on the road anytime. Once the teams get into overtime they have each received a point for a tie game, and are simply playing for an extra point in overtime, No one will be recorded as a loss for this. Hope that set6s the record straight. Keep rocking Cradiac Kids - or should we call them the Road Warriors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony_ Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 They lost, get over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33_ Posted November 11, 2005 Share Posted November 11, 2005 It's called an overtime LOSS. Not winning = losing. [Edited on 11-11-05 by Fanpuck33] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lexrst Posted November 12, 2005 Author Share Posted November 12, 2005 Your wrong. The NHL changed that designation this year. Check the 2003/04 standings. It was called OTL (overtime loss) now it is simply OT - not a loss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOHABSGO22 Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Good point Lexrst Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33_ Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 In the NHL, there are no ties, which means you either win or you lose. If you win, you get two points. If you lose, you get 0 or 1 point, depending on when you lose. Don't try to get into semantics. They did not win, they did not tie, that only leaves one possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lexrst Posted November 12, 2005 Author Share Posted November 12, 2005 OT = overtime tie i.e. not a loss. Get with it FanPuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olematelot Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 There's still only a 3 in the loss column Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Point is, we've still got way more numbers in that first column... And the Leafs still suck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoHabsGo_24cups Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 no offence, but this is a stupid conversation. I admit it, I was very disapointed when we lost 2 the peinguins (especially to Sidney Crosby which by the way is shown way 2 much on TSN), but im not so pathetic that i cant admit it that we lost. Ask anyone who watches hockey in the new NHL, and they will tell you that losing in OT is a loss. Besides, losing in OT shouldn't even count as a point. Rewarding teams who lose doesn't seem like the way to go. A team who have lost more games but have gone 2 OT more then another team could take their playoff spot. :ghg: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lazy26 Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 A team who have lost more games but have gone 2 OT more then another team could take their playoff spot.:ghg: With every team playing the same amount of games, I'm not sure that is mathematically possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33_ Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Originally posted by LexrstOT = overtime tie i.e. not a loss. Get with it FanPuck THERE ARE NO MORE TIES IN THE NHL! You get with it! Your whole argument about the difference between "OTL" and "OT" is not valid. Using your theory that "OT" stands for "overtime tie," that would mean that losing a game during the 5 minute overtime would not go under the "OT" category. This is not how it works. If a team loses in overtime, it most certainly goes in the "OT" column. Obviously, there was no "overtime tie" in this case. Losing in a shootout is no different than losing in overtime. The winning team still gets two points and the losing team gets one point. When there are no ties, there is a winner and a loser. Pittsburgh won the game, so the Canadiens had to have lost. It would be illogical for one team to get a win while the other team gets a tie. [Edited on 11-12-05 by Fanpuck33] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycing Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Lol, oh dear. Any chance OT just means... overtime? As in, the loss came in OT. It's also a lot easy to figure out the points as you just double the first number, ignore the second and add the 3rd... Ah yes, That is why I think they've set it up that way. [Edited on 12/11/05 by Macaskill] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PMAC Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Possibly one of the stupidest threads I've read about what is unquestionably the stupidest rule in sports. Get rid of the OT loss point A loss is a loss is a loss. Giving the losers a point just makes the NHL look stupid. If they can eliminate ties then they should elimuinate this rule too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trizzak Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Pittsburgh 3 Montreal 2 We had less goals than Pittsburgh We lost. This isn't rocket science. Now let's take the disgusting 1 point and blow away the Leafs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch_Habs_Fan Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 What a stupid discussion. How blind will you be, LOSS=LOSS. You sound like a leaf fan, they also make things prettier than things are!! (i say sound like, calling you a leaf fan would go to far, thats swearing ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoHabsGo_24cups Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 and if we didn't lose, why did pittsburge get more points then us? because they won. who here honestly agrees Laxrst? [Edited on /11/12/05 by GoHabsGo_24cups] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoHabsGo_24cups Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Originally posted by lazy26 A team who have lost more games but have gone 2 OT more then another team could take their playoff spot.:ghg: With every team playing the same amount of games, I'm not sure that is mathematically possible. It is possible, but you are right it would be very unlikly, because they both would have to lose a lot of games and still get into the playoffs. my mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 can somebody close this thread? In fact, can somebody delete this thread? It's embarrassing to have this around if someone comes to see the level of debate amongst hab fans... Frankly.... does it make you feel better to think that we sucked just as much as the penguins rather than if we were to say that we sucked a little bit more? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lexrst Posted November 12, 2005 Author Share Posted November 12, 2005 Look I'm not making this up for the sake of arguing. Its just how the NHL records these things. Here is the standings key from NHL.com. What more can I say. Whether you agree with it or not. OT is not a loss - its a point! We are now undefeated in 6 straight games. Celebrate! GP - Games Played W - Wins L - Losses OT - Overtime (worth one point) PTS - Points Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33_ Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 OT = losing in overtime/shootout. I don't give a crap about your semantics or NHL.com's. The reason they took the "L" off of "OTL" was so that they could use a single column for both overtime and shootout losses. If a team LOSES in overtime, it goes in the OT column, since the loss occurred in overtime. If a team LOSES in a shootout, it goes in the OT column, because the winner was determined after overtime. An OT is nothing more than a one-point loss. It's better than a regular loss, but it is still a loss. When there are no ties, there is a definite winner and loser. In this case, the Pens won. That only leaves one possibility, a loss. If it's not a 2 point win, it's either a 0 point loss or a 1 point loss. In this case, we got a "good loss," since we still earned one point in defeat. Using your argument, losing a game in overtime is not a loss either, since the team still gets one point. So now losing in overtime isn't a loss either? Using your argument, a team could go undefeated without winning a single game. A team could go 0-0-82 and earn 82 points. There are no wins, which means they lost every other game, since there are no more ties. Originally posted by simonuscan somebody close this thread? In fact, can somebody delete this thread? It's embarrassing to have this around if someone comes to see the level of debate amongst habs fans... Shouldn't we help this Habs fan see the light? Do we really want a fan of the Habs making silly arguments like a Leafs fan? [Edited on 11-12-05 by Fanpuck33] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Fanpuck, you were always the kinder of the two of us... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lexrst Posted November 12, 2005 Author Share Posted November 12, 2005 if you want to get around the semantics fanpuck OT essentially means tie in todays nhl. you get one point and you don't add anytng to the loss column. The GM's were admant that OTL disappear because they didn't consider it a loss if you got a point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanpuck33_ Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Originally posted by Lexrstif you want to get around the semantics fanpuck OT essentially means tie in todays nhl. That's interesting, since there are no more ties in the NHL. That was the whole reason for shootouts, so there would be a clear winner and loser. "The League will award two points to a team that wins in regulation, overtime or the shootout; one point to a team that loses in overtime or the shootout; and no points to a team that loses in regulation." From NHL.com http://www.nhl.com/nhlhq/cba/shootout072205.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony_ Posted November 12, 2005 Share Posted November 12, 2005 Hmmmmmm I'll say this again, they lost, GET OVER IT. The purpose t of a shootout is the determine a winner in the game because TIES DO NOT EXIST IN THE NEW NHL. The Pens won the shootout, the Habs didn't. THEREFORE THE PENS WON AND THE HABS LOST. 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.