3 Point Regulation Wins

[mattola]

Three-point debate: Change the standings? - Cross Checks Blog - ESPN

 

[pixburgher66]

Do we *really* want the Rangers to have that many points? I think not.

 

[ritari330]

3 points or 2 points, i really don't care, just make every game worth the same number of points.

 

[dash]

I like the quote from windbag Burke (is it pick on Burke day?):

"Because it's a terrible idea," then-Anaheim GM Brian Burke said on Feb. 21, 2007 after the meetings wrapped up. "That's why it didn't have any support. ... They tried this in British soccer and everything I've heard is that it didn't make a difference. Teams would get ahead and then would shut it down

Have you watched the third periods of tie hockey games? Teams shut it down now and take their chances in OT or the SO? This wouldn't happen as often with three points on the line for a regulation win.

 

[dash]

Take last night for example (and comeds, I'm not picking on the Habs):

Winnipeg destroys Florida 7-0 and earns two points for a resounding victory in regulation.

Montreal has a 4-1 lead in the 3rd period and melts down/Minnesota rallies to tie in regulation and force OT. Seto blows a tire in the shootout and the Habs win and get two points.

These games are at truly opposite ends of the spectrum, yet at the end of the evening, the victorious teams each end up with two points.

Edit: At least in the old days (when we had ties), the Jets would get two points, and the Habs and Wild would get one point each. This is not advocating going back to ties (as that's not going to happen), but the reward should be to win the game in 60 minutes.

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

I don't care how the Islanders get points as long as they get them.

 

[BOSSMANPC]

Take last night for example (and comeds, I'm not picking on the Habs):

Winnipeg destroys Florida 7-0 and earns two points for a resounding victory in regulation.

Montreal has a 4-1 lead in the 3rd period and melts down/Minnesota rallies to tie in regulation and force OT. Seto blows a tire in the shootout and the Habs win and get two points.

These games are at truly opposite ends of the spectrum, yet at the end of the evening, the victorious teams each end up with two points.

Maybe teams should get two points for a win and three points if they win by three or more goals....

 

[BOSSMANPC]

I don't care how the Islanders get points as long as they get them.

It may take them four games to get them.

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

It may take them four games to get them.

Well Saturday they play the Bruins. So any points would be considered an upset of EPIC proportions.

 

[4thstreet]

I've said it numerous times 2 pts for a win ,1 for a tie,0 to loser.

Get rid of ot and shootouts.
A losing team hangs on through 3 rounds and still gets a point?With that logic,shouldn't they be rewarded a point for each round they advance in losing?3 for regulation loss,2 for ot loss,and 1 for shootout loss-thereby putting the winners at 6pts for regulation win,5 for ot win,and 4 for shootout win.

It's all a stupid concept,but as of right now giving points to losing teams is stupid.IMO

 

[rares]

Ugh... I just don't understand why GMs can't/won't support some kind of each-game-is-worth-the-same-#-of-points compromise.

I mean, I read all those quotes and it still makes no sense... if your team is good/great already, they'll still be good/great. Also, I get it that you don't care much about the other teams, but c'mon... how does it make any sense to have some 2-pt games and some 3-pt games out there?

I'll never understand but yeah, we keep going over this every couple weeks, I feel like... Hah!

 

[davnlaguna]

Ugh... I just don't understand why GMs can't/won't support some kind of each-game-is-worth-the-same-#-of-points compromise.

I mean, I read all those quotes and it still makes no sense... if your team is good/great already, they'll still be good/great. Also, I get it that you don't care much about the other teams, but c'mon... how does it make any sense to have some 2-pt games and some 3-pt games out there?

I'll never understand but yeah, we keep going over this every couple weeks, I feel like... Hah!

The NHL likes it this way becuase so many teams have a chance at poat season. Somebody somebody suggested putting more teams in the playoff. Each conf winner would get a by in the first round. More playoff games means more tickets at higher prices without havingto pay the players more.

 

[Vadered]

The NHL likes it this way becuase so many teams have a chance at poat season. Somebody somebody suggested putting more teams in the playoff. Each conf winner would get a by in the first round. More playoff games means more tickets at higher prices without havingto pay the players more.

I'm opposed to more teams in the playoffs. Already more than half the teams in the league make it in. I like feel of the current NHL playoffs, but I feel it would work better with 36 or so teams so that you don't feel like some folks just get into the playoffs by default. Good luck finding 6 more spots to put franchises though (7 if you count Phoenix).

 

[rares]

I'm opposed to more teams in the playoffs. Already more than half the teams in the league make it in. I like feel of the current NHL playoffs, but I feel it would work better with 36 or so teams so that you don't feel like some folks just get into the playoffs by default. Good luck finding 6 more spots to put franchises though (7 if you count Phoenix).

Yeah, this, basically.

The NHL is already (I think? Haven't checked lately) the most "generous" of major sports leagues in terms of how many teams make it to the playoffs. 16 out of 30 is *A LOT*..

Outside of a couple of teams who might miss the playoffs by a couple points at the end of the season, if you don't make it, well, no offense but you probably weren't good enough to make it... or, even if you made it, you probably wouldn't get far anyway.

So basically, they want us to feel the excitement of the race between the 7-9 or 7-10 playoff spots the last week of the season and watch shootout after shootout decide shit for teams who win outright?

 

[dash]

I guess the main thing that bothers me about the current system is that the shootout plays a prominent role in deciding playoff positioning as well as which teams ultimately end up making the playoffs and then it disappears once the playoffs start. As mentioned many times previously, the shootout is here to stay and it better never make an appearance in the post-season, but at least one way to diminish some of its impact is to go to a 3-2-1 points system.

 

[Darkstone42]

Here is my proposal (which will never happen):

Go to the 3-2-1-0 system.

Also go to OT of 5-on-5 for 10 minutes. After that 10-minute overtime, go to the shootout.

Now overtime is just like the rest of the game, consequently either a regulation or an overtime win will earn 3 points.

A shootout win will earn two.

A shootout loss will earn one.

And a regulation or overtime loss will earn none.

Now there is no longer a benefit to just getting to overtime. Now you have to win in overtime. Once in overtime, you have to incentive to try to win in overtime since, even if you win in a shootout, you won't get as many points as you otherwise would.

It would make the third period and the overtime period a heck of a lot more exciting, I think.

 

[dash]

As an additional hook, the league should give the 3-2-1-0 points system a try in a shortened 48 game season.

 

[elocomotive]

Here is my proposal (which will never happen):

Go to the 3-2-1-0 system.

Also go to OT of 5-on-5 for 10 minutes. After that 10-minute overtime, go to the shootout.

Now overtime is just like the rest of the game, consequently either a regulation or an overtime win will earn 3 points.

A shootout win will earn two.

A shootout loss will earn one.

And a regulation or overtime loss will earn none.

Now there is no longer a benefit to just getting to overtime. Now you have to win in overtime. Once in overtime, you have to incentive to try to win in overtime since, even if you win in a shootout, you won't get as many points as you otherwise would.

It would make the third period and the overtime period a heck of a lot more exciting, I think.

Too... complicated....

Keep it simple like this:
3 points for win in regulation
2.5 points for win in OT
2 points for win in SO or tie after OT
1.5 points for losing in regulation but coming back during mandatory shootout in all games
1 bonus standing point for scoring 6 goals or more
5 bonus standing points for scoring from rock 'n jock center ice circle
1 points for loss SO
2 bonus standing points if someone on team bangs a Kournikova or a Duff
Standing point totals double for all categories if 10 goals combined after 2 periods

 

[jstewismybastardson]

how will bettman be able to efficiently utilize "game management" to manufacture perceived parity?

Every team deserves to be in the playoff battle until the last week of the season no matter how shitty they are .... Cause bettman says so

 

[dash]

how will bettman be able to efficiently utilize "game management" to manufacture perceived parity?

Every team deserves to be in the playoff battle until the last week of the season no matter how shitty they are .... Cause bettman says so

Unfortunately, this is the correct answer...