Ho_Brah
Active Member
It is what it is. I accept the way the league is run. Never question the all mighty Bettman, or he will find you
and fondle you.
and fondle you.
A smart fan will look at games played and realize "Well, we're 3 points behind Team A, but we have 2 games in hand, so we could effectively make up that ground". If a fan doesn't feel like doing that research...well, who cares.
Jeff, if you go strictly by points, then you effectively make a loss the same as not playing. So when comparing 13-12-0 vs. 12-10-0, you are really comparing 13-0-0 vs. 12-0-0.
Why should the detrimental value of the losses be ignored?
Not to play devils advocate here, I do not hate our current system.
BUT, I do think Soccer got this one right. My proposal is to combine both with awarding 3 points to the winner. And then Overtime should maybe share the 3 points. 2 to the winner, 1 for the loser.
Honestly it sounded good when I thought of it but now that I am typing, i do not remember what I was going for.
Thats the olympic point system.
How about you all just get pissed when Lidstrom hoists the Cup? :p
Yes. Either way you do it is imperfect. (1) You can rank teams by the points they actually have, but not account for the games they have yet to play. (2) You can rank teams by their overall winning percentage, which puts teams ahead of others that have yet to earn them and bases it on their likelihood to win games based on their record. Either way has flaws - it's bird in hand vs. the ones in the bush. You seem unable to recognize that.
What, is he gonna be nice enough to hand it to Chara so him and the Bruins can skate around with it after they win it?
What, is he gonna be nice enough to hand it to Chara so him and the Bruins can skate around with it after they win it?
Lets see if you guys can get by Pronger & Co. first. Last time didn't turn out so well.