JSAQ Explains His Rationale For the No Point Loss System
Posted 6:46 PM ET | Comments 28
I have seen two different blogs now exhorting the idea I posted in two different random thoughts blogs. It has been praised and ridiculed. I'd like to explain exactly what my rationale is, and why I suggested the points levels in the manner which I described.
The System would be:
2 Standings Points for a regulation or OT win
1 Standings Point for a shoot out win
0 Standings Points for a loss
The NHL has toyed with a way to settle ties for most of the Bettman era. It was thought that games that were tied late in the third would be played more aggressively if they awarded a second point for an OT win and the loser kept the point for a regulation tie. The idea was to try and force teams that were busy trapping to play to win rather than playing to not lose.
That still didn't work exactly, so they added shootouts. I am fine with ties, and have issues with a gimmick deciding a hockey game. However, the shootout is popular, and I have always said that you do not eliminate things that make every fan in the building stand up and cheer. So, the shootout can stay.
However, I have noticed that the old pattern is reappearing-late in OT, some teams seem to pull it back a little and play to get to a shootout. That makes for boring hockey, when it should be really exciting.
That is why my idea was formulated and blogged about.
I think a regulation win is the best thing you can achieve. It comes from winning a hockey game. An OT win is almost as good and should be worth the same amount of points. Two points is a fair reward for winning a game in either manner.
Shootouts are, despite the entertainment value, a gimmick. There is no way that two teams should play hockey for 65 minutes, then settle the matter with a gimmick-and have that gimmick count as much as a regular win. Winning a shootout should NEVER be as valuable as winning a hockey game.
Now, getting nothing for a loss...why the Hell should anyone get anything for losing a game? "But we were tied at the end of regulation," is what some will say. To that I say BFD. You shouldn't get points for losing a game under any circumstances. You shouldn't get points for being tied at the end of regulation. You want more excitement? Force defense first coaches to go after wins, instead of playing to not lose.
I think that the final goal at the end of the day is to have the most exciting, most pure game of hockey we can possibly have. I think a point for losing a game-or just getting to regulation without a loss, and rewarding a win in a gimmick as much as a real game takes away that purity and encourages teams to play to not lose.
The System would be:
2 Standings Points for a regulation or OT win
1 Standings Point for a shoot out win
0 Standings Points for a loss
The NHL has toyed with a way to settle ties for most of the Bettman era. It was thought that games that were tied late in the third would be played more aggressively if they awarded a second point for an OT win and the loser kept the point for a regulation tie. The idea was to try and force teams that were busy trapping to play to win rather than playing to not lose.
That still didn't work exactly, so they added shootouts. I am fine with ties, and have issues with a gimmick deciding a hockey game. However, the shootout is popular, and I have always said that you do not eliminate things that make every fan in the building stand up and cheer. So, the shootout can stay.
However, I have noticed that the old pattern is reappearing-late in OT, some teams seem to pull it back a little and play to get to a shootout. That makes for boring hockey, when it should be really exciting.
That is why my idea was formulated and blogged about.
I think a regulation win is the best thing you can achieve. It comes from winning a hockey game. An OT win is almost as good and should be worth the same amount of points. Two points is a fair reward for winning a game in either manner.
Shootouts are, despite the entertainment value, a gimmick. There is no way that two teams should play hockey for 65 minutes, then settle the matter with a gimmick-and have that gimmick count as much as a regular win. Winning a shootout should NEVER be as valuable as winning a hockey game.
Now, getting nothing for a loss...why the Hell should anyone get anything for losing a game? "But we were tied at the end of regulation," is what some will say. To that I say BFD. You shouldn't get points for losing a game under any circumstances. You shouldn't get points for being tied at the end of regulation. You want more excitement? Force defense first coaches to go after wins, instead of playing to not lose.
I think that the final goal at the end of the day is to have the most exciting, most pure game of hockey we can possibly have. I think a point for losing a game-or just getting to regulation without a loss, and rewarding a win in a gimmick as much as a real game takes away that purity and encourages teams to play to not lose.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to leave a comment.Blog Archive
15 The Little Engine That Almost Could....Part One
24 Turco's Choke Collar Stays In Place
29 Want To Ruin A Wonderful Game Experience On Television?
24 Turco's Choke Collar Stays In Place
29 Want To Ruin A Wonderful Game Experience On Television?
14 Under Review??????? Better Than Letting The Ref Decide
19 A Flyers Fan's Opinion On The Offseason
19 The NHL On NBC? No So Fast, Pal....
19 A Flyers Fan's Opinion On The Offseason
19 The NHL On NBC? No So Fast, Pal....
05 Pronger Out Of Conn Smythe Race...Alfie Should Sit
06 Flyers Shuffle Staffs: Mullen, McIllhargy In, Berube To AHL
07 Congrats To The Ducks...And Let The Games Begin
14 What If You Had An Awards Show And Nobody Could Watch
15 Change Of Opinion? Sort Of....
20 Flyers Jump The Gun. Was It Worth It?
24 Next Step For Philadelphia?
28 OK Homer, Might Be Time To Get Away From The Big Money Table
06 Flyers Shuffle Staffs: Mullen, McIllhargy In, Berube To AHL
07 Congrats To The Ducks...And Let The Games Begin
14 What If You Had An Awards Show And Nobody Could Watch
15 Change Of Opinion? Sort Of....
20 Flyers Jump The Gun. Was It Worth It?
24 Next Step For Philadelphia?
28 OK Homer, Might Be Time To Get Away From The Big Money Table
03 A Quick First Look At The New Flyers...
08 Some Wacky, Wild Stuff.....
19 Players on the spot, players on the move....maybe?
23 Welcome Back BOOOOOOOSH!!!!! Flyers sign Giroux, too.
26 Carol Alt: Dumber Than Plywood?
28 The Simpsons Movie-A Hockeybuzzard's Review
08 Some Wacky, Wild Stuff.....
19 Players on the spot, players on the move....maybe?
23 Welcome Back BOOOOOOOSH!!!!! Flyers sign Giroux, too.
26 Carol Alt: Dumber Than Plywood?
28 The Simpsons Movie-A Hockeybuzzard's Review
15 Random Thoughts Whilst Fighting Insomnia
18 Random Thoughts Hit The Road
23 Random Thoughts on Kids, Games and Whatnot
28 Random Thoughts
30 One Reason Hockey Is Great....The Players
18 Random Thoughts Hit The Road
23 Random Thoughts on Kids, Games and Whatnot
28 Random Thoughts
30 One Reason Hockey Is Great....The Players
01 Random Thoughts
11 Head Shots
13 Random Thoughts on How to Better The NHL
16 Bouelrice Waived?!?!?! Oh, just because Eager's Hurt...
19 Random Flyers Thoughts-What A Difference A Year Can Make
21 Random Thoughts
11 Head Shots
13 Random Thoughts on How to Better The NHL
16 Bouelrice Waived?!?!?! Oh, just because Eager's Hurt...
19 Random Flyers Thoughts-What A Difference A Year Can Make
21 Random Thoughts
13 Random Thoughts
21 The Good, The Bad and the Ugly-Flyers deals thru the years
23 The Good, The Bad and The Ugly II-The Flyers Drafts
28 Consistency Is Needed
21 The Good, The Bad and the Ugly-Flyers deals thru the years
23 The Good, The Bad and The Ugly II-The Flyers Drafts
28 Consistency Is Needed
02 Disgraceful Effort, Suspension Five
04 Flyers Need To Look Ahead, Learn From Mistakes
11 Richie vs Sid, Round II AND More Random Thoughts
12 Flyers Destroy Pens, Causing Michel Therrien to Weep
14 Keep Me In Philadelphia As Long As You Can
17 Random Thoughts
19 Ugly Loss, Good Trade
04 Flyers Need To Look Ahead, Learn From Mistakes
11 Richie vs Sid, Round II AND More Random Thoughts
12 Flyers Destroy Pens, Causing Michel Therrien to Weep
14 Keep Me In Philadelphia As Long As You Can
17 Random Thoughts
19 Ugly Loss, Good Trade
07 Random Thoughts
10 "
11 Random Thoughts Strike Back
13 You Know What Sucks? The NHL Store In NYC
14 Foppa Doppa Doo Dah
17 JSAQ Explains His Rationale For the No Point Loss System
19 Crosby Hurt!!!! Oh The Humanity!!!
21 Random Thoughts
23 Campbell Must Act Harshly..But Of Course He Did Not
10 "
11 Random Thoughts Strike Back
13 You Know What Sucks? The NHL Store In NYC
14 Foppa Doppa Doo Dah
17 JSAQ Explains His Rationale For the No Point Loss System
19 Crosby Hurt!!!! Oh The Humanity!!!
21 Random Thoughts
23 Campbell Must Act Harshly..But Of Course He Did Not
15 JSAQ Picks The Major Award Winners....TODAY!!!
19 Foppa Doppa Do NOT!!!
26 JSAQ's Deadline Day Review And Analysis!!!
19 Foppa Doppa Do NOT!!!
26 JSAQ's Deadline Day Review And Analysis!!!
I don't mind ties either. However, I think if anything makes sense as they play the games now it should be 3 for reg win, 2 for OT/SO win, 1 for OT/SO loss, 0 for reg loss. One thing I'm adamant about is all games being of equal point value. OT/SO games having more point value is just silly.
OT/Shootout games, under this plan, would have less value, unless a team wins it in OT. I don't think a SO win should be worth as much as a OT win, and I don't think making it through regulation and an OT tied is worth half a win.
But essentially you're leaving a team which played to a tie hockey game, regardless of the goofy keep-the-'fans'-happy OT/SO mentality, without any credit whatsoever.
good job js I am one of the few people that like the system nowbut found your blog very informative. great job buddy
JS, I'm in complete and total agreement with you...... whcih scares teh hell outta me....... ;-)
I know Gforce, you shouldn't get any credit for a tie at the end of regulation. You did not win the game. No win, no reward.
Ya I hear ya, but you didn't really WIN the hockey game by winning 4-4 in OT or a shootout. I like your idea better than the one in place for sure, but I still believe you gotta make all games equal points-wise, no? Isn't that the most maddening thing about the current system?
Why even have the Shoot out count at all, 2 points for regulation/ot win, 0 points for a loss of any kind, 1 point each for a tie and if it results in a tie have 3 shooters each but dont count it in the standings.
The fact that the shoot out is even part of the NHL causes me to hate Gary Bettman more and more...
Honestly, the most maddening thing to me is having a shootout win count the same as a regulation win. I just can't reconsile a shootout win being equal to a win earned by playing hockey-with defensemen and forwards, not just shooter and goalie. Hell, make it a 5 on 5 OT for 10 minutes if you want to make it more fair. I'd just rather not reward mediocrity and force teams to play to win and take chances. Makes the game more exciting, because coaches don't have that point earned to fall back on.
OOPS, sorry for the blank. Ya I hate the shootout counting as a win, thus the 3 pts for reg win. If they have to use the stupid thing, they really need to downgrade its importance. That much we'll all agree to.
I agree that a loss is worth ZERO points. Professional sports is about competition, so there's no point (pun unintended) in giving consolation points to the losers. That attitude is for youth sports which emphasize participation rather than winning.
I agree with gforce there is something screwy with a system that makes certain games with 3 points and others only 2. If the shoot-out has to stay (shudder) then they need to adjust the point system. As for your original suggestion Jsaquella, I personally couldn't stomach giving an out and out win based on the friggin' shootout. How popular is this system really? I guess it's compelling - but is it really attracting people to the game in the US? I would think it would have the opposite effect and make the sport look even more like a sideshow. I'm really baffled by this. The media up here tells us that US fans just won't accept ties...is this true? What the hell is wrong with a tie? Some of the greatest games I've ever watched were ties - and deserved to end that way.
Bill, I have never had a problem with ties, absolutely hate the shootout, and think that a game should be won or lost by playing the game, that is why I say that if a team wins a game in a shootout, it shouldn't get 2 points, just one. But I also have no issue with a game ending in a tie and each team getting 1 point. However, under Bettman, the shootout is as likely to be removed as ice.
Nice job JS. I agree completely.
personally i would like if instead of the shootout they moved to a 10 minute 4v4 overtime, which is then followed by 10 minute 3v3 overtimes. it would be like pond hockey style. this would likely appease the league, as it would be exciting with that much ice for skilled players to work with, but would also not take things down to a 1 on goalie level that i hate so much.
ninja, I don't disagree, but you'd quickly end up with people (and TV affiliates) complaining about the length of some games. That's another reason the shootout came in, to keep the length of games tighter while eliminating ties.
oh im well aware. so perhaps keep the 5 mionute 4v4, then have 3v3 overtimes after that. honestly in a 3v3 I dont think you would see it go past the 5 min mark. if any penalties are called, you can go down to a minimum of 2 skaters. i think its an idea to work with more or less, since i cant stand the shootouts.
I like the point system. I am also a huge fan and raising the shoot out to 5 per team to start.
Ties never bothered me. What bothered me was coaches playing for ties and not the win. So now we have shootouts and coaches are still playing for the tie. The only way to correct this is to give 0 points for losing. Whether that loss is in regulation, OT or shootout.No points for losers. Its as simple as that.
What I really like about your idea is it simplifies the points system. We've had a lot of people jump on the band-wagon here in Anaheim and one for the hardest things is explaining the current points system. The perplexed look on their faces afterward is priceless! The best system though is to just let them play until someone wins as they do in the playoffs.
I think it's interesting that so many people have posted on hockeybuzz generally that they were perfectly happy with ties. Of course, this is far from scientific survey...but does make me think that shoot-out is just another attempt to attract those illusive fans in the US hinterlands. Rayc16, you're right is frustrating to watch teams play for ties, now we're seeing teams playing for shoot-outs and - no doubt - devoting significant amounts of time in practice to them
the more i look at this the more it makes sense. in the playoffs, do you get a "point" for losing in overtime? no. a loss is a loss.
the only way to make the teams play hard all the way to the end of the game and through overtime is to eliminate all and any points for losing. Since they started giving one point for a tie, all teams have been playing not to lose, instead of to win. How many teams will keep playing not to lose if they know that 1 point isn't still going to be there for them? This will force all teams to go for the win and open things up. Doesn't matter how many points you give for regulation vs ot vs shootout wins...as long as the loser still gets ZERO!!!!! In football, baseball and basketball, there is no ties, and you play the game until there is a winner. Unfortunately, hockey is a different sport than those games and as we have seen in the playoffs, we can play a whole extra game before a goal is scored. So weather you make it 4 on 4 or 3 on 3 or use the shootout or whatever, you need to win the game and get all the points rewarded, and get nothing for a loss...trust me, that will make the ends of games more exciting for the winners, and ever more devistating for the losers....
I'm an American and I just don't buy that US fans wont accept a tie, don't know where that came from but it's just another silly reason to hate us. No hockey fan I know likes the shootout. The fact that baseball and football and basketball are our foremost sports is a crying shame but they're deeply ingrained in our culture and I played them all with pleasure. Not having ties isn't going to change anything---- ever. Might as well keep the game traditional for those of us that dig it and hope that the fans increase in America by giving us the great sport it is.
That I agree with `100% gforce. I have no issue with tie games, in fact it's compelling and I want to see games decided by playing the game. Some nights that means you get a tie game. But as long as Bettman is running the show, we'll have the gimmick.
I agree with your last comments - gforce and jsaquella - 100%. Gimmicks like SO do more harm than good in the long run.