|T O P I C R E V I E W
|The 4th Line Banger
||Posted - 03/28/2009 : 21:30:49
The 3 Point Joke
By the 4th Line Banger
I am sure you have heard this argument before, but Iím bringing it up again. I like most of the new rules that the NHL has brought in since the Labour Dispute. I like adjusting the rules that makes the game faster and smoother. I donít care as much about scoring. I would rather watch a 2-1 game that goes end to end with big hits, big saves, and fast play over a 6-5 blow out with weak goalies, bad defense, and a goal every 3 shots. The issue I have is that the 3 point game sucks, plain and simple.
Can anyone out there think of another league or sport in the world that rewards losing??? NFL?? Nope. CFL?? Nope. MLB?? Nope. NBA?? Nope. I could go on and on. Hockey is the only sport I am aware of that rewards a team that loses with a point. Itís a complete joke. It over inflates a teamís numbers and creates a false sense of parity in the league.
Under the current system there are 24 of 30 teams with more wins than losses and the average point total across the league is 84. This shows the non-educated that only 6 of the current NHL teams are weak and most are winning more than losing. However, take away all the extra points for OT losses and there are only 14 of 30 teams with more wins than losses and the average point total is 73. The average team has picked up the equivalent of 5 wins a year worth of points by losing. Thatís just not right.
The rankings overall do not change by much, but there still is change. The top and bottom 3 teams in each conference would remain the same, but almost 1/2, or 10 of 21 teams would be in different positions in the middle of the group.
In the East, Carolina would be ahead of Philly in the 4th and 5th spot which has playoff implications as it would be Carolina with home ice and not Philly. Florida would be in 7th spot and in the playoff and NYR would be in 9th spot and out of the playoffs. Ottawa would still be out of the playoffs, but would be ahead of Toronto. That has draft implications. In the West, Edmonton (in 8th) and Nashville (in 9th) would be in each others position as well as St. Louis and Anaheim. This again has both playoff and draft implications.
I could write and write about what could be if this or that or the other, but really, I have an issue with the principle of the OT loss and the shoot out in general. I love watching a shoot out and I think most fans do. I would suggest that most of the hockey fans out there that have an issue with the shootout agree. Two teams who skate through 65 minutes of hockey and are still tied each deserve one point. An extra point should not depend on who is better at a singular facet of the game. It would be like a baseball game being decided by a Home Run Derby or a Basketball game being decided by a game of Horse. Itís a joke. The shoot out could remain but it could be used as a tie breaker for playoffs. I would like to see the conference ranking to be based on points. However, the tie-break should be 1, the records between the team that are tie, 2, shoot out record is the tie breaker. This way, the shoot out still has some weight, but would not come into play very often.
Call me a purist, call me a moron, call me what you will. But I just canít agree with a system that rewards failure. It would be nice to see the competition committee look at this in the off season, but Iím not holding my breath.
Have an opinion on The Fourth Line Banger's article? Let us know. Just hit reply below and post your thoughts. Anything goes...but keep it clean.
PickupHockey.com is your online hockey community. We're always looking for sharp volunteer writers. If you feel that you'd like to contribute please send us an email at admin at pickuphockey.com
PickupHockey.com and the owners of PickupHockey.com do not necessarily endorse the opinions expressed on its website of the volunteer writers. The opinions expressed here in this and other posts are solely the opinions of the writers.
|9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)
||Posted - 04/16/2009 : 07:37:47
The difference is that before the shoot out, if a team lost in overtime, they got zero points and the winning team got two points. If the game was still tied after after the over time, the teams got 1 point each.
The problem I see is that only some games are 3 points games. Others are 2 point games. And I will never agree with a team getting rewarded for losing, regardless of the method of loss.
I agree with the "Banger" on this one.
(PS, what kind of guy calls himself the 4th Line Banger?? Must be a genius or a meatball.....)
||Posted - 04/16/2009 : 00:45:33
I think what you need to ask yourself is: does any league NOT give a point for a tie? Essentially these teams are not losing, they are getting a point for a draw in regular time. We used to have W-L-T, now we have W-L-OTL. Your whole argument about 'rewarding losing' is false because you still don't get any points in the L column.
I take your point about the point averages being inflated, but at the end of the day this is working for everyone. So is it really that big a deal?
||Posted - 04/15/2009 : 12:38:48
just so you know...
rugby gives teams points for losing
aussie rules football
euro league basketball
and in some tournaments Fifa does too
so its not just the NHL. Oh, and by the way, go any where in the world outside of North America and ask them if they have heard of the NFL NBA MLB or NHL these arent major world sports
||Posted - 04/13/2009 : 07:09:37
I think that the idea to add a shootout in was dumb. Look at what Bettman did in the NBA. He made it so that it was the Harlem Globetrotters every game. This is what he is doing in the NHL and it needs to stop. I SAY NO SHOOTOUT JUST CONTINUOUS OVERTIME IF A WINNER IS NEEDED OTHERWISE PUT TIES BACK IN!
||Posted - 04/08/2009 : 10:38:56
i like your mullet
||Posted - 04/04/2009 : 15:32:36
Like the idea, European leagues use a 3 point system every game, giving 3 points for a regulation win
2 for an ot or shootout win
1 point for ot or shootout loss
This rewards teams who win it in regulation making it worth more than winning after 3 periods. The shootout and ot loss points where added to stop tentative play since both teams where more concerned about losing the point (when we had ties)than gaining the win which made for some boring hockey.
||Posted - 03/30/2009 : 10:20:11
I do and I don't agree. Yes, the shootout skews the point totals, and makes some changes to the standings.
However, the shootout is exciting. More people will appreciate hockey if the game goes into the shootout, creating a larger fan base, especially in the States. I think that the slight changes in the standings during the regular season is allowable in order to create more excitement. If the shootout is here to stay, then coaches and players should be practising it more, and building it into their games.
As for shootouts in the playoffs, I'd have to say no, unless it's after at least 20 minutes of additional play.
||Posted - 03/29/2009 : 11:57:53
I agree wholeheartedly!
Now . . . can we do something about it? My direct line to Bettman isn't working today . . .
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
||Posted - 03/29/2009 : 09:34:51
Agreed - I also don't like that winning a shootout gets the same points as actually defeating an opponent in a regulation game.