Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cobra
The sole reason they don't go to this system is that it makes teams appear better than they really are.
The vast majority of teams get to .500, or 82 points in 82 games, when in reality, it takes about 92+ points to get to the real .500.
It makes the worse teams look better than they really are for their fans.
Bettman is not blind to this, but there are business reasons in play here. It's indeed obvious that the 3-2-1 system makes the most sense hockey wise.
|
Is it? A pure win-loss system based on winning % seems to me like it would peel away any oddities in a cut the $#@& method of doing away with loser points or bonus points and any points in general.