Will the NHL ever change this godawful point system?

[nfotiu]

I know it's been discussed a million times, but how can the NHL still think it is a good idea to incentivize teams to play for a tie? As the games get more significant at this time of year, it gets even worse. A tied game in the third period is the most boring 20 minutes in sports!

If they're going to stick with this scheme, then at least end the third period when someone ties it up, and go straight to OT and let me go to bed before 1am eastern! Who the hell wants to watch a period of 2 teams playing for a tie and maybe hoping to accidentally score a goal?

Can anyone provide a rational explanation why the league has gone with the worst possible idea for assigning points for so long? The only advantage is that it creates a false sense that the standings are closer than they are. The system is an insult to the intelligence of their fans.

Any system would be better, 3-2-1-0, ending in ties, W-L, anything! It needs to change. This should be an exciting part of the season, and these third periods are just awful to watch, and the fact that it is by design blows my mind.

[White Out 403]

I'd love to see Soccer style standings. 3 points for a regulation win. 2 for OT/SO win with 1 to loser

[Northendzone]

^ I would like to see two or three seasons worth of data using that point system described above. I am just not interested enough to go and do the math myself.

I'd assume the nhl will keep the current system, as it gives the illusion that things are closer than they really are.

[Erick Estrada]

If you look at the league as a business the current system is perfect as it keeps the majority of teams in the race right up to the last month. Given the NHL is largely a gate driven league I don't think they can afford a MLB situation of a lot of fans knowing the season is over for their team at the half way mark.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

I know it's been discussed a million times, but how can the NHL still think it is a good idea to incentivize teams to play for a tie? As the games get more significant at this time of year, it gets even worse. A tied game in the third period is the most boring 20 minutes in sports!

If they're going to stick with this scheme, then at least end the third period when someone ties it up, and go straight to OT and let me go to bed before 1am eastern! Who the hell wants to watch a period of 2 teams playing for a tie and maybe hoping to accidentally score a goal?

Can anyone provide a rational explanation why the league has gone with the worst possible idea for assigning points for so long? The only advantage is that it creates a false sense that the standings are closer than they are. The system is an insult to the intelligence of their fans.

Any system would be better, 3-2-1-0, ending in ties, W-L, anything! It needs to change. This should be an exciting part of the season, and these third periods are just awful to watch, and the fact that it is by design blows my mind.

Because the NHL is a business first and foremost and their allegiance is towards whatever gives them more $$$. We as fans forget that sometimes. The current point system creates parity and keeps the standings close which keeps a lot of teams and fans in it till the end.

Personally, I don't mind the system. If the incentive is to get to 3 on 3 OT, I'm all for it. It's bar none the most exciting part of the game.

[YYC in LAX]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

end the third period when someone ties it up, and go straight to OT and let me go to bed before 1am eastern!

godawful take

[GGG]

I think the results of such a change are marginal. I think in comparisons I have seen that usually 14/16 playoff teams make it and it's only bubble teams that miss out. So as
Much as I don't like the optics of it it doesn't meaningfully change results

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think the results of such a change are marginal. I think in comparisons I have seen that usually 14/16 playoff teams make it and it's only bubble teams that miss out. So as
Much as I don't like the optics of it it doesn't meaningfully change results

It's not the standing that bother me so much, it's that it changes how teams play the game. It's pretty obvious that teams aren't taking risks in the third period in tied regular season games. It's the right strategy to play, when 50% more points are available if the game goes to OT.

[Hanni]

I ran the numbers quick using 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for a OT/SO win and 1 point for an OT/SO loss.

2016


2015

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Classic_Sniper

Because the NHL is a business first and foremost and their allegiance is towards whatever gives them more $$$. We as fans forget that sometimes. The current point system creates parity and keeps the standings close which keeps a lot of teams and fans in it till the end.

Personally, I don't mind the system. If the incentive is to get to 3 on 3 OT, I'm all for it. It's bar none the most exciting part of the game.

It creates an illusion of parity, when in fact, the OTL makes it pretty tough to climb back up in standings. A smart business would be more concerned about ensuring they have an entertaining product on the ice, than they would about tricking people into thinking their team still has a chance.

[Classic_Sniper]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

It creates an illusion of parity, when in fact, the OTL makes it pretty tough to climb back up in standings. A smart business would be more concerned about ensuring they have an entertaining product on the ice, than they would about tricking people into thinking their team still has a chance.

Except that if your team is still in it till the end regardless of an illusion or not, it puts butts in seats and eyes on the tv. It's tough to climb up the standings because teams are always collecting points on a nightly basis and thus are always close in the standings, every pundit will tell you the OT point has created a closer race and that's why the league has zero interest in changing it.

Look at the standings for international tournaments that use a 3-2-1 point system and you see large discrepancies. It's not nearly as entertaining to the league and it's bottom dollar to do things that way. The higher ups for this multi-billion dollar league have probably had countless boardroom meetings on this and have come to the conclusion that this is the best approach and I guarantee it'll never change.

[savemedrzaius]

Originally Posted by Hanni

I ran the numbers quick using 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for a OT/SO win and 1 point for an OT/SO loss.

2016


2015

Even with 3 pointers Avs still only have 62 points!

[Geeoff]

I think as far as the NHL is concerned, the current points system is working as intended. I doubt it will change any time soon. Obviously, it's an issue for those with OCD that some games are worth more total points than others but I don't think the NHL gives a flip about it. Having both teams get a point basically gives them carte blanche to implement whatever wacky gimmick they want for extra time. I bet without both teams getting a point, the other GMs would never have agreed to 4-on-4, 3-on-3 or the shootout.

We'd probably still have 5 minutes 5-on-5 and ties.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I think as far as the NHL is concerned, the current points system is working as intended. I doubt it will change any time soon. Obviously, it's an issue for those with OCD that some games are worth more total points than others but I don't think the NHL gives a flip about it. Having both teams get a point basically gives them carte blanche to implement whatever wacky gimmick they want for extra time. I bet without both teams getting a point, the other GMs would never have agreed to 4-on-4, 3-on-3 or the shootout...

Yeah, no chance of that. It is bewildering to me, because as many people there are who complain about the present points system, the shootout, and the 3v3 OT format there were just as many if not more in the late 1990s who complained about how pointless late third-period ties and OT had become as a result of the old W-L-T / 2-0-1 system.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Geeoff

I bet without both teams getting a point, the other GMs would never have agreed to 4-on-4, 3-on-3 or the shootout.

You're probably correct. The ironic thing is that by going with a point system that encourages teams to play for ties, it makes the 3v3 OT and shootouts have more of an impact on the standings than if they would go something like straight Win/Loss where there is no incentive to play for a tie.

[Phaneufenstein]

Originally Posted by Hanni

I ran the numbers quick using 3 points for a regulation win, 2 points for a OT/SO win and 1 point for an OT/SO loss.

2016
and
2015
Point differential

Thanks for taking the time to put it together and present this info but we don't know how the games would go if 3 points were on the line to win in regulation instead of the potential 1 or 2 in OT/SO split.

I don't think we will ever really know because the league isn't likely to change it.

I truly don't understand why the insist on this system.

If anything it should make things more exciting all-around with late game pushes for 3 points especially in March and April when it's a dog-fight for playoff positioning.

[mrkajz44]

The issue with just comparing two different point systems is you are comparing apples to oranges. If the actual point system was 3-2-1-0, games would be played differently when they were close or tied near the end of the game.

I fully agree that 3-2-1-0 makes a lot more sense, but I do think we'd see some pretty different standings compared to what actually happened (moreso than just applying the different point system to old records).

[Strange Brew]

You simply have to accept that current system is not designed to reward best teams, but designed to keep playoff races as tight as possible.

It is too bad, because the entertainment value of a 60 minute game has decreased since teams aren’t always playing to win. Other major North American sports don’t have this issue.

[Joborule]

They should change it, since teams are just gonna play it safe in the late stages of the 3rd period, which takes away from what should be one of the most exciting points of the game. With current OT rules, I could understand why they would never go back to a simple W-L or W-L-T system, but I feel that there should be incentive in finishing the game in regulation, before you have to alter the rules of the game to try to draw a winner.

A soccer style 3-point system seems reasonable. Win in regulation, and you get all 3 points. Win in OT/SO, you get 2 points, while the loser gets 1. So no matter what, 3 points is always up for grabs. Eliminates the appearance of a random point with the OTL appearing, recognizes that the game structure games in OT, so both teams get at least a point, and most importantly, it will give teams incentive to push for the win in the final 10 minutes of the game instead of playing conservative. This will especially be the case during the playoff push during the later stages of the season. Could elevate drama for teams that need points to get in.

But the system is working for the NHL right now, so they don't have a desire to change it anytime soon. The standings are tight which means lots of teams still have games worth playing for. The 3 point system won't necessarily take away from this. If anything, it could amplify this effect since 9 points behind isn't as daunting since that's only 3 regulation wins away. But until too many games are heading into OT as a result of teams playing for the point intentionally, there's no need from the NHL perspective to change.

[Philly06Cup]

My fantasy booking:

It's the final day of the regular season. The last game is Pittsburgh vs Washington. Crosby vs Ovechkin. The two teams are sitting in 8th and 9th.The game gets all sorts of hype and media attention. Winning team makes the playoffs; losing team is out. But, there's a wrinkle. Both teams can make the playoffs with a point. This gets neglected in the hype.

The game begins. Crosby wins the face off back to Letang. Letang retreats back behind his own net... And just stands there. All five caps players... just stand at their own blue line. At first there's confusion in the crowd. Murmurs, then some light boos. But after about a minute, the boos turn into cheers! Everyone has caught on that with this strategy, their team will make the playoffs. Caps fans and Pens fans in attendance break out in wild applause. Eventually the applause dies down, because literally nothing is happening in the ice. Letang passes to Schultz out of boredom. The crowd lets out a sarcastic cheer!

This goes on for about 5 minutes. To entertain themselves, the crowd starts a wave. One guy snuck in a beach ball and it gets passed around. Random chants break out. "This is stupid". "Fire Bett-man, clap, clap, clap clap clap." At the 10 minute mark, the referee blows the whistle. There is an announcement from the NHL front office. If the penguins do not attempt to make forward progress with the puck, Washington will be awarded with a goal. It's an outrageous mandate, but the NHL can't tolerate this behaviour.

Letang passes to Crosby, who skates to the red line dumps it in. John Carlson takes the puck behind his own net and... Also just stands there. The crowd erupts again!

At the end of the first period, the NHL decides to postpone the game to determine what to do about this situation. It creates international headlines. Everyone is ridiculing the NHL for allowing this mockery to take place. Because, you know, the NHL should absolutely be ashamed of their pathetic loser point system which encourages teams to do literally nothing to maximize their expected points.

Meanwhile, back in Philly (the current 7th place team, which is about to be knocked into 9th) -- There is mass rioting, and their city burns to the ground. SEE WHAT YOU DID BETTMAN?!! YOU MONSTER!