Is it just me or are there more extra time games than ever before?

[FleeceGang]

I brought this up with friend this weekend that I feel the amount of games going to OT or SOs is way up! To that point, 5/6 games that are past the 3rd period tonight have gone to extra time.

Did some quick maths and found that the extra time rate for each season since COVID has been as follows:

21/22 - 22%
22/23 - 23% (Year Flames almost broke the record with 17 loser points)
23/24 - 21%
24/25 - 21%

Then this year we are currently clicking along at a very healthy 29%!

My two working theories are that this is due to a strategy that securing a point is better than an loss so if its tied at any point in the 3rd that teams sit back and just run out time. Or is this due to teams being more equal skill wise?

Would be interested in others thoughts on the matter. I'm probably out to lunch though.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

I was just looking at the standings and thinking how many loser points there were in the Western Conference.

God I hate loser points.

[GirlySports]

shhhhh proline ties

[Locke]

Interesting...if true...

[My2Cents]

Game management by refs?

[Tsawwassen]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

shhhhh proline ties

Here in BC, the rules for SportsAction/Proline hockey has changed. A tie was when the game headed to the shootout. Now, it is considered a tie after 60 minutes.

[Tsawwassen]

Originally Posted by FleeceGang

My two working theories are that this is due to a strategy that securing a point is better than an loss so if its tied at any point in the 3rd that teams sit back and just run out time. Or is this due to teams being more equal skill wise?

Would be interested in others thoughts on the matter. I'm probably out to lunch though.

Early in the season and for the 1st half, most teams will lock it down in the 3rd period to get the single point. For the second half of the season, teams will notice that they need regulation wins for tie breakers. I think more games will end in reg time later on.

[lazypucker]

That's why the 3-2-1 point system should be implemented ASAP

[dino7c]

Or just remove the loser point...its was put in so teams didn't sit back for ties but now ties don't exist...teams sit back in the third instead.

[squiggs96]

There is no such thing as a loser point. There is a bonus point, not a loser point.

Two points are awarded at the end of every single regulation game. It does not matter what happens in OT and/or the SO for the two points. There is a bonus point awarded to the OT or SO winner. The team that only gets one point doesn't get it because they lost. They get it, just like the other team, for finishing the regulation three periods tied. Given that each game gets two points, but some get an extra point, it's literally a bonus point.

I will kill you on this hill. I used to say I'd die on this hill, but saying I will kill you on it is way more aggressive and appropriate.

I would prefer a 3-2-1-0 point distribution, so that every game is awarded the same number of points and there are no bonus points awarded.

[ForeverFlameFan]

Welcome to the fun times of parity. Heavily emphasized for: 1) revenue purposes (your team is still in it), and 2) sports betting purposes. It’s happening everywhere.

Soon, watch us go the nba route and have 10 teams make playoffs, with 7-10 being WC seeds. It’ll be stupidly and pathetic, but it’s playoff revenue that all are after.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

There is no such thing as a loser point. There is a bonus point, not a loser point.

Two points are awarded at the end of every single regulation game. It does not matter what happens in OT and/or the SO for the two points. There is a bonus point awarded to the OT or SO winner. The team that only gets one point doesn't get it because they lost. They get it, just like the other team, for finishing the regulation three periods tied. Given that each game gets two points, but some get an extra point, it's literally a bonus point.

I will kill you on this hill. I used to say I'd die on this hill, but saying I will kill you on it is way more aggressive and appropriate.

I would prefer a 3-2-1-0 point distribution, so that every game is awarded the same number of points and there are no bonus points awarded.

lol a "bonus point" given to the team that loses...call it what you like
some games being worth more than others is crazy to me.

"they won't change it, parity" I get it, doesn't mean I have to like it

[getbak]

Originally Posted by dino7c

lol a "bonus point" given to the team that loses...call it what you like
some games being worth more than others is crazy to me.

"they won't change it, parity" I get it, doesn't mean I have to like it

No, the bonus point is given to the team that wins. Both teams earned a point by being tied through 60 minutes.

[FleeceGang]

Originally Posted by Tsawwassen

Early in the season and for the 1st half, most teams will lock it down in the 3rd period to get the single point. For the second half of the season, teams will notice that they need regulation wins for tie breakers. I think more games will end in reg time later on.

This makes sense. I guess time will tell if the trend continues or if teams start to win in regulation.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Go back to allowing ties, but with zero points for both teams.