For most of NHL history a team received 1 point for being tied after regulation.
If anything it's the opposite. The teams poor OT record is preventing them from accumulating enough "bonus" points to be in the playoffs.
Winnipeg is 10-3 in OT/SO.
Nashville is 10-8 in OT/SO.
Flames are 6-15 in OT/SO.
If anything their records are a bit inflated by the OT/SO wins (more so Winnipeg).
9 teams have played 20 OT/SO games or mo - so it's not like it's just the Flames playing lots of OT games. Issue is the Flames have been terrible in OT.
I feel like the league should change it to Regulation tie (RT) instead of overtime loss (OTL). There’d probably be a lot less complaining about a loser point. Granted it’s not hard to understand. The rules of the game literally change after 60 minutes in the regular season. It would be silly to get rid of the point earned through regulation.
Just win next 5 straight games. Sharks, Kings, Ducks, Canucks, Blackhawks.
Then it will be interesting. 89 points.
Last 4 games.
1 against Jets and 1 against Preds.
Then really playoff starts for the Flames.
4-0 continue
3-1 may continue
2-2 out
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to NewFan For This Useful Post:
Just win next 5 straight games. Sharks, Kings, Ducks, Canucks, Blackhawks.
Then it will be interesting. 89 points.
Last 4 games.
1 against Jets and 1 against Preds.
Then really playoff starts for the Flames.
4-0 continue
3-1 may continue
2-2 out
Thanks NewFan, after last night game, I was mad and sad. This post of yours lifted my spirit a bit, so thank you so much.
The Following User Says Thank You to midniteowl For This Useful Post:
I meant more historically you got a point for games that ended tied after the 5v5 play finished.
From 83- 99 if you went to overtime and lost you didn't get the point but those games were also played 5v5 and something like 10% of games actually were finished in OT.
Really the "loser point" isn't a thing IMO. It would be more ridiculous if they went to 2 points for a win and 1 points for a loss for games that end in 3v3 or a SO.
The real problem is it should be a 3-2-1 points system.
What would the standings in the pacific look like with a 3-2-1
Kinda irrelevant since I think Nashville getting is in more grim than the Flames:
Spoiler!
To keep the Predators out of the final spot the Predators need to receive 12 or less points with the above scenario. (13 would get them in on a tie breaker)
Opponents: @Leafs (L), @Bruins (L), @Penguins (OTL), @Blues (W), @Stars (OTL), Vegas (W), Hurricanes (L), Jets (W), @Flames (L), Wild (W), Avs (L)
7-0 not including the Jets isn’t totally that unbelievable. The King are the only tough team, but we could see a flip of the last result if we come out angry for revenge. Canucks are playing well but chance of wins is still high in my opinion.
Looking at the 3 teams still in the running for the WC2 spot and their schedules I think Nashville is in tough. They have a bunch of injuries too. Even though they have games at hand on the Flames when they are against Boston, Toronto, Dallas, Vegas, Carolina ect. It doesn’t mean much.
If Winnipeg keeps free falling they probably have a tougher last 8 games than the Flames.
It’s probably going to come down to whether we can beat the Jets in Winnipeg and whether Nashville can do the same thing.
Looking at the schedule I think the Flames will get to 91 or 93 points. I think if the two games mentioned above go positively for us winnipeg gets to 91.
Basically all of the games between Nashville, Winnipeg and us have to go the right way. Then we have a shot. Beating LA would be gravy. The Flames can’t crap the bed in any others either.
We’ll see soon enough.
Last edited by Goriders; 03-26-2023 at 05:52 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Goriders For This Useful Post:
