HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Columbus Blue Jackets (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31)
-   -   Your thoughts on this system (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=475566)

Aging Goalie 02-08-2008 08:48 AM

Your thoughts on this system
 
Been thinking about it for a while watching the games but figured I was in the minority. The other day listening to XM they were discussing the same thing. Do you think with the way the points scoring system is set up that teams are coasting at the end of the games to get the gauranteed 1 pt by making it to OT? I personally do. They were speaking of ways to change the scoring system to stimulate playing hard through the end of regulation. One of them I like so felt I would see how it affected the standings in our conference. This system rewards not only winning but moreover winning in regulation. Here is what it would shake out like: 3pts reg win, 2 pts OT W, 1 pt OT L(I highlighted teams that would change position Red=dropped Green= moved up) I think this system would work great because it rewards hard play through the end of the game and will make for more exciting hockey all around.

Current:

DET 86
DAL 71
MIN 64
SJS 65
ANA 65
COL 63
NSH 62
CGY 62
VAN 61
PHX 60
CBJ 59
STL 55
EDM 55
CHI 53
LAK 49


New:

DET 121
DAL 96
MIN 91
SJS 91
ANA 87
NSH 86
CGY 84
VAN 82
CBJ 82
PHX 81
COL 80
STL 77
CHI 71
EDM 68
LAK 67

DJAnimosity 02-08-2008 08:57 AM

I think you should get 2 points for a win and zero points for a loss (OT/SO included).

Talk about some intense overtimes.

I also think the shootout should be eliminated and overtime should be a 20:00 sudden death period (like in the playoffs), but still at 4-on-4.

Doctor Spin 02-08-2008 09:27 AM

I like the "all-or-nothing" proposal of DJA with the modification of 10 minutes of 4-4 sudden victory followed immediately, if necessary, by 10 minutes of 3-3. Only in the handful of times a season neither team scores in the 20 minute OT would a penalty shot shootout occur. I believe this would be as exciting for the fans, the games would end at a manageable time, and the outcome would be more team based than the current shootout. In any case, the half credit for losing nicely should be eliminated. An OT win should count as a full win, and an OT loss should be a total loss.

DJAnimosity 02-08-2008 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Spin (Post 12407957)
I like the "all-or-nothing" proposal of DJA with the modification of 10 minutes of 4-4 sudden victory followed immediately, if necessary, by 10 minutes of 3-3. Only in the handful of times a season neither team scores in the 20 minute OT would a penalty shot shootout occur. I believe this would be as exciting for the fans, the games would end at a manageable time, and the outcome would be more team based than the current shootout. In any case, the half credit for losing nicely should be eliminated. An OT win should count as a full win, and an OT loss should be a total loss.

I like this a lot. Lets make it happen.

Aging Goalie 02-08-2008 09:38 AM

Under DJ's method the standings would look like this

DET 82
DAL 66
MIN 60
SJS 58
ANA 58
NSH 56
PHX 56
CGY 54
VAN 54
CBJ 52
COL 52
EDM 50
STL 48
CHI 48
LAK 46

I don't know. To me the other way still seems better and more productive in spreading things out and rewarding good play. Seems like with this it will end up being more like the BCS because of the same pt totals for so many teams.

DJAnimosity 02-08-2008 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aging Goalie (Post 12408076)
I don't know. To me the other way still seems better and more productive in spreading things out and rewarding good play. Seems like with this it will end up being more like the BCS because of the same pt totals for so many teams.

I just think with 3 points for a win, 2 points for an OT win, and 1 point for an OT loss, this would create TONS more available points and the standings would be even more maddening than they are now. Plus, you'd have the 4 column standings again (W-L-OW-OL), which is very hard to keep track of.

Aging Goalie 02-08-2008 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Spin (Post 12407957)
I like the "all-or-nothing" proposal of DJA with the modification of 10 minutes of 4-4 sudden victory followed immediately, if necessary, by 10 minutes of 3-3. Only in the handful of times a season neither team scores in the 20 minute OT would a penalty shot shootout occur. I believe this would be as exciting for the fans, the games would end at a manageable time, and the outcome would be more team based than the current shootout. In any case, the half credit for losing nicely should be eliminated. An OT win should count as a full win, and an OT loss should be a total loss.

As far as the shootouts. I am a goalie and like the shootouts. It gives the goalie a chance to win it for the team. If you think about it the NFL's "sudden death" is usually more of a who wins the coin toss crap shoot than an actual test of the teams players. Team who wins the coin toss more often than not will get into field goal range and kick it in for the win. It is almost a case of let's just toss the coin for the win.

I know it is a litlle different for hockey in that regard but the other thing to think about is that the NHL is trying to make the sport more broadcast friendly (fit into a more defined time slot) changing it around to sudden death until a win could last forever. Great for us hockey fans but terrible for broadcast execs. This would leave hockey struggling even more than it already is for air time. I agree 5 minutes is too short and should be lengthened to 10 but don't drop the shootout.

blahblah 02-08-2008 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJAnimosity (Post 12407716)
I think you should get 2 points for a win and zero points for a loss (OT/SO included).

Talk about some intense overtimes.

I also think the shootout should be eliminated and overtime should be a 20:00 sudden death period (like in the playoffs), but still at 4-on-4.

Let's not.

The desire to "have a winner" has lead to wacked out system we have now. I don't like shoot-outs, it's a cheesy way to decide things.

Give me back the old system where teams used to skate around during OT to get a point. Oh wait, they mostly skate around now to get to the shoot-out.

Either way, if you work it to an OT, I think you deserve a point. I would just perfer they nix the desire to "have a winner".

DJAnimosity 02-08-2008 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blahblah (Post 12408165)
Let's not.

The desire to "have a winner" has lead to wacked out system we have now. I don't like shoot-outs, it's a cheesy way to decide things..

Did you miss the part where I said "eliminate the shootout"?

Aging Goalie 02-08-2008 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blahblah (Post 12408165)
Let's not.

The desire to "have a winner" has lead to wacked out system we have now. I don't like shoot-outs, it's a cheesy way to decide things.

Give me back the old system where teams used to skate around during OT to get a point. Oh wait, they mostly skate around now to get to the shoot-out.

Either way, if you work it to an OT, I think you deserve a point. I would just perfer they nix the desire to "have a winner".

That would cost some of the newer fans in my opinion. Do what you always have and you will get the results you have always achieved nothing more. So if we want the fanbase to shrink back to what it was that would definitely be the route to take.

DJAnimosity 02-08-2008 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aging Goalie (Post 12408278)
That would cost some of the newer fans in my opinion. Do what you always have and you will get the results you have always achieved nothing more. So if we want the fanbase to shrink back to what it was that would definitely be the route to take.

Agreed, ties are retarded. Most fans want a clear winner. My/Dr. Spin proposal eliminates the cheesy shootout and allows teams to play (as in the playoffs) indefinite overtimes until a winner is determined. There would not be marathon overtimes as in the playoffs, as a goal is most definitely going to be scored during a 4-on-4 or 3-on-3.

Aging Goalie 02-08-2008 09:57 AM

My biggest point to this was that teams should be better rewarded for a regulation win versus an over time win. If you want to take away the points for an OT loss still works great and no "extra" columns get added to the stat sheet. The competition will be harder in the OT periods and the game will be better for it.

On a side note from a marketing standpoint the shootout, like it or not, brings in the fringe fans. You have to remember that this is a business when it is all said and done.

Doctor Spin 02-08-2008 09:59 AM

You're a tad too modest AG. The goalie has a chance to win the game every night, not just in a shoot out. Skaters and fans forget that.

Actually, the "all-or-nothing" of DJA's proposal might result in more games in regulation with the OT premium removed. Of the 2600 or so NHL games a year, I doubt if more than a handful would go to the shootout at the end of a 20 minute OT. Maybe a few more if the OT period was 10 minutes. Besides most NHL games in the USA are covered by regional sports nets who are used to loose tails on most of their live programming. Up North, folk are smart enough to know there is nothing more important than OT hockey anyway, so they don't care what program is joined in progress(that's pro' gress, eh).

Aging Goalie 02-08-2008 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJAnimosity (Post 12408299)
Agreed, ties are retarded. Most fans want a clear winner. My/your proposal eliminates the cheesy shootout and allows teams to play (as in the playoffs) indefinite overtimes until a winner is determined. There would not be marathon overtimes as in the playoffs, as a goal is most definitely going to be scored during a 4-on-4 or 3-on-3.

I see your point but think it would hurt the marketability to the networks. I realize the market share is not that great as it stands but think it would shrink even further if they can't plan their broadcast schedules.

Aging Goalie 02-08-2008 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Spin (Post 12408344)
You're a tad too modest AG. The goalie has a chance to win the game every night, not just in a shoot out. Skaters and fans forget that.

Actually, the "all-or-nothing" of DJA's proposal might result in more games in regulation with the OT premium removed. Of the 2600 or so NHL games a year, I doubt if more than a handful would go to the shootout at the end of a 20 minute OT. Maybe a few more if the OT period was 10 minutes. Besides most NHL games in the USA are covered by regional sports nets who are used to loose tails on most of their live programming. Up North, folk are smart enough to know there is nothing more important than OT hockey anyway, so they don't care what program is joined in progress(that's pro' gress, eh).

Down here we might just get dumped for a Cavs pregame with the promise of updates on the score if we stay tuned. I would go with the 10 because it can be planned around by scheduling postgames shows etc. The 20 minute period gets a little touchy as most games are running a little long (into the time already allotted for the postgame) already.

DJAnimosity 02-08-2008 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aging Goalie (Post 12408348)
I see your point but think it would hurt the marketability to the networks. I realize the market share is not that great as it stands but think it would shrink even further if they can't plan their broadcast schedules.

I understand what you're saying, but if a game goes into a shootout, think of how long it takes. You have to decide on shooters. The ice has to be Zamboni-ed. Guys have to stand around and mess with their sticks, and skate around in circles while the goalie warms up. I swear, getting a shootout started takes so long I want to fall asleep. At least with a 20:00 overtime period, you get the show on the road and it probably wouldn't take as long as most shootouts.

Aging Goalie 02-08-2008 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Spin (Post 12408344)
You're a tad too modest AG. The goalie has a chance to win the game every night, not just in a shoot out. Skaters and fans forget that.

Actually, the "all-or-nothing" of DJA's proposal might result in more games in regulation with the OT premium removed. Of the 2600 or so NHL games a year, I doubt if more than a handful would go to the shootout at the end of a 20 minute OT. Maybe a few more if the OT period was 10 minutes. Besides most NHL games in the USA are covered by regional sports nets who are used to loose tails on most of their live programming. Up North, folk are smart enough to know there is nothing more important than OT hockey anyway, so they don't care what program is joined in progress(that's pro' gress, eh).

That would, after rereading your post, get what I was hoping to accomplish though. Hard play til the whistle at the end of the third. :thumbu:

Bluebengal 02-08-2008 10:29 AM

i agree with AG (hey that rhymes!):handclap: the way you said it would work but ot should definitely be changed to 10 minutes. shootouts happen way to often and i'm sure that would help cut down on them a little bit.

blahblah 02-08-2008 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJAnimosity (Post 12408254)
Did you miss the part where I said "eliminate the shootout"?

No, but you stated you wanted a "sudden death" period of 20 minutes. This would seem to be linked to a desire to have a winner. I'm not a fan of anything that extends the OT period beyond it's 4 on 4, 5 minutes it is now. Shootout or timewise.

So, not in favor of the 20 minute, SD thing, either... :)

I would perfer to just go back to the old way. Whenever we jack with something, we just seem to end up making it worse.

DJAnimosity 02-08-2008 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blahblah (Post 12408893)
No, but you stated you wanted a "sudden death" period of 20 minutes. This would seem to be linked to a desire to have a winner. I'm not a fan of anything that extends the OT period beyond it's 4 on 4, 5 minutes it is now. Shootout or timewise.

There are hardly any winners scored in 5-minute OT. I'd actually like to see numbers of how many games have been decided in OT and not the shootout so far this year. Seems absolutely pointless to play a 5 minute OT to me. It's over before it even begins.

Aging Goalie 02-08-2008 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blahblah (Post 12408893)
No, but you stated you wanted a "sudden death" period of 20 minutes. This would seem to be linked to a desire to have a winner. I'm not a fan of anything that extends the OT period beyond it's 4 on 4, 5 minutes it is now. Shootout or timewise.

So, not in favor of the 20 minute, SD thing, either... :)

I would perfer to just go back to the old way. Whenever we jack with something, we just seem to end up making it worse.

Yes the old way led to how many lockouts because the players thought they were underpaid and management couldn't turn a profit? ;)

cpmCBJ 02-08-2008 10:54 AM

i like the idea, but i'd probably make OT 10 minutes of 4 on 4. no tie and no OTL would definitely make the OT period intense, i agree. good stuff.

cbjrocks 02-08-2008 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJAnimosity (Post 12407716)
I think you should get 2 points for a win and zero points for a loss (OT/SO included).

Talk about some intense overtimes.

I also think the shootout should be eliminated and overtime should be a 20:00 sudden death period (like in the playoffs), but still at 4-on-4.

Under this plan, points would become unnecessary, since the single point would be eliminated. You could move to a "games back" system like baseball.

Personally, I hope this happens...

1. As is being discussed quietly, the NHL will expand to 32 teams in the 2010-2011 season with cities being awarded this summer (Can you say KC and Vegas).
2. League moves to two confereneces each with four divisions of four teams.
3. Points are eliminated and the league goes to a win/loss system. Ties are broken in OT and shootouts (I no longer like shootouts, but they are here forever)
4. Top two teams in each division play in the first round of the playoffs. This makes divisional play more important and eliminates this insane idea of chasing the eighth seed. You only need to chase the team in front of you.
5. Division winners playoff based on best record---etc Conference winners--SCF.

As this thread started off-- I think teams are playing for OT and settling for the point. It's making OT more of a joke and shootouts more important.

Bobs Tuna Melt 02-08-2008 11:01 AM

Thank you for starting this thread...

I have never understood why both teams are rewarded for getting to OT. I mean, if you lose in OT, you lose. Even though it is 4 on 4 (not regulation), it is still regular hockey and a extension of the game. You should not get a point if you lose in OT.

Now if the game gets to the shootout, I believe that both teams should be awarded a point, and of course, the winner of the shootout gets 2 points.

I personally like the shootout...I was one that never liked ties.

Win in regulation/OT = 2 points
Loss in regulation/OT = 0 points
Shootout = 1 point to loser. 2 points to winner.

Macster 02-08-2008 11:03 AM

I love the shootout. I am also all for the system that's being talked about all over XM, TSN etc.

3 points for a win is great, 2 for OT win. Love it. Make it happen Bettman.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:13 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.