HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

I'm Just Sayin'

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-12-2011, 11:58 AM
  #51
jb**
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Planet Lovetron
Country: Italy
Posts: 8,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
So, you want to have no OTL and the shootout remain in place?

Fine. I think that's even more ridiculous than the current setup (which I'm not a fan of).
correct, you lose in ot you get nothing. i dont like the shootout and would rather extend the ot. however if they kept the shoot out then yes you lose , nothing.

jb** is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 12:03 PM
  #52
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWO View Post
correct, you lose in ot you get nothing. i dont like the shootout and would rather extend the ot. however if they kept the shoot out then yes you lose , nothing.
Extending OT is the best solution if you want to avoid the situation. However, it would have a significant negative impact in terms of wear and tear over the course of the season. 4 on 4 also remains a different beast than 5 on 5.

I simply don't understand why anyone would want to punish the "losing" team that much for not winning a shootout... but that's just me.

3 pts for a win in regulation solves all these problems with a quickness, while also rewarding teams for finishing off an opponent in regulation.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 12:17 PM
  #53
wahoowa
All in the Game
 
wahoowa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
Extending OT is the best solution if you want to avoid the situation. However, it would have a significant negative impact in terms of wear and tear over the course of the season. 4 on 4 also remains a different beast than 5 on 5.

I simply don't understand why anyone would want to punish the "losing" team that much for not winning a shootout... but that's just me.

3 pts for a win in regulation solves all these problems with a quickness, while also rewarding teams for finishing off an opponent in regulation.
DING DING DING

wahoowa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 02:50 PM
  #54
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdalite View Post
At the end of 1/11/11 the Flyers over the last ten games had a 7-3-0 record... Over their last ten games Tampa Bay had a record of 6-3-1 ... Boston and Washington had identical records of 6-1-3.

The Flyers had 7 wins
TB, Boston & the Caps each had 6 wins

The Flyers had only 3 losses
TB, Boston & the Caps had 4 losses each

The Flyers had one more win than each of those teams
The Flyers had one less loss than each of those teams
The Flyers had more wins and less losses than any of those teams

In a 'Normal' and rational World the Flyers would have gained ground on all the teams listed.

In a 'Normal' and rational World a win is a win, and loss is a loss.

... In the NHL:

The Flyers had 14 points over that span
The Bolts had 13 points during those ten games
The Bruins and Capitals had 15 points over that identical ten game period


The Flyers with one more win and one less loss than all three teams lost ground to two of the three teams... and the Lightening lost ground to all three other teams while having the same number of wins and the same number of losses as two of the three.







... I'm just sayin'

Okay... with a 3 points for a regulation win and 2 and 1 for OT wins and losses respectively... if we assume for the sake argument that all wins in the original examples were in Regulation... we have the following results:

Flyers 7-3-0 = 21 points

Tampa Bay 6-3-1 = 19 points

Boston 6-1-3 = 21 points

Washington 6-1-3 = 21 points


Results is the Flyers have one more win and one less loss than the other three teams and gain no points on Caps and Bruins rather than lose a point as they now do... and they gain two points on the Bolts rather than only one now.

Better but IMO no cigar because the Flyers still would have won one game more... but the argument could and would be made that they flat out lost two games in regulation, which is a valid one.

That the Flyers gained a point on TB with the gained win rather than OTL seems fair... and the Bolts losing out most of the four teams in the revised points system also seems fair.

In summation... Seems a good solution to me, and over the course of an entire season should prove an even fairer solution I believe.

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 03:14 PM
  #55
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,707
vCash: 500
With the win last night, the Flyers reached 57 points, 1 point more than they achieved in the entire season that must not be named. I'm just sayin'.




With regards to the 3-point system...

I would be shocked if the NHL ever moved away from the current system. Awarding points for overtime and shootout losses keeps playoff races tighter deeper into the season, which means more warm bodies in the seats.

Moving to a three point system will take that 'parity' away and fans of bottom feeders will stop showing up in arenas and following along on tv much earlier in the season.

It has nothing to do with what's 'fair' and has everything to do with $$$.

CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 03:18 PM
  #56
dbr2
Lockout Beard
 
dbr2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,340
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to dbr2
CanadianFlyer seeing your avy/saying makes me miss Knuble every time I read it.

dbr2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 03:29 PM
  #57
CanadianFlyer88
Moderator
Knublin' PPs
 
CanadianFlyer88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Van City
Posts: 14,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbr2 View Post
CanadianFlyer seeing your avy/saying makes me miss Knuble every time I read it.
I always wanted him to finish out his career in Philly.

CanadianFlyer88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 03:47 PM
  #58
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
I always wanted him to finish out his career in Philly.
My next game will be the Caps and I will be rocking my personally autographed Knuble KOHO Black #22.

When he signed it right after he re-signed in O&B he said to me (paraphrased), "Who wouldn't want to play in Philly"... That was smack dab in the middle of that not to be mentioned season, when we were afraid that the Flyers would be trading off his upcoming UFA contract and that he would be grateful to escape the worst team in the NHL... I really believed he would have stayed here and retired here if given the contract he deserved. I think Homer did try, but couldn't pull it off in the grand scheme of the team.

That said, the Flyers went to within two games and a decently goaltended Finals of the Cup and Knuble with OV and one of the darling teams of the NHL hit the links early... I cannot argue with how things worked out.

It would be nice however, when his current contract ends, for him to accept a deal that would allow him to return and fit in under the Cap with the long term core players... He would have to take less in his final years and not look for long term security. He would have to be like Recchi and take less on yearly contracts... maybe with over 35 allowed bonuses if the CBA again covers them down the line.

Just sayin'


Last edited by Sawdalite: 01-12-2011 at 07:18 PM.
Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 05:07 PM
  #59
mdm815
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: pa
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 446
vCash: 500
Okay I'm just going to throw out an idea that I've had for awhile. Haven't read this whole topic so not sure if it's been said before, but here it is:

-2 points for a win in regulation or OT. Obviously you get points for winning in reg, and the purpose of OT is to determine a winner. U should get the points.

-0 points for loss. A team wouldn't be rewarded for a loss in any capacity.

-1 point for a shootout win. This will hopefully generate more intensity in OTs as teams try to win it before they lose the second point, and it should keep teams who are good at the SO from sitting back for the same reason (losing that second point).

I think this system keeps alot of what's in place now intact without dramatically changing what's already there, but implementing a new version that would keep shootout fans happy (since its still there), and those who aren't fans of it happy as well (in the sense that the shootout means less and therefor will hopefully generate more action in regulation and OT).

mdm815 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 05:15 PM
  #60
dbr2
Lockout Beard
 
dbr2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,340
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to dbr2
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianFlyer88 View Post
I always wanted him to finish out his career in Philly.
If I recall correctly, you used to show up in the GDTs out of nowhere every time he knubed the PPs.

dbr2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 05:26 PM
  #61
Clown Baby
Registered User
 
Clown Baby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,586
vCash: 500
I think thigns could stand to improve. How about each team gets one point for stepping on the ice (except for the Penguins who get two... one for Crosby and one for everyone else). This way no one's feelings get hurt. Two points if you win in regulation.

Each team gets two points for making it to over time because thats EXTRA HOCKEY TIME. It doesnt matter who wins OT, so no one gets any extra points. No one likes to see a team run up the score. Now once we get to shootout, each team gets a single point on top of the two they have already for every goal scored.

Clown Baby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 05:42 PM
  #62
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdm815 View Post
Okay I'm just going to throw out an idea that I've had for awhile. Haven't read this whole topic so not sure if it's been said before, but here it is:

-2 points for a win in regulation or OT. Obviously you get points for winning in reg, and the purpose of OT is to determine a winner. U should get the points.

-0 points for loss. A team wouldn't be rewarded for a loss in any capacity.

-1 point for a shootout win. This will hopefully generate more intensity in OTs as teams try to win it before they lose the second point, and it should keep teams who are good at the SO from sitting back for the same reason (losing that second point).

I think this system keeps alot of what's in place now intact without dramatically changing what's already there, but implementing a new version that would keep shootout fans happy (since its still there), and those who aren't fans of it happy as well (in the sense that the shootout means less and therefor will hopefully generate more action in regulation and OT).
Let me see if I understand your proposal... A team gets two points for winning at any point, and the losing team gets no points no matter what point they lose... and if the winning team doesn't win until it wins the Shootout, it gets a bonus point along with the two for a total of three. In OT and Regulation wins there are two points awarded to one team and in SO wins there are three points awarded and all to the one team, the one who won.

Did I get that correctly?

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 06:34 PM
  #63
Phileeguy
RIP Pat
 
Phileeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philly
Country: United States
Posts: 5,024
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdalite View Post
Let me see if I understand your proposal... A team gets two points for winning at any point, and the losing team gets no points no matter what point they lose... and if the winning team doesn't win until it wins the Shootout, it gets a bonus point along with the two for a total of three. In OT and Regulation wins there are two points awarded to one team and in SO wins there are three points awarded and all to the one team, the one who won.

Did I get that correctly?
I think he meant 2 points if you win in Regulation/OT and only 1 if you win in the Shootout. Not 3 points.

Phileeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 06:38 PM
  #64
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phileeguy View Post
I think he meant 2 points if you win in Regulation/OT and only 1 if you win in the Shootout. Not 3 points.
Which still runs into the problem of answering the following question: Why should a team get nothing out of playing to a tie after 65 minutes of hockey?

If folks want to advocate for the old format with ties, I could understand this angst towards the "loser point," but I simply do not understand when you throw in the BS that is the shootout into the mix. Of course, I don't really have a problem with awarding each team a single point when they tie after 60 minutes of hockey... my only real problem is that I think teams that win in regulation should be more rewarded than those that win in OT.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 07:03 PM
  #65
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
I would like to see the AHL do a 3-2-1 system for a season to see what happens. I mean, we can all look at past standings and do the math. That's easy. But one would hope that there'd be a psychologically affect from potentially leaving a point behind by shutting things down at the tail end of the third and in OT.

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 07:10 PM
  #66
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
I would like to see the AHL do a 3-2-1 system for a season to see what happens. I mean, we can all look at past standings and do the math. That's easy. But one would hope that there'd be a psychologically affect from potentially leaving a point behind by shutting things down at the tail end of the third and in OT.
The game theory would be interesting. Largely because it would make a regulation loss a really big deal, particularly to a conference opponent. The danger, then, would be that teams would get extremely cautious late in games with a tie score.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 07:20 PM
  #67
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phileeguy View Post
I think he meant 2 points if you win in Regulation/OT and only 1 if you win in the Shootout. Not 3 points.
Ahhh... Thanks... I thought I was off base there somewhere.

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 07:27 PM
  #68
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
The game theory would be interesting. Largely because it would make a regulation loss a really big deal, particularly to a conference opponent. The danger, then, would be that teams would get extremely cautious late in games with a tie score.
Yep. Teams up by a goal would also likely trap the mother****ing hell out of the puck.

There are unintended consequences to each of the proposed scoring systems. I'm not sure that I am all that upset with what we have now.

If your team is unable to play a series at home, you aren't winning the Cup. And the best teams will rise to the top no matter which of these systems are used. Changing things around usually only results in a few mediocre teams getting switched from being in the playoffs to being out of them.

The affect of the 3 point game is hugely overstated. It just keeps ratings up a bit down the stretch.

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 07:30 PM
  #69
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
Yep. Teams up by a goal would also likely trap the mother****ing hell out of the puck.

There are unintended consequences to each of the proposed scoring systems. I'm not sure that I am all that upset with what we have now.

If your team is unable to play a series at home, you aren't winning the Cup. And the best teams will rise to the top no matter which of these systems are used. Changing things around usually only results in a few mediocre teams getting switched from being in the playoffs to being out of them.

The affect of the 3 point game is hugely overstated. It just keeps ratings up a bit down the stretch.
The reason I like the 3 point system is purely because I think it will separate the top teams and keep 'em free of the clutter a bit. As we know, it doesn't have a significant impact on the standings... but I do want to see the playoff seedings as accurately as possible reflect the ordering of the respective teams.

Jester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 07:36 PM
  #70
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
I would like to see the AHL do a 3-2-1 system for a season to see what happens. I mean, we can all look at past standings and do the math. That's easy. But one would hope that there'd be a psychologically affect from potentially leaving a point behind by shutting things down at the tail end of the third and in OT.
Exactly... reallocating points on a basis that was not in effect when they played really doesn't prove much... When a team doesn't know those rules going in, they may well play differently. It can be fodder for arguments, but IMO cannot determine what would have been.

All this makes me think of all the Florida 2000 presidential election debates on intents and disenfranchising and hanging/vs dimpled chads... All that led to debates and arguments and court injunctions. Firm rules understood going in, and proper actions upon those rules, allow a definite outcome; anything short of that can be debated forever.

The NHL can determine and implement new rules, but applying the rules to past seasons to determine the effects/results proves little as I see it.

The AHL trial balloon seems to be a great thought.

EDIT: Upon further thought, it would take a while for teams to determine just how they will adjust their play... so a two year AHL test period would actually be better, IMO.

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 07:42 PM
  #71
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Some people do forget that SO wins are not counted when breaking ties in the standings anymore. And that's new this season.

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 07:57 PM
  #72
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
Some people do forget that SO wins are not counted when breaking ties in the standings anymore. And that's new this season.
But that is only to break ties... what about flipping teams?

And would they throw SO wins out to determine seeding... or only when two or more teams have the exact same number of points at the end? My guess is only in cases of ties.

What if a team is Shootout maters and win a great many... enough to have them climb over multiple teams BUT are NOT tied with any at the end? A case where tossing the points would drop them below a few teams and out of the postseason... what then?

What if they are tied... and in tossing out the SOs it drops them below teams that they are not tied with... does that count to determine if the other teams make the POs?

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 08:11 PM
  #73
Valhoun*
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 10,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Valhoun*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdalite View Post
But that is only to break ties... what about flipping teams?

And would they throw SO wins out to determine seeding... or only when two or more teams have the exact same number of points at the end? My guess is only in cases of ties.

What if a team is Shootout maters and win a great many... enough to have them climb over multiple teams BUT are NOT tied with any at the end? A case where tossing the points would drop them below a few teams and out of the postseason... what then?

What if they are tied... and in tossing out the SOs it drops them below teams that they are not tied with... does that count to determine if the other teams make the POs?
Only the ****** seeded teams get flipped (and not all that often). And they don't win Cups. Why is this an issue?

Valhoun* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 08:30 PM
  #74
Garbage Goal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 17,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester View Post
In theory, yes, in actual fact, as Valhoun notes, it doesn't have a tremendous impact. If you go back and look at the standings prior to OTL with the ties, you'll see a LOT of ties.

Teams got into OT and played extremely cautious in order to protect their point. Then they want to the 3 point OT with the OTL (no shootout) and games between conference opponents remained tremendously boring because they didn't want to give an extra point in the standings to their opposition... and OT with the other conference were wide open, because who cared?

That being said... I don't see the travesty in 4 OTLs (given the current format of OT) being the same as a 2-2-0 record. Come playoff team, the 4 OTL team is harder to beat in regulation apparently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
This gets looked at every season and, every season, it is found that the pity point does virtually nothing meaningful to the standings. Only the top 4 or 5 teams ever win the Cup anyway.

It seems like it would mess with the standings but it really doesn't have much affect. Just look at the final standings from each year since the lock out and see what would happen.
These two said it all for me basically.

I'm of the opinion that people just like to complain. The system is fine as is. It's better then the tie system and the top teams are going to be the top teams regardless. This system is better then ties and it really doesn't have as grand an impact on the game as everyone likes to believe.

Garbage Goal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-12-2011, 09:10 PM
  #75
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,415
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valhoun View Post
Only the ****** seeded teams get flipped (and not all that often). And they don't win Cups. Why is this an issue?
Chill... it is not an issue, it is an honest question on a forum.

Bear with me please; if the top seed has 105 points and the second seed has 104 seeds and the third seed has 103 points after 82 games played by each... there is no ties.

If the First seed had seven shootout wins because of a great goalie and a few snipers who excel at SOs and the 2nd and 3rd seeds have only SO win one each... will the SO wins be tossed providing the the 2nd and 3rd teams to flip over the team with 105 points.

In this case you have three top teams and all could have legitimate shots at the Cup...

For the sake of curiosity and education I seriously would like to know if the SO wins are disregarded across the board or merely for tie breaking as we assumed... In close races I would assume SOs could make a difference in who plays weaker teams and who has home ice... If anyone knows the answer, I would like to hear it.

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:58 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.