HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Notices

Standings without Shootout results

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-14-2011, 07:34 PM
  #26
mbar
Registered User
 
mbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 660
vCash: 500
I agree but, unfortunately, it seems the shootout is here to stay.

mbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2011, 08:23 PM
  #27
RonSwanson*
Gadfly
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Food 'N Stuff
Country: United States
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay View Post
You see it wrong.
How so?

I said that the losing team gets a point... and that is wrong because???

It's a fact that the losing team gets a point. You can't even debate that.

RonSwanson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2011, 09:06 PM
  #28
Dr. Naysay
Registered User
 
Dr. Naysay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 365
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Dr. Naysay
Quote:
Originally Posted by adevandry View Post
How so?

I said that the losing team gets a point... and that is wrong because???

It's a fact that the losing team gets a point. You can't even debate that.
Sure I can.

There's over 100 years of precedent demonstrating that in the event of a tie both teams receive a point.

Starting a few seasons ago they started awarding bonus points for teams that win the ridiculous "4 on 4" exhibition game that follows 60 minutes of regulation hockey. Now they've added an additional round of exhibition to help decide who receives the bonus point.

To suggest that a team that "loses" the shootout somehow "lost" the hockey game is absurd. Hell they awarded Bernier a shutout for a game he allegedly lost according to you.

How could a goalie possibly LOSE a game in which he allowed zero goals?

Dr. Naysay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2011, 09:09 PM
  #29
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay View Post
Sure I can.

There's over 100 years of precedent demonstrating that in the event of a tie both teams receive a point.

Starting a few seasons ago they started awarding bonus points for teams that win the ridiculous "4 on 4" exhibition game that follows 60 minutes of regulation hockey. Now they've added an additional round of exhibition to help decide who receives the bonus point.

To suggest that a team that "loses" the shootout somehow "lost" the hockey game is absurd. Hell they awarded Bernier a shutout for a game he allegedly lost according to you.

How could a goalie possibly LOSE a game in which he allowed zero goals?
By getting beat in the shootout, of course. Was that supposed to be a trick question?

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2011, 09:23 PM
  #30
mbar
Registered User
 
mbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
By getting beat in the shootout, of course. Was that supposed to be a trick question?
That assumes that a shootout is a legitimate way to decide who won a hockey game.

It isn't.

mbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 02:32 AM
  #31
RonSwanson*
Gadfly
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Food 'N Stuff
Country: United States
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbar View Post
That assumes that a shootout is a legitimate way to decide who won a hockey game.

It isn't.
Do you walk out of Staples Center after a shootout loss and say to yourself "Well, at least we didn't lose!"???

No.

A shootout loss is a loss. Not a win. Not a tie. A LOSS.

RonSwanson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 11:51 AM
  #32
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Gentle Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 19,159
vCash: 863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay View Post
Sure I can.

There's over 100 years of precedent demonstrating that in the event of a tie both teams receive a point.

Starting a few seasons ago they started awarding bonus points for teams that win the ridiculous "4 on 4" exhibition game that follows 60 minutes of regulation hockey. Now they've added an additional round of exhibition to help decide who receives the bonus point.

To suggest that a team that "loses" the shootout somehow "lost" the hockey game is absurd. Hell they awarded Bernier a shutout for a game he allegedly lost according to you.

How could a goalie possibly LOSE a game in which he allowed zero goals?
This isn't a court so wtf does precedent have to do with anything?

Technology, life, everything moves forward and gets better all the time.
Should we still use carbon paper because it was around for so many years? Or are copy machines, and digital images easier and better for anyone?

Gentle Ben Kenobi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 04:49 PM
  #33
Dr. Naysay
Registered User
 
Dr. Naysay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 365
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Dr. Naysay
Quote:
Originally Posted by adevandry View Post
Do you walk out of Staples Center after a shootout loss and say to yourself "Well, at least we didn't lose!"???

No.

A shootout loss is a loss. Not a win. Not a tie. A LOSS.
As a matter of fact that's EXACTLY what I do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Bunny Foo Foo View Post
This isn't a court so wtf does precedent have to do with anything?

Technology, life, everything moves forward and gets better all the time.
Should we still use carbon paper because it was around for so many years? Or are copy machines, and digital images easier and better for anyone?
He said "you can't even debate that". I'm debating it and I'm using the existence of ties to do it.

As for "change"....

Has anybody revolutionized "the wheel" lately? I could be wrong but I feel like a circle is still the shape of choice when it comes to making wheels.

Technology has changed the game of hockey... but that has nothing to do with shootouts or ties. Out of curiosity... how would you feel if, in twenty years, someone proposed that we toss out wins and losses and instead just focused on how many goals are scored in a season?

I mean after all... that would force teams to play an exciting offensive brand of hockey and after all... change is part of life right?

Dr. Naysay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 04:52 PM
  #34
Christina Woloski
Registered Something
 
Christina Woloski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Narnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lafan13 View Post
The 3rd point is a retarded concept... This is a prof sport,there are no victories in losing.NHL needs to take a step back in the stats, and take out all the useless BS.

Have 2 colums.
Win's and losses...
No more Ties, S.o.L., Points..
Just winners on top.
Losers on bottom....

seriously doubt hockey will ever adopt that system though...Its not complex enough...
I think they need to go back to win-loses-ties.

Cut the seasons down by a dozen games or so...

... extend over time to at least ten minutes, ideally more.

... allow more players on the bench and on a roster.

Christina Woloski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 04:56 PM
  #35
Dr. Naysay
Registered User
 
Dr. Naysay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 365
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Dr. Naysay
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsBeReality View Post
I think they need to go back to win-loses-ties.

Cut the seasons down by a dozen games or so...

... extend over time to at least ten minutes, ideally more.

... allow more players on the bench and on a roster.
I'm curious... what's the benefit of more players on the bench?

Dr. Naysay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 05:17 PM
  #36
mbar
Registered User
 
mbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 660
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by adevandry View Post
Do you walk out of Staples Center after a shootout loss and say to yourself "Well, at least we didn't lose!"???

No.

A shootout loss is a loss. Not a win. Not a tie. A LOSS.
I walk out realizing that the game ended in a tie and we lost the coin flip for the extra point.

mbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 05:18 PM
  #37
Christina Woloski
Registered Something
 
Christina Woloski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Narnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay View Post
I'm curious... what's the benefit of more players on the bench?
Valid question..

..this is to help fatigue to further help elongating games. Hopefully a by-product of this will be less injuries as well.

Another unintentional but possibly cool by-product of a larger bench would be higher skilled players going against lower skilled players. More goals, exciting plays, etc.

Christina Woloski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 05:34 PM
  #38
DeeMeck
Registered User
 
DeeMeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,366
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsBeReality View Post
I think they need to go back to win-loses-ties.

Cut the seasons down by a dozen games or so...

... extend over time to at least ten minutes, ideally more.
I actually like that.

I don't know if you want to cut down a dozen..but a few can go (which will never happen)

10 minutes of 4 on 4 isn't going to yield many ties, especially if the refs don't swallow their whistles.

DeeMeck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 06:04 PM
  #39
Christina Woloski
Registered Something
 
Christina Woloski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Narnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeMeck View Post
I actually like that.

I don't know if you want to cut down a dozen..but a few can go (which will never happen)

10 minutes of 4 on 4 isn't going to yield many ties, especially if the refs don't swallow their whistles.
Yeah, I think with extending the bench they wouldn't have to cut back so many games... I think cutting down six would eliminate back to back games for a season, making this possible.

I've always hated 5 minute overtimes. Especially when a penalty is called. I mean, at least have one minute penalties in overtime or something or have penalties in overtime be four on five.

Four on three has been too dominating IMO.

I especially like these moves because it's just "tinkering".. it's not going to yield changes to the core game (such as four on four, which I somewhat don't like), but should make the subtle differences to improve the game.

Christina Woloski is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-15-2011, 06:23 PM
  #40
onlyalad
Registered User
 
onlyalad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 4,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by adevandry View Post
Do you walk out of Staples Center after a shootout loss and say to yourself "Well, at least we didn't lose!"???

No.

A shootout loss is a loss. Not a win. Not a tie. A LOSS.
After a shoot out loss I usually say "At least we got a point"
People that are complaining about 3 point games don't do it when it helps their teams. The issue is that other teams get points. When the Kings get one or two points people are either happy or not so upset. When the Ducks and Avs each get points in a game and the Stars and Wild each get at least one point the same night that is when Kings fans get upset. That is why most of us deep down hate the the OT point system. Our team has gone 8 games without a regulation loss and has gained no ground on the rest of the teams because everybody is getting points every night.

onlyalad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2011, 10:15 AM
  #41
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Gentle Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 19,159
vCash: 863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay View Post
As for "change"....

Has anybody revolutionized "the wheel" lately? I could be wrong but I feel like a circle is still the shape of choice when it comes to making wheels.
Yes they have, tires are constantly being improved, i.e. new tread technology. Also, new engines came out about 5 years ago too

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay View Post
Technology has changed the game of hockey... but that has nothing to do with shootouts or ties. Out of curiosity... how would you feel if, in twenty years, someone proposed that we toss out wins and losses and instead just focused on how many goals are scored in a season?

I mean after all... that would force teams to play an exciting offensive brand of hockey and after all... change is part of life right?
Defense is part of the game too. And frankly, that is a ridiculous example


Last edited by Gentle Ben Kenobi: 02-17-2011 at 11:16 AM.
Gentle Ben Kenobi 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 01:46 AM.

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.