HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Overtime Loss Point talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-14-2007, 05:00 PM
  #26
ilovehockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 169
vCash: 500
If i recall one of the conferences standings last year.The playoff order would not of changed if you take away the single point, and the other conference the top 8 were still the top 8.

ilovehockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 05:10 PM
  #27
puck_08
Registered User
 
puck_08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perogieboy View Post

If that were the logic there would be no point for an OT loss.

Its not a logical practice; its a gimmick.
There is a reason it's called OVERtime.

puck_08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 05:48 PM
  #28
Rudolf Yaber
Registered User
 
Rudolf Yaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by puck_08 View Post
There is a reason it's called OVERtime.
So even though the team loses they get a point for a tie?

Everyone talks about "its a bonus". Crap. A bonus is getting an extra 2% on your exam, or getting a mini-candy bar for a right answer. The extra-point "bonus" has a significant impact on the standings (2 OT or SO losses = 1 win).

Its gimmicky and there is no point trying to deny that.

Like another poster said in another thread, it isn't ties that made the game boring; it was the "dead puck" era. Add that to vain attempts to market the game by changing the game (let the game sell itself), and you have a farcical point structure where playoff teams golf in the spring and people no longer understand what under .500 means.

Rudolf Yaber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 06:06 PM
  #29
New Sabres Captain
ForFriendshipDikembe
 
New Sabres Captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 39,454
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAlfie View Post
how about talking directly to me?

you sir are missing the point that it is not an extra point. regulation time goes 60 minutes, if its a tie then its 1 point for each team because there was no winner.
the team might no have won in regulation time, but they also did not lose. it was a tie, if its a tie after 60 minutes then both should be awarded a point. since its usually 2 points for a win, so they split it because it was undecesive.

one could argue to change the system into 3 points for a regulation time (60mins) win and 2 for an extra time /SO win where the team that loses in overtime or shootout should be rewarded 1 point for making it into overtime.


OT and SO is not regulation time.


jeez... i wonder if some who still dont understand it ever saw a school from the inside...
If this is the case, then why don't other sports reward teams that finish regulation tied? You don't see football, baseball, basketball, etc. award .5 wins (which is really what 1 point is) to each team when they end regulation tied? It would seem logical, right?

New Sabres Captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 06:26 PM
  #30
puck_08
Registered User
 
puck_08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveDaSlug View Post
If this is the case, then why don't other sports reward teams that finish regulation tied? You don't see football, baseball, basketball, etc. award .5 wins (which is really what 1 point is) to each team when they end regulation tied? It would seem logical, right?
Because they have time to go into a full overtime to decide the outcome of the game properly. Because the nature of football, basketball and baseball (although to a lesser degree) are such that a point will be scored in a reasonable amount of time, unlike hockey, where games would drag on for much longer.

puck_08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 06:30 PM
  #31
Bobby Lou
Moustache Power
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,379
vCash: 894
I agree that you at least have to make a regulation win worth more then a OT/SO win. Or just kill off the OTL point I suppose, the winner takes 2, the loser takes 0 no matter when they win/lose. Really it's kind of the exact same thing. The way it is now is scewing the standings, and seriously under-valuing legitimate regulation wins.

Bobby Lou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 06:32 PM
  #32
puck_08
Registered User
 
puck_08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perogieboy View Post
So even though the team loses they get a point for a tie?

Everyone talks about "its a bonus". Crap. A bonus is getting an extra 2% on your exam, or getting a mini-candy bar for a right answer. The extra-point "bonus" has a significant impact on the standings (2 OT or SO losses = 1 win).

Its gimmicky and there is no point trying to deny that.

Like another poster said in another thread, it isn't ties that made the game boring; it was the "dead puck" era. Add that to vain attempts to market the game by changing the game (let the game sell itself), and you have a farcical point structure where playoff teams golf in the spring and people no longer understand what under .500 means.
I'll definitely give you that people don't understand what .500 really means now, however its not as bad as everyone seems to think it is.
I'm not sure which playoff teams that are playing golf in the spring you are referring to unless it was Vancouver last year.
But its not like there are any teams that are in 10th under the current system, but "should" be 7th in the standings.

puck_08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 06:34 PM
  #33
Rudolf Yaber
Registered User
 
Rudolf Yaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoveDaSlug View Post
If this is the case, then why don't other sports reward teams that finish regulation tied? You don't see football, baseball, basketball, etc. award .5 wins (which is really what 1 point is) to each team when they end regulation tied? It would seem logical, right?
Or consider soccer, which doesn't circumvent the tie.
I'm not sure that I can think of a sport that has fundamental rules changed for marketing purposes like Bettman has for hockey.

Rudolf Yaber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 06:41 PM
  #34
New Sabres Captain
ForFriendshipDikembe
 
New Sabres Captain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 39,454
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by puck_08 View Post
Because they have time to go into a full overtime to decide the outcome of the game properly. Because the nature of football, basketball and baseball (although to a lesser degree) are such that a point will be scored in a reasonable amount of time, unlike hockey, where games would drag on for much longer.
But that is not the point. MrAlfie is claiming that the point is for ending REGULATION tied. There was no mention of having to play a full overtime or not. In fact, even if none of the games went to shootout it wouldn't impact the argument at hand. His claim is that teams should get a point for being tied after REGULATION, regardless of whether or not the game gets settled in overtime or a shootout. Plus, basketball and baseball (well, not exactly if the home team scores enough they don't cmplete the inning) aren't sudden death, so they play the full overtime, while hockey and football are sudden death and don't necessarily mean that the full session is played. Whether or not the overtime must be played completely is irrelevant to giving away the extra point.

New Sabres Captain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 06:46 PM
  #35
Rudolf Yaber
Registered User
 
Rudolf Yaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by puck_08 View Post
I'm not sure which playoff teams that are playing golf in the spring you are referring to unless it was Vancouver last year.
I'm not referring to any team in particular, just that the possibility exists. Unfortunately, there will be teams other than Vancouver in '05/06 who will experience this in the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by puck_08 View Post
But its not like there are any teams that are in 10th under the current system, but "should" be 7th in the standings.
There are no teams who would find themselves out of the playoffs at present, but we'll see at the end of this year. But both Atlanta and Calgary would lose their division lead, which has significant implications for playoff matchups.

Rudolf Yaber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 06:55 PM
  #36
Merc29
Sid ney Cr os by
 
Merc29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Minot, ND
Country: United States
Posts: 2,264
vCash: 500
how freaken depressing would 0-0-82 be?

Merc29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 06:57 PM
  #37
fras123
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kelowna, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carbo-Nation View Post
Agreed.

If they're good enough to never lose in regulation, why should they not deserve a spot?
because they havnt wone any games, it means that in 70 games they were the worse team on the ice, why should a team who hasnt been the better team on the ice for more than 12 games in a season deserve to be in the playoffs? (generalization the best team on the ice doesnt always win)

fras123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:05 PM
  #38
sticknrink
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,723
vCash: 500
Win=2pts, OT/SO loss=.5pt

Wondering what people think of having half a point instead of a full point for overtime / shootout losses.

The reason why the NHL will not go 3pts for a win is because it messes up historical records. A win is always going to be 2pts. If we use half a point to calculate an OT/SO loss, here's what the standings in the west would look like:

*Nashville: 77.5
*Anaheim: 70
*Calgary: 64
Detroit: 75
San Jose: 72.5
Dallas: 69
Vancouver: 64
Minnesota: 64
====
Edmonton: 58
Colorado: 56
Phoenix: 51
St.Louis: 48.5
Chicago: 47.5
Los Angeles: 42.5

This system would really value wins and I feel would help make expand the standings out.

sticknrink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:14 PM
  #39
bd007h*
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,135
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to bd007h* Send a message via MSN to bd007h*
um, no thanks. Decimals would make it too confusing.

bd007h* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:15 PM
  #40
Rudolf Yaber
Registered User
 
Rudolf Yaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bd007h View Post
um, no thanks. Decimals would make it too confusing.
Like in baseball right?

Rudolf Yaber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:17 PM
  #41
Mr_Jones*
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,129
vCash: 500
Jesus ****ing Christ, are wins and losses so damn difficult to understand?

Mr_Jones* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:22 PM
  #42
Paxton Fettel
Registered User
 
Paxton Fettel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 6,201
vCash: 500
omg, another thread on this ... jesus, kill'em, kill'em all!

edit : what's with the anti-Blue Jacketism?

Paxton Fettel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:23 PM
  #43
fob
Registered User
 
fob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lost Angeles
Country: Zimbabwe
Posts: 2,930
vCash: 500
12-0-70?

Those 70 points are going somewhere, and I'm thinking it's probably the 5 other teams that make it to the playoffs before you.

"A pretty much guaranteed playoff spot" my ###.

fob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:38 PM
  #44
jBuds
pretty damn valuable
 
jBuds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: NYC Suburbs
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 27,437
vCash: 500
I think it's fine to give out half-points. The only thing I wouldn't do is give any team, at any point, more than 2 pts. for a win.

2 for a win and either 1 or .5 for the OT/SO loss

jBuds is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:44 PM
  #45
Janney
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,102
vCash: 500
Better than .5 pt loss in OT/SO...

2 pts for win

1 pt for 4-4 overtime loss

0 pts for SO loss


The whole idea was for teams to have this killer instinct and win at no cost. But the ones that excel in SO will prolong the game just to get to that point.

Janney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:46 PM
  #46
Golden Jet
Registered User
 
Golden Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 127
vCash: 500
Presently, some games award three points while others award two points. Every game should have the same value or the stats/standing get skewed. Here is what I recommend:

Three points should be given out each and every game. If the game is won in 65 minutes or less, three points for the winner and zero for the loser.

If the game goes to a shootout, three points are still awarded. However only two are given to the winner since a shootout win isn't a real win imo and the loser still gets a point because a shootout loss isn't a real loss.

What do you think?

Golden Jet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 07:47 PM
  #47
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 500
All of the talk about the OTL / "loser point" merged into one thread; please try to keep all of the discussion here.

__________________
No promises this time.
Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 08:15 PM
  #48
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sticknrink View Post
The reason why the NHL will not go 3pts for a win is because it messes up historical records. A win is always going to be 2pts. If we use half a point to calculate an OT/SO loss, here's what the standings in the west would look like:
I don't buy that if that's the NHL's reasoning. Point records are already obsolete with some games being worth three points. Plus teams get credit for wins in games they wouldn't have won before in the case of shootout wins. I don't see how going to a 3-2-1 system is any different.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 08:44 PM
  #49
AVSfan2daMAX
Registered User
 
AVSfan2daMAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 500
Like I say: "It doesn't matter whether you win or lose all that matters is if you get it to the circus(aka the shootout/overtime/dart throwing contest)"


Last edited by AVSfan2daMAX: 02-14-2007 at 10:34 PM.
AVSfan2daMAX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2007, 10:27 PM
  #50
I Ron Butterfly
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 637
vCash: 500
This whole mess came about because overtimes were ridiculously boring. Both teams were holding out for the point. It was not a gmmick, it was to inspire teams to go for it. Now overtimes are incredibly entertaining, and if worst comes to worst an exciting skills competition takes place to determine the winner. As stated before, everyone plays under the same point system and every game has a winner. Maybe a tweak regarding the 3 point games could help, but other than that I don't think you'd be able to change this situation for the better.

I Ron Butterfly 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 05:59 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.