This Year Around The League

[Trotsky]

I am ok with the shootout, but the effect should be de-emphasized, especially the creation of the extra point in the standings.

Each game should be worth 5 points -
5 - regulation win
4 - overtime win
3 - shootout win
2 - shootout loss
1 - overtime loss
0 - regulation loss

No.  No, no, no, no, no.  No.

The ECAC does this one thing exactly right, and everyone from mites to the NHL should adopt it and then leave it alone forever.

[redice]

I am ok with the shootout, but the effect should be de-emphasized, especially the creation of the extra point in the standings.

Each game should be worth 5 points -
5 - regulation win
4 - overtime win
3 - shootout win
2 - shootout loss
1 - overtime loss
0 - regulation loss

No.  No, no, no, no, no.  No.

The ECAC does this one thing exactly right, and everyone from mites to the NHL should adopt it and then leave it alone forever.

I would like them to cut down on the number of ties...  Maybe go to a longer OT.   5  minutes often settles nothing.  Why bother??

[LGR14]

No to the shootout, but I don't understand why the ECAC plays 5-on-5 in OT. Taking away one player from each team would make overtime much more exciting and probably decrease the number of ties. Not ready for 3-on-3 yet, but 4-on-4 should be a no-brainer.

[billhoward]

I am ok with the shootout, but the effect should be de-emphasized, especially the creation of the extra point in the standings.

Each game should be worth 5 points -
5 - regulation win
4 - overtime win
3 - shootout win
2 - shootout loss
1 - overtime loss
0 - regulation loss

No.  No, no, no, no, no.  No. The ECAC does this one thing exactly right, and everyone from mites to the NHL should adopt it and then leave it alone forever.

Be grateful the next ECAC commissioner doesn't come from NASCAR ranks.

Code Select Expand


2015 DRIVER        POINTS MONEY        WINS POLES TOP 5 TOP 10
1 Kyle Busch 5043 $4,887,217 5 1 12 16
2 Kevin Harvick 5042 $9,018,421 3 3 23 28
3 Jeff Gordon 5038 $6,026,506 1 2 5 21
4 Martin Truex 5032 $5,391,296 1 0 8 22
5 Carl Edwards 2368 $4,590,413 2 2 7 15
6 Joey Logano 2360 $8,405,613 6 1 22 28
7 Brad Keselowski 2347 $6,497,671 1 1 9 25
8 Kurt Busch 2333 $4,675,011 2 1 10 21
9 Denny Hamlin 2327 $6,537,373 2 3 14 20
10 Jimmie Johnson 2315 $7,238,747 5 1 14 22


[redice]

No to the shootout, but I don't understand why the ECAC plays 5-on-5 in OT. Taking away one player from each team would make overtime much more exciting and probably decrease the number of ties. Not ready for 3-on-3 yet, but 4-on-4 should be a no-brainer.

I could go for this...    Just do something to cut down on the number of ties...   4 on 4 should add some excitement to the OT's.

[jkahn]

I am ok with the shootout, but the effect should be de-emphasized, especially the creation of the extra point in the standings.

Each game should be worth 5 points -
5 - regulation win
4 - overtime win
3 - shootout win
2 - shootout loss
1 - overtime loss
0 - regulation loss

No.  No, no, no, no, no.  No.

The ECAC does this one thing exactly right, and everyone from mites to the NHL should adopt it and then leave it alone forever.

I agree with Greg, and the biggest thing that has bugged me about the NHL system is that each game should have the same total point value.  Is winning one game in overtime and losing another in overtime really 50% better than a 3 period win and a 3 period loss?   Now that the NHL has gone to the exciting but gimmicky 3 on 3 overtime, at least I'd like to see a 3-2-1-0 point value for NHL games, with the 2-1 covering both overtimes and shootouts. In effect then, an o't or shootout win would only be worth 1.33x what it was worth in the old system where teams divided 2 points.

[KeithK]

I am ok with the shootout, but the effect should be de-emphasized, especially the creation of the extra point in the standings.

Each game should be worth 5 points -
5 - regulation win
4 - overtime win
3 - shootout win
2 - shootout loss
1 - overtime loss
0 - regulation loss

No.  No, no, no, no, no.  No.

The ECAC does this one thing exactly right, and everyone from mites to the NHL should adopt it and then leave it alone forever.

I agree with Greg, and the biggest thing that has bugged me about the NHL system is that each game should have the same total point value.  Is winning one game in overtime and losing another in overtime really 50% better than a 3 period win and a 3 period loss?   Now that the NHL has gone to the exciting but gimmicky 3 on 3 overtime, at least I'd like to see a 3-2-1-0 point value for NHL games, with the 2-1 covering both overtimes and shootouts. In effect then, an o't or shootout win would only be worth 1.33x what it was worth in the old system where teams divided 2 points.

The non-constant point value is a horrible feature of the OT rules and has been since the beginning. Neil and/or Jeff's suggestions would at least eliminate this quirk. But getting rid of the OT gimmicks is really the answer.

I've also never liked the idea of playing with a different rule set in OT than used in the rest of the game.  Adding gimmicky rules in special situations to add "excitement" just diminishes the game.  If OT with fewer than five skaters per side is a good idea then why not use it in the playoffs too?

[LGR14]

I am ok with the shootout, but the effect should be de-emphasized, especially the creation of the extra point in the standings.

Each game should be worth 5 points -
5 - regulation win
4 - overtime win
3 - shootout win
2 - shootout loss
1 - overtime loss
0 - regulation loss

No.  No, no, no, no, no.  No.

The ECAC does this one thing exactly right, and everyone from mites to the NHL should adopt it and then leave it alone forever.

I agree with Greg, and the biggest thing that has bugged me about the NHL system is that each game should have the same total point value.  Is winning one game in overtime and losing another in overtime really 50% better than a 3 period win and a 3 period loss?   Now that the NHL has gone to the exciting but gimmicky 3 on 3 overtime, at least I'd like to see a 3-2-1-0 point value for NHL games, with the 2-1 covering both overtimes and shootouts. In effect then, an o't or shootout win would only be worth 1.33x what it was worth in the old system where teams divided 2 points.

The non-constant point value is a horrible feature of the OT rules and has been since the beginning. Neil and/or Jeff's suggestions would at least eliminate this quirk. But getting rid of the OT gimmicks is really the answer.

I've also never liked the idea of playing with a different rule set in OT than used in the rest of the game.  Adding gimmicky rules in special situations to add "excitement" just diminishes the game.  If OT with fewer than five skaters per side is a good idea then why not use it in the playoffs too?

For the same reason that we don't use 20 minute overtimes in the regular season: it's just different.

In addition, teams have a reason to try to play for a tie in the regular season. Having 10 skaters on the ice allows a team playing for the tie to completely clamp down and clog everything. This is bad from an entertainment perspective and from a perspective that argues we want teams to play for the win.

Contrastingly, neither team plays for a tie in the postseason (obviously), and thus 5-on-5 isn't a hinderance.

Turn on Caps-Penguins for OT right now: both teams are going to be flying up and down. That will not happen in the ECAC (unless you get a situation like Harvard-Cornell a couple years ago where both teams really want the win and have nothing to lose)

[Trotsky]

I am ok with the shootout, but the effect should be de-emphasized, especially the creation of the extra point in the standings.

Each game should be worth 5 points -
5 - regulation win
4 - overtime win
3 - shootout win
2 - shootout loss
1 - overtime loss
0 - regulation loss

No.  No, no, no, no, no.  No.

The ECAC does this one thing exactly right, and everyone from mites to the NHL should adopt it and then leave it alone forever.

I would like them to cut down on the number of ties...  Maybe go to a longer OT.   5  minutes often settles nothing.  Why bother??

We used to have 10-minute ot.  IINM the coaches hated it because the players were tired and at greater risk of injury.

I don't know what percentage of games that go to OT end in ties (my completely off the cuff guess is about 60%), but it's > 0 anyway.  I think 5 is the compromise between driving down ties and player safety that makes sense to the coaches.

I've gotten used to 5 and like it better than 10, but I also don't have an aversion to ties.

As for 4x4, if it's a better product then just drop a player and skate 4x4 the whole game.  I'm not for it, but if people like skills competitions so much just change the game.

[Al DeFlorio]

We used to have 10-minute ot.  IINM the coaches hated it because the players were tired and at greater risk of injury.

I don't know what percentage of games that go to OT end in ties (my completely off the cuff guess is about 60%), but it's > 0 anyway.  I think 5 is the compromise between driving down ties and player safety that makes sense to the coaches.

I've gotten used to 5 and like it better than 10, but I also don't have an aversion to ties.

As for 4x4, if it's a better product then just drop a player and skate 4x4 the whole game.  I'm not for it, but if people like skills competitions so much just change the game.

Agree completely.  Bastardizing the game in OT is as stupid as the old "two-games-total-goals" series the NCAA used for awhile.

[Scersk '97]

As for 4x4, if it's a better product then just drop a player and skate 4x4 the whole game.  I'm not for it, but if people like skills competitions so much just change the game.

Agree completely.  Bastardizing the game in OT is as stupid as the old "two-games-total-goals" series the NCAA used for awhile.

Also, also agreed. Who ever said hockey is a skills competition? People who like shootouts and dislike hard-nosed defense, whatever the game, don't understand the notion of team sport.

Ties, moreover, ought to be preserved as one of the last vestiges of gentlemanly conduct.

[Beeeej]

As for 4x4, if it's a better product then just drop a player and skate 4x4 the whole game.  I'm not for it, but if people like skills competitions so much just change the game.

Agree completely.  Bastardizing the game in OT is as stupid as the old "two-games-total-goals" series the NCAA used for awhile.

Also, also agreed. Who ever said hockey is a skills competition? People who like shootouts and dislike hard-nosed defense, whatever the game, don't understand the notion of team sport.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: If you think a shootout should decide a hockey game after a brief overtime, you should be fine with a home-run derby deciding a baseball game after the tenth inning.

[RichH]

Count me in the "There's nothing wrong with ties" crowd.

[Dafatone]

I'm actually the only person on earth who doesn't mind the NHL extra point for OT.  I wouldn't mind if they did away with the shootout, but I don't think an extra point popping up is as inherently wrong as most people do.

It "feels" wrong, but I don't think it's unfair or unbalances things.  The standings generally shake out to be more or less what they'd be otherwise.  I'm more concerned with the current playoff format that forces a really tough division to eat itself up before facing the weaker (on paper) opposing division.

[Trotsky]

I'm actually the only person on earth who doesn't mind the NHL extra point for OT.  I wouldn't mind if they did away with the shootout, but I don't think an extra point popping up is as inherently wrong as most people do.

It "feels" wrong, but I don't think it's unfair or unbalances things.  The standings generally shake out to be more or less what they'd be otherwise.  I'm more concerned with the current playoff format that forces a really tough division to eat itself up before facing the weaker (on paper) opposing division.

I don't know anybody who thinks it's unfair (although it does benefit teams that play lower scoring games).  It's just frickin' inelegant.