Should NHL Adopt Olympic Point System?

by David Oleksy on Feb 23, 2010 9:00 AM EST Comment 22 comments

When is the NHL going to stop being stubborn and realize the three point game is bad for hockey? It doesn't make sense that in the same night they can award two points in some games and three in others and yet it happens.

The 2010 Winter Olympic hockey tournament is using a different system to run their tournament. They are awarding three points for a regulation win, two points for an overtime or shootout win, one point for an overtime or shootout loss and zero points for a regulation loss.

A couple of games went to overtime and the point system altered the standings considerably. If the tournament was using the NHL point system, Canada would have been a number four seed and would have had a first round bye. This is a three game tournament and just a couple of points make a world of difference. Over the course of an 82 game schedule the standings may not be altered too much.

I was surprised to find out that the standings would be altered quite considerably. Many teams would be in the very same position but others swapped spots. It affected the lower playoff seeds more than it did the top seeds. Follow the jump to see the results.

Eastern Conference

Eastern Conference Standings							Eastern Conference Standings (Olympic Style)
	Team	GP	W	L	OTL	PTS		Team	GP	W	OTW	OTL	L	PTS
1	Washington	62	41	13	8	90	1	Washington	62	34	7	8	13	124
2	New Jersey	61	37	21	3	77	2	New Jersey	61	29	8	3	21	106
3	Ottawa	63	36	23	4	76	3	Ottawa	63	28	8	4	23	104
4	Pittsburgh	62	36	22	4	75	4	Pittsburgh	62	26	10	4	22	102
5	Buffalo	60	33	18	9	75	5	Buffalo	60	26	7	9	18	101
6	Philadelphia	60	32	25	3	67	6	Philadelphia	60	27	5	3	25	94
7	Boston	60	27	22	11	65	7	NY Rangers	62	25	3	7	27	88
8	Montreal	63	29	28	6	64	8	Tampa Bay	61	20	6	11	24	83
9	NY Rangers	62	28	27	7	63	9	Atlanta	60	20	6	10	24	82
10	Tampa Bay	61	26	24	11	63	10	Boston	60	17	10	11	22	82
11	Atlanta	60	26	24	10	62	11	Montreal	63	16	13	6	28	80
12	Florida	61	24	27	10	58	12	Florida	61	18	6	10	27	76
13	NY Islanders	62	25	29	8	58	13	Carolina	61	19	5	7	30	74
14	Carolina	61	24	30	7	55	14	NY Islanders	62	12	12	8	29	68
15	Toronto	61	19	31	11	49	15	Toronto	61	18	1	11	31	67

The 1-6 seeds in the Eastern Conference remained the same while big changes happened the rest of the way down the standings. It will be interesting to see how the standings finish at the end of the season but I have a feeling that some teams will make the playoffs that shouldn't actually be there.

Western Conference

Western Conference Standings							Western Conference Standings (Olympic Style)
	Team	GP	W	L	OTL	PTS		Team	GP	W	OTW	OTL	L	PTS
1	San Jose	62	40	13	9	89	1	San Jose	62	33	7	9	13	122
2	Chicago	61	41	15	5	87	2	Chicago	61	28	13	5	15	120
3	Vancouver	61	37	22	2	76	3	Vancouver	63	32	5	2	22	108
4	Phoenix	63	37	21	5	79	4	Colorado	61	29	6	6	20	105
5	Los Angeles	61	37	20	4	78	5	Los Angeles	61	27	10	4	20	105
6	Colorado	61	35	20	6	76	6	Phoenix	63	25	12	5	21	104
7	Nashville	61	33	23	5	71	7	Nashville	61	25	8	5	23	96
8	Calgary	62	30	23	9	69	8	Calgary	62	25	5	9	23	94
9	Detroit	61	28	21	12	68	9	Anaheim	62	24	6	7	25	91
10	Dallas	61	28	21	12	68	10	Detroit	61	22	6	12	21	90
11	Anaheim	62	30	25	7	67	11	Dallas	61	22	6	12	21	90
12	St. Louis	62	28	25	9	65	12	Minnesota	61	22	8	4	27	86
13	Minnesota	61	30	27	4	64	13	St. Louis	62	20	8	9	25	85
14	Columbus	63	25	28	10	60	14	Columbus	63	20	5	10	28	85
15	Edmonton	61	19	36	6	44	15	Edmonton	61	14	5	6	36	58

The Western Conference doesn't have the same shakeup in the standings as the Eastern Conference had. Still the experiment shows me that the NHL should change to this point system. It will not alter the standings too much but it will eliminate the "three-point game". This system would allow three points in all games instead of only some games.

0 recs | Comment 22 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Brilliant!

Would make for some wild hockey in late season games between teams fighting for a spot. You could take home 3 points versus 0 if tied late in regulation and you score in 3rd period.

IMHO the team that wins should get the 2 point differential whether they wi in regulation or OT.

by freddyjj on Feb 23, 2010 9:36 AM EST reply actions

Hopefully it would eliminate those “playing not to lose” games where the last 5 minutes of the 3rd period is constant dump-and-change by both teams.

by Andy Boron on Feb 23, 2010 9:51 AM EST reply actions

I like it.

I wouldnt mind going to the 3-2-1-0 system. I just hate how a shootout win is the same as a 5-0 dominate shutout (for the winner). But damn the Caps would be running away with the East. It makes sense, doubt theyll ever switch, but I wish they would.

"Hey ey ey ey"

by bflo on Feb 23, 2010 10:16 AM EST reply actions

The Caps are already running away with the East. Proportionally, the two systems are pretty close in that regard.

by Andy Boron on Feb 23, 2010 10:42 AM EST up reply actions

True.

Just seeing a team at 126 at the Olympic break is a eye-opener lol. But I am a fan of it.

"Hey ey ey ey"

by bflo on Feb 23, 2010 11:05 AM EST up reply actions

Under the current system, the Devils trail by 7 wins (well, 6 plus an OT loss, technically). In the Olympic system, they trail by 6 wins. As odd as it sounds, the Devils are actually closer in the Olympic system.

Defending maligned chants since 2009

by Gorbachav5 on Feb 25, 2010 2:51 PM EST up reply actions

the only thing about a 3 point system that annoys me is point inflation.

Not even the Toronto Maple Leafs could kill my optimism

by Ubiquitous on Feb 23, 2010 10:17 AM EST reply actions

Why not just REALLY inflate the points?

W=5 OTW=4 SOW=3 SOL=2 OTL=1 L=0. If you’re going to give/take points for a regulation vs OT game, why not extend it into the shootout? If a regulation win deserves more points than an OT win, why does a SO win deserve the same points as an OT win?

Ok, so I don’t really think that should happen. I also don’t think we should go to this Olympic style. It’s great for a 3-game round robin, but in an 82-game season, it gives teams way too much opportunity to skyrocket ahead of the pack. I think rather than a dramatic change, I think they should just eliminate the loser point and go back to the way it was.

A win is a win, and a loss deserves no points.

(I also wouldn’t mind seeing the shootout be taken out of the game and allow ties. Losses are disappointing to see, but to me the shootout is a skills event and not a team aspect of a TEAM sport.)

by The Burl 8 on Feb 23, 2010 11:48 AM EST reply actions

…I forgot to say…

I WOULD rather see the Olympic style than the current system, I just like the old ways better.

by The Burl 8 on Feb 23, 2010 11:49 AM EST up reply actions

I kind of agree with getting rid of the shootout. Its nice, but it takes too long (5, 6, 7+ mins) after the OT ends because they have to clear the ice, zamboni down the middle, then submit a list of skaters, etc. Plus I dont like the idea of a skills comp deciding points in the standings.

But at the same time Im against ties, so idk if there is any way to get what I really want. haha

"Hey ey ey ey"

by bflo on Feb 23, 2010 12:33 PM EST up reply actions

that system actually does little (assuming you use otl as a tiebreaker like currently) to the final standings unless you are top or bottom 3 win% in overtime.

Not even the Toronto Maple Leafs could kill my optimism

by Ubiquitous on Feb 23, 2010 12:48 PM EST up reply actions

Its nice that every game is worth three points, no matter what happens. I would love to see the NHL adopt this style, it gets rid of the extra point that everyone dreads.

Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by Zachary Zielonka on Feb 23, 2010 12:39 PM EST reply actions

i don’t dread the extra point.

Not even the Toronto Maple Leafs could kill my optimism

by Ubiquitous on Feb 23, 2010 12:46 PM EST up reply actions

I just want every game to be worth the same. Around playoff time, that extra point gets real annoying.

Die By The Blade - An SB nation destination for Sabres fans everywhere

by Zachary Zielonka on Feb 23, 2010 8:05 PM EST up reply actions

You see, that’s the trick. The extra point is only annoying in short streches, over the year it doesn’t really do much (unless you’re florida)

Not even the Toronto Maple Leafs could kill my optimism

by Ubiquitous on Feb 24, 2010 10:59 AM EST up reply actions

The 3 (W), 2 (W OT) and 1 (L OT) system has been logically proposed to the NHL over and over & over again by fans and media, but it’ll never happen. Why? Bettman et al. love the “look” of real playoff races all season long. Crappy teams gain that extra point and it gives the illusion that they are still in the hunt. More teams in the hunt = more butts in the seats. It’s all about the $$$$ in NHLland.

by DiscoStu_YOW on Feb 23, 2010 1:41 PM EST reply actions

is there anything wrong with that?

Not even the Toronto Maple Leafs could kill my optimism

by Ubiquitous on Feb 23, 2010 3:25 PM EST up reply actions

The obvious issue with looking at the standings this way is the fact that teams would behave differently under a 3-2-1-0 system. Ultimately, we have no idea what their records would look like.

Personally, I favor a one point system. Win in regulation or OT, get a point. Lose in regulation or OT, get no points. Now that we have no ties there’s no need for a true point system (other than tradition, but this system is functionally the same as the system used by all other major North American leagues) in an 82 game season.

by sixsevenfiftysix on Feb 23, 2010 3:04 PM EST reply actions

You could even call that a NO point system

I like it.

All I can say is that however it plays out, EVERY game should be worth the SAME.

by The Burl 8 on Feb 23, 2010 4:21 PM EST up reply actions

ya - we need to do this

Hello - thanks for reading my signature. It's very interesting. Bye

by J2 on Feb 23, 2010 4:09 PM EST reply actions

I favor the one-point or zero point system. The teams play three periods, if one team is ahead of the other team at the end of three periods, that team gets one point. If the two teams are tied, neither team gets a point. You only get rewarded for a win. Under this system of scoring the fans would get their money’s worth. Under any other system, the players cheat the fans.

by Geolover on Feb 23, 2010 5:15 PM EST reply actions

Wow, now THAT’s a dramatic overhaul.

I’m not sure if I buy having no opportunity to break a tie AND no points awarded for a tie. It does stand to reason that a tie (if you have ties) should be worth more than a loss. But I agree that teams should only be rewarded for winning, so I’m in favor of having an overtime period after regulation if it’s tied.

by sixsevenfiftysix on Feb 23, 2010 6:09 PM EST up reply actions