Parity or result of loser point?

[JD]

As of today, there are a mere 7 teams under .500.

So much for .500 actually meaning something.

You look at the standings, and you see about 5 really bad teams, 5 really good teams (Atlanta being one of them!), and the rest of the league. Sure you could chalk it up to parity, but that loser point thing has to change, IMO. Or at least make it so a shootout or OT gimmick win isn't treated the same way as a regular win. I see no problem with 3 points for a real win. The argument always seems to be that the all-time records would be rendered meaningless. Well guess what: they already are. The way things are headed now, half the league could have over 100 points by the end of it all.

Time for a change. The standings need to better represent what is actually going on. Absolute stupidity that some games are worth 3 points and others worth only 2.

As a sidenote, interesting that the NW division teams are all separated by 2 points. It looks like a dogfight right now, but my prediction is that the Flames rise to the top of that heap within a month and the Canucks fall out of the race. Edmonton will struggle to keep pace with Calgary because of key injuries. The Avs and Wild will shake out to be middle-of-the-pack teams.

[Cicatrix]

but my prediction is that the Flames rise to the top of that heap within a month and the Canucks fall out of the race.

Just who in the hell do you think you are?

Sincerely,

I am still the prediction champion of this swamp.

[JD]

Week 9 Results
AcidQueen.....10 pts
Hobbes.....8
JD.....8
Joey Moss.....8
moon.....8
Mustang.....8
RSoxFan.....8
xtremeplzr.....8
Billdong.....7
Laxplayer.....7
MuchoBulls.....7
Otis.....7
Shoalzie.....7
Cross Traffic.....6
godzilla2002.....6
James Dean Bradfield.....6
Smoked Meat.....6
The Rat Pack.....6
Mrs. Stoll.....5
Cicatrix.....4

Ah but who needs proof anyway.

[The Rat Pack]

You're really reaching, Jed.

It's a shame that most everyone on this board is a bitter & twisted fool.

Therefore, I withdraw myself from any more Saturday picks. Shoalzie old boy...take me out of it. Scratch me from the Patrick. I didn't realize that by entering it would be used for mindless attacks by other posters.

It's a shame, but hardly surprising. Everyone knows that Jed & Cici are tampons. They can't help themselves..

[JD]

You're really reaching, Jed.

It's a shame that most everyone on this board is a bitter & twisted fool.

Therefore, I withdraw myself from any more Saturday picks. Shoalzie old boy...take me out of it. Scratch me from the Patrick. I didn't realize that by entering it would be used for mindless attacks by other posters.

It's a shame..

So your 14 of 15 for the NFL on Sunday is fair game but your NHL picks for Saturday are not?

I suppose it's the Patrick Division that suffers the true loss with the removal of its most effective competitor. A shame indeed.

[The Rat Pack]

It is a shame.. Grovelling won't change my mind.

[Hobbes]

As of today, there are a mere 7 teams under .500.

So much for .500 actually meaning something.

You look at the standings, and you see about 5 really bad teams, 5 really good teams (Atlanta being one of them!), and the rest of the league. Sure you could chalk it up to parity, but that loser point thing has to change, IMO. Or at least make it so a shootout or OT gimmick win isn't treated the same way as a regular win. I see no problem with 3 points for a real win. The argument always seems to be that the all-time records would be rendered meaningless. Well guess what: they already are. The way things are headed now, half the league could have over 100 points by the end of it all.

Time for a change. The standings need to better represent what is actually going on. Absolute stupidity that some games are worth 3 points and others worth only 2.

As a sidenote, interesting that the NW division teams are all separated by 2 points. It looks like a dogfight right now, but my prediction is that the Flames rise to the top of that heap within a month and the Canucks fall out of the race. Edmonton will struggle to keep pace with Calgary because of key injuries. The Avs and Wild will shake out to be middle-of-the-pack teams.

The problem, JD, is that your suggestion makes too much sense. That's why Bettman will never go for it. But I agree with you completely. Even without it jacking up the standings, a point for a loss is just dumb. Second place is the first loser, you don't get rewarded for a tie, or worse still, a loss. I hate that a team can rise to the top of its division, and be guaranteed a top 3 playoff spot, based on points they got when they actually lost games. Two columns, W-L.

As for the old records being meaningless, that's a crap argument. Any time the league expands, you're going to have to put an asterisk next to team records because there's more points to be had. We have a league with 30 teams that each play 82 games. How can you compare that with old stats? The Wings won the Cup after only winning 25 games and garnering a whopping 61 points. Oh yeah, but that was in 1943 and they only PLAYED 50 games a year. How can you compare that with the Wings of last year who amassed 124 points in 82 games? Also, just by virtue of the fact that they give a point for a loss, the league has rendered those records meaningless anyway. Those 124 point Red Wings got 8 of those points in games that they actually LOST! Dumbest system in the world, if you ask me.

The NW division is going to be a classic example of how important divisional matchups have become. It kills me that the Avs have to play each of those teams 8 times.

[JD]

The NW division is going to be a classic example of how important divisional matchups have become. It kills me that the Avs have to play each of those teams 8 times.

Ha, despite the boredom of 8 games with the Wild, it bodes well for us. The Flames have been downright dominant vs. the NW division in recent years. Not only that, games vs. the Oilers, Canucks and Avs tend to be the most entertaining games on the slate.

As far as two columns, W and L, I don't agree with that. I like the fact that the freebie point gives teams the ability to take more chances in OT, and makes the SO more of an exhibition than a do-or-die scenario. But it's also a shit-or-get-off-the-pot sort of thing too... if we're going to include those aspects in the game, they may as well be meaningful.

At any rate, I'd do everything the same as it is, but provide 3 points for a regulation W. Might light a fire under teams' asses that like to trap their way into a shootout.

[Joey Moss]

Bwahahahahah!!

Ratty, WTF you're losing so you're quiting? Should we have expected anything more from a Caps fan?

Seriously dude, you can't quit, you're losing to my wife by 4 points and that's something that I will never let you live down. You'd be my bitch's bitch.

[fix]

Right, like the last fucking thing this league needs is yet another idiotic gimmick to settle regular season games. :roll:

Get rid of the OT and the wannabe rendition of Showdown.

Win gets you two points, Loss nets you nothing and a Tie gets you one for showing up. If you don't settle it in regulation time, so be it.
But then why would they want to do something that was a proven way to score a game. Hell, I'm almost shocked they haven't gone to using a special glowing puck to decide the shootouts or made scoring a goal from outside the circles worth two points instead on one.

[Shoalzie]

I've never been a fan of the OTL category in the standings. I had less of a problem with the point each for a tie although I didn't like games ending in ties. Short of playing games with a full length OT, I don't think there is a perfect system to decide games. Baseball doesn't limit the length of games...games can last almost the length of two games sometimes and they play twice the number of games the NHL does. I would be all for the full length OT but given the travel schedules and the back-to-back games, it would take its toll over time. I would be in favor of just going with the basic wins and losses in the standings and getting rid of the points. If you got rid of the bonus points for ties and OTL there's no sense in giving points for wins and just go with total wins/win% like the other major sports do.

Just for fun, this is the NHL standings with adjusted wins-losses (*-division leaders)...
*Buffalo.....20-6 / .769
*San Jose.....20-7 / .741
Anaheim.....20-9 / .690
*Nashville.....17-8 / .680
Dallas.....17-9 / .654
*Atlanta.....17-11 / .607
Montreal.....15-10 / .600
Detroit.....14-11 / .560
*New Jersey.....14-11 / .560
N.Y. Islanders.....14-12 / .538
Carolina.....15-13 / .536
*Edmonton.....13-12 / .520
Ottawa.....14-13 / .519
Boston.....12-12 / .500
Calgary.....12-12 / .500
Minnesota.....13-13 / .500
N.Y. Rangers.....13-14 / .481
Tampa Bay.....13-14 / .481
Vancouver.....13-14 / .481
Toronto.....13-15 / .464
Colorado.....12-14 / .462
Pittsburgh.....11-14 / .440
Washington.....11-15 / .423
Chicago.....10-14 / .417
Phoenix.....9-15 / .375
Los Angeles.....10-19 / .345
Philadelphia.....8-19 / .296
Florida.....8-20 / .286
Columbus.....7-18 / .280
St. Louis.....7-18 / .280

[JD]

Well your standings don't work either Shoalzie. You can't have it both ways and give teams a loss for losing in the shootout and a win for winning in it. Take away the shootout W's and then I'm down.

As for your saliva-splattered diatribe, Otis, you can long for the old days all you want, but the fact is, shootouts are staying. 4 on 4 overtime is staying. And I'm not even debating those topics. All I'm talking about is how the current standings misrepresent the actual picture of what's happening. I'm not proposing a gimmick, as you say, I'm proposing a more accurate way of representing a team's success.

Winning in a shootout isn't as good as winning in regulation, BECAUSE of the gimmick. 3 points for a regulation win, 2 for gimmick wins, 1 for gimmick losses, and nothing for losing in 60. And sorry if all those columns are confusing the lesserlights.

[Hobbes]

you can long for the old days all you want, but the fact is, shootouts are staying. 4 on 4 overtime is staying.

Sad, but unfortunately true. I don't see the league going back on this, especially given all the bitching and moaning about games ending in ties.

Winning in a shootout isn't as good as winning in regulation, BECAUSE of the gimmick. 3 points for a regulation win, 2 for gimmick wins, 1 for gimmick losses, and nothing for losing in 60. And sorry if all those columns are confusing the lesserlights.

This is probably the only way to make it even a remotely appetizing system. I would love to see a W-L system, but I'm a realist, and Bettman and his cronies are not going to get rid of anything that appears to make the NHL more appealing to a broader audience. Fact is, the shootout works for that, at least in Denver. Having heard some feedback from what I would call casual fans, they seem to like the shootout as a way to showcase both offensive talent and goaltending ability. Of course, it doesn't do either of these things, but I won't go into a rant. Casual fans also seem to like the fact that there are no more ties.

I dunno if this is as evident in a place like Calgary, or any other "major hockey" market for that matter, but in Denver, and probably in many other U.S. cities, the shootout has done it's job of making hockey more appealing to more people. This translates to more $$$$, which you know Bettman is never going to turn away from.

[JD]

I dunno if this is as evident in a place like Calgary, or any other "major hockey" market for that matter, but in Denver, and probably in many other U.S. cities, the shootout has done it's job of making hockey more appealing to more people. This translates to more $$$$, which you know Bettman is never going to turn away from.

I think generally people are OK with the shootout here. I was for it to begin with as I absolutely loathe ties, and I think a lot of the traditionalists are coming around after seeing how exciting it can be. Although the Flames haven't really been in a lot of shootouts and lose more than their share of them, people seem to at least be satisfied with their existence.

So long as we don't fuck with the playoffs.