September 12th, 2013, 01:13 AM #11
I don't mind the 10 minute OT. 4 on 4 then 3 on 3. But then I wanted them to go to 4 on 4 all the time to reduce all the clogging.
September 12th, 2013, 07:24 AM #12
2 Points for a Win, 1 Point for OT Win, 0 Points for a Tie/OT loss. No Shootouts.
September 12th, 2013, 10:25 AM #13
That could create some logistical problems for teams on a back-to-back. Or could you imagine a never ending OT game on a day where Staples is double booked?
Originally Posted by Birdman
I've never understood why they have never even broached the subject of the 3-2-1 point format. They've already messed up the historical comparison by adding the loser point, so just make it a legit system.
Last edited by Pucker25; September 12th, 2013 at 10:27 AM.
September 12th, 2013, 12:57 PM #14
The "historical" comparison went down the drain when they added more games to the season after expansion....45 years ago. It's meaningless....but...in fact you CAN compare using percentages etc etc.
Originally Posted by Pucker25
I agree with the above statement of why they actually needed the SO in the first place. I never saw any kind of data they said there were more games that went to OT that ended in ties than in the past. Of course, even if it was true the reasoning would probably have been that there were less goals being scored overall after the mid-90s. That would translate to more games ending in ties.
I think they just ought to scrap the whole damn thing...play 10 min of 5 on 5 and call it a tie at the end. However, if they get rid of the loser point the standings won't be so crowded at the of the season and Buttman would have to quit running around saying how "balanced" the league is....which in reality is only an artificial result of the OT system they have.
September 12th, 2013, 02:49 PM #15
Here's the perfect system....
2 points for a win.
0 points for a loss.
AND HERE'S THE TWIST.... you ready for this? It's genius.
1 point to both teams for a tie.
And it's not a "Loser Point" it's a "Bonus Point". The team that wins the bogus OT or shootout is the one awarded the unearned point, not the team that played 60 minutes of regular hockey to a tie.
September 12th, 2013, 04:05 PM #16
Here's the problem I have with ties: Soccer has ties.
And soccer sucks.
Therefore, by the transitive property, which is a mathematical law, Ties suck.
There is no greater logic than that.
And I still don't see how 3 on 3 is any less 'gimmicky' than the shootout. Penalty shots are FAR more common than 3 on 3 hockey.
But yes, a 3-point system only makes sense at this point.
Last edited by FishMonger; September 12th, 2013 at 04:07 PM.
September 12th, 2013, 05:25 PM #17
Ties should suck and should hurt both teams. Thus no team should get a point.
2/3s in agreement with Dr. Naysay.
September 12th, 2013, 07:04 PM #18
September 13th, 2013, 09:22 AM #19
Rarely. Does it even happen every year? Five per decade in the league I could handle. 5 per week? Not so much.
Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay
Also, I noticed you didn't try to disprove my mathematical proof, so, you know. Point Fish.
September 13th, 2013, 09:49 AM #20
Apparently, Grumpy Cat supports ties. You're on the side of Grumpy Cat.
Originally Posted by empire
The evidence keeps piling up.