Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

The more shootouts I see, the more I support a 3 point win system.


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

Poll: The more shootouts I see, the more I support a 3 point win system. (41 member(s) have cast votes)

Should the NHL adopt a 3 point win in regulation and OT, then split the points 2-1 in the shootout?

  1. Yes (36 votes [87.80%])

    Percentage of vote: 87.80%

  2. No (5 votes [12.20%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.20%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,754 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:29 PM

I am not in opposition to shootouts, but I don't think that a shootout win should have as much impact on the standings as a regulation or OT win. I realize that adopting a 3 point win system will make regular season statistical comparisons less relevant, but I do think goals during the game need to be rewarded more than the shootout. I notice overtime looks rather defensive, and I think that this would create a little more urgency and excitement without sacrificing league parity.

What do you think?
  • 0

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

MirandaKerr.jpg
2 0 1 5 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#2 Kass9

Kass9

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,847 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 07

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:30 PM

For the Canucks' sake, I voted yeah!
  • 0

#3 SOB for MVP

SOB for MVP

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,596 posts
  • Joined: 23-January 10

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:31 PM

I agree, ROW should be rewarded over the shootout
  • 0

Posted Image

sig by -VC-


#4 Where's Wellwood

Where's Wellwood

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,299 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 10

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:34 PM

I like it.

That way, all the games would be 3 point games, rather than having some 2 point games and some 3 point games like it is now. Plus, losing in the shootout and only getting 1 of 3 points is how it should be. You get something but it's less than a half win. Also, winning in the shootout isn't worth as much as a regulation/OT win.
  • 0

14diqh3.jpg
Credit to khalifawiz501 for the sig.
"There is a time and place for everything but not now."

http://forum.canucks...a-bros-game-on/


#5 n00bxQb

n00bxQb

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,967 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 09

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:35 PM

It should just be:

3 points: Regulation win
2 points: Overtime/shootout win
1 points: Overtime/shootout loss
0 points: Regulation loss

ROW still used as first tie-breaker

Or just bring back the tie after 20 minutes of overtime.
  • 3

#6 Sea2Sky Country

Sea2Sky Country

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,084 posts
  • Joined: 02-April 09

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:37 PM

as canucks fans, I'm sure we all wish that the concept of the 'shootout' was never conceived, never existed in the first place and the whole idea was wiped from the face of this earth!

however, the whole sideshow of the shootout is good for the league, it's entertaining and fun, and is here to stay. i don't see the league switching up the points format, rewarding 3 points for a regulation/OT win would get too confusing for fans, make the standings way too unpredictable ... no other pro sports league has four possible point amounts (3, 2, 1, 0) a team can walk away from a game with.
  • 0

#7 Pineapples

Pineapples

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,427 posts
  • Joined: 15-June 10

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:47 PM

I like that idea a lot actually. Not only does it reward ROW wins over shootout wins, it also means fewer teams will make the playoffs because of a bunch of OT loses. Like LA did last year I believe.
  • 0

Pineapple_jumps.gifPineapple_jumps.gif

 


#8 goalie13

goalie13

    Osgoodian One

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,144 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:49 PM

It should just be:

3 points: Regulation win
2 points: Overtime/shootout win
1 points: Overtime/shootout loss
0 points: Regulation loss

ROW still used as first tie-breaker


I prefer this solution. Teams should be rewarded for finishing their opponent off in regulation.

It's likely to stay the way it is though as it creates false parity and keeps teams in the playoff race longer.
  • 1
Posted Image

#9 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,128 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 20 February 2013 - 04:00 PM

I agree 100%. It's just retarded the way it is now, and if you think that's bad wait until there are about 10 games left. Pretty much every other game will end in ties.

Only in the NHL could you lose every single hockey game all year and still make the playoffs. This league is dumb, it actually rewards the teams for tying as the game becomes worth 3 points instead of 2.
  • 0

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#10 mau5trap

mau5trap

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,903 posts
  • Joined: 03-May 09

Posted 20 February 2013 - 04:08 PM

Hate the shootout. I guess I'm a little biased as a Nucks fan, but still. I don't like the concept that a game (or sometimes when theres more at stake) can come down to 3 or 4 shooters that have fancy skills. Hockey is a team game.

Maybe 5 minutes 4-4 and if thats not resolved 3-3?
  • 1

Posted Image


#11 *vInTaGe*

*vInTaGe*

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,408 posts
  • Joined: 30-November 06

Posted 20 February 2013 - 04:13 PM

I'm definitely in favor of the three point system, especially if we're keeping the shootout.
  • 0

Posted Image


#12 Jägermeister

Jägermeister

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,217 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 12

Posted 20 February 2013 - 04:23 PM

2 points for a win, 0 points for a loss.
I don't care how long it takes a team to lose, they shouldn't be rewarded for it.
  • 1

Jagermeister.jpg


#13 NordicNinja

NordicNinja

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 923 posts
  • Joined: 10-February 03

Posted 20 February 2013 - 04:47 PM

It should just be:

3 points: Regulation win
2 points: Overtime/shootout win
1 points: Overtime/shootout loss
0 points: Regulation loss

ROW still used as first tie-breaker


This.

3 point system is absolutely the way to go. Until that system is adopted, the so called "parity" in the league is a joke. This system will improve the game and give teams something to play for within regulation time instead of playing it safe and easing their way into overtime. Anybody with half a brain can see this.
  • 0

#14 Riviera82

Riviera82

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,706 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 11

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:12 PM

No to the 3 point win. It should go back to the way it was back in the day, get rid of the circus (shootout), 2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss in reg or OT.
  • 1

#15 hudson bay rules

hudson bay rules

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,386 posts
  • Joined: 03-November 10

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:21 PM

HAHAHA

I voted yes and then realized an overtime loss would give the looser nothing in yer system so I deleted it because I don't agree.

3 for a regulation win and 2 for a SO/OT win with a point given to the SO/OT looser. 3 points given in every game no matter what.
  • 0
I love rock and roll, just put another dime in the juice box baby.

#16 RyanKeslord17

RyanKeslord17

    Canucks First-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,895 posts
  • Joined: 22-January 11

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:21 PM

2 points for a win, 0 points for a loss.
I don't care how long it takes a team to lose, they shouldn't be rewarded for it.


Ouch. I think that's a little harsh. Canucks for example would be 8-7 then.
  • 0
Posted Image

#17 Edlerberry

Edlerberry

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,245 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 12

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:51 PM

Shootout should be extended to 5 shooters minimum, as well as a 3 point system.

Overtime wins should be 3 points and 0 points for the losing team, just like it is in the playoffs.
  • 0
July 7-2013

Toronto will take a step back next year.
Feel free to quote me.


July 8-2013

Wow I can't believe peoples replies...
Im done here. You people are disgusting..


#18 Kevin Biestra

Kevin Biestra

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,869 posts
  • Joined: 31-October 08

Posted 20 February 2013 - 05:57 PM

Like basketball and baseball. 2 points for a win, whether it's in regulation or overtime. 0 points for a loss, whether it's in regulation or overtime.

What is the point in providing a weird incentive to go to overtime?

There's 82 games in a season. People won't jump off bridges if the team has nothing to show for a regular season game that went past 60 minutes.
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image


Biestra speaks. Biestra educates.

Let Canucks management know you want King Richard Brodeur in the Ring of Honour with no further delay! He's been retired for 25 years!

http://forum.canucks...e-king-richard/

#19 Kevin Biestra

Kevin Biestra

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,869 posts
  • Joined: 31-October 08

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:04 PM

Ouch. I think that's a little harsh. Canucks for example would be 8-7 then.


It's not that harsh. It's how virtually every major sporting league does things.

Baseball doesn't give points for losing in extra innings. Football doesn't give extra points if there is overtime, or basketball...

It's really just a weird hockey anomaly in the last 15 years or so that makes the league look more bush and makes it impossible for casual followers to decipher the standings.
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image


Biestra speaks. Biestra educates.

Let Canucks management know you want King Richard Brodeur in the Ring of Honour with no further delay! He's been retired for 25 years!

http://forum.canucks...e-king-richard/

#20 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:13 PM

If regulation ends in a tie you should get one full period of overtime to settle it and that's it, if no one scores then it ends in a tie with one point each.

Nice and simple.

Edited by Gumballthechewy, 20 February 2013 - 08:52 PM.

  • 2

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#21 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,754 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:15 PM

It should just be:

3 points: Regulation win
2 points: Overtime/shootout win
1 points: Overtime/shootout loss
0 points: Regulation loss

ROW still used as first tie-breaker

Or just bring back the tie after 20 minutes of overtime.


To be honest, I prefer 3 point OT win, and 0 point OT loss, but yeah, that's the thought.
  • 0

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

MirandaKerr.jpg
2 0 1 5 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#22 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,754 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:19 PM

I think if you score a goal to win the game, then you should get all the win points. Conversely, if you let in a goal to lose a game, then it should be 0 points. 1 pt OT losses don't exactly create urgency. If you make it to the shootout, then split the points, but if you lose while playing hockey, then you should lose, and vice versa for a win.

Edited by WiDeN, 20 February 2013 - 06:19 PM.

  • 0

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

MirandaKerr.jpg
2 0 1 5 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#23 TheRick

TheRick

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Joined: 05-June 11

Posted 20 February 2013 - 06:53 PM

It should just be:

3 points: Regulation win
2 points: Overtime/shootout win
1 points: Overtime/shootout loss
0 points: Regulation loss

ROW still used as first tie-breaker

Or just bring back the tie after 20 minutes of overtime.


On the right track but I would go with this:

2 points: Regulation/Overtime win
1 point: Shootout win
0 points: For simply losing!

Personally 3 points would be too much as it is and more 4 on 4 overtime is needed as I find it more entertaining then shootouts. I would extend it to 10 minutes of Overtime!

Edited by TheRick, 20 February 2013 - 07:17 PM.

  • 1

#24 Vansicle

Vansicle

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,610 posts
  • Joined: 24-August 09

Posted 20 February 2013 - 11:11 PM

No to the 3 point win. It should go back to the way it was back in the day, get rid of the circus (shootout), 2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss in reg or OT.

This.
  • 0

Snake Doctor, on 23 May 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:snapback.png

Miller is not on our list. It's Lack as our #1. There is no reason we would have traded both Schnieder and Luongo if we never intended to give Lack the #1 starting job.  Furthermore, the salary and term Miller is looking for is not in our favor.

 


#25 TheRick

TheRick

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90 posts
  • Joined: 05-June 11

Posted 21 February 2013 - 12:06 AM

Also having the 3 point win system could easily end up breaking the 1976 - 77 montreal canadiens single season points record of 132!
  • 0

#26 brewdog

brewdog

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 356 posts
  • Joined: 30-June 12

Posted 21 February 2013 - 12:11 AM

I would rather see fewer games go to shootouts by encouraging more action in OT. 3-on-3 or no offsides might help with that.
  • 0

#27 ajhockey

ajhockey

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,683 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 10

Posted 21 February 2013 - 02:58 AM

As much as I don't like drastic changes, this one would really be for the better.

Also, I don't like the idea of going back to ties. I like having a winner each game. That said, I'd agree that the amount of shootouts should be reduced to make them more of a rarity and thus more exciting.

Edited by ajhockey, 21 February 2013 - 03:01 AM.

  • 0

14ndb35.jpg
Credit to -Vintage Canuck- for the awesome sig!

"Gino, Gino, Gino, Gino!"
Rest In Peace, Rypien, Demitra, and Bourdon


#28 Lychees

Lychees

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,155 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 07

Posted 21 February 2013 - 04:41 AM

Yeah.... especially with the 48 game season, teams are more and more reluctant to push for the win when it's crunch time, and are satisfied as long as they get the 1 point.

But if we'll see it? Doubt it.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.