Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Loser Points


Recommended Posts

Loser point needs to go. Im a fan of the 3 point system that im sure we've all heard of

Regulation win = 3 points

Overtime win = 2 points

Shootout win = 1 point

Loss = 0

Losers should not be rewarded

I used to feel similarly. Many a debate (over beers) about which system is better always had me saying regulation/overtime for 3 points, 1 point for shootout win. Now, I'd just like the loser point gone.

Win - 2 Points

OT/Shootout Win - 1 Point

OT Loss - 0 Points

Truth is though, as much as it hurts us in the standings, and definitively rewards fighting for OT and not necessarily the win in regulation, I like the sheer number playoff races around the league at this time of year and adapting a new 3 point system might remove many of those tight races.

If I weren't so tired I'd hit the standings and math up some numbers to see how the current teams would be faring with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Loser point needs to go. Im a fan of the 3 point system that im sure we've all heard of

Regulation win = 3 points

Overtime win = 2 points

Shootout win = 1 point

Loss = 0

Losers should not be rewarded

3 points for a win imo would end up being too many. Teams would end up with some ridiculously high points totals when the season is done.

I'm not a fan of the loser point too just because it's unfair to teams that don't lose often in OT/SO. I think this would be a good way to even things out.

W - 2 points

L - 0 points

OT/SO - 0.5 point

Think that'd be the perfect balance and level the playing field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been a big proponent of this:

Regulation Win - 3 points
OT/SO Win - 2 points
OT/SO Loss - 1 point

Regulation Loss - 0 points

This still gives the NHL some loser points to keep the standings closer but rewards teams for putting the effort in to get it done in regulation. I'm so tired of watching teams sit back with a couple minutes left in the 3rd so they can get that guaranteed point. Having 2 extra available in regulation would quell some of that thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The loser point a disgrace and shouldn't exist.

The Queen's shouldn't even be in playoff contention with their massive amount of loser points.

Awarding loser points is horrible for society. It teaches kids that losers get rewarded. The loser point is a joke.

But yes as you said it does bode well for us. But then again not really because losers like the King's and ducks who have what 12 13 loser points are benefiting in the standings from it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always been a big proponent of this:

Regulation Win - 3 points

OT/SO Win - 2 points

OT/SO Loss - 1 point

Regulation Loss - 0 points

This still gives the NHL some loser points to keep the standings closer but rewards teams for putting the effort in to get it done in regulation. I'm so tired of watching teams sit back with a couple minutes left in the 3rd so they can get that guaranteed point. Having 2 extra available in regulation would quell some of that thinking.

I’d love to see this implemented

Less teams would be playing the trap in the 3rd and hockey would be more exciting as a whole

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They'll keep the turtle-points if they're so sincere about their bloody expansion.

Too many times now, I've tuned in to think I'm watching a soccer match. They've stifled out the creativity/attack, by rewarding the plodding, unimaginative stragglers of this league. Employing aging, once mediocre players, as abundantly supplied coaches, tasked to over-defend, & extinguish any spark of an offensive-notion. How about a new rule, where all bench coaches cover their heads with a cloth bag, thereby preventing their real-time observance? Allow them to just stagger back & forth, barking out the same ol' tired doctrine...

BTW, Bettman is a subterranean mole rat. He's sold this game to US interests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there was no such thing as a loser point, we don't win the presidents trophy in 2012. Over the years the loser point has helped us way more than it hurt us. This is the first outright year where it has actually hurt us.

I'm all for keeping it.

There was one season we wouldn't have won the division if there was a 3 point system, I think it was 2007.

Although I am for the 3 point system, artificial parity is a disgrace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A 3 point system wouldn't work because it'd only make the current case worse.

W (3), OTL (2), SOL (1) would only give more options for loser points lol. Point is to get rid of it or minimize it. Either would take the loser point out completely, reduce it (half of), or make wins worth 3 points and keep loser point as 1 but that'd make the overall points accumulated over a year too high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

maybe one of you stat types should make us a chart that tells us what the actual difference the loser point has made for the standings since it has been implemented. so go back through the years of regulation standings and take away all the loser points for each team and tell us who would have made the playoffs as a result and what those standings would have been and compare the difference to the standings with the loser point results.

id be curious to know how much of a difference it actually makes in the overall grand scheme of things.

ive never liked the idea of the loser point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the people who say it needs to go. it was brought in so that teams would go for the win in O.T. so that there would be fewer ties. Tie games are a thing of the past since the shootout was brought in. It's keeping teams like L.A. and Winnipeg in a playoff race that they would otherwise be out of, but yet they get rewarded for losing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 points for a win imo would end up being too many. Teams would end up with some ridiculously high points totals when the season is done.

I'm not a fan of the loser point too just because it's unfair to teams that don't lose often in OT/SO. I think this would be a good way to even things out.

W - 2 points

L - 0 points

OT/SO - 0.5 point

Think that'd be the perfect balance and level the playing field.

No offense, but your math sucks. Your system would be even worse than the one you quoted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...