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

[Discussion] Should the NHL give 3 points for regulation win?


Recommended Posts

I first read this article on hockeybuzz, and was ready for a good laugh, but I ended up being moderately surprised. 

In Summary, it's argued that the NHL should award 3 points each game:

  • 3 points for a regulation win
  • 2 points for an overtime win, with 1 point going to the losing team

 

I for one, think this would go a long way to make the NHL exciting, especially in the 3rd period. We see it consistently that teams will go idle in the last few minutes of a game to ensure that they get a point. With this 3 point system, we should see more exciting hockey for the entirety of a game. Obviously, teams would still get a point for losing, but you also lose a point for an overtime win compared to a regulation win. With a 3-point system we should see players battle hard for a win with games tied in the last couple of minutes. It would make the last minute of hockey in a close game the most exciting part, rather than often leaving it in a lull.

What would you prefer? A revamped 3-point system per game, or stick with the same? 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I firmly believe that as long as you still reward an overtime/shootout win as the same as a regular regulation win, teams will drag out games as much as they can to the final minutes to chance getting an extra point.

 

I'd be interested to see the stats as how many NHL games this year have gone to extra time/shootout.  It seems more and more games are heading there now, which shows a lack of urgency within the first 60 mins to win. 

 

As I said in another thread, 3 points should be awarded for a regulation win, 2 points for an overtime win, and 1 point for a shootout win, no points altogether for a loss.  Doing so will create far more urgency in teams to win in 60 mins.  Perhaps you see more goals, more errors in teams games as the game opens up to maximize the 3 points.  I just hate how teams are awarded 2 points for a shootout win for an individual based result. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the introduction of loser points, I have always been in favour of, and often advocated for, the three points for every game system.  But it's never going to happen.

 

The current system keeps teams mathematically in the playoff race longer.  It's artificial parity and the NHL owners love it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it was okay back when there were ties, as both teams would essentially lose a point, however, we now have the shootout, so someone is guaranteed that extra point. Since we won't go back to ties, I think a 3 point system would be good, as long as OT and Shootout wins are both worth two and an OT and shootout loss is each worth one (I've seen suggestions for a 0pt shootout loss, but I could see teams purposely losing in OT to get a point).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Yes.  And keep playing OT until a winner.  Ditch the shootout altogether.

I'd be on board with this since the introduction of 3 on 3 overtime. Its very exciting and the shootout is often anti-climactic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I would.. give 1 point to each team that makes it into OT. then only the team that wins the game gets a 2nd point. it would make OT much more dynamic and all out. if its a draw in OT it finishes as a tie and no one gets the extra points. it would definitely put pressure on teams not to run the clock.

 

OTW - Score in 5 minutes 3 on 3 OT. (Awarded 1 extra point)

OTL - Get scored on 5 minutes 3 on 3 OT (No point awarded)

OTT (tie) - No goals scored in 5 minutes of 3 on 3 OT (No points awarded)

 

This puts the pressure on teams to close out the games. 3 on 3 hockey in that framework will be fast and full of chances. Because.. if you don't score you lose even if you don't let one in.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Fateless said:

I honestly don't know why this hasn't been implemented. The three point system is superior in every way to the existing two point system. 

 

The current system keeps teams mathematically in the playoff race longer.  It's artificial parity and the NHL owners love it.  It doesn't matter to the owners whether a three point system is better or not, it's all about technically staying in the playoff race.

 

Just watch, I predict that with expansion and a new CBA, the owners will find a way to increase the number of playoff teams too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, goalie13 said:

The loser point and new OT formats have already done that.

Not to mention forward passing in all three zones. We already have asterisks by Esposito's shutout record to exclude those early days.

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...