Lv-Bills Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 playing .500 hockey or better. The new point system kinda blows. 24 of 30! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 I didn't realize that many teams were above .500. That's weird. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 I still say they should have a shoot out win column... Why throw them (SO wins) in with the rest of the regulation wins?... Still, 1/2 of the teams MAKE the playoffs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Not following the logic here. What does 24 of 30 teams playing above .500 have to do with the point system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zevo Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Not following the logic here. What does 24 of 30 teams playing above .500 have to do with the point system? It doesnt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 What are you talking about? In the east alone there are only 7 teams that have above a .500 record. The OT column is a loss. While the team gets a point for a regulation tie, that column is really OTL which stand for overtime loss. In the west there are 9 teams at or above .500. So out of 30 teams that's 16 with above .500. Which statisically is within the norm. In fact from the NHL.com website: OT = OT/Shootout losses (worth one point) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 What are you talking about? In the east alone there are only 7 teams that have above a .500 record. The OT column is a loss. While the team gets a point for a regulation tie, that column is really OTL which stand for overtime loss. In the west there are 9 teams at or above .500. So out of 30 teams that's 16 with above .500. Which statisically is within the norm. In fact from the NHL.com website: OT = OT/Shootout losses (worth one point) Winning percentage is total points/possible points. So for the winning percentage, an OTL counts as 0.5. If a team has more wins than regulation losses, they're above .500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Winning percentage is total points/possible points. So for the winning percentage, an OTL counts as 0.5. If a team has more wins than regulation losses, they're above .500. No a loss, is a loss. Just because you get a tie for regulation time tie, doesn't make it a non-loss. If you want to consier them ties then you have to do the same for Ot/shootout wins, consider them ties as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricojes Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Well it only makes sense that with the SO, there will be more teams over .500. Last year the regular season ended with 23 teams "over" .500. Since they get a point you can't truly count a SOL as a loss, but if you added those losses to the overall loss total you would have more teams under .500, and those are generally the teams on the bottom of the heap. This is the way its going to be with the new scoring system, the numbers will appear a bit skewed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 No a loss, is a loss. Just because you get a tie for regulation time tie, doesn't make it a non-loss. If you want to consier them ties then you have to do the same for Ot/shootout wins, consider them ties as well. Bang your head all you want, but I gave you how it's calculated. Why would a game where you gain 1 point be considered the same as a game where you get nothing? Anyway, in the end it really doesn't matter at all since all anyone cares about is the point totals. This "winning" percentage is just another way of quantifying that point total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 playing .500 hockey or better. The new point system kinda blows. 24 of 30! It started when they decided to emulate roller hockey with the shootouts, and then compounded it with no-touch-me rules after their player strike. I see that Crosby is the 2nd NHL teenager to score 200 points. Gretsky did it while getting hip checked, boarded, roughed, cross-checked, speared, tripped, gloved, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 why don't we change the euphemism from "winning percentage" to "points percentage"? Seems rather more correct IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 It started when they decided to emulate roller hockey with the shootouts, and then compounded it with no-touch-me rules after their player strike. I see that Crosby is the 2nd NHL teenager to score 200 points. Gretsky did it while getting hip checked, boarded, roughed, cross-checked, speared, tripped, gloved, etc. Bull. Sidney Crosby takes 10 times the abuse Gretzky EVER did and until last week had NO BACKUP. Gretzky always had Semenko, McSorely, etc. That says nothing of the significant increase in skill of the average NHL player (especially goalies) or the schemes they play vs the pond hockey of Wayne's heyday. Gretzky would be roadkill in today's NHL. He's admitted nearly as much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 I still say they should have a shoot out win column... Why throw them (SO wins) in with the rest of the regulation wins?... Still, 1/2 of the teams MAKE the playoffs... Which is just about right, as evidenced by the EIGHTH seed representing in the Western Conference in the Stanley Cup Finals last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Gretzky would be roadkill in today's NHL. He's admitted nearly as much. But if he was born in 1987 like Crosby, could he take it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Ok, I gave the shootout a chance as a fan...and my 2 cents say it is time to get rid of the shootout. Go back to the old system. The skills competiton is hurting teams from making/contending for the playoffs. Consider Florida and Boston, who are on both sides of this now: Florida is 1-7 is shootouts and are 6 points out....Boston is 8-3, 4 points out of the playoffs and I predict will get the 8th seed (3 games in hand with Carolina) Both are alive/hurt for different reasons because of the skills competition. Note that Edmonton qualified for the playoffs over the Canucks last year BECAUSE of the shootout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Ok, I gave the shootout a chance as a fan...and my 2 cents say it is time to get rid of the shootout. Go back to the old system. The skills competiton is hurting teams from making/contending for the playoffs. Consider Florida and Boston, who are on both sides of this now: Florida is 1-7 is shootouts and are 6 points out....Boston is 8-3, 4 points out of the playoffs and I predict will get the 8th seed (3 games in hand with Carolina) Both are alive/hurt for different reasons because of the skills competition. Note that Edmonton qualified for the playoffs over the Canucks last year BECAUSE of the shootout. Wait, you want to get rid of shootouts because they are making a difference in who will make the playoffs? Isn't that the whole point, to settle who gets 2 points and who doesn't? The shootouts rock. They are fun, exciting, and another thing that teams have to build a roster for. If a team neglects shootouts, its their own fault. you are blaming the shootouts when you should be blaming the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Gretzky would be roadkill in today's NHL. He's admitted nearly as much. He did? Consider the possibility that it's neither profitable, or good public relations, to be less than complimentary to the current smell of the NHL...and Wayne-O likes his cash and fame. Cash is king... No more Phil Espositos camping out, no more Robatille hip checks, No Jerry Korabs, no more Billy Smiths. Ice Follies with sticks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 Wait, you want to get rid of shootouts because they are making a difference in who will make the playoffs? Isn't that the whole point, to settle who gets 2 points and who doesn't? The shootouts rock. They are fun, exciting, and another thing that teams have to build a roster for. If a team neglects shootouts, its their own fault. you are blaming the shootouts when you should be blaming the team. I'm not blaming the team, I am blaming on teams fate being determined by a 'gimmick' or a skills competition....they play 65 minutes to the max and then have shootouts...I do not like PK's in soccer either...similar concept. Under the current system, yes, you have to have a decent shootout record or it can hurt you...but I just do not like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted March 5, 2007 Share Posted March 5, 2007 I'm not blaming the team, I am blaming on teams fate being determined by a 'gimmick' or a skills competition....they play 65 minutes to the max and then have shootouts...I do not like PK's in soccer either...similar concept. Under the current system, yes, you have to have a decent shootout record or it can hurt you...but I just do not like it. lol, gimmick. Shootouts are: 1.) Exciting 2.) Fun 3.) Fair 4.) The same for everyone If a team is not going to make the playoffs because of shootouts: 1.) They should be playing better hockey 2.) They, just like everyone else, knew shootouts were going to happen and needed to have some players for them. Detroit has won one shootout and is going to make the playoffs just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts