Hockey Points System
Posted: January 6th, 2009 | Author: saldarji | Filed under: sports | 1 Comment »Unfortunately, the Bruins have lost two games in a row. They had a fair number of chances in both games, but the puck just did not seem to go in. The Bruins are still on top of the conference at this point.
As a fan, I am really excited about this. However, as I have started to realize, the standings are a terrible indication of the actual strength of each of the teams. With many games being determined by OT shootouts, it is really difficult to say that the standings reflect the true strength of the team.
This issue is explored by Jeff Klein in his NYT Article.
Let’s examine the record of a random team, like the Rangers. The N.H.L. tells us they’re 20-11-2. Wow, that sounds good — 20 wins, 11 losses, and 2 “OTL,” which seems like ties or kind-of ties. They’re a powerhouse, and Rangers fans should be really happy!
The reality, of course, is that 9 of those 20 wins came via overtime or penalty shootout, and those 2 “ties” are actually losses in OT or PS. And, you know, in the playoffs there is no four-on-four overtime or penalty-shot contest … just hockey, with five skaters a side and no guaranteed points for being tied after 60 minutes.
There have been have a number of solutions proposed, including the three point system and a no points system. Regardless, I really wish there was a place to get a “normalized” version of the standings for hockey purists.
The three-point system would be best. W is 3, OTW is 2, OTL is 1, loss is zero. It still keeps the reward for trying to win in OT, rather than sitting back, and gives a huge incentive to try to win in regulation rather than play for overtime — a win is 3, while the best you can hope for in OT is 2 and maybe only 1. I don;t see any sort of flaw in this system.