weeoiler Posted October 22, 2018 Report Share Posted October 22, 2018 Hey Boys ... Just doing a quick survey of the Capwise world of how GMs feel about the current points system in the NHL. Choose one of the three options, or feel free to propose your own idea. 1) Keep it the same 2) 2 points for Regulation or Overtime win, 1 point for Shoot-out win, 0 points for the loser. 3) 3 points for Regulation win, 2 points for an Overtime win, 1 point for Shoot-out win, 0 points for the loser. Stay classy, Capwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarry85 Posted October 22, 2018 Report Share Posted October 22, 2018 Option 3 gets my vote, with a slight amendment. Biggest thing in my mind is that games should all be worth the same amount of points, rather than having OT games being worth one more point, as the current points system stands. Instead of one point for the shootout win though, any win after regulation is 2 points and Bettman gets to keep the loser point in play for teams losing after regulation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Festivus Posted October 22, 2018 Report Share Posted October 22, 2018 Option 3 with the amendment Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huntz71 Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 (edited) 2 points for any win and only 1 point for the shootout lose Edited October 23, 2018 by Da Leafs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 (edited) No matter what we want or what would be a much better system. Fact is the current system keeps ( beside a few exception from top and bottom team) everyone in the mix until mid march which is money in the bank for the nhl. Exemple there was 9 point gap from washington 6th overall to dallas 19th overall or somthing like that Edited October 23, 2018 by Vegeta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RegDunlop Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 I'm going with option 4 - eliminate the shootout, keep 3 on 3, bring back ties, and have two points for a win and one for a tie. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 Just now, RegDunlop said: I'm going with option 4 - eliminate the shootout, keep 3 on 3, bring back ties, and have two points for a win and one for a tie. Agreed. Maybe have a 7min 3on 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 Shootout is boring 3on 3 ia more hype Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RegDunlop Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 Just now, Vegeta said: Agreed. Maybe have a 7min 3on 3 I like it - actually make it 10! That would give teams an incentive to win in regulation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djb738 Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 I don't like giving a point for a shoot out or over time loss.....it's almost like giving a kid a participation trophy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavz25 Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 13 minutes ago, RegDunlop said: I'm going with option 4 - eliminate the shootout, keep 3 on 3, bring back ties, and have two points for a win and one for a tie. Im going option 4, i miss when two goalies can get shutouts, sometime neither team deserve to lose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeoiler Posted October 23, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 Love to eliminate the loser point somehow. Has to be the only league in pro-sports that awards a point for losing a game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RegDunlop Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, Chavz25 said: Im going option 4, i miss when two goalies can get shutouts, sometime neither team deserve to lose That's how I like to see it. Of course, others may see it differently and that's fine too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 I say 2 points for a win, and change OT to 10 minutes 3-on-3. Tie after that (one point each). No loser point. 3-on-3 is super exciting... fans love it, and players don't seem to hate it. I also like that it's a little bit closer to real game action, as compared to the shootout. Plus you'll almost always have a winner after 10 minutes of it. Ties will be extremely rare. Of course, I'm also a fan of shortening the season to 65 games. Playing 10 minutes of 3-on-3 in a brutal 82-game season is probably asking a lot. I never realized how much of a hockey progressive I am... 65 game season, ban fighting, switch to the olympic size rink... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeoiler Posted October 23, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 You had me with everything up to "watching less hockey" har! Everyone says I'm nuts for wanting Olympic sized rinks. You had me at enlarge, James. You had me at enlarge... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralphdog Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 (edited) Ya you 6 minutes ago, James said: Of course, I'm also a fan of shortening the season to 65 games. I was with you all the way, and then you went rogue. Less hockey??? Youve clearly gone mad. Edited October 23, 2018 by Ralphdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jawlesscdizzle Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 I'd agree. Makes games more relevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 Dont switch to olympic rink. Its awful to watch the defense is played so passively its disgusting, none existant forcheck its the jacque lemaire trap city. 65 game is short. But id see a a 74ish shcheduel On a 32 team league have the top 9 from each conference make the playoff and 1 wildcard series best of 3 in each conference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RegDunlop Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 (edited) 15 minutes ago, James said: I say 2 points for a win, and change OT to 10 minutes 3-on-3. Tie after that (one point each). No loser point. 3-on-3 is super exciting... fans love it, and players don't seem to hate it. I also like that it's a little bit closer to real game action, as compared to the shootout. Plus you'll almost always have a winner after 10 minutes of it. Ties will be extremely rare. Of course, I'm also a fan of shortening the season to 65 games. Playing 10 minutes of 3-on-3 in a brutal 82-game season is probably asking a lot. I never realized how much of a hockey progressive I am... 65 game season, ban fighting, switch to the olympic size rink... While we’re at it, disband the CHL (make college the only path to the pros) and expand to Helsinki, Stockholm, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Berlin, and Prague. A man can dream... But to get back on topic, I really am strongly in favour of bringing ties back. Edited October 23, 2018 by RegDunlop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, weeoiler said: You had me with everything up to "watching less hockey" har! Everyone says I'm nuts for wanting Olympic sized rinks. You had me at enlarge, James. You had me at enlarge... Bigger rink leads to super passive defensive play. You dont want that trust me. The game just ends up beeing cycle plays nobody over extend its terrible. Also no more hits since you take ur self out of the play so badly. I play 3on 3 hockey on zone sized ice its MUCH more offensive. Big ice = tight play Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 I think the skill level of NHL players would keep the game exciting on the olympic rink. We think of olympic-rink hockey as passive and wimpy because we only really see it with european leagues or exhibition games. But I thought it was plenty exciting in the Sochi games. Plus you'd have so many fewer injuries and concussions... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 Well in sochi canada was winning 2-1 vs latvian teams. It wasnt really exciting beaide usa russia game Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeoiler Posted October 23, 2018 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 The NHL rinks are shrinking every year due to players and equipment getting larger. Concussions are a major legal issue in the league, and guys are just running into each other cuz there's no where else to go. By the playoffs, we're looking at smash mouth hockey again where a group of guys are pushing the puck toward the net against another group of guys. The larger ice creates the room the leagues craves, let's the skilled players do their thing, and will force players/coaches to do the same. I'd prefer that to the league making drastic changes to the integrity of the game, like regulation 4 on 4 or something like that. They can set min/maxes for nhl rink sizes, and let individual teams do what they want. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavz25 Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 i see this has gone away from point system to rink size debate. just throwing my two cents in on that. No owner will give up 2000 of their highest priced seats just to make the rink bigger. So no matter how much we all would want it its never going to happen, Bettman works for the owners, and will never make that change to the NHL 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeta Posted October 23, 2018 Report Share Posted October 23, 2018 (edited) 40 minutes ago, weeoiler said: The NHL rinks are shrinking every year due to players and equipment getting larger. Concussions are a major legal issue in the league, and guys are just running into each other cuz there's no where else to go. By the playoffs, we're looking at smash mouth hockey again where a group of guys are pushing the puck toward the net against another group of guys. The larger ice creates the room the leagues craves, let's the skilled players do their thing, and will force players/coaches to do the same. I'd prefer that to the league making drastic changes to the integrity of the game, like regulation 4 on 4 or something like that. They can set min/maxes for nhl rink sizes, and let individual teams do what they want. The thing is it doeant give skilled players any real room, since the opposing team plays tighter then on a normal rink to prevent any sizable gap basicly defense over compensate/simplified their play. On a smaller rink u can over extend a little bit to open up the play because the only way way to abuse that is a perfect play. On a big rink you have more space so defenseman play much more safer. Think of it this way because its bigger its actually smaller. Edited October 23, 2018 by Vegeta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.