|
|
Post by Habit on Jun 9, 2005 3:00:10 GMT -5
With all the focus on the CBA and how to improve the game of hockey with bigger nets, smaller equipment for goalies, the "Bowman" line and changing the lines, I just had a very "Weird" thought: Get rid of the current point system and go for a new one.
Say goodbye to 2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie and go for a "Goal Driven" point system. If you score 6 goals on a game, you get 6 points. If you scaore 2 goals in a game, you get 2 points. Montreal beats Boston 5-4, the habs get 5 points, Boston gets 4.
Would this open up the game or make it more defensive?
If this was the solution then the following would have been the final standing of last year:
GP W L T OTL GF
Ottawa 82 43 23 10 6 262
Tampa Bay 82 46 22 8 6 245
Toronto 82 45 24 10 3 242
NY Islanders 82 38 29 11 4 237
Philadelphia 82 40 21 15 6 229
Buffalo 82 37 34 7 4 220
Atlanta 82 33 37 8 4 214
New Jersey 82 43 25 12 2 213
Boston 82 41 19 15 7 209
Montreal 82 41 30 7 4 208
NY Rangers 82 27 40 7 8 206
Pittsburgh 82 23 47 8 4 190
Florida 82 28 35 15 4 188
Washington 82 23 46 10 3 186
Carolina 82 28 34 14 6 172
Central
Team GP W L T OTL GF
Detroit 82 48 21 11 2 255
Colorado 82 40 22 13 7 236
Vancouver 82 43 24 10 5 235
Edmonton 82 36 29 12 5 221
San Jose 82 43 21 12 6 219
Nashville 82 38 29 11 4 216
Los Angeles 82 28 29 16 9 205
Calgary 82 42 30 7 3 200
Dallas 82 41 26 13 2 194
St. Louis 82 39 30 11 2 191
Chicago 82 20 43 11 8 188
Minnesota 82 30 29 20 3 188
Phoenix 82 22 36 18 6 188
Anaheim 82 29 35 10 8 184
Columbus 82 25 45 8 4 177
|
|
|
|
Post by Rimmer on Jun 9, 2005 6:57:09 GMT -5
so neither team has any incentive for a win whatsoever? what stops them from pulling a goalie for an extra skater and finishing a game, say, 100:99?
I would rather go for a system that rewards winning by awarding 3 pts for a win and 1 pt for a tie. no OTs in a regular season. maybe have a shootout in case of a tie with the winning team earning an extra point.
R.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 9, 2005 11:13:20 GMT -5
If the objective is increase scoring to pander to US NASCAR fans; let them watch basketball. Scoring in hockey is much more meaningful because there are fewer points scored. Some of us like to see a goaltender earn a shutout, a close 1-0 game or a well played defensive battle. Players like Bob Gainey, Guy Carbonneau and Doug Jarvis didn't challenge for the scoring title but were a treat to watch and valuable to their teams.
Don't change the game, change the league president.
|
|
|
|
Post by Forum Ghost on Jun 9, 2005 17:27:05 GMT -5
Full marks for creativity Habit ;D ... but I can't say that I'd be a fan of this kind of points system.
Although your idea could encourage scoring, it does have the potential to become defensively stifling as teams who lack scoring punch will be forced to prevent the opposition from getting goals (or points) so that they can keep up with them in the standings. Especially if the opposition is a division rival.
But my position on this whole "lack of goals" problem in the NHL has more to do with the lack of scoring opportunities. To me, an exciting hockey game is one that has a high number of scoring chances. Scoring chances can produce one of two exciting plays. It can either produce a goal or it can produce a great save. A win-win situation in terms of entertainment. Also, you can't score a goal without having a scoring chance. Increase the number of chances and it should, theoretically, increase the number of goals. In the free-wheeling 80's there was more room for scoring chances so it was no surprise that there was a high number of goals.
IMO, a 2-1 game with tons of scoring chances and great saves is way more exciting to watch than a 7-6 game with not too much of either.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 10, 2005 5:16:16 GMT -5
Full marks for creativity Habit ;D ... but I can't say that I'd be a fan of this kind of points system... But my position on this whole "lack of goals" problem in the NHL has more to do with the lack of scoring opportunities. To me, an exciting hockey game is one that has a high number of scoring chances. Scoring chances can produce one of two exciting plays. It can either produce a goal or it can produce a great save. A win-win situation in terms of entertainment.... IMO, a 2-1 game with tons of scoring chances and great saves is way more exciting to watch than a 7-6 game with not too much of either. Yeth. And I like Rimmer's suggestion for awarding points for the standing. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 10, 2005 12:22:51 GMT -5
I vaguely remember listening on the radio to the last game of the season between the Canadiens and Blackhawks around 1970 where the Habs could clinch a playoff berth by winning, tying or scoring a certain number of goals. (missing the playoffs was unacceptable then) The Hab's pulled their goaltender with half the third period to play and allowed 10 goals. It was a travesty and they didn't make the playoffs.
Rewarding goals scored instead of winning is not a good idea and is not hockey.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habit on Jun 10, 2005 22:42:20 GMT -5
I vaguely remember listening on the radio to the last game of the season between the Canadiens and Blackhawks around 1970 where the Habs could clinch a playoff berth by winning, tying or scoring a certain number of goals. (missing the playoffs was unacceptable then) The Hab's pulled their goaltender with half the third period to play and allowed 10 goals. It was a travesty and they didn't make the playoffs. Rewarding goals scored instead of winning is not a good idea and is not hockey. Hey, I said it was a "Weird Idea".  |
|
|
|
Post by Habit on Jun 10, 2005 22:45:02 GMT -5
I'm just throwing out ideas here...
2 points for a win
1 point for a tie
...but...
Score more than 5 goals in your win and get 3 points?
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 18, 2005 16:57:12 GMT -5
I vaguely remember listening on the radio to the last game of the season between the Canadiens and Blackhawks around 1970 where the Habs could clinch a playoff berth by winning, tying or scoring a certain number of goals. (missing the playoffs was unacceptable then) The Hab's pulled their goaltender with half the third period to play and allowed 10 goals. It was a travesty and they didn't make the playoffs. Rewarding goals scored instead of winning is not a good idea and is not hockey. You had to bring this up.  I remember listening on the radio to this game. It was embarassing. I was living in Montreal then and all the Habs fans I knew ( just about everybody) were embarassed. The worst part was the next day. Sitting in the high school cafeteria and listening to a friend of mine rib me about the Rangers getting the last spot. He was the only Ranger fan I knew then and is still the only Ranger fan I know of now. |
|
|
|
Post by roke on Jun 19, 2005 1:36:39 GMT -5
I vaguely remember listening on the radio to the last game of the season between the Canadiens and Blackhawks around 1970 where the Habs could clinch a playoff berth by winning, tying or scoring a certain number of goals. (missing the playoffs was unacceptable then) The Hab's pulled their goaltender with half the third period to play and allowed 10 goals. It was a travesty and they didn't make the playoffs. Rewarding goals scored instead of winning is not a good idea and is not hockey. If I recall correctly Montreal could have made the playoffs had a team (Detroit?) who rested a lot of their starters had beaten another team (Rangers?) but they ended up losing. I could be compeltely wrong about this but I'll dig out a couple of my hockey books and look it up to see whether I'm dillusional or that my memory has not failed me at this time. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Jun 19, 2005 10:34:15 GMT -5
I vaguely remember listening on the radio to the last game of the season between the Canadiens and Blackhawks around 1970 where the Habs could clinch a playoff berth by winning, tying or scoring a certain number of goals. (missing the playoffs was unacceptable then) The Hab's pulled their goaltender with half the third period to play and allowed 10 goals. It was a travesty and they didn't make the playoffs. Rewarding goals scored instead of winning is not a good idea and is not hockey. If I recall correctly Montreal could have made the playoffs had a team (Detroit?) who rested a lot of their starters had beaten another team (Rangers?) but they ended up losing. I could be compeltely wrong about this but I'll dig out a couple of my hockey books and look it up to see whether I'm dillusional or that my memory has not failed me at this time. You are right about this. Detroit played somebody and rested their stars. I can't remember the details though. ( I have blanked it out of mind). |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jun 19, 2005 11:55:35 GMT -5
1969-70 Standing - NHLE
Chicago Blackhawks 76 45 22 9 0 99 250 170
Boston Bruins 76 40 17 19 0 99 277 216
Detroit Red Wings 76 40 21 15 0 95 246 199
New-York Rangers 76 38 22 16 0 92 246 189
Montreal Canadiens 76 38 22 16 0 92 244 201
Toronto Maple Leafs 76 29 34 13 0 71 222 242
First tie-breaker, goals for. Oh well. Finished ahead of the Leafs, though.
|
|
