Your New NHL Standings

by Dirk Hoag on Feb 8, 2007 4:45 PM EST

Thanks to Chris for emailing me an article suggestion this time - in light of this morning's story (courtesy of Off Wing Opinion) that the NHL is considering a revision to the points system (awarding 3 points for a regulation time victory, and only 2 for a SO or OT win). While constant tinkering with the rules is something I find annoying, and the addition of another column to the NHL standings would make them even messier than they already are, this may not be such a bad idea. Far too often in the third period, teams which are tied have little incentive to try and win the game, at the risk of giving up a late goal and walking away with zero points. Too many coaches consider it better to play conservatively and wait for overtime, where chances can be taken more freely. I'm not blaming the coaches here - their job is to earn points in the standings, and given the current setup, boring 3rd periods can be the result of proper risk/reward analysis.

So what would the standings look like if there were an extra point at stake during regulation? With that much more reward available, we'd certainly see some different behavior in various games, but just looking at this season so far, here's how the New And Improved NHL Standings would shape up (New Pts = 3*Reg W + 2*OT W + 1*OT L):

Somewhat surprisingly, we really don't see too much change in today's standings as a result of awarding the additional point for a regulation win. San Jose, which was the last team in the NHL team to even go to the shootout this season, leaps ahead of Anaheim in the Pacific division, and Edmonton jumps ahead of Minnesota into the 8th playoff spot, but outside of that, we don't see any wholesale reordering of the divisions or conferences. What this analysis leaves out, obviously, is how the 3rd period of different games would have played out with the additional point on the line. Personally, I think it's an idea worth looking at further. We'll see what happens in the months ahead...

Tweet Comment 4 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Hey -- he ran with my idea! I'm really suprised that it doesn't make much of a difference. It is more of a "rich get richer" type of thing. I figured the teams like Minnesota, Florida, Boston, Atlanta -- any team that has been to overtime a lot would be 'penalized' more. Like you said, there's no way to measure any more incresed intensity that these new rule changes would have brought about, but it sure would make the last few minutes of a lot of games more interesting.

Any chance we could see how the playoffs would have looked last year?

by Chris on Feb 8, 2007 6:06 PM EST reply actions

I can put last year's adjusted standings up tomorrow morning... thanks for the inspiration!

by The Forechecker on Feb 8, 2007 9:18 PM EST reply actions

I like it!

Another thing I would like to see is a 1-on-1 period before the shootout. Five minutes, no substitution between whistles, icing gives the player a free entry into the zone, any penalty is a penalty shot. Real wide open end-to-end hockey.

by Anonymous on Feb 13, 2007 9:19 AM EST reply actions