Find solution
How to get from Philadelphia to Toronto?

Should the NHL get rid of the loser point for overtime losses?

  • Here are the standings as of around 12:30am 3/27/27 cst. At the end I subtracted the points they receive for overtime losses to get a total without. Atlantic GP W L OTL Pts x-NY Rangers 75 47 21 7 101 - 7 = 94 x-Pittsburgh 75 47 22 6 100 - 6 = 94 x-Philadelphia 76 44 24 8 96 -8 = 88 New Jersey 76 42 28 6 90 -6 = 84 NY Islanders 75 31 33 11 73 -11 = 62 Northeast GP W L OTL Pts Boston 75 44 28 3 91 -3 = 88 Ottawa 77 39 28 10 88 -10 = 78 Buffalo 76 37 29 10 84 -10 = 74 Toronto 76 33 34 9 75 -9 = 66 Montreal 76 29 34 13 71 -13 = 58 Southeast GP W L OTL Pts Florida 75 36 24 15 87-15= 72 Washington 76 38 30 8 84-8 = 76 Winnipeg 76 35 33 8 78-8 = 70 Tampa Bay 75 35 33 7 77-7= 70 Carolina 76 30 31 15 75-15= 60 Western Conference Standings Central GP W L OTL Pts x-St. Louis 76 47 20 9 103 -9 = 94 x-Detroit 76 46 25 5 97 -5 = 92 Nashville 76 44 24 8 96 -8 = 88 Chicago 76 42 26 8 92 -8 = 84 Columbus 76 24 45 7 55 -7 = 48 Northwest GP W L OTL Pts y-Vancouver 76 46 21 9 101 -9 = 92 Colorado 78 40 32 6 86 -6 = 80 Calgary 77 35 27 15 85 -15 = 70 Minnesota 75 31 34 10 72 -10 = 62 Edmonton 76 31 36 9 71 -9 = 62 Pacific GP W L OTL Pts San Jose 76 39 27 10 88 -10= 78 Dallas 76 41 30 5 87 -5 = 82 Phoenix 77 37 27 13 87-13 = 74 Los Angeles 76 37 27 12 86-12 = 74 Anaheim 76 32 33 11 75 -11 = 64 And is the new playoff picture without those points if the season was over now. Current with the overtime losses is in (#). East 1(1/4) NY/Pits 94 2(2) Boston 88 3(8) Washington 76 4(1/4) NY/Pits 94 5(5) Phili 88 6(6) New Jersey 84 7(7) Ottawa 78 8(9) Buffalo 74 Florida would be out of the playoffs when right now they are a division leader based off of 15 points from overtime losses West 1(1) St. Lousi 94 2(2) Vancouver 92 3(7) Dallas 82 4(4) Detroit 92 5(5) Nashville 88 6(6) Chicago 84 7(10) Colorado 80 8(3) San Jose 82 This would put Colorado in where they would not have mad the playoffs, make Dallas win their division instead of San Jose, move San Jose to the eighth seed and knock Phoenix out of the playoffs all together. I lean more towards a simple 2 points for a win 0 points for a loss whether its overtime, shootout, whatever. I don't like ties. I much prefer playoff hockey where we play till somebody wins so I think a full 20 min 4 on 4 overtime is best. Make wins matter. Cause right now we have a division leader that wouldn't even make the playoffs without their points from 15 games they lost. I think rewarding at all for a loss is not a good idea because it takes away the importance of winning. As my details point out there is currently a team leading a division when without the "loser' points for losing in OT they would not even make the playoffs. A team that won more games is going in at a lower seed, and a team that won more games won't even make the playoffs because they managed to wait until overtime to lose 15 games.

  • Answer:

    yes, yes they should, while it would it suck for my calgary flames ( they lose every damn game in OT) why should you get a point for losing, some people say 3 points w 2 points for otw and 1 point for otl, i also disagree with that, make it simliar to the NBA, if you have 45 wins and 37 losses you have 90 points is how it should be

David B at Yahoo! Answers Visit the source

Was this solution helpful to you?

Other answers

The loser point is factually incorrect-it states in the rules that a point is awarded for tied games! I'd simply make all games worth 3 points, and award 3 points for a regulation win, and 2 points for an OTW/SOW, and 1 point for an OTL/SOL (and use Ken Holland's idea of having a 4on4 OT, then a 3on3 OT and then a shootout).

Leafsfan29-Embrace the drought!

The loser point is factually incorrect-it states in the rules that a point is awarded for tied games! I'd simply make all games worth 3 points, and award 3 points for a regulation win, and 2 points for an OTW/SOW, and 1 point for an OTL/SOL (and use Ken Holland's idea of having a 4on4 OT, then a 3on3 OT and then a shootout).

Leafsfan29-Embrace the drought!

Yes get rid of the 1 point for losing and get rid of the shoot out. Nothing wrong with just a point for a tie in one over time period.

Storage box #9

yes, yes they should, while it would it suck for my calgary flames ( they lose every damn game in OT) why should you get a point for losing, some people say 3 points w 2 points for otw and 1 point for otl, i also disagree with that, make it simliar to the NBA, if you have 45 wins and 37 losses you have 90 points is how it should be

Jim Hockey

Yes. It's a stupid rule. Go back to the old days where all games only have 2 points up for grab. Besides, the NHL is becoming more and more stupid as Gary Bettman tinkers with the rules to meet the satisfaction of non-hockey markets in the southern US.

Romance Expert

No I favor the point for for the ot so loss because it increases the amount of ots in a season I like to watch games that go into ot even if its my team. if you remove the point for the ot or so loss the point system would be pointless because they would go by games back instead of points

Nick

Yes it is a very stupid point system and they need to get rid of the extra point. But they wont get rid of it, or they would have already. They have 10 years of new team point records. And if they reduce the point system of extra points for ties, teams will not be able to beat their old records. The history is they added the 5 minute over time. Then they added the extra point for over time loss as teams were overly defencive in OT to not lose the game. Then they added shoot outs, but left the extra point in. So again, many teams seem overly defencive in OT and would rather go to shoot out than to risk a loss during OT. As much as I don't like ties, I prefer them to shoot outs. Your point is well taken. Florida is going to be 3rd place in the East while only being able to score 6 more goals than NYI. I'd agree but have a different solution. To some extent, hats off to Florida for Knowing the system, and being able to work it. But I say get rid of the divisional seeding. It is a joke to watch teams flipping from 3 place to 7th, 8th or 9th place. A bit less extreme I would make it a minimum of 1 representative from each division, but not seed them 1,2,3. Thus Boston would be 4th and Florida would be 7th.

JuanB

One of many reasons that I like the NHL and Soccer Leagues is that they award teams with games that pass regulation. They also use point value. I don't like the winning percentage because there aren't as many ways to help you in the standings. It benefits teams for tieing the game. this it puts great importance on the final minutes of the game....unlike basketball, baseball, and football.....where if you team is down by 10 points, you HAVE no chance of winning. This structure forces teams that are losing to try their hardest in the final minutes of play. even if you lose the Overtime, it benefits your team because you are able to tie the game and allow you to get somewhat better than other teams with the same winning record, but the other team has more losses. I think we should do: 5 points for regulation win 0 points for regulation loss 4 Points for OT win 1 Point for OT loss 3 Points for Shootout Win 2 Points for Shootout Loss We can change the shootout, so they it takes 2 goals advance to win instead of 1, which makes it more dramatic as the teams will continue to tie....until a winner. I also like the fact that the division winners are the top 3 places. It is much better than the NBA. It is annoying how you need to focus yourself on teams outside your division, which doesn't make sense if you have the division format. Might as well eliminate divisions. Division is the most important like in MLB/NFL and I like the fact the NHL is focusing on conferences in 2 years. Top 4 spots and go to playoffs.

Kevin

I think that it evens out in the end and some years a team will benefit from it and some years a team won't benefit from it. Anyway, to answer your question, yes, I hate the 1 point for losing in overtime. I don't like the shootout either. I think they should go back to the old way where they play overtime and if nothing is solved, then make it a tie. If they feel there are too many ties then they should increase the length of overtime. Play 20 minutes of overtime at 4 on 4. My guess is there would be very few ties.

J.

Load more

Related Q & A:

Just Added Q & A:

Find solution

For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.

  • Got an issue and looking for advice?

  • Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.

  • Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.

Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.