In
Larry Brooks' column in the New York Post on Sunday he argues that the NHL should go to a new point system where a regulation win gets 2 points a shootout win gets 1 (OT would be eliminated) and a loss of any type gets 0. His argument against the current system is the same as all the other complaints it inflates points, rewards losing, and punishing teams that win in 60. I have never seen his points proposal done so I decided to look at the standing using his format although slightly adjusted because overtime exist.
For the standings below a team gets 2 points for a regulation or OT win, 1 point for a shootout win, and 0 points for a loss of any kind.
UPDATED Through the end of the season
Atlantic | W | L | SW | P |
New Jersey | 39 | 33 | 10 | 88 |
Pittsburgh | 37 | 35 | 10 | 84 |
NY Rangers | 33 | 40 | 9 | 75 |
NY Islanders | 33 | 42 | 7 | 72 |
Philadelphia | 21 | 60 | 1 | 43 |
Northeast | W | L | SW | P |
Buffalo | 43 | 29 | 10 | 96 |
Ottawa | 46 | 34 | 2 | 94 |
Montreal | 36 | 40 | 6 | 78 |
Toronto | 36 | 42 | 4 | 76 |
Boston | 26 | 47 | 9 | 61 |
Southeast | W | L | SW | P |
Carolina | 40 | 42 | 0 | 80 |
Atlanta | 36 | 39 | 7 | 79 |
Tampa | 34 | 38 | 10 | 78 |
Florida | 33 | 47 | 2 | 68 |
Washington | 27 | 54 | 1 | 55 |
Central | W | L | SW | P |
Detriot | 48 | 32 | 2 | 98 |
Nashville | 45 | 31 | 6 | 96 |
St. Louis | 28 | 48 | 6 | 62 |
Columbus | 28 | 49 | 5 | 61 |
Chicago | 26 | 50 | 6 | 58 |
Northwest | W | L | SW | P |
Vancouver | 44 | 33 | 5 | 93 |
Minnesota | 38 | 34 | 10 | 86 |
Calgary | 40 | 39 | 3 | 83 |
Colorado | 39 | 38 | 5 | 83 |
Edmonton | 29 | 50 | 3 | 61 |
Pacific | W | L | SW | P |
San Jose | 49 | 31 | 2 | 100 |
Anaheim | 44 | 34 | 4 | 92 |
Dallas | 40 | 32 | 9 | 89 |
Phoenix | 26 | 51 | 5 | 57 |
Los Angeles | 23 | 55 | 4 | 50 |
Conference Standings:
East |
|
Team | PTS |
BUF | 96 |
NJ | 88 |
CAR | 80 |
OTT | 94 |
PITT | 84 |
ATL | 79 |
MON | 78 |
TAM | 78 |
TOR | 76 |
NYR | 75 |
NYI | 72 |
FLA | 68 |
BOS | 61 |
WSH | 55 |
PHI | 43 |
West |
|
Team | PTS |
SJ | 100 |
DET | 98 |
VAN | 93 |
NSH | 96 |
ANA | 92 |
DAL | 89 |
MIN | 86 |
CGY | 83 |
COL | 83 |
STL | 62 |
EDM | 61 |
CBJ | 61 |
CHI | 58 |
PHX | 57 |
LA | 50 |
To compare here is the current
NHL standingsIt's clear why the NHL will never adopt this, the point totals will plummet to lower to what they were before the 1999-2000 bonus point was introduced. There would be only 1 100 point team (San Jose) and only 12-13 (depending on the Colorado result tonight) would be above .500 point percentage wise which makes the league look mediocre. There would be also be a below .500 (with 0 shootout wins) division champion. The reason for the point drop to below the old 2 for a win 1 for a tie format is because you cutting out the tie points in half. If OT was eliminated as Brooks wants points would be even lower.
That said there are some big changes. For one San Jose who will start the playoffs on the road would be the Presidents Trophy winners as the only 100 point team. Carolina who will missed the playoffs would be the Southeast Division champs and would have home ice. Also last nights Montreal and Toronto game would have been meaningless as Montreal would have made it anyways. The Islanders would have finished far back and the Rangers who are the 6th seed would have missed as well.
This system is probably more fair but because of the illusion of more worse teams than there are this won't be adopted in the NHL.
No comments:
Post a Comment