 |
 oilfan94
Messages: 556
Registered: June 2006
Location: USA
No Cups
|
|
| CrusaderPi wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 16:32 |
| RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 14:14 |
| CrusaderPi wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 14:06 |
The bonus point is not awarded for losing. The two point game ends at regulation then the extra point is awarded for winning in overtime. It's a very important difference. The dead puck era was largely driven by teams being afraid to push for offense in the third period and overtime. I totally agree that it would make more sense to have every game worth 3, but sensible isn't what the NHL is about. They made regulation wins the first tiebreaker to mitigate the value of the bonus point for winning, but I don't think it's enough to not impact the standings.
It is nice to keep more teams in the hunt, especially now that only half the teams make the playoffs, but the drive was the miserable soul sucking hockey in the 90s.
|
Your argument makes no sense.
The Oilers play the Hawks next.
If they win in regulation, they get 2 points. If they win in the OT or the shootout, they still only get 2 points. vs The Hawks get nothing for losing in regulation but get rewarded if they get to OT. So the only team that benefits is the losing team.
|
It's not an argument. I'm explaining why the decision was made to move from the old w/l/t system to the w/l/t/otl system to the current system. It wasn't done to reward losing, it was done so you and I don't have to watch the Devils and Stars destroy hockey for another decade.
Functionally the game ends after regulations time. Should regulation end in a tie a bonus game is played with the winner getting a point. Context matters. This is why teams don't play for an OTL, but they did play for a tie.
|
I've never thought about it from that angle, and when putting it in that era, the change makes sense. At this point it feels like we are dealing with the lasting effects of the rule though, which I would not mind seeing changed to just 2 points for a win and 0 points for a loss. I think that is unlikely to happen unless several coaches start to adopt the Daryl Sutter just lose in OT as much as possible strategy, and that leads to teams the NHL cares about missing the playoffs by a hair multiple times.
|
|
|
|
