| Review:
Ottawa @ Edmonton (Game #36) [message #828547] |
Sat, 06 January 2024 22:30  |
|
|
|
 |
 tardigrade81
Messages: 2262
Registered: November 2022
Location: Regina, Saskatchewan
2 Cups
|
|
This team is red hot. We are not worthy of Hyman!! Go Oilers Go
Back in a playoff spot!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016
3 Cups
|
|
An 8 game winning streak not long ago. Now currently on a 7 game streak. Went from being almost dead last in the NHL to being in the second wild card, 4 pts behind the first wild card with 4 games in hand. 5 pts out of 3rd, 10 pts out of second with 4 games in hand. They are tied for 12th in goals against. PK is over 80%.
Pretty hard to argue against the coaching change especially with the improvements on the defensive side. The improvement of the entire defense core is very noticeable.
Looking at the next 9 games, winning all 9 is an actual possibility based on who they play. It's probably not realistic they win all 9 but I think 7-2 is very realistic.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
oilfan94
Messages: 409
Registered: June 2006
Location: USA
No Cups
|
|
| RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 13:28 |
An 8 game winning streak not long ago. Now currently on a 7 game streak. Went from being almost dead last in the NHL to being in the second wild card, 4 pts behind the first wild card with 4 games in hand. 5 pts out of 3rd, 10 pts out of second with 4 games in hand. They are tied for 12th in goals against. PK is over 80%.
Pretty hard to argue against the coaching change especially with the improvements on the defensive side. The improvement of the entire defense core is very noticeable.
Looking at the next 9 games, winning all 9 is an actual possibility based on who they play. It's probably not realistic they win all 9 but I think 7-2 is very realistic.
|
The other strategy the Oilers struggle with is losing in OT or the SO. Lots of other teams with loser points making the standings closer. We have the same number of wins as the Kings (in the same number of games) and only 3 less than Vegas (in 4 less games).
|
|
|
|
|
RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016
3 Cups
|
|
| oilfan94 wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 11:52 |
| RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 13:28 |
An 8 game winning streak not long ago. Now currently on a 7 game streak. Went from being almost dead last in the NHL to being in the second wild card, 4 pts behind the first wild card with 4 games in hand. 5 pts out of 3rd, 10 pts out of second with 4 games in hand. They are tied for 12th in goals against. PK is over 80%.
Pretty hard to argue against the coaching change especially with the improvements on the defensive side. The improvement of the entire defense core is very noticeable.
Looking at the next 9 games, winning all 9 is an actual possibility based on who they play. It's probably not realistic they win all 9 but I think 7-2 is very realistic.
|
The other strategy the Oilers struggle with is losing in OT or the SO. Lots of other teams with loser points making the standings closer. We have the same number of wins as the Kings (in the same number of games) and only 3 less than Vegas (in 4 less games).
|
Don't get me started on the loser point. I think it's the biggest joke in the NHL and all it does is artificially make teams look like they are in the hunt. Seattle is tied with the Oilers and listed as having a points percentage of .526. But they are 16-14-9. So their actual win/loss record is 16-23.
While I am not in favor of ties, the shootout does create a winner, you should not be rewarding teams for losing a game. If they don't want to go to a 3 point system then why not give 2 points for a regulation or OT win and then only award 1 point to the team that wins a shootout. Then you would have teams going for it more in OT if there is the chance you get nothing vs what often happens now which is the constant circling back that can happen in games.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Mike
Messages: 1397
Registered: August 2005
Location: Moncton, New Brunswick
1 Cup
|
|
| RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 16:02 |
| oilfan94 wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 11:52 |
| RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 13:28 |
An 8 game winning streak not long ago. Now currently on a 7 game streak. Went from being almost dead last in the NHL to being in the second wild card, 4 pts behind the first wild card with 4 games in hand. 5 pts out of 3rd, 10 pts out of second with 4 games in hand. They are tied for 12th in goals against. PK is over 80%.
Pretty hard to argue against the coaching change especially with the improvements on the defensive side. The improvement of the entire defense core is very noticeable.
Looking at the next 9 games, winning all 9 is an actual possibility based on who they play. It's probably not realistic they win all 9 but I think 7-2 is very realistic.
|
The other strategy the Oilers struggle with is losing in OT or the SO. Lots of other teams with loser points making the standings closer. We have the same number of wins as the Kings (in the same number of games) and only 3 less than Vegas (in 4 less games).
|
Don't get me started on the loser point. I think it's the biggest joke in the NHL and all it does is artificially make teams look like they are in the hunt. Seattle is tied with the Oilers and listed as having a points percentage of .526. But they are 16-14-9. So their actual win/loss record is 16-23.
While I am not in favor of ties, the shootout does create a winner, you should not be rewarding teams for losing a game. If they don't want to go to a 3 point system then why not give 2 points for a regulation or OT win and then only award 1 point to the team that wins a shootout. Then you would have teams going for it more in OT if there is the chance you get nothing vs what often happens now which is the constant circling back that can happen in games.
|
My biggest issue has always been all games not being worth the same total points in the standings.
I would like to see a 3 points system being used. People have argued it would taint season records or whatever, but different number of games and the loser point have already done that anyway.
But from what I've heard (somewhere - don't recall where) it's by design as it keeps more teams in the mix for a longer period of time, therefore more interest from more fanbases.
|
|
|
|
|
RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016
3 Cups
|
|
| Mike wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 13:40 |
| RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 16:02 |
| oilfan94 wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 11:52 |
| RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 13:28 |
An 8 game winning streak not long ago. Now currently on a 7 game streak. Went from being almost dead last in the NHL to being in the second wild card, 4 pts behind the first wild card with 4 games in hand. 5 pts out of 3rd, 10 pts out of second with 4 games in hand. They are tied for 12th in goals against. PK is over 80%.
Pretty hard to argue against the coaching change especially with the improvements on the defensive side. The improvement of the entire defense core is very noticeable.
Looking at the next 9 games, winning all 9 is an actual possibility based on who they play. It's probably not realistic they win all 9 but I think 7-2 is very realistic.
|
The other strategy the Oilers struggle with is losing in OT or the SO. Lots of other teams with loser points making the standings closer. We have the same number of wins as the Kings (in the same number of games) and only 3 less than Vegas (in 4 less games).
|
Don't get me started on the loser point. I think it's the biggest joke in the NHL and all it does is artificially make teams look like they are in the hunt. Seattle is tied with the Oilers and listed as having a points percentage of .526. But they are 16-14-9. So their actual win/loss record is 16-23.
While I am not in favor of ties, the shootout does create a winner, you should not be rewarding teams for losing a game. If they don't want to go to a 3 point system then why not give 2 points for a regulation or OT win and then only award 1 point to the team that wins a shootout. Then you would have teams going for it more in OT if there is the chance you get nothing vs what often happens now which is the constant circling back that can happen in games.
|
My biggest issue has always been all games not being worth the same total points in the standings.
I would like to see a 3 points system being used. People have argued it would taint season records or whatever, but different number of games and the loser point have already done that anyway.
But from what I've heard (somewhere - don't recall where) it's by design as it keeps more teams in the mix for a longer period of time, therefore more interest from more fanbases.
|
The loser point is 100% to keep more teams technically in the hunt which I get but I don't agree with because I don't agree with rewarding losing in professional sport. Whether you lose in regulation, OT or the shootout, you lost the game. So why just because 1 team hung on to get it to OT should they be reward for losing. The point of professional sport is to win every game, not to get close but fall short.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
CrusaderPi
Messages: 7803
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100
6 Cups
|
|
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.
Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.
|
|
|
|
|
RDOilerfan
Messages: 3908
Registered: January 2016
3 Cups
|
|
| 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CrusaderPi
Messages: 7803
Registered: December 2003
Location: AB Highway 100
6 Cups
|
|
| 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.
Please do not feed the bears. Feeding the bears creates a dependent population unable to survive on their own. Bears.
|
|
|
|
|
|
oilfan94
Messages: 409
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
oilfan94
Messages: 409
Registered: June 2006
Location: USA
No Cups
|
|
| RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 15:02 |
| oilfan94 wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 11:52 |
| RDOilerfan wrote on Mon, 08 January 2024 13:28 |
An 8 game winning streak not long ago. Now currently on a 7 game streak. Went from being almost dead last in the NHL to being in the second wild card, 4 pts behind the first wild card with 4 games in hand. 5 pts out of 3rd, 10 pts out of second with 4 games in hand. They are tied for 12th in goals against. PK is over 80%.
Pretty hard to argue against the coaching change especially with the improvements on the defensive side. The improvement of the entire defense core is very noticeable.
Looking at the next 9 games, winning all 9 is an actual possibility based on who they play. It's probably not realistic they win all 9 but I think 7-2 is very realistic.
|
The other strategy the Oilers struggle with is losing in OT or the SO. Lots of other teams with loser points making the standings closer. We have the same number of wins as the Kings (in the same number of games) and only 3 less than Vegas (in 4 less games).
|
Don't get me started on the loser point. I think it's the biggest joke in the NHL and all it does is artificially make teams look like they are in the hunt. Seattle is tied with the Oilers and listed as having a points percentage of .526. But they are 16-14-9. So their actual win/loss record is 16-23.
While I am not in favor of ties, the shootout does create a winner, you should not be rewarding teams for losing a game. If they don't want to go to a 3 point system then why not give 2 points for a regulation or OT win and then only award 1 point to the team that wins a shootout. Then you would have teams going for it more in OT if there is the chance you get nothing vs what often happens now which is the constant circling back that can happen in games.
|
I've heard that argument before, but I think the answer as to why the NHL does what they are doing in 3 fold.
1. Keeps playoff races tighter (or sometimes the illusion on being tighter for some teams).
2. More teams reach 100 points (That used to mean that you team was top tier, now it just means you are in the top 30-35% of the league).
3. It doesn't mess up historical records so much. If you are comparing which teams have had the best or worst seasons then on the surface it can look apples to apples when in reality its more like apples to apple flavored jolly ranchers.
|
|
|
|
