National Hockey League General Managers are considering a new 3-point system.
It's a system where teams would be rewarded for winning a game in regulation time.
Here's how it would work: If you win in regulation time, you get three points. If you win after that — either in overtime or in the shootout — you get two points. If you lose after regulation time, you get one point.
It's a system where teams would be rewarded for winning a game in regulation time.
Here's how it would work: If you win in regulation time, you get three points. If you win after that — either in overtime or in the shootout — you get two points. If you lose after regulation time, you get one point.
And trust me if the N.H.L considers the new point system it would affect us at the Western Hockey League level.
The aim of the new point system is to ultimately create a more entertaining game.
Instead of teams either playing for overtime or the shootout, being rewarded with 3 points for a regulation win would undoubtedly product a better product on the ice over 60 minutes with teams wanting to generate offense by going to the attack to get that regulation game winning goal.
The bottom line is teams want the maximum amount of points.
How would it affect the Western Hockey League today if that 3-point system was in place?
Let's take a look!
I can tell you the Kelowna Rockets wouldn't like it.
Instead of being tied with Chilliwack for the 4th and final playoff spot in the BC division, the new system would have the Bruins with a 10 point lead because simply they have won more games in regulation time than the Rockets.
Spokane and Seattle are tied for the final playoff spot in the U.S division, but under the 3-point system the Chiefs would have a 17 points lead simply because of the number of points they would have earned through winning in regulation time.
How would the division leaders be affected?
In the U.S division the Everett Silvertips currently have a 19 point lead on second place Tri City. If the new format was used, the Tips would have a 39 point lead because they've won so many more games in regulation time than the Americans have.
In the Eastern division the Brandon Wheat Kings lead Regina by 13 points. If the new format was implemented, the Wheat Kings would have a 15 point lead on the second place Pats. Not much of a difference there!
The Medicine Hat Tigers would have a 18 point lead on second place Kootenay in the Central under the new format while the Vancouver Giants lead over Kamloops would be just one point, instead of the the four point difference that currently exists in the BC division.
So while in some cases the new 3-point system doesn't show dramatic differences when used with the games played under the existing formula, I am sure if coaches knew right from the start of the season that winning in regulation time would assure you 3 points, not 2, you would notice teams playing desperate hockey, not just down the stretch in the fight for a playoff spot but playing desperate hockey all season long.
Team's that want to win in regulation time would be rewarded for their efforts.
Conversely hockey fans would be rewarded with a more entertaining product.
The aim of the new point system is to ultimately create a more entertaining game.
Instead of teams either playing for overtime or the shootout, being rewarded with 3 points for a regulation win would undoubtedly product a better product on the ice over 60 minutes with teams wanting to generate offense by going to the attack to get that regulation game winning goal.
The bottom line is teams want the maximum amount of points.
How would it affect the Western Hockey League today if that 3-point system was in place?
Let's take a look!
I can tell you the Kelowna Rockets wouldn't like it.
Instead of being tied with Chilliwack for the 4th and final playoff spot in the BC division, the new system would have the Bruins with a 10 point lead because simply they have won more games in regulation time than the Rockets.
Spokane and Seattle are tied for the final playoff spot in the U.S division, but under the 3-point system the Chiefs would have a 17 points lead simply because of the number of points they would have earned through winning in regulation time.
How would the division leaders be affected?
In the U.S division the Everett Silvertips currently have a 19 point lead on second place Tri City. If the new format was used, the Tips would have a 39 point lead because they've won so many more games in regulation time than the Americans have.
In the Eastern division the Brandon Wheat Kings lead Regina by 13 points. If the new format was implemented, the Wheat Kings would have a 15 point lead on the second place Pats. Not much of a difference there!
The Medicine Hat Tigers would have a 18 point lead on second place Kootenay in the Central under the new format while the Vancouver Giants lead over Kamloops would be just one point, instead of the the four point difference that currently exists in the BC division.
So while in some cases the new 3-point system doesn't show dramatic differences when used with the games played under the existing formula, I am sure if coaches knew right from the start of the season that winning in regulation time would assure you 3 points, not 2, you would notice teams playing desperate hockey, not just down the stretch in the fight for a playoff spot but playing desperate hockey all season long.
Team's that want to win in regulation time would be rewarded for their efforts.
Conversely hockey fans would be rewarded with a more entertaining product.
2 comments:
How 'bout the Rockets get three points for a win for the rest of the season. That should make for a good battle with the surging 'wack.
For now the Rockets will have to settle for just 2 points for a win, but it would be interesting if the NHL adopts the change in point system,because the WHL will quickly follow suit.
Post a Comment