New York Times reporter Jeff Z. Klein (@jzedklein) recently put together an alternate version of the league standings (More simply laid out on Puck Daddy here). Instead of the current system-where two points are awarded for any win, one point awarded in a shootout or overtime loss, and zero points in a regulation loss-he implemented the three point system. In case you aren't familiar, this proposed format would award three points for a regulation win, two points for an overtime or shootout win, one point for an overtime or shootout loss, and zero points for a regulation loss.
As you can see, the results were, well, fairly underwhelming. While there was a small amount of jockeying for position in the Eastern Conference, the Western Conference was exactly the same, save for flip-flopping Anaheim for San Jose at the top of the Pacific.
The whole purpose of this exercise is to see how things would look if more value was placed on winning in the first 60 minutes of the game as opposed to dragging things out, and the league is expressly in favour of shorter games. Granted, things may have actually been different if teams played with the knowledge of three points on the line rather than two but we do get an idea as to whether this would bring with it a noticeable change.
While this scenario is an improvement on the system we have now, it still places points at the forefront and not necessarily, you know, wins. So for those of you who think that we should just call a win a win and a loss a loss, here's a set of the current standings where wins are presented as a percentage, not a point total.
Atlantic
Boston - 27-18-9 - .667 (Currently 1st)
Tampa Bay - 27-16-11 - .593 (Currently 4th)
Montreal - 28-16-12 - .571 (Currently 2nd)
Detroit - 28-14-14 - .500 (Currently 3rd)
Toronto - 28-14-14 - .500 (Currently 5th)
Ottawa - 28-11-17 - .393 (Currently 6th)
Florida - 28-7-21 - .250 (Currently 7th)
Buffalo - 28-6-22 - .214 (Currently 8th)
Metropolitan
Pittsburgh - 29-19-10 - .655 (Currently 1st)
Washington - 28-14-14 - .500 (Currently 2nd)
N.Y. Rangers - 28-14-14 - .500 (Currently 3rd)
Philadelphia - 27-12-15 - .444 (Currently 6th)
New Jersey - 28-11-17 - .393 (Currently 4th)
Columbus - 28-11-17 - .393 (Currently 7th)
Carolina - 28-11-17 - .393 (Currently 5th)
N.Y. Islanders - 28-8-20 - .286 (Currently 8th)
Central
Colorado - 25-19-6 - .760 (Currently 3rd)
St. Louis - 26-18-8 - .692 (Currently 2nd)
Chicago - 29-20-9 - .690 (Currently 1st)
Minnesota - 29-16-13 - .552 (Currently 4th)
Dallas - 26-13-13 - .500 (Currently 5th)
Nashville - 28-13-15 - .464 (Currently 7th)
Winnipeg - 29-13-16 - .448 (Currently 6th)
Pacific
San Jose - 27-19-8 - .704 (Currently 1st)
Los Angeles - 29-18-11 - .621 (Currently 3rd)
Anaheim - 30-18-12 - .600 (Currently 2nd)
Phoenix - 27-16-11 - .593 (Currently 4th)
Vancouver - 30-15-15 - .500 (Currently 5th)
Calgary - 27-9-17 - .333 (Currently 6th)
Edmonton - 29-9-20 - .310 (Currently 7th)
[Just a note, in order to keep things simple, I decided any tie-breaker by total goal differential. I'm sure the league would have a more convoluted procedure, such as the record between the tied teams, but not all these teams have played each other so I couldn't use any variation of that method.]
As you can see, the league is slightly more turned on its head with this system. Most notably, Colorado of all teams is the class of the league, mostly by virtue of playing fewer games. Chicago, on the other hand, slips below St. Louis to 3rd in the Central and 4th in the league overall. The East doesn't change in any drastic fashion aside from some minor shuffling, but that seems to be due to how bad the Metropolitan division is. Seriously, 2 of their 3 teams that actually make the playoffs are .500 teams. That only earns you a wild card spot in the Atlantic and 5th in the West.
Now that we can actually see what the league would look like in all scenarios, how do you think we should tally the standings? Does the current system work for you, should we expand to a 3-point format, or should we use just move to wins and losses regardless of the means?
No comments:
Post a Comment