New point system rather than changing OT format?

[FrogGoalie40]

Sure, it'll be awesome to watch, but honestly I think the new 3 on 3 overtime format is a little too gimmicky, even more so than the shootout. Instead of making all these changes, I think they should change the point system...

3 points for a regulation win
2 points for an overtime win
1 point for a shootout win
0 points for any type of loss

...long story short, the sooner you win, the more points you get. This will prevent teams from playing conservatively and promote actually trying to win the game if it's close in the 3rd period (especially late in the season when every point is crucial in the playoff race). Any thoughts?

[Zarovich]

The point (get it?) of the overtime extra point was to get teams to try to win and not play for a tie. I do like the idea of 3 points for a regulation win. It should be 2 points for ot/shootout win and 1 point for ot/shootout loss. The 3 on 3 is just as gimmicky as a shootout.

[dman66]

I agree that the point system needs to change, but I'd prefer a 5 point system:
5 - Regulation win
4 - OT Win
3 - Shootout Win
2 - Shootout loss
1 - OT loss
0 - Regulation loss

Losing in a shootout shouldn't be the same as losing in regulation. I agree that either of the changes would push teams to play less conservatively in the 3rd and OT if they can get the extra point. The issue is the GM's, I believe, are the ones that need to approve the change. That won't happen since it causes teams that have more talent to gain more points (or should). Now, if you can play solid D, you can get the games to the shootout, which is basically a coin flip and get the same points.

[Pitt87]

I agree that the point system needs to change, but I'd prefer a 5 point system:
5 - Regulation win
4 - OT Win
3 - Shootout Win
2 - Shootout loss
1 - OT loss
0 - Regulation loss

Losing in a shootout shouldn't be the same as losing in regulation. I agree that either of the changes would push teams to play less conservatively in the 3rd and OT if they can get the extra point. The issue is the GM's, I believe, are the ones that need to approve the change. That won't happen since it causes teams that have more talent to gain more points (or should). Now, if you can play solid D, you can get the games to the shootout, which is basically a coin flip and get the same points.

I like this... sets every game as a 5-point opportunity and rewards how you win, but in a tight playoff race an OT loss doesn't help you keep pace with a team that wins in regulation, but a shoot out win doesn't help you much either. Good teams that WIN can figure out how to pull away.

I still feel like any systems based on points creates too much subjectivity... you either win or you lose, and you should either get points or not get them. Why doesn't the NHL go to a win percentage system? It would make the shootout a really important part of the game... its not just an extra point, its all or none.

[no name]

No need to change point format. Change OT, 5 on 5, no rules. Refs sit on the bench, who ever wants it more gets the win.

no bit really my solution would be

5 on 5 for 5 minutes with bigger nets. The game will remain the same the chances of a goal being scored goes up. in stead of a 4x6 you play with a net . 4'4' x 6'6'. It sounds extreme, but really if you don't want a gimmick but the game to draw to a conclusion I think its a simple idea. It will never happen but hey its what I would rather see.

The NHL wants the OT to be exciting. I would rather see them make changes to regulation and make that more exciting.

[Jim]

1 point for a regulation win.

That is it. No OT. A tie means no one won, period.

[SubtropicalPenguin]

I would love the three point system. I've been pulling for that for a while. I hate when a game ends up being a three point game now. There is no reason for more points to be given out in an OT game. Keep every game worth the same amount. Get on it NHL!

[no name]

3 points for a regulation win
2 points for a OT/shootout win
1 point for a OT/shootout loss.

Yeah this might push teams to go for regulation wins. But leave it to the coaches to tell the guys "don't play to win, play not to lose"

[no name]

5 - Regulation win
4 - OT Win
3 - Shootout Win
2 - Shootout loss
1 - OT loss
0 - Regulation loss

Wait, shouldn't OT loss be worth 2 and Shootout loss be worth 1?

[dman66]

5 - Regulation win
4 - OT Win
3 - Shootout Win
2 - Shootout loss
1 - OT loss
0 - Regulation loss

Wait, shouldn't OT loss be worth 2 and Shootout loss be worth 1?

I would say no. Once you get to a shootout, it's pretty much a 50/50 chance of winning. So the winner barely gets an advantage points wise over the loser and then it would mean some games would be worth 5 total points, others would be 6, and shootouts would be 4 points.

[toby91_ca]

5 - Regulation win
4 - OT Win
3 - Shootout Win
2 - Shootout loss
1 - OT loss
0 - Regulation loss

Wait, shouldn't OT loss be worth 2 and Shootout loss be worth 1?

No, shootout winner gets 3 points and loser gets 2 - total of 5. OT winner gets 4 and loser gets 1 - total of 5.

Why would losing sooner (OT) get you more points than later (SO)?

I'm not a fan at all of this type of point system though, it would just be too drastic of a change. I honestly didn't mind the way it was (with ties). Hate the shootout.

[no name]

3 points for a regulation win
2 points for an overtime win
1 point for a shootout win
0 points for any type of loss

Actually Froggoalie is the one I would go with. No points for a loss of any kind. Only the winner gets rewarded and rewarded with less points with how far as it goes. The best teams who can win the games in regulation get the points. These are the teams who will most likely win in the playoffs cause in the playoffs you can't gage your ability when you get points in a SO or 3 on 3.