JujuFish Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Hey, I want to play! I was in the GDG argument too! Pick me, pick me!
Bmwolf21 Posted January 20, 2009 Report Posted January 20, 2009 Hey, I want to play! I was in the GDG argument too! Pick me, pick me! You're just late to the party, Juju...
carpandean Posted January 21, 2009 Report Posted January 21, 2009 Hey, I want to play! I was in the GDG argument too! Pick me, pick me! You're just late to the party, Juju... JuJu ... er ... Johnny-come-lately. :nana:
Foligno's Nose Posted January 21, 2009 Report Posted January 21, 2009 No. A three point game is 3 for winning in regulation, 2 for winning in OT/SO, 1 for losing in OT/SO and 0 for losing in regulation. Basically, if a loss in not a loss (OT losses have different points than regulation losses), then a win is not a win. If you, as the winning team, let the other team take it to OT/SO, then they get one of your three points. This, the 2/0 system and the 2/1/0 (1 for tie) are the only fair systems. This sounds good. Just make the OT ten minutes and were all set. This system always made sense to me back in the NPSL days with the Buffalo Blizzard. I think they play ten minutes OT in International/ Olympic play before the SO. The NHL should never have SO's in the playoffs. NEVER. EVER. This system always made sense to me back in the NPSL days with the Buffalo Blizzard.
JujuFish Posted January 21, 2009 Report Posted January 21, 2009 You guys are killing me. But I shall not cower in fear. I will press on, in efforts to achieve new levels of pointless posts never before to have graced the pages of SabreSpace! That, or maybe have some ice cream with chocolate syrup. Tough decision....
Foligno's Nose Posted January 21, 2009 Report Posted January 21, 2009 You guys are killing me. But I shall not cower in fear. I will press on, in efforts to achieve new levels of pointless posts never before to have graced the pages of SabreSpace! That, or maybe have some ice cream with chocolate syrup. Tough decision.... How about both? Just keep the IC and Hershey's off the keyboard.
carpandean Posted January 21, 2009 Report Posted January 21, 2009 Just keep the IC and Hershey's off the keyboard. Mmmm ... Hersey's
SwampD Posted January 21, 2009 Report Posted January 21, 2009 This sounds good.Just make the OT ten minutes and were all set. This system always made sense to me back in the NPSL days with the Buffalo Blizzard. I think they play ten minutes OT in International/ Olympic play before the SO. The NHL should never have SO's in the playoffs. NEVER. EVER. This system always made sense to me back in the NPSL days with the Buffalo Blizzard. Just for fun I went back and redid the standings of last year using the 3-2-1-0 scoring(I only did down to Buffalo in the east 'cuz all those numbers started to make me loony and no, the Sabs still weren't in). Surprisingly it wasn't that different. My conclusion is that they should either go back to the 1 point apiece after five of OT(with no shootout) or keep it the way it is now(which I actually prefer) Last year, Boston would have been out and Carolina would have been in and the Rags would have ended up in the 8th spot, not 5th. I actually think that the scoring is more accurate in the current system. I think it benefits good goaltending and that can go a long way in the playoffs(look how far Hasek took the Sabres)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.