WJC using new scoring system

[Beaner]

So as I am sure most of you are aware the WJC is using a new scoring system which is as follows; 3 points for a regulation Win, 2 for an Overtime or Shoot-out Win, and 1 point for an overtime Loss or Shoot out loss.

So I took it upon myself to recalculate the WHL standings using this new system to see what the results are;

GP W L OTW OTL SOW SOL PTS NEW PTS
1 Brandon Wheat Kings 37 17 13 0 2 1 4 42 59
2 Swift Current Broncos 37 13 17 2 1 3 1 38 51
3 Prince Albert Raiders 35 13 15 0 2 3 2 36 49
4 Regina Pats 35 10 18 1 1 3 2 31 41
5 Saskatoon Blades 34 9 22 0 0 2 1 23 32
6 Moose Jaw Warriors 35 8 23 2 1 1 0 23 31
Rank Central Division GP W L OTW OTL SOW SOL PTS NEW PTS
1 Medicine Hat Tigers 39 22 9 3 2 3 0 58 80
2 Kootenay Ice 35 19 10 2 1 1 2 47 66
3 Calgary Hitmen 36 19 11 2 0 1 3 47 66
4 Red Deer Rebels 37 18 11 1 3 1 3 46 64
5 Lethbridge Hurricanes 38 14 16 1 2 3 2 40 54

Western Conference

Rank B.C. Division GP W L OTW OTL SOW SOL PTS NEW PTS
1 Vancouver Giants 36 20 5 2 3 3 3 56 76
2 Kamloops Blazers 35 21 10 0 1 2 1 48 69
3 Prince George Cougars 35 13 17 0 1 1 3 32 45
4 Chilliwack Bruins 37 8 22 1 2 2 2 26 34
5 Kelowna Rockets 35 8 20 1 2 1 3 25 33
Rank U.S. Division GP W L OTW OTL SOW SOL PTS NEW PTS
1 Everett Silvertips 33 21 5 1 0 5 1 55 76
2 Seattle Thunderbirds 34 12 9 4 1 0 8 41 53
3 Tri-City Americans 32 15 13 2 0 2 0 38 53
4 Spokane Chiefs 34 16 13 0 3 1 1 38 54
5 Portland Winter Hawks 33 7 21 3 0 1 1 23 30

I have bolded the new point totals based on this new scoring system.

Frankly it hasn't made much of a difference in the standings, except for Spokane who jumps from 4th to 2nd in the US, but personally I feel it gives a more accurate reflection of whos done what thus far this year.

Not sure if i like the 3 points thing though, would destroy the record books, I would prefer a 2 for a Regulation win, 1 for an OTW or SOL, and Zero, Zilch, Zippo for a regualtion loss, overtime loss and shoot-out loss respectively. :D

[Coyote14]

If it barely changes anything, then what is the point in changing it?

The only part of the standings that I would change is the WHL's win %. Overtime and shootout losses should count in a negative way towards a teams percentage. I mean... they did lose the game, right?

[RunTheGoalie]

If it barely changes anything, then what is the point in changing it?

The only part of the standings that I would change is the WHL's win %. Overtime and shootout losses should count in a negative way towards a teams percentage. I mean... they did lose the game, right?

Because it *does* change things. In this case specifically, it puts Seattle in the position of avoiding Everett in the first round if the season were to end today.

In the case of the NHL, it would be the difference between making and missing the playoffs for a couple teams.

However, while it is an improvement in that every game is worth the same, I still do not like it because I despise the concept of wins and losses having different values.

Personally, I still prefer the idea of removing the third and fourth columns altogether. Either you win or you lose. Doesnt matter how you lose, you still lost, therefore you deserve nothing.

[old_time_hockey]

I still don't understand what is wrong with a tie.

Why do we HAVE to always have a clear cut winner? Don't get it, don't like. And if you HAVE to have a winner, if you lose in OT or shoot out you should get no points just like you would for a regulation loss.

But if Seattle got on points for their shootout losses, that is 8pts they are missing.

[dondo]

I agree about the ties -- some of the hardest fought games I have seen have ended in well-deserved ties.

Beaner the 1 point is for completing a regulation (5 on 5) game tied, when it changes to 4 on 4 it becomes a whole different animal and therefore unfair to give the losing team nothing.

I like the three point win -- it will make teams fight harder in regulation to get that valuable point and not play for the tie to get into OT. It'll also separate the teams in the standings were it implemented. Three points up for grabs in every game, the distribution depends upon how the win comes about

It rewards team who win in regulation and will cause wider swings in the standings during crunch time.

I'd also like to see OT become 10 mins and not just five -- and ideally scrap the shootout, but if its kept in the longer OT might off-set the number of games going to the shootout.

[Flathead]

I agree about the ties -- some of the hardest fought games I have seen have ended in well-deserved ties.

Beaner the 1 point is for completing a regulation (5 on 5) game tied, when it changes to 4 on 4 it becomes a whole different animal and therefore unfair to give the losing team nothing.

I like the three point win -- it will make teams fight harder in regulation to get that valuable point and not play for the tie to get into OT. It'll also separate the teams in the standings were it implemented. Three points up for grabs in every game, the distribution depends upon how the win comes about

It rewards team who win in regulation and will cause wider swings in the standings during crunch time.

I'd also like to see OT become 10 mins and not just five -- and ideally scrap the shootout, but if its kept in the longer OT might off-set the number of games going to the shootout.
I agree with your whole post. there's nothing wrong with a tie. 4 on 4 is a different game than the 5 on 5. the three point win would stop teams from playing for a tie, that extra point could come in handy come crunch time. I would love to see the OT changed to 10 minutes, if I could change one rule in hockey that would be it, and scrap the shoot out. But like dondo said a longer OT would eliminate a lot of the shoot outs.

[Beaner]

I agree about the ties -- some of the hardest fought games I have seen have ended in well-deserved ties.

Sorry I disagree, I hate ties, will always hate ties, dont want to see ties.


Beaner the 1 point is for completing a regulation (5 on 5) game tied, when it changes to 4 on 4 it becomes a whole different animal and therefore unfair to give the losing team nothing.

pfft. Fair. You lost, you get nothing. Both teams know that before they start, you lose you get nothing.


I like the three point win -- it will make teams fight harder in regulation to get that valuable point and not play for the tie to get into OT. It'll also separate the teams in the standings were it implemented. Three points up for grabs in every game, the distribution depends upon how the win comes about

It rewards team who win in regulation and will cause wider swings in the standings during crunch time.

The other implication it would have is at the end of the year when 2 teams are tied in points, the one with more regulation wins would get the higher ranking.

One of the main reasons I suggested the 2/1/0 system still is to perserve the record books somewhat, under a 3/2/1/0 system the max point total is 216 compared to a 2/1/0 system which is 144, for a 72 game schedule.

However the more I think about it the more valuable the win in regulation becomes under a 3/2/1/0 system. Look at it this way, win in regulation its a 3 point gain, win in OT or a SO and its only a 1 point gain on your opposition ( 2 for you 1 for your opponent). Thus winning in reg. in the 3 point system is much more important.


I'd also like to see OT become 10 mins and not just five -- and ideally scrap the shootout, but if its kept in the longer OT might off-set the number of games going to the shootout.

I hate to say it but I enjoy the shoot-out. It is very entertaining, and like I said previously, I want a winner. Ties blow.

Increase OT to 10 minutes but you have to keep the shoot-out to decide it.

[SectionNDeserter]

I agree with Beaner, tieing the other team is like kissing your sister, and losing the game is like kissing your grandmother with her teeth out.

[dondo]

nah don't agree -- but I understand how you could feel that way.

I do not like shoot-outs in the least -- I don't find them entertaining or exciting and its a hollow win/loss -- always has been -- remember playing Sweden and getting the silver on a shoot-out when Kariya mishandled the puck going in? That just made me sick.

I understand the concept of preserving the stats to allow them to be comparative, but i would rather have the three point win, than to have a team get 0 for losing in either a 4 on 4 format or a shoot-out -- lose in a shootout and get nothing?? you gotta be kidding me -- that's not hockey and neither is a shootout.

[old_time_hockey]

I agree with Beaner, tieing the other team is like kissing your sister

Care to elaborate? ;)

If the current OT then shootout format stays cause people need to have a winner in everygame, I think that the loser gets no points. If you lose the game you should get nothing. Stops teams from playing for the tie just to get their 1 point, especially against teams in their division.

[dondo]

which having a 3 pt regulation win would accomplish

I think everyone's all for no points if you lose, but when its your team barley losing in OT or the shootout then you'll change your tune. Take at least six points from the Giants for away for SOL, and OT losses -- our current mini-slide looks a lot less appetising.

It's an accomplishment to come out of 5 on 5 tied after 60 and should be recognized with a point.

[Wingnut]

Last spring, I looked at the NHL standings under different scoring systems. I used three different systems - the 3/2/1 system that is in use by the IIHF and in Sweden and Finland; no points for any kind of loss; and no OT or shootout. Here are the playoff changes from the actual playoff teams under the different systems.

Under the 3/2/1 system:

In the West - Vancouver makes the playoffs instead of Edmonton as the number eight seed; Anaheim and San Jose flip seeds (five and six).
In the East - Philadelphia is the Atlantic Division champs instead of New Jersey and would have been the three seed with New jersey becoming the fifth seed.

Under no points for any loss:

In the West - Los Angeles makes the playoffs as the number eight seed instead of Edmonton; Colorado is the six seed, Anaheim moves to seven.
In the East - Tampa Bay is the seven seed, Montreal is the eight seed.

No OT or Shootout:

In the West - Anaheim is the number five seed, Colorado is number six, San Jose is number seven, Vancouver is number eight, Edmonton misses the playoffs.
In the East - Philadelphia is the Atlantic champs and number three seed, NY Rangers is the number five seed, New Jersey is number three, and Toronto makes the playoffs as the number eight seed instead of Tampa Bay.

Playing .500 hockey means something different under the current scoring system and it is different for each team, depending on the number of OT games a team plays in. Some games only have two points available for a team (a game decided in regulation) while all OT and Shootout games have three points available.

Under the current system, we would think that a team at .500 (same number of wins and losses) would have 82 points in an NHL season. However, some losses are worth more than others, so Edmonton, which had 41 total wins and 41 total losses, finished with 95 points. However, they had an equal amount of OT/SO wins and OT/SO losses (13 each) so they really did get 50% of all points that were available to them (95 of 190). However, Vancouver finished with a record that we would normally think is above .500 with 42 total wins and 40 total losses but finished with 92 points because of fewer OT losses than Edmonton. To confuse things even more, Vancouver finished with a .511 record as they got 92 of 180 available points. The upshot is that finishing at .500 is different for every team, depending on how many OT games they play in.

Under the 3/2/1 system, three points are awarded in every game. It makes you readjust your thinking and isn't as simple to compute in your head but it does establish some degree of equity. It rewards a team for winning in regulation.

On a personal note, I would like them to go back the the old WHL/WHA overtime system. 10 minutes of sudden death OT at five-on-five, two points for a win, no points for a loss, one point for a tie, no shootout (although I think a shootout is exciting when you have highly skilled players participating).

I can post the details of last season's NHL standings under different systems if you are interested.

[Beaner]

I have updated the current totals using the same system as they used in the WJC.

CURRENT STANDINGS UNDER CURRENT SYSTEM

East Division PTS GP W L OTL SL
Brandon Wheat Kings 52 45 22 15 2 6
Swift Current Broncos 44 44 21 21 1 1
Prince Albert Raiders 40 43 18 21 2 2
Regina Pats 40 44 18 22 1 3
Saskatoon Blades 37 43 18 24 0 1
Moose Jaw Warriors 31 42 14 25 3 0

Central Division PTS GP W L OTL SL
Medicine Hat Tigers 66 48 32 14 2 0
Kootenay Ice 62 43 29 10 2 2
Red Deer Rebels 55 46 24 15 3 4
Calgary Hitmen 51 44 24 17 0 3
Lethbridge Hurricanes 49 45 22 18 2 3

B.C. Division PTS GP W L OTL SL
Vancouver Giants 65 44 29 8 3 4
Kamloops Blazers 64 43 31 10 1 1
Prince George Cougars 38 43 16 21 2 4
Kelowna Rockets 34 44 14 24 3 3
Chilliwack Bruins 30 47 13 30 2 2

U.S. Division PTS GP W L OTL SL
Everett Silvertips 69 42 34 7 0 1
Spokane Chiefs 51 43 23 15 3 2
Seattle Thunderbirds 51 43 20 12 1 10
Tri-City Americans 49 41 24 16 0 1
Portland Winter Hawks 30 43 14 27 1 1


STANDINGS UNDER THE WJC SYSTEM

East Division GP REG W OTW SOW L OTL SL PTS
Brandon Wheat Kings 45 20 0 2 15 2 6 72
Swift Current Broncos 44 16 2 3 21 1 1 60
Prince Albert Raiders 43 14 0 4 21 2 2 54
Regina Pats 44 13 1 4 22 1 3 53
Saskatoon Blades 43 14 0 4 24 0 1 51
Moose Jaw Warriors 42 11 2 1 25 3 0 42

Central Division GP REG W OTW SOW L OTL SL PTS
Medicine Hat Tigers 48 26 3 3 14 2 0 92
Kootenay Ice 43 26 2 1 10 2 2 88
Red Deer Rebels 46 21 2 1 15 3 4 76
Calgary Hitmen 44 21 2 2 17 0 3 74
Lethbridge Hurricanes 45 18 1 3 18 2 3 67

B.C. Division GP REG W OTW SOW L OTL SL PTS
Kamloops Blazers 43 26 2 3 10 1 1 90
Vancouver Giants 44 24 2 3 8 3 4 89
Prince George Cougars 43 14 1 1 21 2 4 52
Kelowna Rockets 44 12 1 1 24 3 3 46
Chilliwack Bruins 47 10 1 2 30 2 2 40

U.S. Division GP REG W OTW SOW L OTL SL PTS
Everett Silvertips 42 27 1 6 7 0 1 96
Spokane Chiefs 43 17 1 5 15 3 2 68
Tri-City Americans 41 18 3 3 16 0 1 67
Seattle Thunderbirds 43 16 4 0 12 1 10 67
Portland Winter Hawks 43 9 3 2 27 1 1 39


So Seattle moves from 3rd to 4th, and the Americans although tied with the Tbirds in points jumps to 3rd with more regualtion wins then the T-birds.

Blazers move ahead of the Giants in total Points and take 1st in the BC Division under the new system.

Frankly speaking at this point and time, Kamloops has the better record, more wins, and should be ranked higher than Giants, as should the Americans over Seattle.

I think this system gives a much more accurate reflection of how a team earns points and rewards those that win in regulation, and thats how it should be.

Going to keep updating this every few weeks, just to see what happens through-out the course of the year, and what playoff implications this system would have.