Just Win, Baby: How to Beat Three-Point Games

by on March 25, 2010 in Uncategorized - 34 Comments

Share

The most common complaint I hear from fans, media and even some hockey people revolves around the point system and the three point game.

Having done extensive point system analysis, alerted of a record shootout pace and declining overtimes, coupled with a scoring dip to the lowest goals-per-game average since prior to the lockout, a conclusion seems to come simple enough.

In the era of three-point games, bemoaning the point system takes precedent over active solutions, other than the oversimplification of changing the system that seems ‘fair’ – more so on a team-by-team basis than for the league overall – without studying the effects of motivation to win games. It’s not about changing the system to make it ‘fairer’ it’s up to the teams to work within the system and make the most of opportunities while it’s actively implemented in the current NHL.

There is a simple solution to minimize the effects of three-pointers that doesn’t require changes to the current structure.

Win.

Win in regulation.

Stop squandering late third period leads and stop making it easy for teams to come back tie games. Do whatever it takes to win in regulation and the point system rarely comes into play.

How does one do that? Team management, doing their jobs to their best ability.

Build a team that is defensively sound that can effectively protect a lead while handling blitzes for equalizing goals.
Draft and develop well, use assets to compliment the notion of winning in regulation and fit them into lineups both for the economic benefit on top of team success.

Draft and develop offensive talent and develop a strong forechecking game that allows a team to get up a goal or two, and overwhelm opponents with a stifling defense.

It’s obviously not as easy as just saying it and that’s why they play the games. Make a mistake and your club is burned.

In the end, forget the regulation season and the points systems.

What good does it do for clubs to go into overtime in the playoffs? Why risk a goal to determine the fate of an overtime game? If teams are consistently blowing leads, allowing teams into games and crawl into overtime, how will that affect their playoff aspirations?

Perhaps teams who can’t get the job done in regulation deserve to lose in overtime, both in regular seasons and postseasons.

THE NUMBERS

Including games from March 24, in 2009-10:

Total Games Decided in Overtime Games: 96 (involving two teams = 192 games) OT winner got two full points, with 96 ‘extra points’ floating in standings.
Total Shootout games: 159 (involving two teams = 318 games)
Each shootout winner received full two points in a win, but an ‘extra’ point was awarded to 156 losers, for being tied after 60 minutes.


Total Wins ShW OTW TotW-SO Regulation Wins
Van 45 3 2 42 40
Was 49 5 5 44 39
SJ 44 6 1 38 37
Col 42 6 1 36 35
NJD 43 6 2 37 35
Cal 37 3 2 34 32
Chi 46 8 6 38 32
Nas 42 6 4 36 32
Phi 37 3 2 34 32
Ott 39 4 4 35 31
Pit 42 7 4 35 31
Buf 40 4 6 36 30
Det 37 4 3 33 30
LA 42 9 3 33 30
NYR 32 2 1 30 29
Pho 46 12 5 34 29
Ana 34 4 3 30 27
Min 35 4 4 31 27
Atl 32 4 2 28 26
Dal 32 5 2 27 25
StL 34 7 2 27 25
Cbs 28 2 3 26 23
Bos 33 9 2 24 22
Car 30 3 5 27 22
Flo 30 6 2 24 22
TB 29 2 5 27 22
Mtl 36 7 8 29 21
Tor 26 4 2 22 20
Edm 24 7 0 17 17
NYI 29 7 5 22 17

Washington and Vancouver led the NHL with 39 regulation wins; San Jose 36, Colorado 35, and New Jersey 34, round out the top five NHL teams in regulation wins.

The feel-good story of the season Phoenix Coyotes hover near the top of the Western Conference, yet place 15th in regulation time wins (29). The Desert Dogs won an NHL high 12 shootout games (only club in double digits) and five more in overtime for 17 extra time wins.

Yet they are tied for second in rankings with 22 extra time games with Montreal and the NY Islanders. Boston leads the NHL with 23, while the Vancouver Canucks have played a league low nine extra time games – and rank first in their division by five points over their nearest opponent (Colorado) and double digits over the rest of the division.

THE EFFECT

In the end, most complaints about how the point system fall on deaf ears regarding how they somehow altered the standings enough to warrant copious amounts of discouragement towards the system itself. It’s easy to point the finger at the point system and it’s structure, and the shootout. The easiest target gets the most attention.

There is an big bonus in winning in 60 minutes.

Win enough games in regulation, and it won’t matter how the point system is structured. The argument is always about the effect at the lower end of the playoff rankings, how these games affect the points standings and a potential playoff spot.

Teams that limit going into extra frames and other teams fighting it out for a playoff spot being in involved in three-pointers mean less in the overall picture. Teams winning enough in regulation are unlikely to be involved in the logjam of standings bottom feeders and playoff races.

The punishment, if one wants to look at it in another way, is to enter overtime and shootouts and be at the mercy of extra points filtering into the system. Want to outright beat the system?

Then just win.

katshockey [at] mapleleafshotstove.com
twitter.com/@KatsHockey

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Print article

  • 2 Minutes for Looking so Guru

    Gus, maybe I read this wrong cause I am pretty baked… but, this doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. Teams usually don’t give a shit about the other team picking up a point, it’s all about making sure you get the point in regulation, then chase the other one. Every team would love to win in regulation, but usually it doesn’t mean two shits to them if they other team were to pick up a point by taking it to OT.

    If the strategy is just win, which it always should be… by winning, in OT or shootout, it makes no difference if the losing team gets a point to the winner.

    It’s the games that other teams are watching and have no part of that it pisses them off. Each time that is in the current game would love to take 1 point out of regulation unless they are against a team they are within reason of catching.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • rustynail

    I love this analysis. I also wonder how the teams that are most successful in winning in regulation will do this year in the playoffs. Seems like a logical step to assume they will do quite well assuming their regulation wins are not skewed to the start of the season.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • wendel over mats

    I never understood why the 3 point for regulation win wasn’t implemented. It makes more sense, and would add late season excitement.

    Yes, it would screw up historical comparisons – but that happened with the current system anyway.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • http://mckeenshockey.com Katshockey

    @ 2 Minutes for Looking so Guru:

    Maybe I was half-baked writing it … The main point is, if you want to avoid any issues with 3-point games, build your team to ensure winning in regulation … do that enough and the 3-point game doesn’t have as much effect (if any) in the standings, or in the hunt for a playoff spot …

    Should stop writing at 3 am, right?

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • 2 Minutes for Looking so Guru
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Schenn

    Another thing:
    If 312 games went to a shootout, would that not produce 312 winners and 312 extra points?

    You said it only produced 156 winners and 156 extra points, well then what happened in the other 156 games?

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • 2 Minutes for Looking so Guru

    There were 2 teams involved in each shootout. When looking at how many shootouts there were for all teams combined in the league, you gotta divide it by two to know how many actual shootouts there were. So I guess we can assume there were 156 shootouts taken.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Schenn

    I must have read it wrong. The way I read it was there were 312 games that went to a shootout, meaning 312 winners and 312 points.

    I guess it should have said 312 teams went to a shootout or 156 games went to a shootout?

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • http://pensionplanpuppets.com Chemmy

    For all the complaints about the current points system I’ve never seen any reasonable suggestion for change that meaningfully impacts the standings.

    If you go 3pt win, 2pt OT win, 1pt OT loss it doesn’t change the standings much except for probably Phoenix this year.

    Florida and Montreal would have swapped 8th and 9th place last year but it’s really minor stuff.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Baumgartner

    @ Schenn

    Yeah, I had a similar issue. there must have been 156 shoot outs (with 2 teams each for 312). You can only have as many wins as there are games.

    I also don’t quite get how 92 goals have been scored in 190 games that went to overtime, to then have 156 (or even 312) shoot out games. Wouldn’t it be 98 shoot outs (190 – 92 = 98 games to go to the shoot out).

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Schenn

    That whole “The Numbers” section makes no sense at all!

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • http://checkingfrombehind.com danvertising

    We’d be tied with the Islanders with 66 points right now if we just won last sunday. and just won in regulation.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Mr. Koolaide

    I have a radical idea… what about you win you get points, you lose you dont??? Why are we awarding teams a point for losing?

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • http://checkingfrombehind.com danvertising

    At least make it you get 1 point if you go to the shootout. Not 1 point if you go to OT. Then it’s essentially the same structure as before the lockout… Still tied after OT, each team gets a point.

    Then just have a shootout for the 2nd point.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Bob is your uncle
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • rustynail
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • luke
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Bob is your uncle
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Dougy

    The point system is a farce.Case and point.Compare Toronto and Montreal.The Habs have 21 wins in regulation.The Leafs have 20.Yet the Habs are battling for 5th in the conference where has the Leafs in dead last.Doesn’t seem right does it.

    If you went back to the old system, 2 points for a regulation win and 1 point for a tie, right now it would break down like this.

    Habs 21 wins in regulation and 23 ties in regulation for a total of 65 points.

    Leafs 20 wins in regulation and 18 ties in regulation for a total of 58 points.

    Thats a 7 point gap in the old system.

    Right now Habs have 80 points and the Leafs have 64 points, for a 16 point gap.

    Imagine if the Leafs finish the season with more wins in regulation than the Habs?

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Bob is your uncle
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Waiting4LSC

    I have a soccer background (grew up in England). No overtime in regular season games. Canadian/North American sports tell us fans demand a winner. I see advantages to both systems, what I don’t like is the structure of overtime and shootouts. My preference would be for overtime to be 20 minutes, no sudden death. If tied at the end then a shoot-out. I would suggest the effort expended in playing an additional 20 minutes would be incentive enough to go for a regulation win. 5 minutes of overtime is more a “hang on and take your chance in the shoot-out”. (In the soccer world cup inferior teams would hang on and take their chance in penalties.)

    Bottom line, I don’t care, because the playoffs are what is important and they have it right.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • wiski

    Here is something I found on another forum, assuming the leafs get 10 points in there remaining games,these would be the magic numbers for the teams we are chasing.

    Toronto @Atl; vsNYR; @Pit; vsAtl; vsBuf; vsBos; vsPit; @NYR; @Mtl

    Islanders vs Cal; @CLB; vsNYR; vsPhi; vsOtt; vsMtl; @Pit; @NJ; vsPit 7

    Tampa @Bos; @Buf; @CLB; @Pit; vsNYR; vsCar; vsOtt; vsFla; @Fla 6

    Carolina vsWash; vsAtl; @Atl; @Mtl; @Ott; vsNJ; @TB; vsMtl; @Bos 7

    CBJ vsChi; vsNYI; @Chi; vsTB; @Det; vsWas; @Stl; @Det; vsDet 6

    Fla @Mtl; @Ott;vsNsh; @Buf; @Bos; vsNYR; vsOtt; vsNJ; @TB; vsTB 6

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • http://checkingfrombehind.com danvertising

    @ rustynail:
    I don’t remember this… damn

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • 2 Minutes for Looking so Guru

    WOOOOOOO!! Just got tickets in Guelph to go see the Knights play the Storm. Small road trip from London lol

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • rustynail

    2 Minutes for Looking so Guru wrote:

    WOOOOOOO!! Just got tickets in Guelph to go see the Knights play the Storm. Small road trip from London lol

    We will expect an in depth analysis after the game.

    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)