Hi there! It looks like you’ve posted an image. If this image is from an article, please provide a source. If it’s a meme, please ignore this comment. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Habs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Borth321
if only 3-4 of those lose in OT were in regulation,we would draft in top 5 🙁
G_skins31
Régulation win should be 3 points. So many games with 3 points given out and still only 2 for a regulation win
PunkBeauPere
Old guy here – i object to it being called a « loser » point – all those were ties – resolved by the spectacle of regular season OT , which is fine as a spectacle, but isn’t real OT ..
FormalWare
Imagine if Cole Caufield had scored 10 or 12 more goals, as many of us expected. (As *he* expected of himself, I daresay.) All those 1-goal losses (in reg and OT) he might have helped his team avoid.
I’m worried his shoulder – and shot – might never be quite the same.
Carbogoat
#BringBackTies
Phil_Atelist
Maybe it’s because I’m an old fart, but back in the day, they called games that ended in ties, A TIE and you got one point for it.
Forget about whether a win should be three points, if you reach the end of regulation and are tied you deserve at least one point. Point final!
carbonated_turtle
I just randomly came across another interesting fact about this season. Our longest winning streak was 2 games, which we accomplished only 6 times. We had a few chances to go for 3 games in OT or the shootout and blew it.
mulder00
« loser pts » were just put in to have as many teams in the playoff race for as long as possible. Why have any pts for a loss? Yes, these games USED to be ties in my olden days but since we have OT and SO’s now to determine a winner, imo, the loser should get 0 pts. I don’t see the difference in losing regulation or losing in OT.
Hockey is the only major sport with this. NBA OT: W or L, MLB Extra Innings : W or L NFL OT W or L or on the verrry rare occasion a tie. Why is hockey the only sport that rewards you for getting to OT and losing?
daysofc
Yup, I wish loser points would be removed. Loser receives 0 points in all cases. Losing, no matter how, should never be rewarded. Difference in Reg wins and OT wins could be used as tiebreakers for tied seedings at the end of regular season.
Getting one guaranteed point by just finishing three periods of regulation play never occurred when there was 5 vs 5 OT and ties were possible.
If the NHL would change their stance that all wins no matter what type must be 2 points then shootout wins should be 1 pt. Since the shootout takes place after an overtime tie then the shootout should decide who keeps their 1 pt and who loses their 1 pt.
This would make the team season point totals more fair to compare to past seasons that had ties. It would also eliminate 3 pt games and make all games give out at most 2 pts. And most importantly it would prevent a scenario where a team loses their last reg season game but gets a point that gets them into the playoffs.
Yeah 3 vs 3 OT is not the same as 5 vs 5 OT of the past but it’s still a type of team play. Although rare, it’s possible to have 3 vs 3 in regulation now (and the Habs did have this happen in one of their reg season games). OT is already altered by becoming sudden death so to me also reducing the number of players in OT during reg season is fine and a practical compromise. Personally I’d like to see a 12 min OT period that starts off with 4 vs 4 then reduces to 3 vs 3 at the first stoppage after 4 minutes.
I really do think the NHL should get rid of this loser point but I see it only being possible if shootout wins are reduced to 1 pt.
Flimsy_Biscotti3473
It shows that we have enough skill to compete 3 on 3.
11 Comments
Hi there! It looks like you’ve posted an image. If this image is from an article, please provide a source. If it’s a meme, please ignore this comment. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Habs) if you have any questions or concerns.*
if only 3-4 of those lose in OT were in regulation,we would draft in top 5 🙁
Régulation win should be 3 points. So many games with 3 points given out and still only 2 for a regulation win
Old guy here – i object to it being called a « loser » point – all those were ties – resolved by the spectacle of regular season OT , which is fine as a spectacle, but isn’t real OT ..
Imagine if Cole Caufield had scored 10 or 12 more goals, as many of us expected. (As *he* expected of himself, I daresay.) All those 1-goal losses (in reg and OT) he might have helped his team avoid.
I’m worried his shoulder – and shot – might never be quite the same.
#BringBackTies
Maybe it’s because I’m an old fart, but back in the day, they called games that ended in ties, A TIE and you got one point for it.
Forget about whether a win should be three points, if you reach the end of regulation and are tied you deserve at least one point. Point final!
I just randomly came across another interesting fact about this season. Our longest winning streak was 2 games, which we accomplished only 6 times. We had a few chances to go for 3 games in OT or the shootout and blew it.
« loser pts » were just put in to have as many teams in the playoff race for as long as possible. Why have any pts for a loss? Yes, these games USED to be ties in my olden days but since we have OT and SO’s now to determine a winner, imo, the loser should get 0 pts. I don’t see the difference in losing regulation or losing in OT.
Hockey is the only major sport with this. NBA OT: W or L, MLB Extra Innings : W or L NFL OT W or L or on the verrry rare occasion a tie. Why is hockey the only sport that rewards you for getting to OT and losing?
Yup, I wish loser points would be removed. Loser receives 0 points in all cases. Losing, no matter how, should never be rewarded. Difference in Reg wins and OT wins could be used as tiebreakers for tied seedings at the end of regular season.
Getting one guaranteed point by just finishing three periods of regulation play never occurred when there was 5 vs 5 OT and ties were possible.
If the NHL would change their stance that all wins no matter what type must be 2 points then shootout wins should be 1 pt. Since the shootout takes place after an overtime tie then the shootout should decide who keeps their 1 pt and who loses their 1 pt.
This would make the team season point totals more fair to compare to past seasons that had ties. It would also eliminate 3 pt games and make all games give out at most 2 pts. And most importantly it would prevent a scenario where a team loses their last reg season game but gets a point that gets them into the playoffs.
Yeah 3 vs 3 OT is not the same as 5 vs 5 OT of the past but it’s still a type of team play. Although rare, it’s possible to have 3 vs 3 in regulation now (and the Habs did have this happen in one of their reg season games). OT is already altered by becoming sudden death so to me also reducing the number of players in OT during reg season is fine and a practical compromise. Personally I’d like to see a 12 min OT period that starts off with 4 vs 4 then reduces to 3 vs 3 at the first stoppage after 4 minutes.
I really do think the NHL should get rid of this loser point but I see it only being possible if shootout wins are reduced to 1 pt.
It shows that we have enough skill to compete 3 on 3.