Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
wataduk

NHL Tie-Breaker Question

23 posts in this topic

If there are 3 teams tied in points for the final wildcard spot and 2 of the teams (A,B) have identical ROW at 35. The other team (C) has 34.

Since the spot is not settled yet, would all 3 teams go to the next tie-breaker step or only the 2 teams (A,B) tied in ROW thus eliminating team C?
 

Edited by wataduk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, wataduk said:

If there are 3 teams tied in points for the final wildcard spot and 2 of the teams (A,B) have identical ROW at 35. The other team (C) has 34.

Since the spot is not settled yet, would all 3 teams go to the next tie-breaker step or only the 2 teams (A,B) tied in ROW thus eliminating team C?
 

pretty sure only the 2 teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first tie breaker (ROW) eliminates Team C. Next tie breaker is... Goal differential, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate that 3 on 3 wins are considered ROW's

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ZTHER said:

Hate that 3 on 3 wins are considered ROW's

Yet another new rule change for the NHL! ROW changes into RW - Regulation Wins only!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Aksun said:

Yet another new rule change for the NHL! ROW changes into RW - Regulation Wins only!

Absolutely! Perhaps then we might see the teams press harder late in the 3rd period for the regulation win if there were some consequence for taking the game into OT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The standings situation was far better without shootouts and overtime losses.  Bring back the tie.

3 on 3 is a no contact gimmick, and the shootout is a poor way to decide a game.

Edited by Fowl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fowl said:

The standings situation was far better without shootouts and overtime losses.  Bring back the tie.

3 on 3 is a no contact gimmick, and the shootout is a poor way to decide a game.

Really disagree with this.   The games became super boring in the 3rd period as teams played for the tie and there were times when teams had upwards of 20 ties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Fowl said:

The standings situation was far better without shootouts and overtime losses.  Bring back the tie.

3 on 3 is a no contact gimmick, and the shootout is a poor way to decide a game.

I like that there are no ties. I'd just prefer that they do something like 5min 4 on 4 then 5min 3 on 3. Going straight to 3 on 3 and then shootout is gimmick followed by gimmick. At least play some 4 on 4 first.

Let's be honest, the league will NEVER go back to ties so there's not much point in making that argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Fowl said:

The standings situation was far better without shootouts and overtime losses.  Bring back the tie.

3 on 3 is a no contact gimmick, and the shootout is a poor way to decide a game.

That, sir, is an excellent point.  I don't think I had ever really considered that 3x3 is designed to be all skating and very little hitting, so players are much less likely to get injured in 3x3.

Which is a great argument to keep it around as an extra point decider that includes play making and skating skills and in-game goalie saves, and not just pot-shotting a goalie.

Holy Dehydrated Donkey Dung, I may have just become a convert to 3x3.  Anything that helps the Ducks not get injured in the regular season is a-ok with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2018 at 0:22 PM, Fisix said:

That, sir, is an excellent point.  I don't think I had ever really considered that 3x3 is designed to be all skating and very little hitting, so players are much less likely to get injured in 3x3.

Which is a great argument to keep it around as an extra point decider that includes play making and skating skills and in-game goalie saves, and not just pot-shotting a goalie.

Holy Dehydrated Donkey Dung, I may have just become a convert to 3x3.  Anything that helps the Ducks not get injured in the regular season is a-ok with me.

Why don’t we play the whole game that way?  It’s a gimmick, and as such, you wont see it, or that miserable shootout in the playoffs.  

Maybe the NFL should dump contact too and look into flag football.  Injuries are a part of the game.  How about making the players wear full face cages to prevent facial fractures and high sticking injuries, as well as prohibiting dropping to the ice to block shots.  Wouldn’t be many fights with them cages on either.  Maybe a no checking league would be exciting.  Wouldn’t want to see anybody get hurt.....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2018 at 7:57 AM, nieder said:

I like that there are no ties. I'd just prefer that they do something like 5min 4 on 4 then 5min 3 on 3. Going straight to 3 on 3 and then shootout is gimmick followed by gimmick. At least play some 4 on 4 first.

Let's be honest, the league will NEVER go back to ties so there's not much point in making that argument.

I know that ties will never come back.  Not as long as Comrade Bettman runs the league anyways.  A three point system would help cut down on some of the standings problem, but I wont hold my breath on that either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Fowl said:

Why don’t we play the whole game that way?  It’s a gimmick, and as such, you wont see it, or that miserable shootout in the playoffs.  

Maybe the NFL should dump contact too and look into flag football.  Injuries are a part of the game.  How about making the players wear full face cages to prevent facial fractures and high sticking injuries, as well as prohibiting dropping to the ice to block shots.  Wouldn’t be many fights with them cages on either.  Maybe a no checking league would be exciting.  Wouldn’t want to see anybody get hurt.....

We have four choices for resolving a tie in the regular season. 1) low risk gimmick 3x3 (this is just a version of 4x4), 2) straight to shootout, 3) playoff 5x5, 4) ends in a tie.

Given that:
the season is long,
the players take hits like NHL players do for 1/4 the season (and maybe 1/8 the total playing time?),
shootout is more of a gimmick than 3x3, takes forever, and showcases very few players/skills,
ties suck,

I think we can stick with 3x3.  I'd love it if we were better at it as a team, and I hate that we aren't, but now that the strategy is clearer to me, I'm a fan of the concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m tired of Bettman and friends’ continual rule tweaking.  A regular season tie could be a meaningful hard earned point, although I clearly know that will never change.  The 3x3 is better than the shootout, but it’s still like flag football to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd play 5 minutes of 4-on-4 then 5 minutes of 3-on-3. Try and end it before 3-on-3 and shootout. You get a ROW for winning in 4-on-4 but not 3-on-3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would an extra 2-3 shifts for the top players every so often really pose much of an increase risk of injury? I wouldn't think so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a tie game after three full periods with a compressed overtime period and extra points on the line?  And at the end of the game when they're already exhausted?  Yeah, there's an increased risk of injury.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2018 at 2:20 PM, Fisix said:

In a tie game after three full periods with a compressed overtime period and extra points on the line?  And at the end of the game when they're already exhausted?  Yeah, there's an increased risk of injury.

Maybe it forces the coaching staff to play lower tier lines more minutes during the early parts of the game.  It’s survival of the fittest and if the conditioning is in question, utilize the players with more energy left in the tank. During the playoffs, that’s how it works.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2018 at 3:20 PM, Fisix said:

In a tie game after three full periods with a compressed overtime period and extra points on the line?  And at the end of the game when they're already exhausted?  Yeah, there's an increased risk of injury.

Because of the occasional game that goes the distance? I doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, nieder said:

Because of the occasional game that goes the distance? I doubt it.

You're improperly mixing your statistical averages (stats on entering OT vs, stats on injuries as ice time in any game increases).  EVERY overtime is a higher risk of injury relative to any of the periods of regular play. 

The risk of injury increases in every game as the game time continues, so the increased risk of the OT is just a natural progression of that.  In addition, however, there's only 5 minutes rest after the 3rd period, and they're the tiredest they've been that game at the end of the 3rd.

So. I think it's fair to counter that increased risk by tweaking the OT to reduce chance of the kinds of play that more often result in injuries, and more often when players are tired.  AND, I'm on board with keeping playoff hockey a separate animal from regular season play.  And I don't like shootouts that much.
    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Animal24 said:

2 min 5x5 and both goalies pulled. Most goals wins.

We already suck at the 3 on 3 OT. Imagine we're going to have empty net OT's. We'll never get the extra point :P

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0