NHL Off-Topic thread

[slickdtc]

Do teams really fall back on being "above" .500 as a point of pride for their bad seasons? Sounds like what a team-centric blog or website would spin to get people excited for the upcoming season. I suppose that goes hand-in-hand with your pitch to potential season tickets holders.

I guess eventually it'll be "discovered" that above .500 is not actually a thing in the NHL, but as long as they can milk it, they will. Gotta think that hardcore fans know better and casual fans don't actually care or even know what above .500 means.

What is the official reason for the loser point? Do we have any reading material about when they introduced it and why the **** was it a good idea originally?

I think the biggest joke was that an OTL was the same point value as a tie. I don't like ties, but they really thought actually losing was equal?

Why was I cursed into hockey fandom...

[DrJones]

Quote: Originally Posted by slickdtc

Do teams really fall back on being "above" .500 as a point of pride for their bad seasons? Sounds like what a team-centric blog or website would spin to get people excited for the upcoming season. I suppose that goes hand-in-hand with your pitch to potential season tickets holders. I guess eventually it'll be "discovered" that above .500 is not actually a thing in the NHL, but as long as they can milk it, they will. Gotta think that hardcore fans know better and casual fans don't actually care or even know what above .500 means.

You pretty much answered your own question there. Casual fans and lazy media types eat that stuff up.

Quote: Originally Posted by slickdtc

What is the official reason for the loser point? Do we have any reading material about when they introduced it and why the **** was it a good idea originally?

Let me tell you a story.

Once upon a time, there was no regular season OT, and it was good.

However, many coaches were gutless cowards who were afraid to lose, and teams started playing for the tie instead of trying to win in regulation. Thus 5 minutes of OT (5 min of 5-on-5, no loser point) was introduced. Problem solved!

However, because many coaches were still gutless cowards, teams continued to play for the tie instead of trying to win in regulation or OT. Around this time, goal scoring in general began to plummet (thanks in large part to coaches, in addition to being gutless cowards, became control freaks who preferred a 2-1 loss to a 5-4 win). Lower scores = greater likelihood of ties. Thus an OT "loser point" was introduced to to induce teams to play more aggressively for a win in OT. Problem solved!

However, because coaches were STILL gutless cowards, teams tried even harder to reach OT to guarantee a "loser point". Once in OT, they still tended to play for the tie. Thus, in addition to a loser point, OT became 4-on-4, and shootouts replaced ties. Problem solved!

However, because coaches are STILL gutless cowards, teams still wanted that guaranteed "loser point" more than anything else. Once in OT, teams tended to play for the shootout rather than win in OT. Why, you may ask, would coaches prefer the coinflip of a shootout, especially since I've already told you that they're miserable control freaks? Because above all else, they are GUTLESS COWARDS who are afraid to lose and hate accepting blame for anything. Because the outcomes of shootouts are essentially random, a shootout loss is essentially blameless. If a team loses in OT due to a bad line change or a bad pinch or a soft goal, the coach (and players) are often held accountable by fans and media (and perhaps upper management). If a team loses in a shootout, the reaction is pretty much ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Thus, in addition to a loser point and shootouts, OT became 3-on-3. Problem solved!

[slickdtc]

However, because coaches are gutless cowards...

[Money99]

Quote: Originally Posted by slickdtc

However, because coaches are gutless cowards...

LOL...

Great post DrJones! You summed it up perfectly.

The season hasn't started yet and already Barry Trotz is talking about playing conservatively in OT so they can unleash the Godzilla of SO skaters, SO Oshie.

I'm going to cry long and hard if we suddenly see all these gutless cowards push 3 dmen out the door over and over again.

[redsox4evur]

Quote: Originally Posted by Money99

LOL... Great post DrJones! You summed it up perfectly. The season hasn't started yet and already Barry Trotz is talking about playing conservatively in OT so they can unleash the Godzilla of SO skaters, SO Oshie. I'm going to cry long and hard if we suddenly see all these gutless cowards push 3 dmen out the door over and over again.

Claude Julien is that you???

[DrJones]

Quote: Originally Posted by Money99

LOL... Great post DrJones! You summed it up perfectly. The season hasn't started yet and already Barry Trotz is talking about playing conservatively in OT so they can unleash the Godzilla of SO skaters, SO Oshie. I'm going to cry long and hard if we suddenly see all these gutless cowards push 3 dmen out the door over and over again.

This is why a longer OT period isn't the answer. Yes, you'd end up with a few more goals (mostly on the PP), but as long as there's a point (whether via OT/SO loss or a tie) at the end of the rainbow, things won't change. Note how often you see ridiculous scoring chances early in playoff OT (even though it's 5-on-5); it's because every incentive for playing conservatively has been removed. There's nothing to "hang on" for; at some point you have to score a goddamned goal to win.

[Cletus]

I'm always amazed at Toronto's media. I think it's because it's new to me. I turned on tsn Toronto expecting to hear hockey talk but of course it was all blue jays. I was fine with it but they actually said that if the jays were an American team they wouldn't be playing in the afternoon. So MLB has never put an American team on in the afternoon? Who are the Jays playing? That other Canadian MLB team. Then they discussed hockey and I wish they went back to baseball.

Sent from my KFSOWI using Tapatalk

[DrJones]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cletus

I'm always amazed at Toronto's media. I think it's because it's new to me. I turned on tsn Toronto expecting to hear hockey talk but of course it was all blue jays. I was fine with it but they actually said that if the jays were an American team they wouldn't be playing in the afternoon. So MLB has never put an American team on in the afternoon? Who are the Jays playing? That other Canadian MLB team. Then they discussed hockey and I wish they went back to baseball.

Now you know why I no longer have cable.