GMs discuss ending three-point circus
NHL’s brainstorm session questions logic in awarding loser points for getting into OT
Imagine a scenario where instead of being one point back of the wild card spot, there was actually a 10-point gap between the Toronto Maple Leafs and the team they are chasing.
For the Leafs, who have lost their last five games, it would be a nightmare. Even scarier is that it could happen: All it would take is for the league to change how wins and losses are weighed.
The proposed 3-2-1 point system — three points for a regulation win, two points for an overtime win and one point for an overtime loss — was one of the ideas that came out of a brainstorming session during Day 1 of the NHL general managers’ meetings on Monday.
With no real pressing issues, general managers were asked to think big picture and envision what the game might look like five to 10 years from now. No ideas were considered bad ideas, although some were admittedly a bit nutty. One GM proposed a complete ban on blocking shots, while another wanted to move the faceoff circles to the middle of the offensive zone.
The 3-2-1 point system, which provides extra incentive for teams to close out games in regulation, was one of the more realistic ideas. It’s been on the table since the overtime shootout was implemented for the 2005-06 season and tie games were made a thing of the past.
Most GMs don’t mind giving a point to a team that loses in overtime or a shootout. But the problem is that regulation wins and overtime or shootout wins are lumped together, when the latter is often the result of being good at a skills competition.
“I’m not one who is personally in favour of three-point games,” Leafs GM Lou Lamoriello said. “But I’m also not in favour of getting a point if you don’t win. I’d rather see the game be two and zero or end up in a tie, one and one.”
The best — and worst — thing about three-point games is it causes the standings to become tighter. The loser point makes it difficult for top teams to pull away, or for non-playoff teams to drop out of the picture.
We’re seeing that again this season, with six teams — four from the East and two in the West — three points out of a playoff spot as of Monday morning.
By making regulation wins count for more, the order of the standings wouldn’t change much. Washington would still be best team in the league and Colorado would still be the worst. But the gaps between teams would become noticeably larger.
The Leafs, who are a win away from being back in a playoff spot, would be 10 points back. The Florida Panthers, who are two points out, would trail by 16.
Of course, there’s more to it than that. Teams play a certain way knowing that regulation wins are not worth more and that a loser point exists.
“We all talk about it all the time, having no three-point game,” New Jersey Devils GM Ray Shero said. “If there was a 3-2-1 system, what would the standings look like today? My thing is, why is that relevant? We’re coaching and playing a game that is this (way), so the idea of a 3-2-1-point game is we play differently.”
Indeed, the bigger question is how it might change the way games are played. Would teams be more aggressive? Would there be fewer overtimes?
“You have to model it out and see how much does it change,” Flames GM Brad Treliving said. “We were a little mixed on that. The idea is, how do you make the game look? Is there change in the game?”
The real sticking point, however, is that there is no pressing need to change things. It might not be fair, but the league is more competitive than ever.
“The system that we’re in right now, you can fuss all you want about it,” Treliving said, “but we’ve got parity and I don’t think we’re changing that any time soon.”