The New York Islanders squeezed into the playoffs on Sunday. Under any normal circumstances I would not write about this mediocre achievement but it’s the way it was done that has this scribe’s mid-sized brain working overtime.
Specifically, the Islanders made the playoffs by winning in a shoot-out over the New Jersey Devils. It allowed them to prevail in a tight three-way battle with the Toronto Maple Leafs and Montreal Canadiens. While in principle I am no fan of the shoot-out, it is unfair to blame it all on the shoot-out. It all balances out in the end anyway. After all, just a few days earlier the Maple Leafs had destiny in their own hands when they played the Islanders and promptly lost 7-2. Same with the Canadiens, all they had to do was win one of their last two games and decided to show up flat in both. Bye-bye.
Still, is the new way of calculating points a fair one? If anything, sports fans should be questioning the NHL’s ridiculous egalitarian decision to award a point for an OT loss. Why doesn’t the NHL just give out “You’re swell” ribbons too?
To see where the new method becomes bizarre we need to break down the numbers. Here is how they finished in the standings:
New York 40-30-12 - 92 pts.
Toronto 40-31-11 - 91 pts
Montreal 42-34-6 - 90 pts.
So what you say? Let's compare these numbers to the past to see how the NHL way of calculating the points skews the reality. Quick history refresher before we go on: Up until the 1982-83 season, there was no OT - both sides got a point. The following 1983-84 season a five minute OT was introduced. Only if you finished the OT in a tie did you get the point.
Now you get a point just for reaching the OT. How nice! So your loss column is spared a loss. In this way the Islanders got seven “free” points, the Leafs four and the Habs one. As a result, I’m increasing the losses by these numbers.
So here’s how the records temporary look like at this point:
New York 40-37-5
Toronto 40-35-5
Montreal 42-35-7
Now, when you lose in a shoot-out your loss record is not affected. But you do get a win because you earn an extra point. Remember up until this point the game is a tie. You’re just trying to determine who will get that point. Here are the shoot-out records for each:
Article comments
1 - J
Did the more medicore team really prevail? No. First, I think you're hard-pressed to argue that any one of the three teams (Habs, Leafs, Isles) was really that much worse than the other. A greater point differential from the overtime loss points would better argue your case, but that didn't happen here.
Second, is the NHL really being egalitarian? I think it's actually more of a meritocracy when it rewards teams tied after regulation with a point. We can finally now rank a team losing by 1 goal higher than a team losing by 10.
Third, it's not some free-for-all where "everyone has to have a shot to win." There is a playoff cut-off and many teams (like the Habs and Leafs) don't have shot this season. The Isles may have a shot but they are the last playoff seed in the East, not the first, so their shot should be seen in this appropriate context.
2 - alessandro Nicolo
Hey J. Well said. Counterpoints if I may. You're absolutely right, of the three you can flip a coin. I will go out and say that the Isles deserved it most based on the fact that they were more consistent this year. However, the OT loss point diff. was greater. The Islanders got seven free points as I pointed out to Montreal's 1. That's a huge gap. So huge that by comparing it to other eras it shows that the Isles benefited as the tables show.
On your seconf point I completely reject it. It's utter nonsense to give a team a point for losing. A loss is a loss no matter how much you lose by. It's not a meritocracy. It's mediocracy. That I stand by.
As for the my parting shot about the Isles getting a "shot," I think we've said the same thing in a different way. The Isles can upset - after all anything can happen. But everyone at the beginning of the year does believe they have a shot to make the playoffs if not win the cup outright. There is no dominant team. It wasn't always like that. For better or for worse.
Anyway, some people like it this way and that's fine. Personally, I'm more of a dynasty kind of guy.
3 - RJ
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it just a few seasons ago that a tie at the end of regulation meant a five-minute OT period? And if no one scored in that OT period, each team was given one point. But if a team did score during that OT period, that team was declared the winner and got two points, while the other team got zero points? And also, there were no shootouts?
That's the NHL scoring system I grew up with. This new scoring system is much more complicated, and seems to reward mediocrity. While I understand the whole shootout thing adds to the excitement of the fans watching the game, I cannot agree with awarding a team a point simply for making it into OT. That is pretty much communist bullshit, in my opinion.
"Oh, look everybody! We didn't lose, yet! Therefore, we get rewarded with points! Yea!!!"
Do NFL teams get some special bonus for losing in sudden-death overtime? Do MLB teams get an advantage for keeping it tied until they blow it in the 10th or 11th inning? Do NBA teams accrue special accolades for choking in OT? NO!!!
The big-wigs at the NHL needs to get their heads out of their asses and go back to the basics.
4 - alessandro Nicolo
RJ, bingo. That's how it went from 1984 until the lockout. That's pretty much the NHL I grew up with too. Before that each team was awarded a point without an OT.
Socialism, communism, Marxism - whatever. They all stink.
5 - El Bicho
I can see points on both sides, but the game is fluid and ever-changing, so it's not enough to get bothered by for me. I'm still pissed they allowed goalie to put masks on.
"This is all moot for a couple of reasons."
Reason #1: Sabres in Five.
6 - alessandro Nicolo
El Bicho, Sabres will win. I also think it's about time they win the cup. The franchise deserves it and I have written elsewhere that Lindy Ruff is among the best - if not the best - coach in the NHL. Once again this year he had to manage with many injuries. Result? He lead them to the President's trophy.
7 - El Bicho
Aless, from your mouth to God's ear. As a Buffalo fan, I try not to get my hopes up, but I do have a good feeling this year. They came so close last year and truly believe it was their injuries that were the deciding factor against Carolina. I am certain they will make a good run at it again.
No interest in any trophy except for Lord Stanley's.
I'll take Lindy Ruff as one of the best coaches in any sport right now. It has surprised me that he hasn't thrown on a uniform and jumped into a game with all their injuries. Did you see him after that hit knocked Drury down? He was ready to jump the glass and get into a fight with their bench. I loved that he threw out the enforcer's line. Plus, he is one of many that knows Hull's foot was in the crease.
8 - alessandro Nicolo
I guess therein lies his value: player play for him. The loyalty and respect is two-way. I'm also a fan of teams in any sports who have the fortitude to hold onto to coaches rather than take the easy way out by firing tem every couple of years or so. It does show stability in a franchise.
9 - RJ
Don't look now, but the Islanders just tied up the series, 1-1...
10 - alessandro Nicolo
Dead cat bounce.