I don’t understand the criticism of “gimmick loser points”, when they’ve been losing the gimmick. It would be more concerning if all their wins were in OT/SO. They’re getting points for taking it into overtime, which would give you a chance to win in the “real season”. Their regulation points percentage is 9th in the league before the games today.
Player Discussion JT Miller Thread - Family Man
- Thread starter Vector
- Start date
I don’t understand the criticism of “gimmick loser points”, when they’ve been losing the gimmick. It would be more concerning if all their wins were in OT/SO. They’re getting points for taking it into overtime, which would give you a chance to win in the “real season”. Their regulation points percentage is 9th in the league before the games today.
theguardianII
Registered User
- Jan 30, 2020
- 3,709
- 1,871
I have no idea where you are getting your stats from.
I can't find ANY stats that show them anywhere near close to 9th best in the league.
The gimmick point? Adding that point just makes it look closer than it is, a team playing .500 is, or was half way right? Add the gimmick point and now .500 is like 5th to 7th worst in the league.
theguardianII
Registered User
- Jan 30, 2020
- 3,709
- 1,871
HairyKneel
Registered User
- Jun 5, 2023
- 1,535
- 1,419
But does the league use the stats they've been rolling with for years or do they say "I wonder how guardianII feels about this" ...... They are 5 and 5 in your world Tiger. That's it. All 32 teams play by the same rules. Points pctg is a thing.
theguardianII
Registered User
- Jan 30, 2020
- 3,709
- 1,871
Except the real season.
Gimmick, ya, .500 isn't half way anymore, it doesn't represent half good or half bad., that is a gimmick used to fool fans into buying tickets, merchandise and thinking a 26th placed team is almost there or there is real parity within the league.
Here is a real points pctg possibility, possibility only and taken to an extreme.
If 95 pts by way of points percentage makes a playoff spot.
10 wins all season, 20 pts and 75 losses, 75 points in OT or SO = 95 pts and a trip to the playoffs. record of 20 reg wins - 0 reg losses - 75 losses in OT/SO
That is extreme but variations of that can occur, say 25 wins and "X" loser/gimmick points or 35 wins and "X" loser/gimmick points.
VERSUS
45 wins team with almost no OT or SO loser/gimmick points.
In Vancouver we saw this happen when Colorado won the division with fewer actual wins which resulted in Naslund's "we chocked" comments at the end of the last game.
Even the covid play in round, Calgary had a better outright wins record but was left out because they didn't play as many games.
Just because team and NHL marketing says this is the new way but then they say it isn't in the real season, playoffs.
If my way of thinking of stats is good and promoted by the NHL in the playoffs, why are they not worthy of consideration now? Odds makers aren't thinking of pts percentages when making the line or playoff appearance odds. They select teams by how good they are, not promoted to be.
Andy Dufresne
Registered User
- Jun 17, 2009
- 2,742
- 907
But we're the team usually not getting the gimmick point.
We've won 1 Ot/so gm and lost 3. we literally have a (1) gimmick pt this year. Go back 50 years if you want:
Our record is 4 wins, 2 losses and 4 ties.
That's not .500. It's .666.
bandwagonesque
I eat Kraft Dinner and I vote
- Mar 5, 2014
- 7,543
- 5,956
Outcomes in OT/SO are essentially random and not coupled with any measure of performance. Therefore, a team with a lot of "loser points;" i.e., that has lost and collected 1 point more often than they have won and collected 2 points in those scenarios, has actually been given fewer points than the mean in that random process and is therefore probably better and not worse than their total points relative to other teams suggests.
Please, please understand this. One of you has to eventually.
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
Have I been wrong to think getting a point for losing in OT / SO is what people call the gimmick point?
It usually is but people are stupid and it’s a nonsense opinion. You get a point for tying after regulation. If the OT/SO is considered a gimmick then the point for winning those are “gimmick points”
Other people have addressed this, but you’re not understanding how these things work. You get a point for tying after regulation. You then get a point for winning the gimmick. Gimmick points are not OT/SO losses but OT/SO wins.
Here’s the list of regulation records for teams currently based on points percentage:
1. Winnipeg: .808 (9-1-3)
2. NY Rangers: .773 (8-2-1)
3. Carolina: .727 (7-2-2)
4. Minnesota: .707 (7-2-3)
5. Florida: .692 (8-3-2)
6. Washington: .682 (7-3-1)
7. LA: .679 (8-3-3)
8. Vegas: .667 (7-3-2)
9. Vancouver: .636 (5-2-4)
10. New Jersey: .600 (8-5-2)
11. Dallas: .591 (6-4-1)
12. Toronto: .571 (7-5-2)
13. Tampa Bay: .500 (6-6-1)
Detroit: .500 (5-5-1)
Columbus: .500 (5-5-2)
16. St.Louis: .462 (5-6-2)
Calgary: .462 (4-5-4)
18. Ottawa: .458 (5-6-1)
19. Buffalo: .423 (5-7-1)
Edmonton: .423 (4-6-3)
Colorado: .423 (5-7-1)
22. Boston: .393 (4-7-3)
23. Montreal: .385 (4-7-2)
Utah: .385 (2-5-6)
Chicago: .385 (4-7-2)
26. Anaheim: .363 (3-6-3)
27. Pittsburgh: .357 (3-7-4)
28. NY Islanders: .346 (2-6-5)
29. Nashville: .333 (3-7-2)
30. Seattle: .321 (3-8-3)
31. Philadelphia: .308 (3-8-2)
32. San Jose: .284 (2-8-4)
The team hasn’t won as much in regulation as you’d want, but they’ve also been limiting their losses and taking games to OT. If you don’t want the “gimmick” OT/SO to influence a team’s record, all you can do is look at regulation. Trying to remove OT losses but keeping OT wins is nonsense.
Last edited:
PuckMunchkin
Very Nice, Very Evil!
You’re not getting a point for losing. You’re getting a point for winning the gimmick after the real hockey game is over
theguardianII
Registered User
- Jan 30, 2020
- 3,709
- 1,871
As long as you are using points percentage then you include the gimmick points.
The gimmick point has changed expectations, points percentage is more about points, not wins.
There are stat sites that include a stats for regulation time results.
SillyRabbit
Trix Are For Kids
- Jan 3, 2006
- 9,001
- 8,959
He's been playing through injury for what, a month now?
And even before then, he didn't look to be in top game shape in the first few games of the season.
With him being benched in the third against the Predators, I think you absolutely have to force him out of the lineup so he can rest, rehab and recover.
He's not helping the team at all, and he's only prolonging the time it will take for him to heal.
Instead of playing ineffective for the next ~15-20 games while he tries to play through the injury, he should just sit out ~8-10 games, get back to 100% and return to the lineup when he's fully healthy and able to have a big impact.
And even before then, he didn't look to be in top game shape in the first few games of the season.
With him being benched in the third against the Predators, I think you absolutely have to force him out of the lineup so he can rest, rehab and recover.
He's not helping the team at all, and he's only prolonging the time it will take for him to heal.
Instead of playing ineffective for the next ~15-20 games while he tries to play through the injury, he should just sit out ~8-10 games, get back to 100% and return to the lineup when he's fully healthy and able to have a big impact.
