EHEC Points and Playoff Seeding System

[SharksGM]

Now that we're nearing the start of the regular season, it's a good time to decide whether we want to change how we allocate points and playoff seeds in EHEC. A quick primer:

EHEC followed the NHL alignment, points and seeding system for most of its history, starting with 3 divisions per conference with division winners getting the top 3 seeds, and switching to the much-maligned two division and divisional playoff format along with the NHL. A season or two ago we decided to stuff that shitty system, given that we were never going to expand to 32 teams, and went right back to the old alignment and seeding. However, EHM lets you change the playoff schedules however you want, so we're free to pick whatever points and seeding system we want. I'd like to suggest three possible changes:

1. Seeding. We can keep the existing rule (division winners get top 3 seeds), drop to a weaker advantage (division winners are guaranteed a playoff spot but not necessarily top 3), or drop it altogether (division winners get no special treatment).

My preference is for division winners to get no advantage whatsoever. If you win your division despite being in the bottom half of the conference, your team is bad and deserves to miss the playoffs, particularly since your schedule featured more divisional games against even worse teams.

2. Shootouts. We can keep 'em or lose 'em. The program is easy to run and realistic in that it seems completely random and nonsensical. It's slightly annoying that you have no control over who shoots, although it's funny when the game lets a guy who got severely injured come out to shoot. Either way we'd still have 5 minutes of regular 5v5 OT; none of those 3v3 shenanigans here.

I think shootouts suck and have a slight preference to drop them. I'd have a stronger preference if there were any way to extend the overtime period.

3. Points. There are many options here which I could subdivide but won't since the choices partly depend on whether shootouts continue or not. Most of the proposals I've seen lean towards 3 points for wins like soccer, and often 2/1 for OT/SO W/L. Or one could drop the SOL/OTL point altogether, which I think is reasonable since OT is still 5v5 and there are no bonus points for overtime losses in the playoffs.

My preference is to stick with 2 point wins and either 2/0 for OTW/OTL or (shockingly) 1.5/0.5. We're adults, we can handle half points, and a 1 point spread for a non-regulation win is reasonable and better than the 2/1 nonsense bonus point for SOL now. 1 each for ties is fine if we drop shootouts.

Thoughts?

[Bruins_GM]

1 - Top 8 teams in each conference make the playoffs.
2 - Keep the shootouts, unless there's a way to just play unlimited OT in the regular season.
3 - The half-point proposal is good.

[NYRNYRNYR]

1) I agree on dropping, take the top 8. That said - are we able to set it to re-seed every round? I always thought that was preferred.

2) I HATE shootouts and think its a stupid coinflip that's worthless. Its a skills comp, not hockey. That goes for the real NHL and for here. I will always vote drop it. I agree with BOS that continuous OT is interesting - the only reason the NHL doesn't is just actual logistics of real people and real travel. But that's all fake here. But even if we can't do continuous OT, DROP.THE.SHOOTOUT.

3) Your half point suggestion is interesting. The "3 point win" has been kicked around in the NHL, which I agree with as long as they keep doing this stupid loser point/shootout. But I like the idea of keeping a "game" worth 2 points, and assigning points as 2/0, 1.5/0.5, or 1/1.

Can we fix how I missed the playoffs last year?

[Edmonton Mike]

1. Eliminate divisions. 2 Conferences; Top 8 teams go through.

If there's a way to eliminate divisions in game or make the calendar more balanced that way, that'd be great. If not, whatever, keep the calendar "division rivalries" oriented but let's go with Top 8 teams regardless of "division winners".

2. Scrap the shootouts. We (some of us) put too much time on lines and all to have it decided at random in a shootout.

3. Good old format: Winners get 2pts, a tie gets you 1 pt and losers get nothing, regular or overtime.

In EHEC, when you lose, you lose.

[NYRNYRNYR]

3. Good old format: Winners get 2pts, a tie gets you 1 pt and losers get nothing, regular or overtime.

In EHEC, when you lose, you lose.

This usually comes up and I was a big believer in this too for awhile. Ultimately I think it's unfair to tell a team that played 60 minutes of even hockey that there's no reward for that. Like, I agree, we certainly can say that, I just think we shouldn't. Sure, its arbitrary, why 60 instead of 50 or 70, but that's the time we said is 1 full game, so I mean, shrug.

[PittsburghGM]

I have no strong preference either way for 1) and 3), but I am definitely for getting rid of shootouts. Ties don't really bother me, and shootouts are stupid.

Forced to make a decision on the others I'd say top-8 teams in each conference with no special treatment for division winners, and I kinda like either the 1.5/0.5 thing or just 2 for a win and no points for a loss, regulation or OT.

[Gritty]

I say continuous overtime so there are no ties or shootouts, and the normal NHL point scoring rules for wins OTWs, OTLs and Ls

[NYRNYRNYR]

I say continuous overtime so there are no ties or shootouts, and the normal NHL point scoring rules for wins OTWs, OTLs and Ls

My only concern with the normal-NHL is the problem that some games are worth 3 points, and others are worth 2. Every game should be the same with either 3 points (3 regulation win, 2-1 OTW/OTL) or 2 points (2 reg, 1.5/.5 OTW/OTL).

[TorontoGM]

1. Division winners get no special treatment
2. Keep shootouts. I don't understand how people think ties are better than a shootout. Ties are incredibly lame, rather lose than tie any day of the week(at least personally in sports). If continuous OT is possible, I'd be down for that though.
3. I like the 1.5/0.5 system. The loser point is the only reason I made the playoffs last time, I'm gonna stay loyal and say we keep it.

[Dallas Stars GM]

1. No special treatment for division winners. Top 8 best teams from each division deserve to be in the play-offs.

2. If it could be done that we would play 3 on 3 during overtime, or try to go with 1 extra overtime period and THEN shootout. I think that would significantly decrease the amount of games going to shootout.

3. I think the point system is good now.

[AvalancheGM]

Top 8 with no special treatment. Get rid of shootouts and go back to ties. Two points for a win, and I'm fine with either a loser point or zero.

[Gritty]

I feel like ties are no fun

[DetroitGM]

Not sure I have any strong opinions on any of this (barring a slight preference for all games being worth the same number of points, regardless of how many that is), but I will point out to folks asking for continuous OT that the game isn't designed for it, nor is there an addon available for it like with shootouts, so I'm pretty sure you'd either need to design an addon from scratch or find a way to edit the code of the game itself. If you've got those skills, go for it, please, but I imagine it'd take a whole lot of work.

[SharksGM]

Changing anything about overtime is not possible.

3. Good old format: Winners get 2pts, a tie gets you 1 pt and losers get nothing, regular or overtime.

In EHEC, when you lose, you lose.

This usually comes up and I was a big believer in this too for awhile. Ultimately I think it's unfair to tell a team that played 60 minutes of even hockey that there's no reward for that. Like, I agree, we certainly can say that, I just think we shouldn't. Sure, its arbitrary, why 60 instead of 50 or 70, but that's the time we said is 1 full game, so I mean, shrug.

Playoff overtime losers get nothing. Having said that, it is worth remembering that EHM loves to end overtime on the first or second shot, so it's less random than the shootout but not exactly like at extra 5 minutes of regulation. That makes me a little more sympathetic to the idea of giving overtime losers something.

[PittsburghGM]

I don't understand how people think ties are better than a shootout. Ties are incredibly lame, rather lose than tie any day of the week(at least personally in sports). If continuous OT is possible, I'd be down for that though.

Speaking for myself, but shootouts to me are basically "people don't like ties and we don't have time to find a winner for a game in which there isn't one so coin flip!", and every time I watch a game that goes to a shootout, the close-to random tiebreaker doesn't do anything to make it feel any less like a tie. There's an excuse to give a team an extra point they didn't earn attached to it, but it's still a tie.

summary: ties are lame, but shootouts are also lame, still feel like ties, and almost-randomly assign an extra point to a team that doesn't deserve it.

[AvalancheGM]

It takes a total team effort to win overtime games in the playoffs - the shootout is the opposite of that. Nothing wrong with a tie when both teams are evenly matched, although as SJ says, EHM loves very short OTs.

[IslandersGM]

Prefer the top 8 in a division.

Drop the shootouts - Continuous OT would be cool but i'm not sure the software allows that option.

for points i'm in favor of the in-game standard.

[TorontoGM]

I love how you all keep referring to shootouts in EHM as a random coin flip and yet most OTs end on the very first shot

[SharksGM]

I love how you all keep referring to shootouts in EHM as a random coin flip and yet most OTs end on the very first shot

In some sense, that's the opposite of a coin flip. Just fight hard for that first faceoff win.

Ok, so it seems like everyone's happy with dump any division leader advantage, mostly on board with ditching the shootout, and somewhat divided on OT points with a lean to eliminating 3 point games. If anyone hasn't chimed in yet, now's the time.

[SharksGM]

Alright, here's my proposal:

1. No advantage of any kind for division winners.
2. No more shootouts. Yes, it means that ties are back, which isn't very exciting, but at least 1 point each for a tie is indisputably fair.
3. Three point games are a crime, so that means either 1.5/0.5 for OTW/L or 2/0. I don't think it makes sense to give fewer points for an OTW when it's regular 5v5 so I'm going to propose we go with 2/0. Now getting nothing for an OTL may seem harsh, so one consolation could be to make most OTL the first standings tiebreaker over most wins. At the least it should go second over most wins, which makes it unlikely but not impossible for it to come up in any given season (it could affect lottery seeding for non-playoff teams too).

Thoughts?

[Dallas Stars GM]

Sorry but I don't like ties. But that's just my opinion

[AvalancheGM]

I like it.

[NYRNYRNYR]

Now getting nothing for an OTL may seem harsh, so one consolation could be to make most OTL the first standings tiebreaker over most wins. At the least it should go second over most wins, which makes it unlikely but not impossible for it to come up in any given season (it could affect lottery seeding for non-playoff teams too).

Thoughts?

I look forward to missing the playoffs this year on this rule