The 2013 NHL Season Thread

[CS85]

Let's check out a couple Holtby gifs.

Er wait, that's not a Holtby gif. Let's try again:

Another? Sure.

[Sport]

WOOOOOOOOOOOO!

This.

One of the reasons I'm rooting for #Lumbus out west is because of guys like Mac here. Diehard fans who deserve to see their teams succeed. You've been with this team through some very, very low times (which I'm sure many other members on here can vouch for) and it's great to see you enjoying the sport of hockey via victories, and not down and out because of the quasi-curse they've had in the last 10+ years.

Good on ya, Mac. Enjoy the ride, brother.

Ditto. I'm pullin for them in the west simply because, well, the Preds crapped the bed all year and aren't in, and I've always viewed the CBJ as kind of a western conference counterpart to the Thrashers. Decent team molded around a superstar player. Now they made big trades and moved out of that phase. Good to see them making it.

Thanks boys. This has been a wild, unexpected ride. It's nice to be the darlings of the NHL for a change. It's also nice to have every other fanbase pulling for us (save Dallas and Detroit), but at the same time I sorta feel like the worst bowler in the group. People love when the worst bowler doesn't gutterball.

Long way to go still. Need some help from our friends playing Detroit and Dallas, need to take care of our own business.

[NEW.ERA]

To think the Flames can actually finish 22-22-4.

[Kramerica Industries]

Which to any hockey fan paying attention, is still a sub-.500 record.

Of course, your concern is still valid, because the douchebags up top will try to convince everyone else otherwise. Because, you know, OITGDNHL.

[Sport]

I understand your conviction that an overtime/shootout loss count the same as a regular loss, but shootouts are such a silly way to end a game that you almost have to give the losing team some credit. The third column in the standings might as well be for coin toss losses.

That said, I really wouldn't mind if they went to straight wins and losses.

[njmeadowlanders]

If they insist on the SO then why not just have that third point ONLY for that? You lose in regular OT (make it 10 minutes) you get nothing.

[A_J_H]

That's funny!

[Still MIGHTY]

Which to any hockey fan paying attention, is still a sub-.500 record.

Of course, your concern is still valid, because the douchebags up top will try to convince everyone else otherwise. Because, you know, OITGDNHL.

We get it. Enough.

Guess what? The NHL is not straight win/loss. It's a points system. Until that changes, it is what it is.

[Sport]

If they insist on the SO then why not just have that third point ONLY for that? You lose in regular OT (make it 10 minutes) you get nothing.

At the very least, ten minute overtimes need to happen. The Blue Jackets and Blackhawks played an overtime this year that was back-and-forth, fast and loose, some of the most exciting hockey I've seen all year and it was a crime that a shootout ended that game. If they had another 5 minutes there's no doubt in my mind one of the teams would've scored and it would've been a proper ending to a great hockey game.

[spartacat_12]

EA Sports has started the voting process for the NHL 14 cover. Here's the ballot: http://covervote.nhl.com/#/ballot. I'm not sure how they decide which two players will be in the running from each team cause there are a few questionable ones, especially in Anaheim. In what world is Matt Beleskey more deserving of the cover than Getzlaf or Perry? I'm predicting that John Tavares will end up winning.

[OnWis97]

If they insist on the SO then why not just have that third point ONLY for that? You lose in regular OT (make it 10 minutes) you get nothing.

At the very least, ten minute overtimes need to happen. The Blue Jackets and Blackhawks played an overtime this year that was back-and-forth, fast and loose, some of the most exciting hockey I've seen all year and it was a crime that a shootout ended that game. If they had another 5 minutes there's no doubt in my mind one of the teams would've scored and it would've been a proper ending to a great hockey game.

I would like 10 minute OT as well, but I'd really like to see a situation where every game ends up in the same number of points. Seeing games between two of my team's rivals for that 8th and final spot go to OT (i.e., for an extra point to be awarded) drives me nuts. (That said it's the Wild's bad play that is pushing them out of the playoffs).

Unfortunately, the best way to do that is to accept the possibility of ties. Which is what should be done. Ties are not the end of the world.

[Still MIGHTY]

EA Sports has started the voting process for the NHL 14 cover. Here's the ballot: http://covervote.nhl.com/#/ballot. I'm not sure how they decide which two players will be in the running from each team cause there are a few questionable ones, especially in Anaheim. In what world is Matt Beleskey more deserving of the cover than Getzlaf or Perry? I'm predicting that John Tavares will end up winning.

Yeah, trust me. I'm not happy.

Getzlaf? Perry? Ryan? Fowler? Beauchemin? Hiller? But no. Andrew Cogliano and Matt Beleskey are excellent choices. The Ducks FOR SURE have a shot at the cover... (And I'd say Selanne or Koivu, but they're probably done. And plus Teemu has been on the cover of the Finnish version of the game every year for a long while if I remember correctly. And Hiller has been a European coverboy once.) I love Cogs and Skey, but there's no way we're getting a Duck on the cover this year. As if it wasn't hard enough in ANY year to have a Duck there... Thanks, EA.

I'd say either Tavares, Malkin, Datsyuk or Hall gets the cover.

[JackieMoon]

It is nice McCarthy. I'm tired of our team being the butt end of a lot of NHL jokes. Time for this team to turn around for good. Sad to say, but Nash leaving was one of the best things that happened to our team.

[Cosmic]

Please forgive my ignorance, because it seems so obvious to me that I feel like I must be missing something. Why do we even need the loser point if we have shootouts?

The loser point came about in the pre-shootout era because teams would play ultra-conservative in a tied game, hoping to guarantee themselves the one point they would get from a tie. OT was usually boring, because neither team would really risk much and "lose" that point. Then came the loser point... the boring part shifted to the end of regulation, so that each team would at least be guaranteed a point from an OTL. I know most hate it and I myself wish they had gone to a 3-2-1 points system, but I at least understand what they were going for. But now with shootouts, the game is guaranteed to have a winner. The point of rewarding teams for making it to OT was to avoid both teams playing for the tie... but that's not possible now. If they took out the loser point for next season, teams would just have to play for a win... no benefit for teams to extend games.

[Kramerica Industries]

Which to any hockey fan paying attention, is still a sub-.500 record.

Of course, your concern is still valid, because the douchebags up top will try to convince everyone else otherwise. Because, you know, OITGDNHL.

We get it. Enough.

Guess what? The NHL is not straight win/loss. It's a points system. Until that changes, it is what it is.

I will always have a hard time differentiating the OTL from regular losses. I know that the games end differently, especially shootout losses, but, at the end of the day, what exactly happened to the team that lost the shootout? They certainly didn't win the game. And since the NHL was so hell-bent on eliminating ties from the formula back in 2005, if a team didn't win, then they had to lose, didn't they?

What you are really noticing is that my beating-dead-horse posts are finally starting to become excruciatingly annoying. I'm surprised it took so long.

[Still MIGHTY]

Which to any hockey fan paying attention, is still a sub-.500 record.

Of course, your concern is still valid, because the douchebags up top will try to convince everyone else otherwise. Because, you know, OITGDNHL.

We get it. Enough.

Guess what? The NHL is not straight win/loss. It's a points system. Until that changes, it is what it is.

I will always have a hard time differentiating the OTL from regular losses. I know that the games end differently, especially shootout losses, but, at the end of the day, what exactly happened to the team that lost the shootout? They certainly didn't win the game. And since the NHL was so hell-bent on eliminating ties from the formula back in 2005, if a team didn't win, then they had to lose, didn't they?

What you are really noticing is that my beating-dead-horse posts are finally starting to become excruciatingly annoying. I'm surprised it took so long.

That's all well and good in a semantic win/loss argument, but the NHL runs on a point system not a straight win/loss. It's kinda what you have to accept to watch the sport at this point, especially considering the NHL has run on a point system since... well... , damn near the entire time it's been in existence?

And it's not that I'm just noticing, I've chosen to hold my tongue because when you first did it I guess I found it as interesting schtick or something. But it's damn near every single time you post in this thread or refer to a record. Like its a straight fact, when it isn't. "Which to any hockey fan paying attention..." As if your way is the real way, and the rest of the way EVERYONE ELSE looks at the standings is wrong and illegitimate and they're just not "paying attention". Say it as much as you want, Columbus, for example, isn't 21-24 and under .500. They are 21-17-7 with 51 points. 51 points out of a possible 92. 51/92 = .554 aka OVER .500.... Call it a straw that broke the camel's back or something I suppose.

[Kramerica Industries]

Then we'll just have to agree to disagree. When it comes to looking at the playoff race, I'll discuss in terms of points like any rational person. But if we're comparing teams to each other in a vacuum, it's going to be straight W-L every single time. Because, in that sense, a loss is a loss is a loss. There's no way I can look at it any differently. I'm far too stubborn and far too entrenched on this train of thought to jump now.

[The_Admiral]

EA Sports has started the voting process for the NHL 14 cover. Here's the ballot: http://covervote.nhl.com/#/ballot. I'm not sure how they decide which two players will be in the running from each team cause there are a few questionable ones, especially in Anaheim. In what world is Matt Beleskey more deserving of the cover than Getzlaf or Perry? I'm predicting that John Tavares will end up winning.

This whole thing is like Vote For Rory Fitzpatrick except we have to rebel by finding a player to vote for who is actually good.

As for records, I think it can be useful to look at the regulation-overtime records, but straight win-loss under this system doesn't really clarify things.

[Sport]

I don't know who I hate more in this game - the Red Wings, the Coyotes for looking like a team who knows they're about to move, or these awful officials.

My two cents on the stating the record as straight wins/losses - I'm with Still Mighty on this one. You can't do that as long as this is the system the NHL uses because it ignores one of the league rules and you're not stating the full story. Sorry you don't like it (who does like it?), but it's what we got right now.

[The_Admiral]

Jets.