Skip to main content

Get rid of loser point and make shootout less valuable

It was nice to see others also dislike the "loser point". Why reward a loss with a point?

A loss is a loss is a loss, no matter how it's achieved. That being said, I am not in favor of the three-point win system. This will just create more boring games.

If you take a "defensive" (i.e. trapping) team like the Wild, who lock down for a two-point win, how much worse will it be if that win is now worth three points? Not to mention the issues of trying to figure out how many points your team has.

Soon you'll need a degree in calculus to just figure out if your team has a shot at the playoffs.

I believe the solution lies in getting rid of the loser point, but not a complete two or nothing.

A team should get two points for a win in either regulation or overtime and one point for a win in the shootout. The loser would get zero, no matter what.

Can you imagine the OT we would see between teams battling for playoff spots, knowing they essentially lose a point if it heads to the shootout? This still gives value to the shootout, but with less weight, which I think is fair.

Darren Koyata, Edmonton, Alta.


Noah Ostlund

Reacting to Team Sweden's 2023 World Junior Roster

Tony Ferrari takes a look at the key players and key omissions after Team Sweden released its roster for the World Junior Championship.

Cale Makar

Can the Avalanche Withstand Their Injury Epidemic?

The Colorado Avalanche have faced unprecedented injury woes. Can the defending Stanley Cup champions weather the storm long enough to get healthy?

Columbus Blue Jackets

Columbus Blue Jackets' Blowout Loss Underscores the Big Picture

After the Columbus Blue Jackets lost 9-4 to the Buffalo Sabres Wednesday night, Adam Proteau writes it's a reminder of the team's struggles this season.