Canucks & Beyond
Next entry: Anyone Else Glad That It's Just Finally Over?
Previous entry: Getting Loose to Lose
The Tie Breaker Deal
by Alanah McGinley on 04/03/08 at 08:18 PM ET
Comments (8)
For some idiotic reason, I’d been under the impression (stupid ESPN wording!) that the first tie-breaker—after points—was the outright number of wins for each team.
1. The fewer number of games played (i.e., superior points percentage).
2. The greater number of games won.
3. The greater number of points earned in games between the tied clubs. If two clubs are tied, and have not played an equal number of home games against each other, points earned in the first game played in the city that had the extra game shall not be included. If more than two clubs are tied, the higher percentage of available points earned in games among those clubs, and not including any “odd” games, shall be used to determine the standing.
4. Goal differential
But I misunderstood that they were simply referring to head-to-head games, not ‘wins’ in general at #2. (How could I not have realized this?? Fake-blonde-itis? Geezus. Apparently...)
Anyway, on the off-chance another blonde out there requires my assistance, here’s the NHL’s official policy (provided by their media resource site) for the tie-breaker.
TIE-BREAKING PROCEDURE
If two or more clubs are tied in points at the end of the regular season, the standing of the clubs in each Conference will be determined in the following order:
1. The greater number of games won.
2. The greater number of points earned in games between the tied clubs. If two clubs are tied, and have not played an equal number of home games against each other, points earned in the first game played in the city that had the extra game shall not be included. If more than two clubs are tied, the higher percentage of available points earned in games among those clubs, and not including any “odd” games, shall be used to determine the standing.
3. The greater differential between goals for and against for the entire regular season.
Well, I’m now a slightly cheerier Canucks fan.
(And yet clearly a shameless one… I should probably just pretend I know crap like this in the first place...)
Filed in: nhl general | Canucks and Beyond | Permalink
Tags: playoffs, statistics, why+i+don't+like+details,
Comments
I just realized this damm game is on PPV which leaves me unable to watch it.
So, with 3 minutes left in the 3rd, Nashville up 3-2, if they hold on and the Canucks lose to Edmonton the Canucks are done.
And I don’t even get to see it. That just F-ing sucks. I hate PPV.
HATE IT
Posted by laker from Williams Lake on 04/03/08 at 09:34 PM ET
Seattle Canuck
It looks like that is indeed what would happen. Calgary would be on the outside looking in then. OH THAT WOULD BE A DREAM COME TRUE.
Oh man I can’t tell you how much I want that to happen.
Posted by Laker from dapuddle on 04/03/08 at 10:40 PM ET
Dammit, Alanah, we’re out. This sucks. So much for our predictions huh? Who are you rooting for now?
Thanks for the tip on the tie-breaker procedure. I didn’t know what it was either. We were discussing it tonight during the ass game.
Posted by Zanstorm from Smithers on 04/04/08 at 12:56 AM ET
SeattleCanuck -- Very sorry that your question was already answered by the disastrous outcome tonight.
Laker -- I bet a lot of people were ticked off by the PPV situation regarding that game. Brutal.
Zanstorm -- I’m glad I wasn’t the only one who found the tie breaker info useful.
As for who I’m rooting for into the playoffs? Oy. I think I need the weekend to recover. I imagine it’ll come down to who I decide that I hate the least. 
Posted by Alanah McGinley from British Columbia on 04/04/08 at 02:27 AM ET
I’m gonna cheer for Montreal now.
#1 because they are Canadian
#2 because they aren’t FLAMERS
#3 Carey Price is from the same small town.
Posted by Laker from Williams Lake BC on 04/04/08 at 09:54 AM ET
“I imagine it’ll come down to who I decide that I hate the least.”
So Colorado then? 
Posted by Shane from Saskatoon on 04/04/08 at 10:15 AM ET
Huh? This post doesn’t make any sense. #2 on the ESPN list of tie breakers is exactly the same as #1 on the NHL list, and #3 on the ESPN list is exactly the same as #2 on the NHL list.
The first tie breaker after total points is total wins, not head to head wins, per both the NHL and ESPN.
Posted by Steve on 04/04/08 at 07:03 PM ET
Add a Comment
Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.
Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.
Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.
Most Recent Blog Posts
Wellwood Returning to Vancouver
In Defense of Dany Heatley (sort of)
Sedin’s Agent Not Optimistic About a Vancouver Deal, but is Anyone?
Mike Keenan Joins the Canucks?
GM Place Keeps its Name; Disaster Averted
What’s Trevor Linden Been Up To?
About Canucks & Beyond
Alanah McGinley has been blogging hockey since 2003, sharing opinions, rants and not-so-deep thoughts with anyone who will listen. In addition to writing Canucks & Beyond and helping manage Kukla’s Korner, Alanah is one of the founders and co-hosts of The Crazy Canucks Podcast, as featured at Canucks.com.
She has contributed pieces to FoxSports.com and the New York Times Slapshot blog, as well as other stray destinations in cyberspace.
Email:
Alanah’s Twitter: Not really hockey-ish. [LINK]
Other Canucks Blogs
So if Min hangs on and beats Cgy, and we beat Edm and Cgy on Sat, we are in, right, regardless of Nashville?
Posted by SeattleCanuck from Seattle on 04/03/08 at 09:26 PM ET