Don't say they're .500; Tampa Bay Lightning at Toronto Maple Leafs preview

by John Fontana on Jan 3, 2012 12:34 PM EST in '11-'12 game previews

WHERE: Air Canada Centre, Toronto, Ontario
WHEN: 7 PM EST | | TICKETS: Check Availability
MEDIA: Sun Sports (cable), 970 WFLA (radio)
OPPONENT COVERAGE: Pension Plan Puppets

Look at the standings, and you get the false impression that the Bolts have gotten back to square-one. The Lightning appears to be back at .500 with a 17-17-3 record. The media are spinning it that way; fan chatter spins it that way... And the narrative of the "shootout epidemic" continues to give the false security that the third column in the standings is a positive number, akin to the age-old system of wins, losses and ties.

It's not. The Tampa Bay Lightning record is 17-20. 17 wins, 20 losses.

That third column represents losses that just happen to be overtime / shootout losses. The "epidemic" that the media talks about, is the fact the losing team gets a point for going to overtime or the shootout. They don't have to be competitive in that extra time, they just have to reach it and their record gets bumped up with an extra point and the false perception they didn't flat-out lose. They just eventually lost.

And yet, a team that doesn't win in overtime or during the shootout... lost. An absolute. Not a shade of gray. It's a loss.

Some think the way to remedy this is to add extra points for wins (3 for wins, 2 for OT/SO wins, 1 for OT/SO losses, 0 for regulation losses). Others believe the entire situation would be best fixed by ending shootouts (...where you get to keep that extra column and extra points for going past regulation). Yet the problem isn't not enough points, or overtime being too-many men on the ice, or the shootout. It's that extra column in the standings and the loser-point.

People will disagree with me, because it's a hot-button hockey issue, but the problem isn't the shootout, or overtime length. It's that 3^rd column in the standings. The game is absolutes now (wins and losses) and to give an extra point for extra effort during a game just seems like a cop-out. What is this, grade school?

But I digress. The point of this rant to lead into today's preview is to remind Bolt fans that the team isn't at .500 yet, and hasn't been at .500 for a while now. The three game winning streak is nice, but it'll would take three more wins and zero losses (a 20-17-3 record) for the Lightning to be at .500.

The Lightning is in Eastern Canada this week with visits to family and relatives, along with games in Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal. We start with the Maple Leafs this evening, and while that pits two of the NHL's leading goal scorers against each other (Phil Kessel is still near the top of the heap in the league with 21 goals on the season - while Steven Stamkos leads the league with 26 goals scored), it also faces off teams that seem to be trending in different directions.

The Bolts, as you well know, have been clawing their way back into the mix in the conference as of late. They are 6-3-1 in their past 10 games, with thanks to Stamkos and efforts in net by Mathieu Garon (can I get a "NON!" here? Can I get an "Amen"?). The Leafs, on the other hand, started out white-hot this season, and have been fading as of late. They lead the Bolts by four points in the conference standings (41 for Toronto, 37 for Tampa Bay) and are a disappointing 3-6-1 in their past 10.

Going into this game, though, the burden of proof is on Tampa Bay. The Lightning has been horrible on the road this season, going 6-12-3 in 21 games away from Times Palace. But maybe, just maybe, luck is on their side tonight? The Leafs aren't exactly dominant at home this season: they are 8-5-4 - or, if you use the logic from the top of the article, 8-9. Whatever the case, this entire trip is a test if the Bolts can be consistently competitive.

Victor Hedman did not travel with the team for this road trip. Fans and media have been mostly kept in the dark on Hedman's concussion. It remains a huge loss for the Lightning. The Bolts also remain without Mattias Ohlund, who is on IR and has been out all season with knee issues. Ryan Shannon also remains out of action.

On the bright side of things, Nate Thompson may very well return tonight at the ACC. He practiced yesterday and today with full contact. Nate's been out the past five games with an ambiguous lower-body injury. It raises the question of who sits with Nate back in the lineup. JT Wyman, who has turned heads and helped win games with his efforts? Perhaps Blair Jones? Yet, it looks like it will be Ryan Malone who sits, while Thompson is not a guarantee to be in the lineup.

Other Previews

Tampa Bay Lightning official team preview

Full game coverage on SB Nation

Tickets

Check Availability

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

.500 is a misnomer

1.000 is correct

If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk

by Incipient_Senescence on Jan 3, 2012 12:45 PM EST reply actions

Garon dit NON! (Je l'espere.)

C’mon JT! If Bugsy’s still out and Nate’s still out…..I shall have sad face tonight. :-(

R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Rakastan suuria maalivahteja Skandinaviasta.
Love is but a song we sing And fear's the way we die.

by CAustin on Jan 3, 2012 12:45 PM EST reply actions

NON!

got it

If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk

by Incipient_Senescence on Jan 3, 2012 12:45 PM EST reply actions

Also also

I will support a loser point for as long as the shootout is a thing. Because a game decided in a shootout is a lower form of decision than a game decided in regulation and overtime. Look at the score we cast on the Devils for winning all their games in skills competitions

If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk

by Incipient_Senescence on Jan 3, 2012 12:51 PM EST reply actions

If you had Zach Parise, Patrick Elias, and Ilya Kovalchuk on your roster, you’d be hoping for a shootout, too.

R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Rakastan suuria maalivahteja Skandinaviasta.
Love is but a song we sing And fear's the way we die.

by CAustin on Jan 3, 2012 12:54 PM EST up reply actions

true enough

and I’d be happy to get the 2 points in the standings. But I just don’t consider a shootout win or loss to be a real win or loss. Which is why, as long as the shootout is a thing, I advocate a 3/2/1/0 point distribution. It’s silly to acknowledge that it isn’t a real loss without acknowledging that it isn’t a real win

If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk

by Incipient_Senescence on Jan 3, 2012 2:22 PM EST up reply actions

See, my problem with this is that I really don’t especially care one way or the other. As long as everyone knows up front exactly what value a win or loss in each situation is, it doesn’t faze me to have it be a shootout or a tie or whatever.

R.I.P. Belak, Rypien, Boogaard, Lokomotiv.
Rakastan suuria maalivahteja Skandinaviasta.
Love is but a song we sing And fear's the way we die.

by CAustin on Jan 3, 2012 2:38 PM EST up reply actions

Per @Mirtle

Gustavsson starts for the Leafs.

Typing is an adventure, and reading should be, too!
Sasquatch, Yeti, The Loch Ness Monster, Evan Oberg - legends that may or may not be real
Raw Charge.

by John Fontana on Jan 3, 2012 1:35 PM EST reply actions

You know very well how I feel about this topic John

I feel a three point system would be the best overall solution, but if we’re going to stick with the current two point system, then I feel like tie’s being a potential ending to a game is a necessary evil.

Game decided in regulation – 2 pts to victor
Game decided in the five minute OT period (with 5-on-5 play) – 2 pts to victor, 1 to loser

At this point, if a game is still tied after the OT period, the home team gets the choice to settling for a tie and both teams have one point and leave, or they go double-or-nothing, and the winner gets both points. I can settle for the three point game in the five minute OT period because the game stretched beyond 60 minutes but not to the maximum 65. Since most games are still tied after five minutes, this wouldn’t be a particularly big deal.

Since I proposed this idea in the spring of 2010, the NHL has logically placed greater emphasis on non-shootout W’s for tiebreaking purposes, which is why New York needed help on the last day of the season even though they would’ve had a better record than Carolina, with identical point totals.

But with the shootout system currently in place, it makes it far too easy to shrug off shootout decisions. Creating a true sense of risking it all in a shootout would make the otherwise-ridiculous skills competition a true source of thrill, or dismay. Too bad this will never happen.

Now on Twitter @Carcillo_

http://twitter.com/#!/Carcillo_

by FloridaownsFSU on Jan 3, 2012 1:41 PM EST reply actions

it would make it more thrilling

but it wouldn’t make it any less ridiculous

If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk

by Incipient_Senescence on Jan 3, 2012 2:24 PM EST up reply actions

So a team needs 1 point to make the playoffs

They know if they go to shootout they can risk not getting one point at all. So they pull their goalie to either score and get scored on. I dunno how that would work.

I think it should be a 10 minute 4 on 4 period. Winner gets 2 points, loser gets 0, if its tied at the end of overtime both teams get 1 point for a tie.

"We're fighting, You can't say we weren't fighting." - Guy Boucher after Tampa Bay Lightning loses third-period lead again in 4-2 defeat at Ottawa Senators.

by Killhowe on Jan 3, 2012 4:01 PM EST up reply actions

this is my opinion as well

but if we want to keep the shootout (which is fine for excitement purposes), let’s just end the facade of it being on par with the rest of the game for deciding a winner and go to a 3/2/1/0 distribution

If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk

by Incipient_Senescence on Jan 3, 2012 5:50 PM EST up reply actions

Make it simpler. One point for a win, no points for a loss. Ignore overtime and shootouts completely.

"You don't have enough talent to win on talent alone." -Herb Brooks

Raw Charge, an SBN Tampa Bay Lightning community. Follow me on Twitter: @dagmar27.

by Cassie McClellan on Jan 4, 2012 8:20 AM EST up reply actions

fine by me

if we do away with shootouts. otherwise, strongly oppose

If I cared more about my UNC side, I'd call myself "Tar Volon," and that'd be awesome.
Bolts, Canes, Preds (now in different conferences!). Canes mini-STH. Southern hockey solidarity
Rocky Top Talk

by Incipient_Senescence on Jan 4, 2012 11:13 AM EST up reply actions