Do Something About This Absurd [Points] System!

I think 2 points for a regulation win and 1 point for a 3 on 3 OT win, none for a loss either way is the route to go.

Yes - If you can't get it done in regulation then you just lost a point. If you can't get it done in OT then you go home a loser.

Yeah it's nonsense that 3 points are given out if a game goes into overtime but only 2 points handed out if the game ends in regulation with a winner. Highly non-equitable scoring system.

I like the suggestion from a previous poster: regulation winner = 3 pts, OT winner = 2pts, OT loser = 1 pt, regulation loser = 0 pts. Not very traditional but it's equitable and would be exciting coming down the stretch run of a playoff race with all the possible combinations. But I'd be just as happy to get rid of the shootout and have a traditional 5 on 5 (or even 4 on 4) 10-minute overtime with 2 pts to the winner, 0 pts to the loser and 1 pt each if it stays tied after the OT.

But that's exactly what they do now in regulation, far more so than pre-OT days. That's why there are so many more reg. ties now than in pre-OT days. Back then, if you wanted two points, you had to go for it in regulation. Now, the rational approach is to take no risks in regulation, secure the point, and then go for wins in regulation win, if taking a risk blows up on you and the other team scores, you still get a point. Look at the records I just quoted. There's your proof.

It's a hair different from back then in the sense that if you got to OT, you defended the SHIT out of your point. OT goals were just not nearly as common, because it was in your best interest to play conservatively and let your opponent give you an opening.

I'd prefer a system where every game awards 3 points. Win in regulation? Get all 3. Win in OT? Opponent stole one of your points.

Also, just stop with the fucking shootout. 3 on 3 is awesome.