Atop the Atlantic Division Standings, the Penguins and Flyers both had 106 points.
Philadelphia had 47 wins (2 points each), 23 regulation losses (0 points each), and 12 overtime/shootout losses (1 point each) to give them 106 total points in the standings.
Pittsburgh had 49 wins (2 points each), 25 regulation losses (0 points each), and 8 overtime/shootout losses (1 point each) to give them 106 total points in the standings.
Okay, they are tied in points, but the Pens won 2 more games than the Flyers overall, so they should win that tiebreakers, right? RIGHT?!?!
Philadelphia wins the Atlantic Division (and 2nd seed in the Eastern conference playoffs) because they have 44 "ROW" while Pittsburgh comes in second in the Atlantic (gets the 4th seed in the Eastern conference playoffs) because they have 39 "ROW."
What the hell is a ROW?
It's regulation and overtime wins. For some reason, the NHL has decided to disregard shootout victories when it comes to tiebreakers. Philadelphia had 41 regulation victories and 3 overtime victories (41+3 = 44 ROW) plus 3 shootout victories. Pittsburgh had 34 regulation victories and 5 overtime victories (34+5 = 39 ROW) plus 10 shootout victories. We have 49 wins and they have 47, but since 10 of our wins came via shootout victories and 3 of their victories came via shootout, they win the tiebreaker? How does this make sense??? Aren't shootout victories still victories? Isn't the point to win more games? We won more game than they did, so shouldn't we win the Atlantic?
I wouldn't have a problem using ROW as a second tiebreaker, but the first tiebreaker should be total wins, since wins are most important (not just regulation and overtime wins). If two teams have the same amount of points AND wins, then go to "ROW" to break that tie. But total overall wins should not be discounted. That's just stupid.
Just had to get that off my chest.