OutKick⁠97%

The NHL Standings Look Like They Got Sauced On Eggnog This Christmas⁠62%

By Matt Reigle⁠91%

12/26/2025, 1:56:01 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 16 faulty reasoning types, including Availability Heuristic, Slippery Slope, and Framing Effect, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 14.2% saturation with 102 hits. Analysis detected 872 faulty-reasoning hits from 720 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 57.3% and a BS Rank of ⁠62% (8,403 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 61.60% of the article peer group.

Christmas is a good time to check in on the NHL standings to really get a sense of where all teams stand, a little over a third of the way into the season. 
This year, however, it's fair to ask if the standings have been hitting the sauce, because upon hitting the three-day Christmas break, these may be some of the strangest standings in years. 
Let's start with the Eastern Conference. 
Take a look at the battle currently unfolding in the Metropolitan Division. 
1. Carolina Hurricanes — 22-11-3, 47 pts 
2. Philadelphia Flyers — 19-10-7, 45 pts 
3. New York Islanders — 20-13-4, 44 pts 
4. Washington Capitals — 19-13-5, 43 pts 
5. New York Rangers — 19-16-4, 42 pts 
6. New Jersey Devils — 20-16-1, 41 pts 
7. Pittsburgh Penguins — 15-12-9, 39 pts 
8. Columbus Blue Jackets — 15-15-6, 36 pts 
That's right, just 11 points separate the first-place Hurricanes from the last-place Columbus Blue Jackets. 
Meanwhile, the Flyers, Islanders, Capitals, Rangers, and Devils, in second through sixth respectively, have just four points between all of them. 
Now, look at the Atlantic: 
1. Detroit Red Wings — 22-13-3, 47 pts 
2. Montreal Canadiens — 20-12-5, 45 pts 
3. Tampa Bay Lightning — 20-13-3, 43 pts 
4. Florida Panthers — 20-14-2, 42 pts 
5. Ottawa Senators — 18-13-5, 41 pts 
6. Boston Bruins — 20-17-1, 41 pts 
7. Buffalo Sabres — 18-14-4, 40 pts 
8. Toronto Maple Leafs — 16-15-5, 37 pts 
Only ten points separate the first-place Red Wings and last-place Toronto Maple Leafs, and, yes, you read that correctly. 
So, with so few points separating teams, we are going to see some crazy movement in the standings almost every night, especially as teams gear up for a spring through January and into the Olympic break. 
I think we should expect the teams in wild card spots to change almost daily. 
It'll be nuts. 
Now, out west, it's nuts too, but in an entirely different way. 
Let's take a peek at the Central Division: 
1. Colorado Avalanche — 27-2-7, 61 pts 
2. Dallas Stars — 25-7-6, 56 pts 
3. Minnesota Wild — 22-10-6, 50 pts 
4. Utah Mammoth — 18-18-3, 39 pts 
5. Nashville Predators — 16-16-4, 36 pts 
6. St. Louis Blues — 14-16-8, 36 pts 
7. Winnipeg Jets — 15-17-3, 33 pts 
8. Chicago Blackhawks — 13-17-6, 32 pts 
Look at that. 
Colorado is on fire and is 14 points clear of the teams leading the divisions in the Eastern Conference. 
Meanwhile, some teams are not where we thought they'd be, and I'm looking at you, Winnipeg. 
The reigning Presidents' Trophy winners are sitting at just 33 points and are in danger of getting passed by the Chicago Blackhawks at any moment. 
Notice the top three teams — Colorado, Dallas, and the Quinn Hughes-ified Minnesota Wild are pulling well clear of the rest of the division. 
The Wild are already 11 points clear of Utah for the third spot in the Central. 
And, last but not least, the Pacific: 
1. Vegas Golden Knights — 17-8-10, 44 pts 
2. Anaheim Ducks — 21-14-2, 44 pts 
3. Edmonton Oilers — 19-13-6, 44 pts 
4. Los Angeles Kings — 15-12-9, 39 pts 
5. San Jose Sharks — 17-17-3, 37 pts 
6. Seattle Kraken — 15-14-6, 36 pts 
7. Calgary Flames — 15-18-4, 34 pts 
8. Vancouver Canucks — 15-18-3, 33 pts 
Things are much tighter in the Pacific Division, with three teams — the Golden Knights, the surprising Anaheim Ducks, and the Edmonton Oilers — tied at 44 points. 
Meanwhile, there's a bit of a logjam between the Kings, Sharks, and Kraken, with any of those teams having the potential to make a run into the postseason. 
But what's even weirder is that of the nine worst teams in hockey, eight of them play in the Western Conference. 
I don't think I remember a time when the conferences were so weirdly aligned with a tight race in one and a few teams almost lapping the field in the other. 
Seriously, it's like the standings have been double-fisting eggnog this Christmas. 
Things could get wilder thanks to the Olympic break, which could shake things up again by allowing teams to reset. 
There's still a long way to go, but there aren't too many teams that look like playoff shoo-ins yet. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.2%Outkick: 0.6%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 8.1%Matt Reigle: 1.9%Outkick: 1.9%Anchoring Bias8.1%This article: 13.3%Matt Reigle: 5.9%Outkick: 5.3%Availability Heuristic13.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.5%Outkick: 0.4%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 5.1%Matt Reigle: 6.4%Outkick: 8.8%Confirmation Bias5.1%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Outkick: 0.1%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 13.1%Matt Reigle: 10.8%Outkick: 12.5%Framing Effect13.1%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.0%Outkick: 3.2%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 6.9%Outkick: 5.2%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 2.2%Matt Reigle: 1.4%Outkick: 1.9%Hindsight Bias2.2%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.3%Outkick: 1.3%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 8.4%Outkick: 5.1%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.5%Outkick: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 6.4%Matt Reigle: 9.2%Outkick: 12.8%Negativity Bias6.4%This article: 14.2%Matt Reigle: 5.4%Outkick: 4.4%Optimism Bias14.2%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.1%Outkick: 2.8%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 9.7%Matt Reigle: 5.8%Outkick: 6.1%Overconfidence Bias9.7%This article: 2.6%Matt Reigle: 1.2%Outkick: 2.5%Pessimism Bias2.6%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.6%Outkick: 0.5%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 8.8%Matt Reigle: 4.2%Outkick: 3.4%Recency Bias8.8%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.3%Outkick: 2.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 4.3%Outkick: 3.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.0%Outkick: 1.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.1%Outkick: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.2%Outkick: 4.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 1.7%Matt Reigle: 1.5%Outkick: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)1.7%This article: 4.3%Matt Reigle: 6.8%Outkick: 4.3%Anecdotal4.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.1%Outkick: 3.6%Appeal to Authority0.0%This article: 1.9%Matt Reigle: 10.3%Outkick: 10.0%Appeal to Emotion1.9%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.5%Outkick: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.9%Outkick: 2.4%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.0%Outkick: 1.7%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.3%Outkick: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Outkick: 0.3%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.2%Outkick: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 2.1%Outkick: 2.3%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Outkick: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Outkick: 0.7%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.0%Matt Reigle: 11.1%Outkick: 11.5%Hasty Generalization5.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.1%Outkick: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.1%Outkick: 0.4%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 11.4%Matt Reigle: 1.0%Outkick: 0.7%Personal Incredulity11.4%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.2%Outkick: 2.9%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.1%Outkick: 1.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 13.3%Matt Reigle: 1.2%Outkick: 1.1%Slippery Slope13.3%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.5%Outkick: 1.0%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 1.7%Outkick: 2.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 0.0%Matt Reigle: 0.0%Outkick: 0.3%Tu Quoque0.0%

720 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.