This day on April 18
None

Happy Birthday To: spaz44, Formica, JDmassive, timothyparis12

F.A.Q. Terms of Use F.A.Q. F.A.Q.
Members Members   Search Search     Register Register   Login Login   Home Home
 NHL » The New Playoff Seeding Format
Switch to flat viewSwitch to tree viewCreate a new topicSubmit Reply
 The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615705]
Tue, 19 November 2013 23:29 Go to next message
smyth260  is currently offline smyth260
Messages: 2276
Registered: November 2007

2 Cups

As it stands right now due to the flat out domination in West over East, there are only 2 out of 14 teams in the west with a losing record. Every other team is .500 or greater. In the East there are 9/16 teams with a losing record.

Is this a fair system? I didn't like it originally, because it's mathematically unfair to the East to have 16 teams competing for 8 playoff spots as opposed to 14 competing for 8 in the west.

But because of the Western domination, you now have a situation where the 2 teams in the top 16 in the league don't make the playoffs within their conference (Dallas and Vancouver). 10 teams in the top 16 of the league are currently from the West. Maybe this will balance itself out over the year so that the points distribution ends up being even between each conference. However there's been the idea for years that the West is the better overall conference. Not sure what the data looks like over the last 10 years, but is it possible there is enough evidence to declare the West better than the East? Has anybody seen any analysis on this?

In the end, the top 16 teams in the league making the playoffs is the most equal thing to do...but that is costly and and Eastern team owners will never approve the higher travel expenses.

More than anything though, it's just a really bad system for the Eastern teams I think. That is for sure.

What is everyone elses thoughts on this?




Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615710 is a reply to message #615705 ]
Wed, 20 November 2013 00:03 Go to previous messageGo to next message
nullterm  is currently offline nullterm
Messages: 7475
Registered: July 2007
Location: Port Moody, BC

6 Cups

I like the older system ALOT better.

The top 4 teams out of 7/8 is just too narrow.

And for playoff teams, I like when there's more possible opponents (7 vs 3).

I would simplify the whole ball of wax...
West and East Conferences each with 15 teams
No Divisions
4 games vs conference teams (2 home, 2 away)
2 games vs other conference teams (1 home, 1 away)
86 games total
Top 8 teams from each conference in old playoff system

Travel might be more, but strong teams in weaker divisions can't get by with just feasting on weaker teams for points. Everyone in a conference has an equal shot at everyone else.



Illegitimi non carborundum.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615731 is a reply to message #615710 ]
Wed, 20 November 2013 10:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
halfafrog  is currently offline halfafrog
Messages: 1024
Registered: March 2006
Location: Scottsdale, AZ

1 Cup

System makes no sense other than its temporary, and even then....if Bettman wants to put a team in Quebec why move 2 teams to the east? One will have to move back. Can a team survive in Seattle? Maybe.....Portland.....maybe. If its run well. It worked in San Jose quite well. Lots of money in San Jose.

Who knows what the lil overpaid Elf Bettman has up his sleeve....



Lowe

Lower

Lowest

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615732 is a reply to message #615705 ]
Wed, 20 November 2013 10:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Hibernia  is currently offline Hibernia
Messages: 1586
Registered: October 1998
Location: Sin John's

1 Cup

smyth260 wrote on Wed, 20 November 2013 02:59

What is everyone elses thoughts on this?


As you've mentioned, unless the league goes back to a Top 16 overall, you're always going to have disparities in the conferences and divisions. These things typically change over time, so, in five years time, you might see the Eastern teams as the dominant ones.



Kool-Aid Addict!

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615737 is a reply to message #615705 ]
Wed, 20 November 2013 12:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
NetBOG  is currently offline NetBOG
Messages: 1433
Registered: January 2006
Location: Parts Unknown

1 Cup

The new playoff format is awesome. It will make for mean, nasty, geographically local rivalries in the first two rounds of the playoffs.

My only issue is with the division crossovers. I wish they would have left it as 1v4 and 2v3 in each division in the first round.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615758 is a reply to message #615705 ]
Wed, 20 November 2013 17:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
goffer48  is currently offline goffer48
Messages: 950
Registered: March 2006
Location: Edmonton , Alberta

No Cups

K.I.S.S.
Every team plays each other 3 X = 87 games / reg. season.top 16 make the POs.
Flip the travel every year.... ie !st year we see Crosby once .. next year .. twice.
The League averages out all the flight costs and each team pays the same to the league. League pays the cost. Time in the air being unequal for each team is the only issue I can see, but I'm sure there would be some way to balance it out.
icon_neutral



-Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
-Don't mess with old folks, they didn't get old by being stupid.



Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615760 is a reply to message #615758 ]
Wed, 20 November 2013 17:08 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Adam  is currently offline Adam
Messages: 9609
Registered: August 2005
Location: Edmonton, AB

6 Cups

goffer48 wrote on Wed, 20 November 2013 17:00

K.I.S.S.
Every team plays each other 3 X = 87 games / reg. season.top 16 make the POs.
Flip the travel every year.... ie !st year we see Crosby once .. next year .. twice.
The League averages out all the flight costs and each team pays the same to the league. League pays the cost. Time in the air being unequal for each team is the only issue I can see, but I'm sure there would be some way to balance it out.
icon_neutral


No chance you'd get the votes on something like this. More games pisses off the PA. More travel pisses off the teams. There would be people complaining that they have unbalanced schedules every year, because certain teams each year would have more away games against the better teams (although I'm curious if there's much difference in hockey between home and away records when looking at a large data set? I'd guess the effects of playing at home in hockey aren't overwhelmingly large.)

I actually don't mind the way it's currently set up. If I were going to make any changes, I'd make the wild cards applicable to any division (so if Edmonton was 4th in whatever our new division is - Pacific? - we would have a chance for a cross over to any of the other three divisions if we're the best of the non-top-three teams). That would increase playoff travel a little bit, but it would equalize things if you have a year like this year, where the West is clearly superior - maybe all four wild cards come from the Western Conference.



#FireLowe #FireMacT #FireHowson #FireEakins #FireActon #FireSmith #FireBuchberger #FireMoores #Burnitdown #KeepJoey

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615761 is a reply to message #615760 ]
Wed, 20 November 2013 17:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
nullterm  is currently offline nullterm
Messages: 7475
Registered: July 2007
Location: Port Moody, BC

6 Cups

One thing I do like about the current schedule (not structure) is getting the East vs West games out early in the season. Then leave divisional games for closer to playoffs so games are more important against rivals standing wise.

And getting the Crosby/Ovechkin superstar games early gets the casual fan base into it earlier.

And if travel is heavily slanted to the start of season, teams will be a bit better rested for playoffs if they have shorter trips against conf/division opponents in the last third or half.

[Updated on: Wed, 20 November 2013 17:19]


Illegitimi non carborundum.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615943 is a reply to message #615761 ]
Sun, 24 November 2013 16:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
nullterm  is currently offline nullterm
Messages: 7475
Registered: July 2007
Location: Port Moody, BC

6 Cups

Had a thought, if the NHL got two more expansion teams they could have a massive 5 round playoff series where everyone makes the post season. Might be interesting, but then regular season isn't as significant.

Or have a best of 3 mini series after the season which would allow the 3-6 teams in a division to play for the 3 and 4 positions for the real playoffs. 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5. Then the winners get 1, 2. Then the winner faces the other div winner. Then the other conf winner for the Cup.

To think only half the teams of 30 can make the playoffs is a bit ridulous. This would allow 24 of 30. Better odds of playoffs, but still advantage to be the top seed.



Illegitimi non carborundum.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615946 is a reply to message #615943 ]
Sun, 24 November 2013 18:49 Go to previous messageGo to next message
CrusaderPi  is currently offline CrusaderPi
Messages: 4221
Registered: December 2003
Location: Republic of Alberta

4 Cups

I've been advocating for a 40 team NHL with 32 playoff teams for years.


WAC's and GAB's. WAC's and GAB's.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615950 is a reply to message #615946 ]
Sun, 24 November 2013 20:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
nullterm  is currently offline nullterm
Messages: 7475
Registered: July 2007
Location: Port Moody, BC

6 Cups

CrusaderPi wrote on Sun, 24 November 2013 17:49

I've been advocating for a 40 team NHL with 32 playoff teams for years.


Moose Jaw, Sask agrees with this. #goingpro



Illegitimi non carborundum.

Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615953 is a reply to message #615950 ]
Sun, 24 November 2013 22:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
CrusaderPi  is currently offline CrusaderPi
Messages: 4221
Registered: December 2003
Location: Republic of Alberta

4 Cups

nullterm wrote on Sun, 24 November 2013 20:23

CrusaderPi wrote on Sun, 24 November 2013 17:49

I've been advocating for a 40 team NHL with 32 playoff teams for years.


Moose Jaw, Sask agrees with this. #goingpro

Fine 38. Screw Moose Jaw and Hamilton. No teams for them.



WAC's and GAB's. WAC's and GAB's.

Send a private message to this user  

 good idea [message #615960 is a reply to message #615943 ]
Mon, 25 November 2013 07:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
AndersonRules  is currently offline AndersonRules
Messages: 446
Registered: April 2008
Location: Shawnee, Oklahoma (OKC ar...

No Cups

I think that's a great idea. Gives the #3-6 teams in each division a chance to move on in the playoffs; also provides a substantial benefit to the #1 and 2 seeds - i.e., rest - for dominating the regular season. I like it.


Send a private message to this user  

 Re: The New Playoff Seeding Format [message #615968 is a reply to message #615943 ]
Mon, 25 November 2013 09:11 Go to previous message
Kr55  is currently offline Kr55
Messages: 3579
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton

3 Cups

nullterm wrote on Sun, 24 November 2013 16:01

Had a thought, if the NHL got two more expansion teams they could have a massive 5 round playoff series where everyone makes the post season. Might be interesting, but then regular season isn't as significant.

Or have a best of 3 mini series after the season which would allow the 3-6 teams in a division to play for the 3 and 4 positions for the real playoffs. 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5. Then the winners get 1, 2. Then the winner faces the other div winner. Then the other conf winner for the Cup.

To think only half the teams of 30 can make the playoffs is a bit ridulous. This would allow 24 of 30. Better odds of playoffs, but still advantage to be the top seed.


Only bad part of having an extra playoff round is that unlike other sports, it can be a huge disadvantage to get time off in a buy situation. The 1 and 2 teams end up ice cold after just practicing and waiting around for 1-2 weeks and play a team already amped up in playoff mode in the 2nd round. Most likely the 1 and 2 teams lose their home ice advantage right away after the first games.

I don't know about more playoff teams. The NHL is already has the hardest championship to win with 4 best of 7 rounds. We already let more than half the teams in the league make the playoffs, most other leagues are a lot harsher. It's just a bummer that our team is so damn pathetic :)

[Updated on: Mon, 25 November 2013 09:19]


..talk is cheap
..success is coming
..the game that we present and stage for the fans most nights is one of very, very high entertainment
..limitless potential
..good structural improvement

Eakins: I know EXACTLY what we need to do next year...

Send a private message to this user  

 
Previous Topic:Stamkos injured
Next Topic:Sabres fire GM and Coach
Oilers NHL Minors Speculation For Sale 


Copyright OilFans.com 1996-2013.
All content is property of OilFans.com and cannot be used without expressed, written consent from this site.
Questions, comments and suggestions can be directed to oilfans@OilFans.com
Privacy Statement


Hosted by LogicalHosting.ca