What's the upside to this playoff format?
- Thread starter c9777666
- Start date
- Status
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
What's the upside? Well....Bettnan's golden boy Crosby won't need to face either the 1 or 2 seed until the conference final....while a team that finished higher than the Pens faces the 2 seed in round one....what else could you want?
Jdavidev
Registered User
It's a business decision plain and simple. There is no logical competitive argument for it. The schedules now are so balanced (vs div x4, vs conf x3, vs other conf x2) that the best teams are the best teams, and should be rewarded. Can't do 1-16 because of travel/start times, but 1-8 should be the only option (and no guaranteed seeding for division winner).
ClydeLee
Registered User
- Mar 23, 2012
- 11,780
- 5,315
I don't get the complaints since often the talk of 1-8 I remember was how lackluster our Confrence finals were compared to prior rounds. Western conference especially at least. For 2009-2013 in its end the it always seemed the team on its way to the cup was a shoe in that already had its great postseason battle. I don't know off my head the Eastern case but its been a much better coming to battle in wcfs since 14.
Not sure if this has been brought up but there is a case to be made that the current playoff format has lead to better conference final match ups.
In the first 4 seasons under the current system, the 8 conference finals have average 6.625 games per series. With 5 out of 8 going to game seven.
Under the previous system the final 4 seasons, the 8 conference finals averaged 5.125 games. With 6 out of 8 going 5 or fewer games and a single game seven.
I know these are small samples sets but I seem to recall most of the WCF & WCF series being short under the old system.
In the first 4 seasons under the current system, the 8 conference finals have average 6.625 games per series. With 5 out of 8 going to game seven.
Under the previous system the final 4 seasons, the 8 conference finals averaged 5.125 games. With 6 out of 8 going 5 or fewer games and a single game seven.
I know these are small samples sets but I seem to recall most of the WCF & WCF series being short under the old system.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Even though they did last year.
Besides, the only reason the Lightning and Bruins are 1 and 2 is because they play in the weaker division. More easy games against true bottom feeders.
737 cumulative points for Metro teams, 699 for Atlantic teams. I don’t even totally believe this point, but it illustrates how easily these things can be spun in whatever direction you want.
I can understand why the league made it like this.
People are overreacting, my only complaint is that unless your team goes far your likely going to play the same team every other year. But I guess that’s to create rivalries.
We could see Boston and Toronto another three or four times in the next five years if not more...
People are overreacting, my only complaint is that unless your team goes far your likely going to play the same team every other year. But I guess that’s to create rivalries.
We could see Boston and Toronto another three or four times in the next five years if not more...
fsanford
Registered User
- Jul 4, 2009
- 7,552
- 2,912
One of possibly the best conference finals ever occurred under this format. Kings \ Hawks would have been a 2nd round game if they reseeded.
believe most people were pretty happy with that WCF
justafan22
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2014
- 11,629
- 6,249
IF the matchups go on as they're looking like we're going to get:
Bruins/Tampa (amazing matchup, of 2 of the leagues top 5 teams)
Penguins/Jackets or caps (round 2 and 4 respectfully for each team)
Jets/Preds (two great teams)
Knights/Sharks (the worst series on paper, but still an interesting series)
However, two of Bruins/tampa/pittsburgh should be a ECF series and Jets/preds is a WCF preview too under the old rules.
Bruins/Tampa (amazing matchup, of 2 of the leagues top 5 teams)
Penguins/Jackets or caps (round 2 and 4 respectfully for each team)
Jets/Preds (two great teams)
Knights/Sharks (the worst series on paper, but still an interesting series)
However, two of Bruins/tampa/pittsburgh should be a ECF series and Jets/preds is a WCF preview too under the old rules.
Luigi Lemieux
Registered User
- Sep 26, 2003
- 21,551
- 9,372
Pittsburgh had to go through a 108 point team then a 118 point team the first two rounds last year, despite having 111 points themselves. The format screws different teams different years. The best teams still emerge.
But yea I'm not a fan of the format. I think it builds more suspense if the battles of the titans happen deeper in the playoffs.
That might get tiresome over time. Back in the 80's, it was pretty much always EDM/CAL in round 2.
But, the time zones are going to be an issue. 7 PST, 3 MST, and 6 CST for the Western Conference. I could see the NHL preferring to keep the Pacific division intact because it is an easy double header to air on TV after an Eastern game, barring OT.
But, when you move series back to the CST, it causes more difficult scheduling for TV.
Either asking the CST to start later, 8 local vs 7 local so that the PST fans can watch at 6pm local time. And when the games head west, asking for earlier start times so that CST doesn't begin at 9 local time.
What was your excuse last year when the #2 overall penguins played the #4 and #1 teams in the league in the first two rounds?
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
Those numbers from last year aren't in the east. They are in the whole league. Toronto is #6. Boston is #4. Tampa is #3.
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
The only benefit beyond the "rivalries" angle is the unbalanced regular season schedule theoretically means less travel and fresher players come playoff time.
Maplebeasts
I See Demons!!!!!
The way the Bruins are looking you might not be around past the 2nd. How is this shit even allowed to be posted?
Nasti
Registered User
I’m betting 99% of those complaining about the current system live in the Eastern time zone and never had to deal with early or late start times. And if you have never been to LA, Anaheim, or San Jose and have never experienced the traffic, please don’t assume that a 6pm start time is easy for us to get home to.
I agree. It's easier for those Cali teams to start later, which they normally do at 7:30 PST for their home games. thus, makes it an ideal situation to do a double header with the East. But, if you have 3 series that are PST and CST in round 1, it makes it harder to setup the TV schedule. Once you get to the final 4, you won't have 2 games on the same day. It should be 1 game per day.
Teams with home ice, don't want to do the 2-3-2 format. Doesn't really make sense for the higher seed to ever have fewer home games than the lower seed at any point during the series.
i dont have any problem with this format. Maybe because i started to watch hockey in the late 80's with the adams/patrick/smythe/norris divisions when 16 teams out of 21 were in the playoffs and it was 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3 within division. Anyway how many "bad teams" are they this year. Or how many matchup could be considered an upset. Maybe the Devils/Avs and Minny (due to Suter injury). No matter how you seed the teams, there will be good teams out after the first round even with no upsets. There is more than 4 good teams per conference.
Let's not forget that the standing is a result of the seeding. The leafs might have played differently with a 1-8 seeding. They were sure to make the PO with months to play and so far away from TB and BOS.
Let's not forget that the standing is a result of the seeding. The leafs might have played differently with a 1-8 seeding. They were sure to make the PO with months to play and so far away from TB and BOS.
HandshakeLineRespect
Respect in the Handshake Line
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Pinguins Bremerhaven @ Eisbaren Berlin - Eisbaren Berlin leads series 2-1Wagers: 3Staked: $415.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
-
