1994 Playoffs (2-2-1-1-1 vs 2-3-2)

[The Man in White]

I was just looking at the playoffs in 1994 on Wiki and I noticed there was a combination of 2-2-1-1-1 series and 2-3-2 series. Anyone know why there was no standardized format? Just thought that was weird.

Edit: Seems as though the Central and Pacific divisions were made 2-3-2 format to reduce travel.

Click to read more...

 

[Kyle McMahon]

I believe this format was available for a few years afterwards, but 1994 was the only time its use is evident in a series recap.

Detroit played San Jose in 1995, Anaheim in 1997, and Anaheim again in 1999, but the Wings swept their opponent in all three instances, so it's not clear whether or not these would have been 2-3-2 formats. Perhaps somebody remembers.

Of note, the higher seeded team had the option of choosing to host Games 1,2,6,7, or 3,4,5.

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

From nhl.com:

"1993-94 - The NHL's playoff draw was conference-based rather than division-based. At the conclusion of the regular season, the top eight teams in each of the Eastern and Western Conferences qualified for the playoffs. The teams that finish in first place in each of the League's divisions were seeded first and second in each conference's playoff draw and were assured of home ice advantage in the first two playoff rounds.

The remaining teams were seeded based on their regular-season point totals. In each conference, the team seeded #1 played #8; #2 vs. #7; #3 vs. #6; and #4 vs. #5. All series were best-of-seven with home ice rotating on a 2-2-1-1-1 basis, with the exception of matchups between Central and Pacific Division teams. These matchups were played on a 2-3-2 basis to reduce travel. In a 2-3-2 series, the team with the most points could choose to start the series at home or on the road. The Eastern Conference champion faced the Western Conference champion in the Cup Final.

1994-95 - Same as 1993-94, except that in first, second or third-round playoff series involving Central and Pacific Division teams, the team with the better record had the choice of using either a 2-3-2 or a 2-2-1-1-1 format. When a 2-3-2 format was selected, the higher-ranked team also had the choice of playing games 1, 2, 6 and 7 at home or playing games 3, 4 and 5 at home. The format for the Stanley Cup Final remained 2-2-1-1-1."

 

[Big Phil]

They did it some other times, and I am surprised they did it this way because it may have cost a team the Stanley Cup. But in 1984 the Islanders and Oilers had a 2-3-2 scenario. Probably to reduce travel of course, but the Oilers led the league in points by a significant margin that year so I don't know why the Islanders had home ice. Ditto in the 1985 final. Philly - who actually did have more points than Edmonton - had home ice in a 2-3-2 format. In both years the Oilers won at home in Game 5.

I've never minded this format, Baseball has used it for decades. Hockey using the 2-2-1-1-1 format is fine though.

Another note, I don't know what it was about 1984 but for whatever reason the Habs had home ice against the Islanders in the normal 2-2-1-1-1 format. If you are wondering why, to tell you the truth I don't remember either why that was.