How much does no round 2 reseeding affect the current playoff format?

[c9777666]

For all the criticism and stuff I hear over the current divisional playoff format, I think it would honestly be less of an issue if they reseeded from highest to lowest like the old days after round 1.

I did some research and here is how past round 2 matchups might have been different if the current format was the same only for round 1, BUT you did lowest seed vs. highest seed ala the 1-8 format we all loved.

2014

Boston (117 pts) vs. NY Rangers (94 pts)
Pittsburgh (109 points) vs. Montreal (100 pts)

Anaheim (116 pts) vs. Minnesota (98 pts)
Chicago (107 pts) vs. LA Kings (100 pts)


2015

No change at all:

WSH/NYR, MTL/TB, ANA/CGY, CHI/MIN would have still been the same even with reseeding and without the division format


2016

Washington (120 pts) vs. Tampa Bay (97 pts)
Pittsburgh (104 pts) vs. NY Islanders (100 pts)

Dallas (109 pts) vs. Nashville (96 pts)
St. Louis (107 pts) vs. San Jose (98 pts)


2017

Washington (118 pts) vs. Ottawa (98 pts)
Pittsburgh (111 pts) vs. NY Rangers (102 pts)

Anaheim (105 pts) vs. Nashville (94 pts)
Edmonton (103 pts) vs. St. Louis (99 pts)


With the exception of 2015, none of the 2nd round real life series we got would have actually happened.

2014- would that CHI/LA series have been the same if that same legendary seven game series had been in the 2nd round?

3 of the last 4 real life West Finals (CHI/LA, STL/SJ, ANA/NSH) would have been in the 2nd round.

Click to read more...

 

[StreetHawk]

No need to reseed when The format is division based. When it was conference based it made sense.

 

[talkinaway]

There are two problems I see with reseeding:

1) The NHL loves brackets. You can print them out, have wagers with friends, make official NHL contests...it's a great publicity scheme, and dovetails nicely with March Madness. If you start shuffling the bracket for the second round, it becomes next to impossible to create a good, clean, easy-to-understand bracket.

2) There's a cool reward for lower teams if you don't reseed. Let's go back to 1-8 conference seeding. Say you're the 8th team, and you manage to upset the 1st team - a really tough feat. If you don't reseed, you get a nice reward - you essentially BECOME the number 1 seed, and get all their favorable matchups for the next rounds. You won't face the #2 team until the finals, if they even make it that far. If you reseed, then as the 8th seed, you'll always be playing the toughest opponent every round.

Now, those aren't 100% watertight arguments, and I can't say that I'm completely against reseeding. I couldn't care less about printable brackets and wagering. And as far as which format is "more fair", reseeding places emphasis on the regular season, while not reseeding places emphasis on the post-season. It's reasonable to use either format.