Is there a way we can make the regular season more meaningful?

[varsaku]

If that was the case, then this year would be totally meaningless and boring because Boston ran away with it by like January. Playoffs are the best part of the season and what makes North American sports great. A team that finished 10th place in the league, let's say, 90% of their games would be totally meaningless. Fans would just tune out.

It works in soccer since teams are still competing for their continental champions league, other continental tournaments or fighting from relegation. This keeps it interesting all they way down except for a few mid table teams stuck in the middle. Also a balanced scheduled is needed to ensure everyone is playing the same teams the same number of times.

 

[1909]

Use a tournament format instead of series. Except the SC Finals between East and West champions..

Each team of a Conference would first start playing two games (one at home and one away) against the seven other best of its own Conference. . The team with the best record goes to the Finals (regular format) against the best of the other Conference.

Instead of having a maximum of 28 games (if all series go to the limit), we would have a max of 21 games (14 + max 7 for the Finals). Each participating team in the Playoffs would have minimum seven games played in their own arena, instead of only 2 when teams are eliminated in 4 games. That's good for everyone's business. Would be a thrill for the fans too.

No hockey should be played beyond May 31st.

 

[ForsbergForever]

First round byes for division winners.

It provides a bigger prize for regular season dominance and the possibility of massive upsets shifts to the second round after the lower Seeds beat up on each other.

 

[Statto]

Add the presidential trophy winner into the draft lottery, with a minimum top 5 pick…

Seriously though, it doesn’t need to be more meaningful. Watch the games and enjoy them.

 

[Suntouchable13]

Use a tournament format instead of series. Except the SC Finals between East and West.

Each team of a Conference would first start playing two games (one at home and one away) against the seven other best of its own Conference. . The team with the best record goes to the Finals (regular format) against the best of the other Conference.

Instead of having a maximum of 28 games (if all series go to the limit), we would have a max of 21 games (14 + max 7 for the Finals). No hockey should be played beyond May 31st.

No, stop ruining the playoffs. The best part of the season. There is nothing like watching your team in a high stakes best of 7 series. I can’t believe what I am reading here.

 

[joestevens29]

First round byes for division winners.

It provides a bigger prize for regular season dominance and the possibility of massive upsets shifts to the second round after the lower Seeds beat up on each other.

I don't know that two weeks off is something that would be a smart idea

 

[Seachd]

I’m not quite understanding how it’s not meaningful.

 

[1909]

No, stop ruining the playoffs. The best part of the season. There is nothing like watching your team in a high stakes best of 7 series. I can’t believe what I am reading here.

Why are the World Cup in soccer, and all International hockey tournaments are played in a tournament format ? Fans are thrilled too.

 

[catnip]

So, the issue is that Boston should've lost in the second round instead of the first? I'm not sure I get what the meaningful difference is there.

 

[sxvnert]

I don’t have a dog in this fight tonight (Boston vs Florida). In fact, my team (CBJ) is one of the biggest beneficiaries of a huge playoff upset and the “variance” of playoff hockey.

But I’m starting to get to a point where I’m wondering what’s even the point of watching hockey October through March? Seems like it’s only meaningful if you’re a bubble team (which is maybe 1/3 of the league). If you’re above that, it doesn’t matter at all. (And if you’re below, it of course doesn’t matter, either, but I have less issue with that than it being meaningless for teams at the top.)

Home-ice is meaningless. Seeding is not particularly meaningful. Is there anything that can be done to at least make it feel/be somewhat more meaningful?

Yes

Instead of 2-2-1-1-1
It should be: 2-2-2-1
If the home team can't close out the series after 4 of 6 games then they dont deserve the 7th. This will also cut down on travel.

 

[rojac]

Skip the playoffs
The winner of the Presidents cup wins the Stanley cup
Make it like how it is in the premier football league
Hockey should end in Spring and not in the summer

Summer normally begins June 21. In normal years, the NHL season is usually over by then.

 

[GAGLine]

The regular season weeds out half the league. The playoffs weed out the other half.

It works. Leave it alone.

 

[rumrokh]

The Presidents Trophy winner in the past eight seasons has yet to make the conference finals. 25% of playoff teams make the conference finals. So even if it was completely random, you’d expect the presidents trophy winner to make it twice in those eight years. And if there’d be some correlation/advantage like you’d expect/there should be, maybe 4-5 times (notice that I didn’t say the president trophy winnner should’ve made the conference finals all 8 seasons).

The Stanley Cup champion has been the top seed in either conference twice in the past 14 years. That’s about what you’d expect if it was completely random. Again, if there was some more direct correlation, that number should be higher, like maybe 5-6 out of 14 SC Champions being the top seed from either conference (notice I didn’t say all 14, or even a number above 50%).

Is that just what YOU would expect or what the numbers suggest? Do you think a sample size of eight or fourteen is meaningful?

It sounds like your expectation is just that the top seeds ought to be better than they are. Maybe the lesson here isn't that the league should prop them up with strategic rewards, but that you shouldn't expect them to be that much better. I still don't understand how rewarding those teams results in a better experience for spectators.

 

[DingDongCharlie]

Let me guess we also need to make the defending champs get a by into the finals. How can you be the champ without beating the champ?

 

[swiftwin]

Wouldn’t necessarily mind this. Would give a benefit to getting into the top-8 in the league/top-4 in the conference during the regular season. Would also almost all-but-eliminate tanking.

Exactly what I've been saying for a long time.

It's win-win-win-win

1. It generates more excitement for the regular season, as there will now be two playoff races. One playoff race for the bye, and a playoff race for the play-ins
2. Add more meaning to the regular season. Finishing in the top 25% now comes with a genuine, legitimate advantage in the playoffs
3. It reduces the incentive teams have to tank. It eliminates the dreaded "mediocrity zone" where teams are neither in the playoffs, and neither have a chance at winning the lottery.
4. More revenue. But, if people want to complain about too many games, then reduce the regular season to 78 or 80 games to compensate for the play-ins.

Most other major leagues in North America have moved to a play-in style playoffs in recent years.

Before crochety boomers come to complain that we "shouldn't mess with tradition", this is exactly how the playoffs worked in the from 1974 up until 1994. The idea of not having a "play-in" preliminary round is a relatively new concept.

 

[swiftwin]

Change the playoff format back

Yes. Back to the way it was in the 1980's up until 1994. Give the top teams a bye, and have a best of 5 play-in round. We did it in 2020, and it worked pretty well.

 

[Givememoneyback]

Bruins would have been fine and would have steamrolled into a 4-0 victory if Pittsburgh Penguins had managed to defeat the tanking Chicago Blackhawks who were trying to lose.

They could have also taken it easy on the Pens instead of winning the last game between the two teams, but then that record wouldn't be the same.

 

[CTHabsfan]

There is an easy answer if you want to make the regular season more meaningful in all sports- reduce the number of teams that qualify. Of course owners don't want to lose that sweet playoff revenue, so this will never happen.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

An easy advantage they could institute - give the higher seeded team "home ice advantages" in all 7 games (while still keeping the locations the same). Meaning they get last change and can put there stick down 2nd in faceoffs, even if they are on the road.

 

[Shocker]

Only way is to play less games, but owners will never let that happen.

 

[HugeInTheShire]

If I wanted to know the outcome beforehand I'd watch wrestling.

 

[Peltz]

I fail to see how the regular season does not matter when it determines who gets into the playoffs in the first place.

 

[Reindl87]

The regular season is obviously absolutely pointless in terms of team success. The only thing that makes the regular season interesting are individual performances, statistics and the competition for individual awards.
All teams in the NHL are well within the "Puck luck " window in the Playoffs. Anyone can beat anyone with a little luck in the NHL playoffs.

 

[Peltz]

Not an echo, because I never indicated anything like that.

But what I am saying is maybe in the future: there should be a bye for higher seeded teams (more through lower-seeded teams having to play an extra round to win the Cup than now, rather than higher-seed teams having to play one fewer round than now), maybe an extra home game for higher-seeded teams (although, again, number of home games seems pretty meaningless itself), I'm not sure.

Nah... it's too much of a physical sport to give higher team seeds a bye round. A single round takes more of a toll in the NHL than a round of any other type of sport, even the NFL (since it's only one game vs potentially 7 in the NHL).

Making the SC winner get 16 wins is part of why it's all so intense. Making them win less games or making others win more would be ridiculous at this point.

 

[Peltz]

The regular season is obviously absolutely pointless in terms of team success. The only thing that makes the regular season interesting are individual performances, statistics and the competition for individual awards.
All teams in the NHL are well within the "Puck luck " window in the Playoffs. Anyone can beat anyone with a little luck in the NHL playoffs.

Regular season performance is a good way to benchmark player value for trades when playoff time comes around. it's how you build a team.

It's also a good way for players to earn their next contracts even when they aren't playoff bound or about to be traded.

So sure individual success matters. But also....

Every team wants to win. Load management being for playoff bound teams is a myth.

Panthers barely squeaked into the playoffs and it wasn't due to load management. Bruins just failed to win against them. It's not that one team managed their regular season load better. Because if they managed it any more than that, they'd be where Pittsburgh is - not in the tournament.

To say it didn't matter just because Bruins didn't get anything for their trouble is just dumb. Stop this. If the Bruins won the Stanley cup, their fans would be saying how they're the greatest team of all time due, in large part, to the regular season success.