Tdot Soldier
Registered User
The Leafs are 9-4 in shootouts, if they were 4-9 in shootouts we would be battling for our playoff lives right now. It's part of the game though now, and no need to apologize for being good at it.
New playoff seeding format
- Thread starter mcleex
- Start date
The Leafs are 9-4 in shootouts, if they were 4-9 in shootouts we would be battling for our playoff lives right now. It's part of the game though now, and no need to apologize for being good at it.
Rants Mulliniks
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2008
- 23,071
- 6,136
And that has been the case for much of the NHL's history. When ties still existed, you could have 82 ties and thus a points % of .500 with 0 wins.
I agree, in baseball, the Blue Jays have had a lot of trouble making the playoffs because they're in the hardest division eg in 1987 the Jays had the 2nd best record of all 30 teams and did NOT make the playoffs. The new format for NHL makes the metropolitan division the "crap division" and much easier to make the playoffs. I think they need to eliminate divisions all together and just have the top 8 teams from each conference make it. Also they need to revise the point system to what they do in the Olympics 3 points for regulation win, 2 for ot or so win, and 1 point for ot/so loss. This way all games are 3 point games and the same # of points are awarded to all games.
this is true, if the Leafs lose the rest of their games they will end up 92 points as long as the losses are ot or so losses and their point %age would be .500.
You are right with regard to this year. But it is possible if this system is used for enough of years that one time we'd end up with a division with a gap between #4 and #5 so #3 could afford to sit their best, drop to #4 and cross over to an easier division. It took 30-40 years for tanking games to happen before, but it did and if it does again, it will be exposed for its flaws and a change will be implemented. The media might have a field day with it and it could hurt the NHL.
This is true, especially this year -#3 through #5 is close and in some divisions #3 through #6 are close. But over the course of time we'll see a division with the top 4 a "cinch to clinch" with #5 through 7(or 8) a distance back. #3 and #4 have the luxury of jockeying for playoff position.
Even if the breathing room only allows #3 to tank 1 game (likely the last game) of the season to drop to WC#1, it's an insult to paying fans.
As long as no division leader is much weaker than the other leader in their conference, this won't happen and good for the NHL, it won't happen this year.
Intact
Registered User
We're fine if the shootouts didn't exist. Counting all SO wins and losses as ties, we'd be tied with Tampa in points, 3 back of MTL
Rants Mulliniks
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2008
- 23,071
- 6,136
Rants Mulliniks
Registered User
- Jun 22, 2008
- 23,071
- 6,136
When someone can come up with a reason why success should be penalized and failure rewarded, I'll be impressed.
Of course we seem to have adopted such a strategy for our education system. The results of that only serve to strengthen the notion of why such a concept should be avoided at all costs.
Last edited:
Duffman955
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2010
- 14,635
- 3,988
Baba Ganoush
Registered User
- Dec 8, 2009
- 6,499
- 0
no way. I'd rather just have it like the NBA.
ideally, every game should be worth TWO points. two for a win, none for a loss. if the shootout didn't exist, awesome...but if it has to, every game should still be worth two points.
there's no way a shoot out win should be worth as much as a regulation win, an ot win maybe, because the whole team is still playing, but a shoot out is not and should not be worth the same. All games should be worth the same if you're going to make all wins worth 2 points, then you have to get rid of the shoot out and no point is awarded to the losing team, but the better solution is make all games 3 point games, that only makes sense.
Lol.
I wasn't disagreeing with the math, I was disagreeing at the suggestion of using win percentage instead of points to determine the standings.
Here's a website that refigures the NHL standings based on various point systems, including the 3 point system, used in the Olympics. http://www.hockeystandings.info/
The point system used can affect the playoff pairings, and in one case currently even the Presidient's Trophy leader. However, the 4 division leaders remain in first place for almost any system used.
It's interesting how a subjective decision can affect playoff seeding, and therefore the match-ups. I would hope that a decision could be made and stuck with for a long time. Historically, a team hitting 100 pts was really good. My guess why the NHL doesn't go to a 3pt system is because you'd see more than just 3 or 4 teams hitting the 100pt mark, thus devaluing the greatness of the achievment. This season 7 teams are on pace to hit the century mark. The President's Trophy winner on a 3pt system would have over 150pts.
I read an article recently that the NHL was concerned that the 5 minute overtime wasn't producing the results they wanted. 40% of overtime games went to shootouts since its inception. Tinkering with the point value of an OT win vs a shootout win was discussed to create an incentive, but won't likely get approved. The article said that the most likely thing is for the goalies to switch ends like it is in the 2nd period. The longer distance for a line change may create the plus one difference in men for a score.
I'm curious if any fan poll has been done on point systems.
If it weren't for Central teams playing 9pm (central time) weeknight games at Pacific Division teams, the no-divisions suggestion may have been more strongly considered.
I think they should just get rid of divisions altogether and just do conferences. And have the westernmost team in the Eastern Conference move to the West so we have a 15/15 split.
Sure you'd have an extra game against the opposite division in your conference. But since 3 games means that one team has to go on the road twice, that's even more unfair don't you think? I don't see why it would be World War III if you had 4 games/year with everyone in your conference...
Intra-conference: 14 Teams X 4 games each (2 home, 2 away) = 56
Inter-conference: 15 Teams X 2 games each (1 home, 1 away) = 30
Total: 86
The NHLPA may not be happy with having the players work an extra 4 games per year. But an extra 4 games per year does mean more revenue so they might buy in since the players are given a percentage of the revenue.
Sure you'd have an extra game against the opposite division in your conference. But since 3 games means that one team has to go on the road twice, that's even more unfair don't you think? I don't see why it would be World War III if you had 4 games/year with everyone in your conference...
Intra-conference: 14 Teams X 4 games each (2 home, 2 away) = 56
Inter-conference: 15 Teams X 2 games each (1 home, 1 away) = 30
Total: 86
The NHLPA may not be happy with having the players work an extra 4 games per year. But an extra 4 games per year does mean more revenue so they might buy in since the players are given a percentage of the revenue.
Last edited:
Suntouchable13
Registered User
ToMaLe
Registered User
I think only the first round is meant to provide guaranteed divisional match ups so I'm assuming the second round and onwards would be seeded normally (highest seed advancing gets lowest seed advancing, etc.)
I know it may not be the same people but it's just another example of how circumstances can bring out the opposite side of an argument. Last year people were complaining about the Leafs being so bad in SOs and how it could cost them a playoff spot. It was a part of the game now and they needed to adapt. This year they've been exceptionally good in SOs and now the problem is that they don't have enough ROWs and how there aren't any SOs in the playoffs to save them so they need to stop relying on them.
Suntouchable13
Registered User
no its not like before at all. Teams aren't re-seeded. So if the playoffs started today, Boston would play the 2nd wildcard team and the winner of that plays the winner of Leafs and Tampa. The playoffs are basically like they used to be in the early 90's. Divisional till the semi-finals.
Pyromaniac3
Registered User
They continue within their divisions (So if a team switches divisions in the playoffs, they stay in that division until round 2. Theoretically the conference finals can be between teams in the same divisions. Meaning Leafs vs Habs could happen in the conference finals).
Right now the match ups are like this:
Bos vs Phi (Phi switches over because Bos plays the 2nd wildcard team)
Tor vs Tb
Pit vs Mtl (Mtl switches over because Pit plays the 1st wildcard team)
Nyr vs Clb
Winner of Bos-Phi play the winner of Tor-Tb. Winner of Pit-Mtl play the winner of Nyr-Clb.
