WHAT????? I had only seen examples of how first round match ups would play out so I assumed the divisional stuff only applied to the first round. That can be a rip off especially for the conference winner because that means they could draw a tougher opponent in the second round than the team that finished second in the conference.
New playoff seeding format
- Thread starter mcleex
- Start date
WHAT????? I had only seen examples of how first round match ups would play out so I assumed the divisional stuff only applied to the first round. That can be a rip off especially for the conference winner because that means they could draw a tougher opponent in the second round than the team that finished second in the conference.
Pyromaniac3
Registered User
Like it or not, the conference winner, if he wins the 1st round, will have to beat either the 2nd or 3rd team in its division. So Bos has to face either Tor or Tb and Pit has to face either Nyr or Clb. I don't see how that is unfair at all.
Traditionally higher seeding carried two advantages - home ice and facing lower seeded opponents. This seeding possibly eliminates that second advantage which could suck for a higher seeded team. If one division has two or more strong teams and the other division only has one strong team, the new format presents the possibility that one team will have an easier path to the conference finals if they have to go through two rounds within their own division. We've seen how often people acknowledge the unbalance of the divisions (southeast and southwest being easier division to qualify for playoffs, pacific being harder, etc.). Just because it's a reality doesn't mean that the circumstances don't suck (because they aren't ideal) and yes, it does suck when you're on the lowball end of the situation.
tamle
Registered User
- Nov 13, 2013
- 683
- 0
And your proposed alternative would be.. a cross conference matchup for the 2nd round? It creates as much problem as it solves. What if the 2/3rd seed of the conference winner's division is the "easier" team compared to the other division 2/3rd seed? Or are you thinking the conference winner gets to pick WC#1 as 2nd round if that team beats the other conference leader?
I think the current setup is simple and effective for what it tries to do- you get two rounds of division play before the ECF. Tons of opportunity to rejuvenate playoffs rivalry.
Basically round 1 + 2 are 'divisional' playoffs. If you win round 2 you are the 'division champ'. Then you play the winner of the other division, in the conference final.
I kinda like it. It'll be especially cool to see in the west with all the stacked teams.
We could see this in the west (just advancing who I think would win each series):
Round 2:
STL vs Chicago
ANA vs LA
Round 3:
STL vs LA
That'd just be so epic to see. Crazy high profile matchups in round 2, even round 1 in the west, not so much the east.
I kinda like it. It'll be especially cool to see in the west with all the stacked teams.
We could see this in the west (just advancing who I think would win each series):
Round 2:
STL vs Chicago
ANA vs LA
Round 3:
STL vs LA
That'd just be so epic to see. Crazy high profile matchups in round 2, even round 1 in the west, not so much the east.
If you're arguing for tradition's sake, the current format is much more "traditional" in the sense it had been used between the 1968 and 1993 playoffs. Being first in the conference still gives you home ice throughout the first three rounds of the playoffs, and very likely the Finals as well. The only format that won't see a "lopsided" (for lack of a better term) bracket is if the best eight teams, regardless of division, were given the eight playoff spots in the Conference... and the League wants nothing to do with that.
What things look like in the east now by point percentage.
M1 PITTSBURGH 0.708
A1 BOSTON 0.705
-----------------------------------------------------
A2 TORONTO 0.588
A3 TAMPA BAY 0.583 (0.6 Points Back from Leafs)
M2 PHILADELPHIA 0.562 (3.5 Points Back from Leafs)
M3 COLUMBUS 0.561 (3.6 Points Back from Leafs)
-----------------------------------------------------
A4 MONTREAL 0.575 (1.8 Points Back from Leafs)
M4 NY RANGERS 0.559 (4.0 Points Back from Leafs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A5 DETROIT 0.553 (4.6 Points Back from Leafs; 0.8 Points Back from Playoffs
M5 NEW JERSEY 0.530 (3.9 Points Back from Playoffs)
M6 WASHINGTON 0.529 (4.0 Points Back from Playoffs)
A6 OTTAWA 0.523 (4.6 Points Back from Playoffs)
M7 CAROLINA 0.508 (6.8 Points Back from Playoffs)
M8 NY ISLANDERS 0.434 (17 Points Back from Playoffs)
A7 FLORIDA 0.425 (17.9 Points Back from Playoffs)
A8 BUFFALO 0.348 (27.8 Points Back from Playoffs)
For those confused by the seeding format, it's this...
E1/M1 PITTSBURGH vs WC2/M4 NY RANGERS (higher seed divisional leader in the East faces lower seed wildcard)
E2/A1 BOSTON vs WC1/A4 MONTREAL (lower seed divisional leader faces higher seed wildcard)
A2 TORONTO vs A3 TAMPA BAY (2nd seed atlantic vs 3rd seed atlantic)
M2 PHILADELPHIA vs M3 COLUMBUS (2nd seed metro vs 3rd seed metro)
As things stand now, Leafs have to face Tampa Bay (with home ice advantage for an extra game in the 7 game series). Vezina candidate Ben Bishop and elite goalscorer Steven Stamkos. But no Marty St. Louis (thankfully).
We could also potentially face Montreal (P.K Subban, Carey Price. They recently brought in UFA rentals Vanek and Mike Weaver. Weaver has had a weak season though) or if we slip back into the wild card, Boston or Pittsburgh (cup contenders). Very tough competition. Pittsburgh brought in UFA rentals Marcel Goc and Stempniak to provide depth. They strengthened their weak depth (Pittsburgh is a very top 6 heavy team) in order to make a push for the cup. Boston brought in UFA rental Meszaros to replace the injured Seidenberg.
The Leafs are not a cup contending team nor are they a bubble team (a team that can contend for the cup if only they made some trades right before the trade deadline) so I'm ok with the fact that we didn't pick up any UFA rentals though. Whether the Leafs get knocked out in the first round or make it to the second, it doesn't matter. The team is not going to contend for the cup.
M1 PITTSBURGH 0.708
A1 BOSTON 0.705
-----------------------------------------------------
A2 TORONTO 0.588
A3 TAMPA BAY 0.583 (0.6 Points Back from Leafs)
M2 PHILADELPHIA 0.562 (3.5 Points Back from Leafs)
M3 COLUMBUS 0.561 (3.6 Points Back from Leafs)
-----------------------------------------------------
A4 MONTREAL 0.575 (1.8 Points Back from Leafs)
M4 NY RANGERS 0.559 (4.0 Points Back from Leafs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A5 DETROIT 0.553 (4.6 Points Back from Leafs; 0.8 Points Back from Playoffs
M5 NEW JERSEY 0.530 (3.9 Points Back from Playoffs)
M6 WASHINGTON 0.529 (4.0 Points Back from Playoffs)
A6 OTTAWA 0.523 (4.6 Points Back from Playoffs)
M7 CAROLINA 0.508 (6.8 Points Back from Playoffs)
M8 NY ISLANDERS 0.434 (17 Points Back from Playoffs)
A7 FLORIDA 0.425 (17.9 Points Back from Playoffs)
A8 BUFFALO 0.348 (27.8 Points Back from Playoffs)
For those confused by the seeding format, it's this...
E1/M1 PITTSBURGH vs WC2/M4 NY RANGERS (higher seed divisional leader in the East faces lower seed wildcard)
E2/A1 BOSTON vs WC1/A4 MONTREAL (lower seed divisional leader faces higher seed wildcard)
A2 TORONTO vs A3 TAMPA BAY (2nd seed atlantic vs 3rd seed atlantic)
M2 PHILADELPHIA vs M3 COLUMBUS (2nd seed metro vs 3rd seed metro)
As things stand now, Leafs have to face Tampa Bay (with home ice advantage for an extra game in the 7 game series). Vezina candidate Ben Bishop and elite goalscorer Steven Stamkos. But no Marty St. Louis (thankfully).
We could also potentially face Montreal (P.K Subban, Carey Price. They recently brought in UFA rentals Vanek and Mike Weaver. Weaver has had a weak season though) or if we slip back into the wild card, Boston or Pittsburgh (cup contenders). Very tough competition. Pittsburgh brought in UFA rentals Marcel Goc and Stempniak to provide depth. They strengthened their weak depth (Pittsburgh is a very top 6 heavy team) in order to make a push for the cup. Boston brought in UFA rental Meszaros to replace the injured Seidenberg.
The Leafs are not a cup contending team nor are they a bubble team (a team that can contend for the cup if only they made some trades right before the trade deadline) so I'm ok with the fact that we didn't pick up any UFA rentals though. Whether the Leafs get knocked out in the first round or make it to the second, it doesn't matter. The team is not going to contend for the cup.
Last edited:
TennisMenace
Registered User
Isn't Rangers second Metro and Columbus third metro? Why do you have Philly second?
TennisMenace
Registered User
TennisMenace
Registered User
I'm not a Leafs fan, but if I were, I would want to play Montreal in opening round. Here's why. Montreal has mostly smaller players so in a 6/7 game series you won't get physically abused or physically drained. This means round two should be easier because of this.
Now, for those wondering, well maybe Habs win the series, I don't think so. Montreal is not made for tough seven game series so they should be worn down by your rugged defense. Montreal is now becoming a dump and chase team looking not to get hammered into the boards and rely on Price to win the 2-1 game. The chances of this happening are not great. Look at sens opening series last year. Habs aren't much better this year.
Now, for those wondering, well maybe Habs win the series, I don't think so. Montreal is not made for tough seven game series so they should be worn down by your rugged defense. Montreal is now becoming a dump and chase team looking not to get hammered into the boards and rely on Price to win the 2-1 game. The chances of this happening are not great. Look at sens opening series last year. Habs aren't much better this year.
Yeah the Montreal Canadiens are a pretty poor possession team themselves. Leafs are 29th in Corsi 5v5 score close (42.4%) but Montreal is still 26th (47.2%). They rely a lot on their goalie too. Our 5v5 score close goal differential record is actually better than Montreal's (because our superior shooting % and save % puts us above them goal-wise). Their penalty kill is much better though.
Last edited:
mix1home
Registered User
I prefer Mtl playing Boston. They always give them trouble. Bos-NYR could be good too. For now I'll concentrate on staying ahead of the pack and in divisional spot if possible. There are still many games to play and a lot of those against very teams that try to catch us.
Cross conference? That only happens in the finals, not sure where you got the impression that I was proposing that in the second round. I was under the impression that after the first round of divisional match ups, the higher seed that advances will get the lower seed that advances regardless of division. For example, if Boston beat WC 2 and W1 beat Pittsburgh, Boston would face W1 in the second round rather than face seed 2/3 from the Atlantic.
Again, I get that this is the set up and that's fine but I'm just acknowledging that it creates possible situations that could have a team get the short end of the stick in the match ups before the ECF...that's all. I completely understand the thought process behind divisional match ups and I think it's a great idea but I just wasn't aware that the set up last two rounds.
Traditionally was the wrong word to use as you are correct. I'm accustomed to the higher seed vs lower seed match up. When the league was doing divisional match ups, I was much younger and didn't at all pay attention to the game outside of wins, losses and goals.
ToMaLe
Registered User
I would like to see the first two rounds stay in their respective conferences to save on travel costs etc but would like to see the semi finals seed the top 4 teams left so that seed 1 would play seed 4 even if they are in a different conference. With this change, then it would be possible that the two best teams in the LEAGUE would play each other for the cup. I remember a few years back Colorado and Detroit was far and away the top two teams in the league and the winner would probably win the cup. shouldnt they have been playing in the finals together if they were the two top teams? This way it would still be possible to see a Toronto- Montreal, Rangers-Islanders, Calgary-Edmonton, Montreal-Boston etc final for the cup.
Suntouchable13
Registered User
Yea, why did they change that format? We have some real geniuses running this league, I tell ya.
Hurt
Registered User
- Apr 6, 2009
- 28,303
- 799
Is there a legitimate reason they changed it? Did Gary have a press conference about it with reasoning? Or was it 'just for fun'?
They changed it to save on travel costs and to have better starting times for teams. It more has to do to with western teams. Fans of teams like St. Louis and Chicago have a better chance of having the first 2 rounds at local starting times instead of having late night games if they played teams on the west coast.
For me, I love the new setup. It builds rivalries as you have a better chance of playing the same team a few years in a row. For the people that say a top team gets the short end of the stick by having to play higher seeded teams, if your team is good it shouldn't matter.
For me, I love the new setup. It builds rivalries as you have a better chance of playing the same team a few years in a row. For the people that say a top team gets the short end of the stick by having to play higher seeded teams, if your team is good it shouldn't matter.
Pyromaniac3
Registered User
Would you as #1 seed in the division want to face a team that just eliminated the #1 seed in the other conference?
The CyNick
Freedom of Speech!
- Sep 17, 2009
- 11,364
- 2,032
Funny to see the word tradition thrown around when the divisional playoff format was used for years during the 4 division era.
I just hope they go all the way with the divisional format. I much rather see the Leafs play teams in their own division for the first two rounds rather than random teams from the metro division.
hate the idea of say pittsburgh playing Montreal and Boston playing Philly, when the reverse would be far more appealing for everyone. even worse in the west if say Chicago and Anaheim were the division winners and wild cards were Minnesota and say Los Angeles. much more logical to see minny v Chicago and Anaheim v LA than the flip, which would result in travel and crossing time zones for TV.
Kinda like the idea of re seeding after round two, but again, you could have two series with extra travel. so probably makes sense to just keep the east West divide.
I just hope they go all the way with the divisional format. I much rather see the Leafs play teams in their own division for the first two rounds rather than random teams from the metro division.
hate the idea of say pittsburgh playing Montreal and Boston playing Philly, when the reverse would be far more appealing for everyone. even worse in the west if say Chicago and Anaheim were the division winners and wild cards were Minnesota and say Los Angeles. much more logical to see minny v Chicago and Anaheim v LA than the flip, which would result in travel and crossing time zones for TV.
Kinda like the idea of re seeding after round two, but again, you could have two series with extra travel. so probably makes sense to just keep the east West divide.
I believe the league wanted to A)reduce travel in the 1st and 2nd round and B) keep those rounds either in or as close to the same time zone as possible.
We would have had straight up divisional format (1v4, 2v3) if the NHLPA didn't get involved. That was the initial plan. The wildcard bit is all the NHLPA
3 points - Regulation win
2 points - OT win
1 point - Shootout win
0 points - Any type of loss
Extend OT by 5min, 3 on 3
2 points - OT win
1 point - Shootout win
0 points - Any type of loss
Extend OT by 5min, 3 on 3
The new format ensures frequent division rival matchups. The wild cards improve upon the old playoff format by eliminating a weaker fourth team from getting in (should one division become too dominant).
Love the new format.
Depends. Do I pretend that there are no such thing as favourable match ups and what could be a bad match up for the other conference team (or a great choke job on their part) may actually be a match up that gives me the better odds?
