NHL claims this is the best playoff format they have ever had. no changes on horizon

Choralone

Registered User
Oct 16, 2010
5,171
4,048
Burbank, CA
I was looking forward to bringing back the bitter Smythe rivalries. But it's kind of hard when Edmonton, Calgary, and Vancouver all miss the playoffs, and Los Angeles gets swept in round 1. Step it up, boys!
 

Dr Pepper

Registered User
Dec 9, 2005
70,570
15,751
Sunny Etobicoke
The NBA is also hot ****ing garbage. I don't watch it so I don't know what they do, other than stack a couple of teams and have them play each other in the finals every year.

Why, in your opinion, does the NHL need to mimic the NBA, as that seems to be your reasonable explanation.

I dont follow basketball either and I'm glad we're not stuck in the same time loop with regards to finalists that they are.

I was just using that league as an example since they have the same 16-team playoff format only with division winners and the standard 1v8 format.
 

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
48,760
29,267
Any chance the NHL goes to a 2-3-2 format?

Less travel, which seems to be a sticking point for most teams in the west.
No because the format sucks. It's professional sports - I don't feel too sorry for the fact that their flight is 90 minutes longer in a private jumbo jet.
 

MNNumbers

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 17, 2011
7,658
2,536
I get that you gotta win 16 games regardless, but pitting the conference's 2nd and 3rd seed against each other in the first round just doesn't make sense in any format. Unless you do away with conferences altogether and just make it streamlined, top-4 in each division. But they won't do that, so we get this mess.

Still can't figure out what was wrong with 1v8. I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation for why that system was scrapped. :dunno:

At risk of other posters having gone through this already.....

For Eastern fans.....You have a hard time understanding the rigors of travel and of start times in the west.

The current playoff system was designed in the following way:

1- Initial idea to realign had 4 conferences, with Detroit and Columbus in the Central, Colorado in the Pacific; all conferences had 2 rounds playoffs in conferences. Final 4 were to be possibly re-seeded. Sched was h/a away with everyone all the rest in your conference. The reason for this was to decrease travel in the West. This was obviously a good idea, because previously you had the possibility of Detroit playing 3 straight series against a West Coast opponent, and that's A LOT of travel.

2- PA said "No". Potential of too much travel burden still, and 8 teams vs 7 with no wild card is NOT equal odds of making the playoffs.

3- NHL changed, first the playoff, to put in the WC (thus taking away the argument of unequal odds - kind of), but then had to change the schedule as well, because under a division heavy schedule (ALL other games against your division), it didn't make sense to compare the 5 Pacific with the 4 Central.

I think it's like making sausage. You don't want to know the process.

But, the real reason for the whole thing was the amount of travel that Detroit specifically was enduring playing in the Western Conference. Along with that, you had Minn as the only CTZ team in their division, and you had Dallas the only CTZ team in their division, and you had Winnipeg in the SE. So, a realignment was necessary.

And, I think I am with you. I think that when a 32nd team comes in, they will change to Top4, and 2 rounds in Division.

ETA: However, I think the BEST system, which accommodates all the factors, is:

East:
Sched: 2 games v west; 4 games v division; enough games with the other East division to make 82
Playoffs: 1-8.
Everything is in one Time Zone. There is no reason not to do this.

West:
Since there are 3 time zones included:
Sched: h/a away with everyone, and all the rest in your division
Playoffs: 1-4 in each division for 2 rounds, then the Pac and Cent champs play each other
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad