NHL, NHLPA likely to extend playoff format another season UPD: extended

[Ted Hoffman]

Rivalries only work when all/both teams make it to the dance

Eh, not really. Rivalries occur because of geography or because of playoff history. Being in the same division helps, but it's not sufficient. Same for seeing each other even semi-occasionally in the playoffs. Colorado/Detroit didn't have a rivalry until Lemieux cross-checked Draper in the 96 playoffs; that created the '97 brawl and subsequent playoff series drama. It lacked geography or divisional play, it was purely a playoff experience thing.

Meanwhile, the Blues and Blackhawks were still rivals between 1994 and 2013, even if they only faced each other in the playoffs once in that stretch and at least one of them was lousy between 1997 and 2008. Nashville and St. Louis were rivals long before they ever faced each other in the playoffs for the first time in 2017. Both have to do worth geography, with playoff history being an added bonus. Blues fans probably consider the Sharks minor rivals given playoff history and a pair of regular-season hits by Sharks players on Blues players. That lacks geography and divisional alignment.

You can't artificially crate rivalries where they don't naturally exist. They just have to create themselves, and that happens regardless of what playoff format you use.

 

[DaBadGuy7]

The NBA is a different animal. The only true rivalry that stands the test of time in the NBA is Lakers-Celtics. The rest come and go and are more like flavors of the month. The rivalries in the NBA are star-based. Lebron vs Curry for example. Secondly, the NBA play-offs are pretty much meaningless until the Finals and sometimes the Conference Finals gets a surprise.

Yea, that has nothing to do whether or not a bracketed 1-8 playoff format would work in the NHL or not. I’m just saying that how it is done in the NBA that’s all. Comparing the Stanley Cup Playoffs to NBA Playoffs is comparing apples to oranges after that. If you want to breakdown how fair 1v8 bracketed against 4v5 and 2v7 bracketed against 3v6, fine. But, how the NBA playoffs are usually played out should not be a reason why this format being a possibility not be discussed.

 

[Boeser Fan]

I can see the format staying the same until Seattle joins.

After that, there will no longer a need for wildcards. I can see a straight top 4 per division, perhaps make it 5 down the road with 5@4 one game play-ins.

I really hope when Seattle comes in they make it the Division winners get the top 2 seeds, but other than that seed 1-8 per conference with the 1994-2013 style of reseeding in the 2nd round.
And please no one game playoff!

 

[LeafalCrusader]

I just hope they don't expand the playoffs or do play in games.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Yea, that has nothing to do whether or not a bracketed 1-8 playoff format would work in the NHL or not. I’m just saying that how it is done in the NBA that’s all. Comparing the Stanley Cup Playoffs to NBA Playoffs is comparing apples to oranges after that. If you want to breakdown how fair 1v8 bracketed against 4v5 and 2v7 bracketed against 3v6, fine. But, how the NBA playoffs are usually played out should not be a reason why this format being a possibility not be discussed.

Yes, but the whole point of going back to division play-offs was to help re-ignite old division rivalries.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Yes, but the whole point of going back to division play-offs was to help re-ignite old division rivalries.

What's more important? Old rivalries or trying to get the best teams as far into the postseason as possible?

The NHL clearly went with the former.

 

[YEM]

Yes, but the whole point of going back to division play-offs was to help re-ignite old division rivalries.

and in doing this they changed the schedule so that you play your rivals less during the regular season
I'm a Flyers fan, and we had some really good & entertaining series in the playoffs against Montreal, Buffalo, Toronto, Boston etc over the last decade or so. It's a real shame that the chances of the flyers ever meeting these teams in the playoffs [yes, if they can even get in] is slim to nil.

 

[MNNumbers]

What's more important? Old rivalries or trying to get the best teams as far into the postseason as possible?

The NHL clearly went with the former.

and in doing this they changed the schedule so that you play your rivals less during the regular season
I'm a Flyers fan, and we had some really good & entertaining series in the playoffs against Montreal, Buffalo, Toronto, Boston etc over the last decade or so. It's a real shame that the chances of the flyers ever meeting these teams in the playoffs [yes, if they can even get in] is slim to nil.

This whole conversation, connected with KevFu's continued advocating for his own scheduling ideas, leads me to these conclusions:

#1 - The NHL as a whole wants to maximize profits. For that reason, playing traditional rivals is important because more seats can be sold AT HIGHER PRICES. This is the piece which is sometimes missed. KevFu says that it's ok to schedule the weak road draws in barns which will be sold out anyway. However, the goal isn't maximizing attendance, it's maximizing attendance $$. Since that is the case, no one really wants Carolina or Minnesota to come visiting (along with many others) because there is much more $$ available in hosting Boston or Montreal, or Pittsburgh (at least now), etc.....

#2 - The same goes for the playoffs. The idea is to maximize gate $$, with the added bonus of maximizing TV eyeballs for the sake of the next TV contract. NHL doesn't care about the best teams going furthest. Nor should they. NHL is not at all like NBA. As has been stated, in NBA, the first round, and often the second, are a foregone conclusion, and people watch for the sake of the skill involved. In the NHL anything can happen. One year the North Stars, as a 16 seed, came 2 games away from the Cup. Anything can happen. In NO year could you say that, "If we ran the playoffs again, the winner would be the same..." Even in 78-79, when Montreal was a juggernaut, Boston had them beaten in Game 7 except for a late penalty. Anything can happen.

In short, the league is in it to make money. No other reason. We can argue, in the sense of purity, that it shouldn't be that way. But it is that way...

 

[KingsFan7824]

Yes, but the whole point of going back to division play-offs was to help re-ignite old division rivalries.

I'd say that's maybe a by-product. Realignment was centered around Detroit, and sort of Columbus because they were in the same situation. Then others in the West started thinking yeah, Detroit's making sense. Nashville is basically closer to every Eastern conference team than they are to 2 teams in their own division, let along the whole Pacific. They don't want to be linked to the west coast any more than Detroit did.

 

[Grudy0]

What's more important? Old rivalries or trying to get the best teams as far into the postseason as possible?

The NHL clearly went with the former.

I don't think it's quite so cut-and-dried...

Although a stated reason going to this playoff format was to reignite divisional rivalries, it also cemented better TV start times for the Western Conference playoffs. It became guaranteed that one first round playoff would be between the Central Division, where all but Colorado is a Central time zone matchup for the 2/3 series, and one playoff in the Pacific Division would also be guaranteed not to be more than an hour time zone differential. In most cases since the advent of this format, there's been another Western Conference series that was entirely divisional.

This format allowed for better certainty for start times of first round (and likely second round) playoff series for their TV partners.

 

[DaBadGuy7]

Yes, but the whole point of going back to division play-offs was to help re-ignite old division rivalries.

Clearly it hasn’t worked for the players perspective since they are already sick of it. It is clear it was a money and TV cash grab and it has worked for the league from that perspective. But, seeing PIT-WSH or TOR-BOS isn’t re-igniting old rivarlies, it’s making race for the playoffs more boring outside the WC spots. Btw, it’s not really divisional playoffs, it’s basically a weird mix of both divisional and 1-8 with the WCs.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I'd say that's maybe a by-product. Realignment was centered around Detroit, and sort of Columbus because they were in the same situation. Then others in the West started thinking yeah, Detroit's making sense. Nashville is basically closer to every Eastern conference team than they are to 2 teams in their own division, let along the whole Pacific. They don't want to be linked to the west coast any more than Detroit did.

Not everyone can be in the East. It's why I say just create divisions that have teams scattered across all time zones. Preserve a few major rivalries, leave the rest to a relatively blind draw.

I know why this won't happen, but it would instantly kill claims about unfairness of travel and talk of teams wanting to change conferences and the need to constantly consider geography in realignment.

Oh, X moves to Y? Ok, whatever, no need to figure out how to restructure divisions because of it and someone complaining they're getting screwed.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Although a stated reason going to this playoff format was to reignite divisional rivalries, it also cemented better TV start times for the Western Conference playoffs. It became guaranteed that one first round playoff would be between the Central Division, where all but Colorado is a Central time zone matchup for the 2/3 series, and one playoff in the Pacific Division would also be guaranteed not to be more than an hour time zone differential. In most cases since the advent of this format, there's been another Western Conference series that was entirely divisional.

In theory, yes. In reality, I would argue start yimes are worse now. You have Central Division games starting at 8pm or later which makes zero sense other than helping fit into TV schedules for possible doubleheader or tripleheader coverage.

 

[LadyStanley]

LeBrun Notebook: Agent JP Barry blasts the ‘code’ after...

Paywall. Update from LeBrun

The league and NHLPA have spoken over the past week about simply rolling it over for another year before any possible change can be enacted, sources on both sides confirmed. The NHLPA leadership is in contact with its executive board (31 player reps) about extending it for a year. We should know by next week if that’s indeed the case.

I’m not sure how modifications can be made this late in the league calendar. Changing the playoff format, as far as I understand it, would also require an overhaul of the regular-season schedule and the person in charge of that would require way more time to get it done for next season.

Therefore, I believe the earliest we will see a change to the playoff format would be for the 2020-21 season.

Makes sense about the delay in any change, plus with the impact of Seattle coming in, might make sense to delay until that season.

 

[Pilky01]

The PA picks such stupid issues to fight over.

Playoff format, Olympic participation....that the players even bring that kind of shit up is already a huge win for owners.

 

[LadyStanley]

The PA picks such stupid issues to fight over.

But the BOG had to agree to the length and it not being part of the CBA.

So, I'm unclear why you think the union is "fighting" over this issue.

The agreement is expiring. Some decision has to be made.

 

[KingsFan7824]

In theory, yes. In reality, I would argue start yimes are worse now. You have Central Division games starting at 8pm or later which makes zero sense other than helping fit into TV schedules for possible doubleheader or tripleheader coverage.

That is true. Central fans have gotten the short end of the stick there.

Trying to cover as many interests as possible has been an issue since 1967. Alignments, formats, start times, it's all been a mess. They completely guaranteed a spot in the Final for an expansion team back then, which was far worse than whatever expansion draft rules they put in place for Vegas. Can't even imagine what the reaction would've been had the internet been around 52 years ago.

 

[patnyrnyg]

Clearly it hasn’t worked for the players perspective since they are already sick of it. It is clear it was a money and TV cash grab and it has worked for the league from that perspective. But, seeing PIT-WSH or TOR-BOS isn’t re-igniting old rivarlies, it’s making race for the playoffs more boring outside the WC spots. Btw, it’s not really divisional playoffs, it’s basically a weird mix of both divisional and 1-8 with the WCs.

And, how do we know the player's are already sick of it? Should the league just change to what the players want? Or, just what people on this site want? The race for the play-offs would be the same if it was top-8 per conference. My Isles fan friends are pretty into this chase for the Metro division.

 

[patnyrnyg]

What's more important? Old rivalries or trying to get the best teams as far into the postseason as possible?

The NHL clearly went with the former.

From a business standpoint? The former.

I will say it again, the top-2 seeds in the east met in the ECF only once from 1994-2013. So, people are complaining about something that is not likely to happen anyway. It is not the NBA were the favorite pretty much always wins. Secondly, if the teams truly are the best teams, it shouldn't matter who the play, should it?

 

[patnyrnyg]

But the BOG had to agree to the length and it not being part of the CBA.

So, I'm unclear why you think the union is "fighting" over this issue.

The agreement is expiring. Some decision has to be made.

Only place I have heard the play-off format is an issue for the NHLPA is on here.

 

[patnyrnyg]

I'd say that's maybe a by-product. Realignment was centered around Detroit, and sort of Columbus because they were in the same situation. Then others in the West started thinking yeah, Detroit's making sense. Nashville is basically closer to every Eastern conference team than they are to 2 teams in their own division, let along the whole Pacific. They don't want to be linked to the west coast any more than Detroit did.

I think it was the opposite. I know Detroit hated having so many road games as late starts. I think satisfying Detroit and Columbus was the by-product. When the Thrashers moved to Winnipeg, they could have either simply swapped Nashville and Winnipeg or Detroit and Winnipeg and kept the 6-division format. Before anyone makes the argument that they couldn't put Detroit in the Southeast or had to keep them with other O6 teams, I am not buying it. They would be getting into the East like they wanted. They did not have to give them the perfect division set-up on top of it.

 

[DaBadGuy7]

And, how do we know the player's are already sick of it? Should the league just change to what the players want? Or, just what people on this site want? The race for the play-offs would be the same if it was top-8 per conference. My Isles fan friends are pretty into this chase for the Metro division.

I’m going off this report and what certain players like Stamkos said in the past about them not liking the fact they have to play tougher competition in the earlier rounds. The format clearly has its problems, you can’t tell me seeing either the same matchups over again or the two best teams in a conference facing off in the 2nd round is a good thing. 1-8 was fine, I’m sorry the Western Conference isn’t as densely populated as the East, its not fair, but it is what it is.

 

[patnyrnyg]

I’m going off this report and what certain players like Stamkos said in the past about them not liking the fact they have to play tougher competition in the earlier rounds. The format clearly has its problems, you can’t tell me seeing either the same matchups over again or the two best teams in a conference facing off in the 2nd round is a good thing. 1-8 was fine, I’m sorry the Western Conference isn’t as densely populated as the East, its not fair, but it is what it is.

Would you rather see the 2 best teams in the 2nd round or not at all? Under 1-8, the 2 teams with the best record in the east played in the ECF only 3 times. Only once was it as 1-2 seeds (NJ-Ott in 03). NYR-NJ in 94 and Philly-NJ in 2000 played as 1-4, but had the 2 best records in the conference.

Secondly, "certain players" and "Stamkos" qualify as the "Players are sick of it"?

 

[Ted Hoffman]

From a business standpoint? The former.

I will say it again, the top-2 seeds in the east met in the ECF only once from 1994-2013. So, people are complaining about something that is not likely to happen anyway. It is not the NBA were the favorite pretty much always wins. Secondly, if the teams truly are the best teams, it shouldn't matter who the play, should it?

Giving it a chance and having it happen are two different things. And I agree, there's much more parity in the NHL then there is in the NBA. Think I remember posting a stat a little while back about how many teams from each NBA Conference had made the finals, vs. the NHL. The NHL had far more representation even if the general playoff format was the same through much of it.

There is no perfect playoff format. Even the idea I really like (cross-conference pairing in the opening round) has flaws. The question is whether any idea when floats out accomplishes the intended goals, and whether the flaws in it are something one can live with. The NHL has decided its current structure is worth putting up with first-round matchup involving top five teams potentially, because old rivalries are more important. Not saying whether it's right or it's wrong, that was just what the NHL decided to focus on.

 

[Grudy0]

That is true. Central fans have gotten the short end of the stick there.

Trying to cover as many interests as possible has been an issue since 1967. Alignments, formats, start times, it's all been a mess. They completely guaranteed a spot in the Final for an expansion team back then, which was far worse than whatever expansion draft rules they put in place for Vegas. Can't even imagine what the reaction would've been had the internet been around 52 years ago.

Yes, covering all those interests is painful, but a necessary evil. For example, by stating the Central time zone teams getting a short end of the stick...

Although there's complaining that the Central time zone teams may have 8p local starts at home during the playoffs, it's extremely possible in the old format that the Central time zone teams could play Pacific time zone teams in multiple rounds. Heck, when Detroit was winning Cups they usually had to go out west and play many rounds on a two- or three-hour time zone differential. But so far under this format playing more than one round two hours away happened once, when Nashville beat Anaheim and lost to San Jose in the 2016 playoffs.