NHL Realignment 2012-13 – Part III

[No Fun Shogun]

I've been told now that the Detroit Red Wings, while still wanting to move to the East, might be willing to stay right where they are if the rest of the league agrees to a schedule that allows "a home-and-home series" with every team in the East. That would guarantee the Wings more games in the Eastern Time zone and allow them to get at least one visit per season at the Joe from their longest and most historic rivals (read: Original 6).

Yes please. I've been wanting that for freaking years, if only for the simple fact that we only play the other four Original Six teams once a year is an absolute joke.

 

[Crayton]

No, optimus, it has to work. After each team has its 4 other teams (mostly Divisional opponents) with which it plays 6 games against, then there are 10 teams remaining... 5 to play 4 games against and 5 to play 2 games against.
And then of course the whole other Conference which they play 2 games against, less 2 teams that are only played against once in a Season (unless the schedule would be increased to 84 games thus making it a perfect 2 games against every team in the other Conference).

The scheduling format is exactly the same as with the 3-Conference structure, it's just that those 5 teams that are played against 4 times each aren't obvious to see... you have to program them in.

optimus, as with MoreOrr's NHC/AHC example, the in-conference opponents that a team plays 4 and 2 times are mostly random across divisions (ex. Chicago plays 3 NW teams and 2 PAC teams four times) except for a few key rivalries (ie. Chi-Min or Chi-Van).

I still don't see why 3 games against everyone in your conference is bad. How many times will the tie-breaker go down head-to-head with these new tie-breaker rules. Even though the new rules are... new, the last 10 years it would have happened about 6 times, 3 times with sub #8 teams, and only once to determine playoff eligibility. That is so rare, random even, that a simple schedule is preferable by far.

Here's a quick attempt at a realignment/schedule proposal. It's certainly not perfect, but I tried to balance travel/time zone considerations with regional or traditional rivalries, and keeping in mind my belief that every team should play in every city, every season. This was done fairly quickly whilst at work, so if some of the scheduling math doesn't work, I apologize in advance. Here goes:

Division 1:
VAN, CGY, EDM, WPG, LA, SJ, ANA, PHX

Division 2:
CHI, STL, COL, DAL, CBJ, MIN, NSH

Division 3:
TOR, MTL, OTT, BOS, BUF, PITS, PHI, DET

Division 4:
NYR, NYI, NJ, WSH, CAR, TB, FLA

Schedule (Here's where it got a little more complicated than I would have liked)

Division 1:
plays 5 games vs division opponents (35 games)
plays every other team home and away (44 games)
VAN, EDM, CGY, WPG play OTT, TOR, MTL an additional time = 82
LA, SJ, ANA, PHX play eachother once more = 82

Division 2:
Play division opponents 6 times = 36
Play every other team home and away = 46 (total:82)

Division 3:
Play division opponents 4 times = 28
Play every other team x 2 = 44
TOR, MTL, OTT play VAN, CGY, EDM, WPG
TOR, MTL, OTT play each other 3 additional times
BOS, BUF, PITS, PHI, DET play each other twice more
BOS, BUF and DET play an additional game vs each other
PITS, PHI play twice more

Division 4:
Same format as Division 2.

OK, flame away!

This one was pretty great for all of its complexities. The larger divisions could also be split, mostly along national lines, to reflect the differing schedules.

7 games between TOR/MTL/OTT and BOS/BUF/DET seem like alot. Perhaps re-alocate 1 game among these triads between each other (a 5th BOS-MTL, DET-TOR, & BUF-OTT).

 

[MoreOrr]

optimus, as with MoreOrr's NHC/AHC example, the in-conference opponents that a team plays 4 and 2 times are mostly random across divisions (ex. Chicago plays 3 NW teams and 2 PAC teams four times) except for a few key rivalries (ie. Chi-Min or Chi-Van).

I still don't see why 3 games against everyone in your conference is bad. How many times will the tie-breaker go down head-to-head with these new tie-breaker rules. Even though the new rules are... new, the last 10 years it would have happened about 6 times, 3 times with sub #8 teams, and only once to determine playoff eligibility. That is so rare, random even, that a simple schedule is preferable by far.

I've got an example ready to show him, I'm just waiting for the new thread to be posted. I did the last one, I don't want to appear even more a fanatic than I already show myself to be. I made a request to KevFu to start the new thread but he hasn't replied. Perhaps you sir, mr Crayton, would like to post the OP, Part IV. It could be done now, and a Mod will just close this one.

 

[RandR]

The other bit of info that is circulating is that there is a possibility of the two conferences being eliminated completely, with four divisions remaining. The first two rounds of the playoffs would occur in those divisions with a re-seeding for third round.

I remember suggesting this and getting panned for it. This is really the best way to...

1. come as close as possible to guaranteeing playoff games in every time zone for at least the first round or 2 (not 100% by any means, but definitely better than today's setup)
2. save Detroit (and possibly Columbus) from travelling all over the continent during the first 2 rounds of playoffs
3. prevent teams that don't play against each other much from competing for the same playoff spots

All good points.

On point 1, the semi-finals would also see a better distribution of time zones: 3 time zones would normally be covered. For example, last year we had 2 EST teams in one semi-final (Boston and Tampa Bay) and two PST teams (Vancouver and San Jose) in the other. In the new format we would always see two EST (same as today), one CST (except when Detroit makes it out of the midWest), and one MST or PST. Conversely the finals could see 2 EST teams or no EST teams in the finals.

I would also like to add a point 4:

4. It would be more likely that the 2 best regular-season teams could play in the Stanley Cup finals. Right now the top 2 teams could meet in the finals anytime that they come from the 2 different conferences. In the new format the top 2 teams could meet in the finals anytime that they come from different divisions. In theory, that could be about 2/3 of the time instead of about 1/2 of the time.

 

[Morris Wanchuk]

Yes please. I've been wanting that for freaking years, if only for the simple fact that we only play the other four Original Six teams once a year is an absolute joke.

See i dont get this desire to see out of conference original 6 teams. To me they are just like every other out of conference game.. boring.

I have season tickets to the Bruins and havent gone to a Detroit or Chicago games in years. They are usually boring low hitting affairs because there is no history between the teams.

When was the last time Boston faced Detroit or Chicago in the playoffs? I think is the 1940s and 1970s respectively.