Regular season: Ott 98pts, NYR 102pts - Ottawa has home ice advantage in round 2

[thammias]

I blame all the western conference teams.

This is what they wanted. The NHL created these divisions and unbalanced schedules so that the western conference teams didn't have to travel between time zones as much during the regular season.

Now we can all just whine about it.

 

[GordonGecko]

Under the current format, the Rangers get to play the Sens while the Caps must play the Pens. Regardless of home ice, Caps have far more about which to complain than Rangers' fans.

Are Rangers' fans actually complaining about the format??????

say what? Rangers fans wanted the team to tank into the WC1 spot which is exactly what they did. Pretty much every guy in the locker room said they had nothing to play for in the last 6 weeks because there was no incentive to go up the division

 

[Sam Spade]

say what? Rangers fans wanted the team to tank into the WC1 spot which is exactly what they did. Pretty much every guy in the locker room said they had nothing to play for in the last 6 weeks because there was no incentive to go up the division

Yep, Rangers were the smartest team in the NHL this season. They saw the path they wanted and took it by playing well when needed to and bad when they needed to drop a few points.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Home Ice Disadvantage

I'd rather play game 7 at home though.

 

[Gardner McKay]

As a Sens fan who's benefitting from the current system, I agree that it's flawed. Having the top 2 teams in the conference playing each other in the 2nd round last year (and possibly this year) was ridiculous.

But hey, aren't the Rangers the best road team?

We are. We came I think 2-3 wins shy from setting the NHL record. Our first game in NY against MTL we got absolutely DEMOLISHED. We then figured out how to play at home winning games 4 & 6. I am sure we will now become a good home team and start sucking on the road.

 

[These Are The Days]

But..... but rivalries!

 

[BMOK33]

I wouldn't be totally against them just going to top 4 from each division make it and that's that. The negative of that is the Islanders this year for example would have basically been eliminated by November 15th

 

[MikeyMike01]

This hardly a new phenomenon.

It happened in the old system too.

Something weird happened occasionally in the old system.

Something stupid now happens multiple times per playoffs.

Unbelievable.

 

[Chet Manley]

Yeah this is the issue. It would have been solved if they went with the idea of having the wildcards play in their respective divisions regardless of ranking. So Washington would have played Rangers and MTL would have played leafs. People would be upset with that though as well.

This works. Only time a crossover would happen is if both wildcards are in the same division. Would even be cool to let the conference champs choose which wildcard they want to play. Picturing a GM doing a live coin flip to show he doesn't care about which team to feast on.

 

[MiscBrah]

This works. Only time a crossover would happen is if both wildcards are in the same division. Would even be cool to let the conference champs choose which wildcard they want to play. Picturing a GM doing a live coin flip to show he doesn't care about which team to feast on.

They were supposed to do it the year after switching to wildcard format, but then bailed out on the plan after the GM meetings.

 

[Gabe84]

It's probably been mentioned already but Washington finished 3rd in 2007-2008 ahead of much better teams and Florida did the same in 2011-2012. The old system had its flaws too.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

Oilers would be playing the Blues with home-ice if we re-seeded like we did a few years ago

them's the breaks

 

[MadLuke]

Incorrect. It was a pure 1-8 for much of the 90s. The division leaders getting the top 3 seeds came later.

Was it ?

before 93/94 it was a 4 team by division format.

93/94 to 1998, it was the first 2 place that went to the division winners.

98-99 it started with the top 3 place hold by division winners instead of the top 2.

I'm not sure we ever had a pure top 8, but when it was just 2 team getting the first 2 spot instead of 3, we were just not aware of that rule much.

In 98/99 it was not a new rule to give the top spot to the division champion, it is the number of division that change I think.

 

[Jonas1235]

still need to win 4 games regardless of where they are.

 

[canuckster19]

Would it be fair if for example the Eastern Conference was mashed into one big division while the West remained in it's timezoned divisions? The West has it's divisional playoffs while the East has a 1-8 conference playoffs?

I mean if you're going to have a 1-8 system then you have to have conference balanced games and not division heavy, I don't think many Western teams would like this, if one conference did one thing and one did the other, does it really matter?

 

[Riptide]

Quit crying. Finish as a WC, get a lower seed. This isn't a surprise, we all knew about this going into the playoffs.

When 3 of the top 5 teams in the entire ****ing league are in your division, yeah, no **** someone is going to finish as a WC.

This playoff format is absolutely ridiculous. The fact that Pittsburgh and Columbus and Washington all face each other in the first two rounds, is just as ridiculous as Ottawa having home ice against a team that out performed them in the regular season.

 

[Riptide]

the 1-8 format was also flawed... I remember one year that a division champ would have been 7th (3rd as per rule) and that he was still host for the series... until they decide to seed by points 1-8, there will be issues with their system

That never bothered me. I think there should be some kind of reward for winning the division. Doesn't bother me in the NFL, either although people complain.

I think the NBA set it up so the division winners get the top-4, but if a second place team has a better record than a division winner, that team gets the higher seed. Toronto didn't win their division, but they are the 3 seed while Washington did and are the 4th. Doesn't really matter in the NBA as nobody in the East is beating the Cavs and nobody in the West has a shot against the Warriors.

There were some issues with that in the past, however I think with the better parity we've seen in recent years that it would be less of an issue. What I always wanted to see in the past was that the division winner received a guaranteed PO berth, just slotted where their points dictated things. So if a team in a really weak division gets into the playoffs based solely on winning the division, then instead of getting home ice, they get slotted 8th (or wherever). However I think this is less of an issue with the league having 4 divisions instead of 6, with each of the winners the last few years having 100+ points. They might not be the strongest team in the conference, but they're at least good enough that it's not an embarrassment by them getting home ice until the conference finals.

My issue isn't that the top 3 teams in each division are getting a PO berth, its just that the home ice carries over regardless of who they play - and that's just wrong. In the 1st round the WCs are playing the division winners - so sure give them home ice - that's your reward for winning your division. But that's where it should stop. You get home ice against what in theory should be a weaker team. That gives you every advantage possible to advance to the second round (and the playoff revenue that comes with it). But everything after that should be based on points.

I mean in this example by what virtue does Ottawa deserve home ice? They didn't win their division or have more points then their opponents. Basically the sole reason they're getting home ice is because they do not play in the Metro. That doesn't seem like a valid reason to give them home ice.

 

[Riptide]

The flaw is having a wildcard system.
Just have top 4 in each division move on.

Blame that on the NHLPA and the teams who complained about uneven conferences making it easier/harder to get into the playoffs.

Atlantic had more parity than the Metro this season, not that it was a 'weaker' division. Top metro teams preyed on the weaker metro teams for extra points.

Disagree completely - to the point that to even attempt to suggest this is complete and utter crap. I'm not sure how anyone can look at Pittsburgh, Washington, Columbus or New York and say that Ottawa or Toronto are better teams then them. Do you know what the difference is in games played between those divisions? 6 games. That's right. The top teams in the metro got 1 extra game against those "weak teams" that the teams in the Atlantic didn't get. And when you look at the standings, it's even more obvious that this isn't even remotely close to being true. There's only one team in the Metro with less than 87 points, where as there's 3 such teams in the Atlantic. So where are all these teams that the top guys are "preying on" ?? If anything, the Atlantic was significantly weaker, as evidenced both by the teams total points at the top, and the lack of said points at the bottom. There might be more parity there, but it's the mediocre kind of parity, and not the kind of parity anyone wants to see...

 

[patnyrnyg]

Was it ?

before 93/94 it was a 4 team by division format.

93/94 to 1998, it was the first 2 place that went to the division winners.

98-99 it started with the top 3 place hold by division winners instead of the top 2.

I'm not sure we ever had a pure top 8, but when it was just 2 team getting the first 2 spot instead of 3, we were just not aware of that rule much.

In 98/99 it was not a new rule to give the top spot to the division champion, it is the number of division that change I think.

Uhm, yes we were. The very first year, the Devils had the 2nd best record in the conference, but were the 3 seed. Pitt won the NE and was the 2nd seed.

 

[Flamingo]

Home Ice Disadvantage

I'd rather play game 7 at home though.

Neither team should feel they're in trouble until they lose a game on the road.

 

[Shockmaster]

You guys just picked up on the fact that the Wild Card team is the lower seed regardless of points? Did no one notice this last year in the Second Round for Islanders-Lightning?

 

[The Expert]

This was an issue with the 1-8 playoff format as well, with the #6 team sometimes having more points than the #3 team.

That rarely happened though, with the current system it'll happen regularly. Because the current system is stupid.

That's hilarious but so stupid that Ottawa has home ice advantage.

 

[GordonGecko]

That's hilarious but so stupid that Ottawa has home ice advantage.

That's the strangest part about this, I mean I can listen to an argument that a division winner should get home ice regardless of wins/points, but where is the logic in the higher point team not getting home ice in round 2? Not that I care, because the Rangers are the best road team in the NHL

 

[madinsomniac]

This happens quite regularly in most sports.... heck in the NFL you can have a team with a losing record hosting a team with double digit wins...

 

[topshelf15]

That's the strangest part about this, I mean I can listen to an argument that a division winner should get home ice regardless of wins/points, but where is the logic in the higher point team not getting home ice in round 2? Not that I care, because the Rangers are the best road team in the NHL

TBH Ottawa is in the same boat ,our team plays its game far more focused on the road