Tracking the Blues’ Stanley Cup Quest: 2020 version [aka "Repeat the Feat"] (LOL) (3/12 - On hold)

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,029
12,744
You won't be able to do this at 71. You'll have to get them to 72 or some other even number.

With 31 teams in the league, 15 games played leaves you with 30 teams with 1 GP and someone who hasn't played a game. Another 15 games played (making sure whoever didn't play in the first 15 plays here) leaves you with 2 teams who haven't played 2 games; you'd need a 16th game between those two teams to get them to 2 GP like everyone else. Carry that forward.

I'm skipping a whole lot of other questions that fall out of here, because I don't want to get into refuting points because no one has fully vetted out everything to exhaustion. But I'll just say that even getting to the same # of GP raises a whole lot of other questions that need to be figured out.
From the context of the post it is pretty clear that I was referring to everyone who is within striking distance of the playoffs. If you read the entire post, I'm obviously not talking about everyone in the league getting to the same number of games played.

That's why I talked about needing 7 total games. The games I listed in my post are all of the games that would be played in this hypothetical regular season finale that won't ever happen. It would be a way of rapidly getting playoff relevant teams on the same level as the teams they are competing with for playoff spots. This is a hypothetical for a situation where you can't get approval for taking the standings as they currently are.

Because as of right now, there are no rules in place for how playoff seeding works in a situation like this. I believe any agreement will require unanimous agreement from the teams and there is a very good chance one of the teams who will be the odd-man out by just using the standings as they exist will not vote in favor of missing the playoffs. If you run into a scenario where you can't get approval to use points percentage OR pure point total, this is a potential solution to get teams to unanimously approve a format without needing to spend 2+ weeks finishing up the regular season.
 

Ted Hoffman

The other Rick Zombo
Dec 15, 2002
28,859
8,113
From the context of the post it is pretty clear that I was referring to everyone who is within striking distance of the playoffs. If you read the entire post, I'm obviously not talking about everyone in the league getting to the same number of games played.
I'm going to do both of us a favor and put you on ignore. You get offended any time someone disagrees with you, and I'm tired of reading about it every time it happens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranksu

Ted Hoffman

The other Rick Zombo
Dec 15, 2002
28,859
8,113
BTW, I'm going to go back to we only get to 71 games really quick. Not even getting into "you will have teams in more game shape because they get to play 3-4 games while others (like the Blues) won't play a game until the playoffs start" and "who's going to play who and reasonably set a level playing field for everyone" and a whole host of other stuff, if we just say we're going to take the teams who have a realistic shot at the playoffs and get them to 71:

-- There are 11 teams in the East either already in the playoffs or with a legitimate shot at getting in.
-- There are 10 in the West. Arizona is at 74 points with 70 GP; they couldn't catch Nashville with another GP so they're out.

That's 21 teams. You can't get them all to 71, because of what I explain above. But maybe you can get there if you just take the teams whose seed isn't set yet. So, let's just say we take the teams who've reasonably clinched their seed and exclude them from consideration.
-- Boston and Tampa Bay don't have to play a game (they'd be set at 1st/2nd in the Atlantic)

That's it. Every other team has to - or potentially has to - play remaining games to determine seeding. That includes Dallas, who has 2 to play but could get passed by Nashville if the Predators win 2 games to get to 82 (they'd lead the Stars on regulation wins). Teams in the East (ex-Boston and Tampa) have a total 17 GP to get all the contenders to 71; the West has 10. That's 13.5 games to play - and obviously, we can't have a half a game played. Throwing Boston and Tampa back into the mix doesn't solve anything. Asking someone to play one of them potentially screws their opponent.
Do we set up a schedule to work bottom-up to see whether we need to play every game and then call in Boston/Tampa for a last game if necessary? And how exactly are teams and players going to react to "hey, you're going to Vancouver on Thursday to play a g- ... wait, never mind, you don't need to do it now, so we're scratching it?" or even "hey, we know you're now out of the playoffs, but go out to Vancouver and play this game anyway, the Canucks need it to see where they finish?"

Bottom line: we can't get everyone to 71 games played - even if we just look at only the teams who'd have a shot at the playoffs after playing 71. It's either going to be playing a full season, getting to something like 76 so everyone has a few games under their belt and teams on the fringe have a little chance to play their way in/out, or we're going to be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranksu

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->