So the question I posed to the thoughtful 30 over the last 48 hours was as follows:
Yes or No to a "Play In" single-game elimination to determine the final wild card spot in each conference?
That is, the team holding down the final wild card spot after 82 games would have to play host to a single-game elimination against the next closest team in the standings. Winner claims the final playoff spot; loser goes home.
If you want to better visualize it, two years ago the Detroit Red Wings in the East and Dallas Stars in the West would have had to host a single-game elimination against the Washington Capitals (three points behind Detroit) and Arizona Coyotes (two points behind Dallas), respectively, for the right to play their way into the playoffs on the day or two after the end of the regular season.
Last year, for example, Pittsburgh would have had to play Boston (two points behind Pittsburgh) in the "Play In" game and Winnipeg would have had to play Los Angeles (four points behind Winnipeg).
So, gentlemen, what say you?
The results were fascinating, for two reasons.
One, because it’s clear there is some real support for the concept of a "Play In" game.
Of the 28 GMs who responded, 16 answered Yes.
Eleven GMs answered No.
One was caught in that area between undecided and apathetic.
Two, merely asking this question triggered a torrential response that was quite jarring and revealing.
It turns out that five of the 11 GMs who voted No to a single elimination "Play In" game did so not because they're opposed to potentially broadening the playoff spectrum.
Quite the opposite, in fact.
Five GMs said the single-game elimination for the final wild card spot didn't go nearly far enough, that we actually need to make the "Play In" a best-of-three series and not limit it to just the final wild card spot in each conference.
One GM proposed the following:
Top three teams in each division are guaranteed a playoff spot. Fourth and fifth-place teams in each division would meet in a best-of-three series with the winner becoming the fourth seed within the standard best of seven divisional playoffs. Recognizing there may be time/scheduling constraints, the GM said these "Play In" series may have to be three games in three days but there's the added incentive to finish top three in the division.
Another GM offered up the following proposal:
Top three teams in each division are guaranteed playoff berths but the top four wild card teams in each conference would have to play a best-of-three "Play In" series (WC1 vs. WC4 and WC2 vs. WC3) with the two winners claiming the final two playoff spots in each conference. In order to accommodate these best-of-three series, this GM also proposed that the first round of the playoffs be best-of-five instead of best of seven.
Quite aside from whether you like these concepts or whatever logistical concerns they may raise, the takeaway for me was how passionate so many of the GMs are about expanding the playoff pool in some fashion.
Think about it: 21 of 28 GMs are in favor of some type of "Play In" concept, either single elimination games for one wild card spot in each conference or as many as four best-of-three series for all the available wild card positions.
The passion was unmistakable.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
Just no, it is already ridiculous as it is. It is bad enough that teams can lose out on a playoff spot due to just being in a different division. Change it back to the old way, the top 8 teams in points in each Conference gets in, 1 plays 8, 2 vs 7, etc.
Last edited by dissentowner; 02-03-2016 at 11:02 AM.
Reason: forgot an in, silly me
The Following 9 Users Say Thank You to dissentowner For This Useful Post:
Awesome if your team is out of the playoffs with a chance to play in.
Terrible if your team has been better for the entirety of an 82 game season (even if only 1 point better - still better) and they have the chance to lose their playoff spot because of 1 game.
Not a good thing for fans. Makes the regular season less meaningful. As Bob points out in the article, right now the level of parity makes every game in the regular season important. As a fan, I love that.
Right now, if your team is in the mix (which the Flames, arguably and regrettably are not) you are basically treated to 82 games of playoff hockey.
To maximize revenue, I would propose that teams rank between 5-12 in each conference play a mini best-of-3 series to determine which 4 teams gets into face the top 4 for the next round of playoffs.
The last placed teams also will play a tournament to determine draft orders.
That would add like 50 extra games for the league to sell tickets to and the players won't get payed (because it is the playoffs)...
Where in the hell would they schedule this circus? April 15 -20 end of regular season, teams played 82 games and grinded out a playoff spot by 1 point over the closest team behind them. Said team that made the playoffs won that season series 4-1 but wait.. Now you have to play that team in a 3game mini-series to see who actually gets that last spot..
Come on NHL... This is an absolutely stupid idea.
How about the team that actually earned the playoff spot in the regular season just gets the playoff spot... What a concept..
I don't want a single-game elimination because it's so dis-heartening for the fans of the losing team to have just missed it by a hair.
At least with playoffs, any fan can deal with the fact that their team gave it a fair chance having to win best of 7.
There's too much randomness and disappointment in single-game elimination. Even if you just played an 80+ game season, that would be the focal point. I think it's a great concept but I'd have at least a best of 3 elimination.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Hack&Lube For This Useful Post:
A) It's a best of 3 play-in that is planned so as to not further tax a team
B) The first round is switched to a best of 5.
Even then, I don't like the idea of a team potentially playing an extra 3 games on top of the regular season and playoff schedule. I like the idea of more playoff hockey, but there is something special about that idea of "once you get in, anything can happen". That aspect becomes diminished when you put the bottom bracket teams in this kind of disadvantage.
Right now, you play in and make it on the merits that have always been there: a fair distribution of regular season games and your effort in said schedule.
__________________ "It's a great day for hockey."
-'Badger' Bob Johnson (1931-1991)
"I see as much misery out of them moving to justify theirselves as them that set out to do harm." -Dr. Amos "Doc" Cochran
McKenzie: GMs would support "Play in" concept for Wild Card
