Playoff set up

[btimbit]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Agreed. Winning the division should be done in the post season. Pacific versus Central for the Western Conference; Metropolitan versus Atlantic for the Eastern Conference.

Exactly, and that's why I love it. To get to the conference final you have to actually get through your division. Likewise to be named the conference champs

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by dying4acup

I favor an 8 division format.

Northwest
Calgary
Edmonton
Winnipeg
Vancouver

Pacific
LA
Anaheim
San Jose
Seattle

Southwest
Dallas
Phoenix (Houston)
Vegas
Nashville

Central
Minnesota
Chicago
St Louis
Colorado

Northeast
Toronto
Montreal
Ottawa
Buffalo (or Quebec City if Florida moves)

Metropolitan
NY Rangers
NY Islanders
New Jersey
Philadelphia

Southeast
Florida
Tampa
Carolina
Washington

Atlantic
Pittsburgh
Detroit
Columbus
Boston

2 teams qualify from each division, then conference, then east vs west.

Not bad, but I wouldn’t want to separate the Philly / Pitt rivalry. That’s a good one.

[Owen15]

I would like to see a divisional format with the 1-3 teams set and seeded and a 2 game play in (total goals tie breaker) for the fourth spot. Two rounds then divisional winners reseed.

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by dying4acup

I favor an 8 division format.

Northwest
Calgary
Edmonton
Seattle
Vancouver

Pacific
LA
Anaheim
San Jose
Vegas

Southwest
Colorado
Dallas
Phoenix (Houston)
Nashville

Central
Minnesota
Chicago
St Louis
Winnipeg

Northeast
Toronto
Montreal
Ottawa
Buffalo (or Quebec City if Florida moves)

Metropolitan
NY Rangers
NY Islanders
New Jersey
Philadelphia

Southeast
Florida
Tampa
Carolina
Washington

Atlantic
Pittsburgh
Detroit
Columbus
Boston

2 teams qualify from each division, then conference, then east vs west.

Seattle makes much more sense in a NW division.

[STeeLy]

Originally Posted by dying4acup

I favor an 8 division format.

Northwest
Calgary
Edmonton
Winnipeg Seattle
Vancouver

Pacific
LA
Anaheim
San Jose
Seattle Vegas

Southwest
Dallas
Phoenix (Houston)
Vegas Colorado
Nashville St. Louis

Central
Minnesota
Chicago
St Louis Winnipeg
Colorado Detroit

Northeast
Toronto
Montreal
Ottawa
Buffalo (or Quebec City if Florida moves)

Metropolitan
NY Rangers
NY Islanders
New Jersey
Philadelphia Boston

Southeast
Florida
Tampa
Carolina
Washington Nashville

Atlantic
Pittsburgh
Detroit Washington
Columbus
Boston Philadelphia

I'd say this is probably best for travel, though definitely tough to clump which Eastern team goes into which division because they're all so tightly packed.


Short of the Colorado, Phoenix, Dallas, St. Louis, getting shafted for intra division travel time, everyone else is fairly equal.

[dying4acup]

So I see there are many who favor the 8 division format.

I only fear the day when a top 5 team misses playoffs. This is where expanding playoffs to fave a 2 vs 3 within division to play the division winner might make sense....

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Tiger

A lot of talk about the playoff set up is flawed. Mainly it is because it affects Toronto this year. but is it really a huge deal.

EAST is currently (april 5th)
Lightning - Bluejackets
Capitals - hurricanes
Islanders - Penguins
Bruins - Leafs

If it was 1 vs 8 etc.
Lightning - bluejackets
Bruins - Hurricanes
Capitals - penguins
Islanders - Leafs

WEST is
Flames - Avs
Preds - Stars
Jets - Blues
Sharks - Knights

1 vs 8 etc
flames - Avs
Sharks - stars
Preds - knights
Jets - Blues

1 vs 16 is
Lightning vs Stars
Flames vs knights
Bruins vs canadians
Capitals vs bluejackets
Islanders vs blues
leafs vs hurricanes
Sharks vs jets
penguins vs Preds


Really I think the 1 vs 8 set up is really not that different than the way it is now. I personally like the rivalries of the system now making the first two rounds more interesting. In the later rounds, it is interesting no matter the teams playing. the 1 vs 16 set up people want make no sense to me (random, crazy travel etc).

another point (that is not mine) is that using a 1 vs 8 set up, if you re-seed in the next round you cannot do brackets and may effect betting money coming in.

I personally would want some changes but more like the late 80s early 90s with a twist.
I would want no wild cards. each division gets a 1-4 in it, but have a CFL type crossover where if the 5th place team in one division is better than the fourth, they take there spot. That way, if say this year if a Pacific division team was WC1 and a central was WC2 the flames would still play there division rather than a crossover (not the case this season at all anyways, but just a minor change to double down even more on the first round rivals).

A complaint about this system is you see the same teams over and over again, but that can happen anyways (ie dallas/edmonton)

I just find it is better for rivalry in the first two round rather than hoping for a good matchup that may not happen in the later rounds.

What are everybody's else's thoughts, I want to know why this system seems to be so hated.

I don’t like the idea of a crossover in a best of seven because it would punish the top team in the conference with what could be a brutal travel schedule in the first round. Instead of playing Colorado, the Flames could be playing Carolina when all is said and done.

Edit: I realize Carolina can’t finish 9th in the East this season, but the principle is the same.

[GioforPM]

I don’t know about setups bu I just got back from Nashville. What a fun town. Just tell me the scenario where the Flames go down there this year.

[ST20]

I think divisional playoffs are bad. The first round of the playoffs in hockey are the best of all sports because it's competitive and there's always a few great matchups if you enjoy hockey and not just watching your home town team.

I would rather watch rivalries play out in the later rounds then first round as the current set up makes for a worst Western/Eastern conference finals and Stanley cup finals since better teams are knocked off earlier and worst teams makebl it further. Also it gets tiring since you see divisional opponents 6 times a year already and then kickoff the playoffs against them too.

A Calgary Edmonton WCF is 10 times better than meeting in the first round. You'll never see it in this format and I think it's unfortunate to lose the opportunity to have something special like that in favour of forced rivalries.

[DeluxeMoustache]

^ very theoretical stance. Edmonton generally does not make the playoffs.

[topfiverecords]

Just go straight to a Calgary-Tampa Bay best of 27.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by btimbit

I don't mind it that much.

But when Seattle arrives and the divisions are balanced, just have 1-4 in each division make the playoffs. Easy peasy

Add 4v5 play in games so there are no dead days between reg. season and round 1. Also mitigates a situation where a decent 5th place team could gripe about missing out compared to a worse 4th place team from another division (ie. this year Colorado would be 100% out and Arizona in)

If season were already over:
Colorado @ Dallas; winner plays NAS
Vancouver @ Arizona; winner plays CGY
Columbus @ Carolina; winner plays WAS
Florida @ Montreal; winner plays TBL

Actually, this format would make the last game of this season matter a lot more for all of the bubble teams; COL, DAL, CAR, and CBJ would all be fighting like hell for the right to host their play-in game.

Further advantage for each division winner, as their opponent will not get any extra rest, or be able to really start game planning until after their play-in game.

The NHL refuses to go to 3 pt games in order to keep more teams in the playoff hunt for longer. The 4v5 game would do a great job of that (though ideally I'd go to 3-2-1-0 pt structure, too)

[DeluxeMoustache]

I personally see how people may not like a single game overriding the work they put in over 82.

[Tiger]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

I don’t like the idea of a crossover in a best of seven because it would punish the top team in the conference with what could be a brutal travel schedule in the first round. Instead of playing Colorado, the Flames could be playing Carolina when all is said and done.

Edit: I realize Carolina can’t finish 9th in the East this season, but the principle is the same.

I meant crossover just from divisions in conference. But I wasn't clear

[GeoRock]

Originally Posted by btimbit

I don't mind it that much.

But when Seattle arrives and the divisions are balanced, just have 1-4 in each division make the playoffs. Easy peasy

This is what I'd like also. Burke keeps talking about expanding the number of teams that get in, so with this format they could potentially look at the top 5/8 per division with a wildcard matchup between 4vs5. Would make for an entertaining start to the playoffs.

[Plaedo]

A straight "top 4 in the division make it in" is too easy of a solution. Having some sort of wildcard element compensates for the potential of having a weaker division than others, since intradivisional play is more common than intraconference or interconference play. If you want a straight "top X teams get in" then you ought to even out the games played between all teams. Otherwise, you need some sort of compensating mechanism like a wildcard, as sloppy as it is.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Tiger

I meant crossover just from divisions in conference. But I wasn't clear

Sorry, I thought you meant CFL style, with the potential for an East/West crossover.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I personally see how people may not like a single game overriding the work they put in over 82.

I hear you, but there's an easy solution - finish 3rd or higher in your division.

Under my proposal this year, one of CAR-11th/CBJ-13th could rightly complain about missing 2 home playoff games...then again, under current rules, MTL (14th) is hard done by.

Balanced sched comparison (against the West):
CAR - 41 pts
MTL - 34pts
CBJ - 34 pts (incl 2 loser pts)
FLA - 30 pts (4 loser pts)

vs East:
COL - 38 pts(6 loser)
DAL - 32 pts (2 loser)
ARI - 28 pts (4)
VAN - 31 pts (3)

CHI - 35 pts (3)
MIN - 32 pts (4)


It is certainly flawed that the 24th VAN would get a shot against 18th ARI. All 7 teams in the Central are better by all indicators.

Average pts/team by division (not corrected for 3 pt games, but they avg out pretty darn close):
Central: 91.43
Metro: 90.63
Atlantic: 90. 38
Pacific: 86.38


At the end of the day, every system has its flaws. I just like the play-in games because they are more exciting, keeps races alive for longer, and keeps divisional playoffs internal

[Tsawwassen]

It is funny how the previous division format setup now has former division rivals playing each other in this year's playoffs. The Northwest div rivals, Avs and Flames. The Southeast division has 2 battles going, BJs-Bolts and Hurricanes-Capitals. I know the Hurricanes and Caps are both in the Metro Division.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I personally see how people may not like a single game overriding the work they put in over 82.

While true, the other way to look at it is that the work they put into those 82 games is still what defines where it goes.

For 12 teams, their performance over 82 determines they make the full playoffs.

For 8 teams, their performance forces them into that one game playoff.

For 11 teams, their performance means they go home early and disappointed.

For the Oilers, their performance means they will go to bed hoping the draft lottery fairy leaves a #1 overall pick under their pillow.