[PGT] Flames lose 4-3 in OT

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

You know what is not listed in section 6.3? Changes to the rules. The Board of Governors does that. The playoff format is a rule.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...layoff-format/

But Bettman disagreed with critics of the format, saying that the current setup means the playoffs are exciting from beginning to end.

"I'm pretty dug in on this, I like exactly what we have and if you look at the races that we're having for the regular season, playoffs have started already. We're in our play-in tournament, " Bettman said, in reference to the NBA's addition of extra games to determine the final playoff teams. "Best team to win the Cup has got to get through the best teams. And having great matchups in the first rounds, that's not a problem, that's a great thing."

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by dino7c

If the Flames run the table and either of those teams lose a game in regulation the Flames are in by one point

You sure?

Flames run the table = 96 points
Wild lose in regulation to Calgary, win their other 2 games = 97 points

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

The math did change quite a bit. It's clear you're convinced otherwise so we agree to disagree.

Like if a 4% chance lowers to a 2% chance... it might seem like "only a 2% change!" but in reality it's a 50% change.

Before the Blues lost in regulation maybe...not now. Chances are good one of those teams loses a game. Like the Flames need one result in 4 games.

Chances are not very good the Flames win 4 straight, same as before.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

You sure?

Flames run the table = 96 points
Wild lose in regulation to Calgary, win their other 2 games = 97 points

NO they need to lose one of those 2 games...Flames running the table is already counting that loss for them
and this is exactly why the math doesn't change much. Flames can't tie anyway...they need to beat them. One point or two doesn't matter.


IF the Flames run the table they need the Blues or Wild to lose ONE of the 4 games in REGULATION (the lost point tonight makes it regulation)

IF the Flames can win Friday that Saturday game in Vancouver becomes real big

[Locke]

Well.

Thats not ideal.

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Try reading my post again. Slowly this time.

I did, your last sentence makes no sense. “Tonight we saw what happens when he doesn’t steal it.” You’re right, he didn’t steal it, because there was nothing to steal. They played good enough to win with average goaltending tonight. We didn’t get average, it was below average tonight. Your sentence insinuates the Flames can’t win unless Wolf steals it. Average goaltending would’ve done the trick.

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

You sure?

Flames run the table = 96 points
Wild lose in regulation to Calgary, win their other 2 games = 97 points

He means besides the Minnesota vs Calgary game.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...layoff-format/

I read the article. Nowhere does it say he was opposed by the Board of Governors or by any of the owners.

An unsigned article by ‘Sportsnet Staff’ contains this claim: ‘As for the playoff format, there have been some concerns about the current setup.’ No source is given for these ‘concerns’. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that even one of the owners said such a thing. Journalists often disguise their own personal opinions as unattributed third-party claims, either by outright fabrication, or by hunting high and low for any anonymous ‘source’ that will agree with the slant they want to give the story. When both the reporter and the ‘source’ are anonymous, I give the report no credence at all.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

I read the article. Nowhere does it say he was opposed by the Board of Governors or by any of the owners.

An unsigned article by ‘Sportsnet Staff’ contains this claim: ‘As for the playoff format, there have been some concerns about the current setup.’ No source is given for these ‘concerns’. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that even one of the owners said such a thing. Journalists often disguise their own personal opinions as unattributed third-party claims, either by outright fabrication, or by hunting high and low for any anonymous ‘source’ that will agree with the slant they want to give the story. When both the reporter and the ‘source’ are anonymous, I give the report no credence at all.

Because it isn't a rule change, it's a playoff format change. Otherwise he would not have referred to himself, he would have said "we". You really think because it was put out by Sportsnet staff that they can quote Bettman and they just made it up? The Athletic piece behind the paywall is by LeBraun, is he an unreliable source making stuff up as well? The playoff format is Bettman's call and he doesn't want to change it.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Because it isn't a rule change, it's a playoff format change.

Playoff format is a league rule.

Otherwise he would not have referred to himself, he would have said "we".

You're grasping at straws here.

You really think because it was put out by Sportsnet staff that they can quote Bettman and they just made it up?

Read what I said. The claim that there were people ‘concerned’ about the existing format was not a quote, it was not attributed, and it may very well have been made up. The entire sentence was weasel-worded on purpose to insinuate that there was a source without ever naming one. That's bad journalism.

The Athletic piece behind the paywall is by LeBraun, is he an unreliable source making stuff up as well?

Quote what he said, because I'm not shelling out money I can't afford to get through that paywall.

What I have seen from LeBrun is that the general managers raised the issue at their meeting in March. They are not the Board of Governors, they do not speak for the owners, and Bettman does not answer to them.

The playoff format is Bettman's call and he doesn't want to change it.

You have yet to substantiate your claim that it is not the Board of Governors' call.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates

You sure?

Flames run the table = 96 points
Wild lose in regulation to Calgary, win their other 2 games = 97 points

Flames going 4-0 implies a Minny loss. In their other games that the Flames have no say in, they need to lose one.

Meanwhile with the Blues it's a lot simpler. 2 games remaining, 1-1 opens the door to the Flames.

I'd say between the two teams, they'll have a way in if they run the table.

So 4 games to conquer. Can they do it?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Playoff format is a league rule.



You're grasping at straws here.



Read what I said. The claim that there were people ‘concerned’ about the existing format was not a quote, it was not attributed, and it may very well have been made up. The entire sentence was weasel-worded on purpose to insinuate that there was a source without ever naming one. That's bad journalism.



Quote what he said, because I'm not shelling out money I can't afford to get through that paywall.

What I have seen from LeBrun is that the general managers raised the issue at their meeting in March. They are not the Board of Governors, they do not speak for the owners, and Bettman does not answer to them.



You have yet to substantiate your claim that it is not the Board of Governors' call.

Well if the rules that govern the NHL I quoted that clearly shows it is the commissioners call doesn't convince you nothing will.

[dino7c]

I mean the Flames could win Friday, Canucks win Saturday.
Then we are saying win the next 3 and its guranteed in

Or they lose and its all over in 2 days

Game is meaningful, I won't burn my tickets just yet

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

https://www.sportsnet.ca/nhl/article...layoff-format/

TBH a change is overblown IMO.

If you do the division winners and 3-8 seed format you'd get:

Jets - Blues
Knights - Wild
Stars - Oilers
Avs - Kings

Washington - Montreal
Toronto - New Jersey
Carolina - Ottawa
Tampa - Florida

Or the current format

Jets - Blues
Knights - Wild
Stars - Avs
Oilers - Kings

Washington - Montreal
Toronto - Ottawa
Carolina - New Jersey
Tampa - Florida

TBH the current format actually provides more intriguing round one matchups even if they aren't necessarily the most fair.

[flamesgod]

Originally Posted by SuperMatt18

TBH a change is overblown IMO.

If you do the division winners and 3-8 seed format you'd get:

Jets - Blues
Knights - Wild
Stars - Oilers
Avs - Kings

Washington - Montreal
Toronto - New Jersey
Carolina - Ottawa
Tampa - Florida

Or the current format

Jets - Blues
Knights - Wild
Stars - Avs
Oilers - Kings

Washington - Montreal
Toronto - Ottawa
Carolina - New Jersey
Tampa - Florida

TBH the current format actually provides more intriguing round one matchups even if they aren't necessarily the most fair.

I personally prefer the most fair. That’s what you work all season for.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

Flames going 4-0 implies a Minny loss. In their other games that the Flames have no say in, they need to lose one.

Meanwhile with the Blues it's a lot simpler. 2 games remaining, 1-1 opens the door to the Flames.

I'd say between the two teams, they'll have a way in if they run the table.

So 4 games to conquer. Can they do it?

And why IMO todays loss probably didn't change a whole lot.

If the Flames win tonight are we saying "oh good they can go 3-0-1 now" ... probably not.

Either way they needed to go 4-0-0 and get some help. They still need to go 4-0-0 and get some help.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Well if the rules that govern the NHL I quoted that clearly shows it is the commissioners call doesn't convince you nothing will.

You quoted a section that said the interpretation of the rules is up to the commissioner. It did not say that he gets to alter the rules; that is the prerogative of the Board of Governors.

[dino7c]

I think the biggest issue is not re-seeding after each round...sometimes its better to be a WC team in the easier divisions braket

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by supermatt18

and why imo todays loss probably didn't change a whole lot.

If the flames win tonight are we saying "oh good they can go 3-0-1 now" ... Probably not.

Either way they needed to go 4-0-0 and get some help. They still need to go 4-0-0 and get some help.

thank you!

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Another way to look at the race that simplifies things:

MIN & STL have 93 points. They can add a maximum of 2 more points to keep the Flames (max 96) in contention.

-STL with 2GR must go 1-1
-MIN with 3GR must go 1-2 (1 vs CGY)

Or,

In 4 games not involving the Flames that are remaining between the Blues and Wild, the Flames need 1 regulation loss (minimum) to have a way in.