04-09-2017, 11:13 PM
|
#61
|
Franchise Player
|
Suggestion:
1. Change your password to gibberish
2. Logout
3. Forget all about hockey message boards
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to OutOfTheCube For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-09-2017, 11:17 PM
|
#62
|
Franchise Player
|
More teams?
the Stanley Cup playoffs finished on June 12th last year...
Big pass on adding even more teams...not only does it go far too long now, but it diminishes the importance of the regular season
winning late, only matters for style points, like in the College Football playoffs or the NCAA march madness... Team with defined leagues, like the NBA, NFL, MLB and NHL, game one is as meaningful as game 82... its all about the points, not about when a team is hot...
the biggest change i'd rather see is seeding conferences 1-8 and letting them play out a bracket that way...
i'd prefer 1-16 too, but the NHL won't bite on the travel costs...
Last edited by oldschoolcalgary; 04-09-2017 at 11:20 PM.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to oldschoolcalgary For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-09-2017, 11:45 PM
|
#63
|
Franchise Player
|
Why is a team's last season performance an indication of their status as a 'good team' but their current season record not enough of a clear picture to accurately say whether or not they deserve to be in the playoffs?
This is all so arbitrary in its goal to ensure subjectively determined good teams don't miss out on the playoffs if they have bad luck due to injury.
|
|
|
04-09-2017, 11:48 PM
|
#64
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathgod
I would rather some bad teams make it in than some very good teams miss out.
|
Very good teams don't miss the playoffs, very good teams win their division. Tampa Bay is a below average team, hence they did not qualify for the playoffs.
Game 1 is worth just as much as game 82. Tampa Bay could have started 20-6-4 and then collapsed. Would you then argue that they should have made it because they had such a good start?
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 12:10 AM
|
#65
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Brisbane
|
I think I've figured it out. The OP wants a college football style ranking system for playoff spots. Nope, nope, nope.
__________________
The masses of humanity have always had to surf.
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 12:26 AM
|
#66
|
#1 Goaltender
|
One of the weirdest threads ever
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 12:47 AM
|
#67
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
I'm complaining the other way.
We are deprived of Montreal vs Toronto because the system isn't archaic enough. There should not be wildcard teams if 4 teams from the division make the playoffs regardless of totals. The 5th place team crossing over makes sense but swapping two fourth place teams giving up rivalries isn't good for entertainment.
I think that the idea that the playoffs should be a properly seeded tournament pitting best vs worst each round is flawed. The idea should be to have the most entertaining season and playoffs as possible. This means emphasizing rivalries over idealized points
|
You nailed it on the wildcard. Having the wildcard cross over when there are 4 teams from each division in the playoffs is just dumb.
I'm okay with rivalry seeding, or with 1-8 conference seeding, but this hybrid system doesn't make much sense for me.
If you are going to do rivalry seeding then commit to it all the way.
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 01:01 AM
|
#68
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathgod
Before you scoff at the idea of a larger playoff format, go ask the NCAA how 'horribly' their large playoff basketball format has been working out for them.
|
Piling on! The NCAA basketball format has every playoff matchup decided in about two hours, not two weeks.
Also, bitching about Tampa getting robbed in the playoffs doesn't really fly around here, for some reason.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to RougeUnderoos For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-10-2017, 02:06 AM
|
#69
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Fort St. John, BC
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by markgio
i'm not going to add to the pile up on mathgod, but i will say this, the playoffs could have included a battle of alberta and a battle of california. Instead it's two match ups that are meaningless in rivalry. there's no passion against the ducks, just like there's no passion in the oilers against the sharks.
|
lol wut
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to doctajones428 For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-10-2017, 02:44 AM
|
#70
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Chilliwack, B.C
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oil Stain
You nailed it on the wildcard. Having the wildcard cross over when there are 4 teams from each division in the playoffs is just dumb.
I'm okay with rivalry seeding, or with 1-8 conference seeding, but this hybrid system doesn't make much sense for me.
If you are going to do rivalry seeding then commit to it all the way.
|
Owners wanted it to be 1st plays 4th 2nd plays 3rd in four divisions, like it used to. The NHLPA was against it, players feared because standings were based on rankings in divisions, rather than overall points. Teams with more points could miss the playoffs. The wildcard was a compromise.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 07:10 AM
|
#71
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: I'm right behind you
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathgod
Either that or change the scaling of the games so that results from the first 41 games count slightly less than the results of the latter 41 games. (This isn't likely to happen though due to it being slightly complex.)
|
No, it won't happen because of any complexity. It won't happen because it is stupid.
__________________
Don't fear me. Trust me.
|
|
|
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to Reaper For This Useful Post:
|
bax,
Cali Panthers Fan,
cam_wmh,
Completely,
dino7c,
Fighting Banana Slug,
Fire,
FlameFan21,
HockeyKhan,
IamNotKenKing,
lambeburger,
PepsiFree,
Roof-Daddy,
smiggy77
|
04-10-2017, 07:17 AM
|
#72
|
Crash and Bang Winger
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: next door to Borat
|
I am amazed this thread has reached 70+ posts... if it was the off-season I could see it, but with the playoffs around the corner?
__________________
Sure, Edmonton sucks, but I don't want Kid Hee-haw and his heiress from la-di-da St. Louis dissing it - that's OUR dumb kid brother, not thiers. -Courtesy of Jammies
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to HockeyKhan For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-10-2017, 07:52 AM
|
#73
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: May 2011
Location: in the belly of the beast.
|
Sounds more like you want to change things up because your team didn't make the playoffs
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 08:49 AM
|
#74
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: SW Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgaryred
Owners wanted it to be 1st plays 4th 2nd plays 3rd in four divisions, like it used to. The NHLPA was against it, players feared because standings were based on rankings in divisions, rather than overall points. Teams with more points could miss the playoffs. The wildcard was a compromise.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk
|
What was being suggested would have the same team's making the playoffs, you just wouldn't cross over unless the two wild card teams come from the same division (so this year Leafs would play Canadians and Rangers would play Capitals, instead of what we got)
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 08:51 AM
|
#75
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathgod
Counter arguments so far:
- No matter what the system is, it's totally fair as long as everyone knows what the format is from the start.
- If you get decimated by injuries, you shouldn't be considered a good team even if you win loads of games when you get healthy again.
- No pro league does something, so it must therefore be bad.
- A picture of Oprah Winfrey.
- I'm gonna call something "crazy gibberish" and "ridiculous" without explaining why.
Not exactly off to a flying start here guys...
|
You get out of something what you put in................
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 08:55 AM
|
#76
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathgod
I also think that a team's performance 6 months in the past is not indicative of how good a team they are today.
|
To this, I suppose the natural question is what is a reasonable period of time to determine how good a team is today? One week? One month? How about one season?
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 09:08 AM
|
#78
|
Franchise Player
|
Point totals are inflated because of the 3 point games. Teams with excess of 100 points doesn't mean what it used to.
I look forward to the day when each division has 8 teams. The top 4 teams in each division would make it. No wildcards.
If you're not top 4 in your division, you can't really complain. First 2 rounds are in the division, then conference championship. While we're at it, bring back the old names too. Smythe, Norris etc.
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 09:10 AM
|
#79
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Chicago
|
Unfair and archaic?
The is no regular season in any professional sport anywhere on the planet that assigns a different value or weight on any game at any point in the season.
There have been several interesting and perhaps better alternatives to current, but this suggestion is absolutely nonsense.
|
|
|
04-10-2017, 09:50 AM
|
#80
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The toilet of Alberta : Edmonton
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathgod
Which were...?
Expanding the playoff format to include more teams. It could mean giving the top seed in each conference a first round bye and adding two league-wide wildcard spots.
I would actually take it farther than that if it were up to me. Before you scoff at the idea of a larger playoff format, go ask the NCAA how 'horribly' their large playoff basketball format has been working out for them.
|
Well 68 teams make March Madness out of 347 total division 1 teams or 19.5%.
In the NHL 16 teams make the playoffs out of soon to be 31 total teams or 51.6%
So if we're going to follow the NCAA we should be reducing the amount of teams make the playoffs.
__________________
"Illusions Michael, tricks are something a wh*re does for money ....... or cocaine"
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to MisterJoji For This Useful Post:
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:37 AM.
|
|