[OOT] December 20 with twelve games!

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Locke

I agree...I too loathe Electric Dance Music!

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

You’d still have the three best teams in one conference. No format is going to satisfy everyone.

Saying we shouldn't have a better system because no system is perfect... isn't really a valid argument in my eyes.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Saying we shouldn't have a better system because no system is perfect... isn't really a valid argument in my eyes.

The only system that would fix your complaint completely is to go 1-16 league-wide. And that wouldn’t work because the schedule is unbalanced. And there is no way to have a balanced schedule with 82 or 84 games in a 32-team league.

For two years the league did have a completely balanced schedule and 1-16 playoffs. Everyone hated it because teams kept drawing random opponents that the fans hardly knew or cared about (plus, the travel was brutal). In the 1981 playoffs, the Flames drew Chicago, Philadelphia, and Minnesota, in that order. How many fans want to see a Calgary-Philly series in the first two rounds?

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

The only system that would fix your complaint completely is to go 1-16 league-wide. And that wouldn’t work because the schedule is unbalanced. And there is no way to have a balanced schedule with 82 or 84 games in a 32-team league.

For two years the league did have a completely balanced schedule and 1-16 playoffs. Everyone hated it because teams kept drawing random opponents that the fans hardly knew or cared about (plus, the travel was brutal). In the 1981 playoffs, the Flames drew Chicago, Philadelphia, and Minnesota, in that order. How many fans want to see a Calgary-Philly series in the first two rounds?

I'm asking to reduce the problem as much as possible within the bounds of feasibility. Doing so means going back to the 1v8, 2v7, etc format for each conference.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I'm asking to reduce the problem as much as possible within the bounds of feasibility. Doing so means going back to the 1v8, 2v7, etc format for each conference.

Then, as I said, you’d still have the top 3 teams all in one conference and people would complain about that. Maybe not you, but other people would complain and the total volume of complaints would remain much the same.

The league has zero incentive to monkey with the playoff format every time some fan gets cheesed about an odd bracket in one particular year.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Then, as I said, you’d still have the top 3 teams all in one conference and people would complain about that. Maybe not you, but other people would complain and the total volume of complaints would remain much the same.

The league has zero incentive to monkey with the playoff format every time some fan gets cheesed about an odd bracket in one particular year.

It doesn't matter if they complain about it at that point, because it is not be feasible to go to a 1 thru 16 format.

It is, however, feasible to go to a 1 thru 8 format for each conference. In so doing, removing situations where the 2nd best team and 3rd best team in the league have to face each other in round 1, for the right to face the #1 team in the league in round 2.

No such scenario would take place in a 1 thru 8 format. At worst you'd have the 2nd best and 3rd best team face each other in the 2nd round. Which is miles better than making them play in the first round.

And no this isn't just a one time oddity. This has been an ongoing problem since they brought this dumb format in.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

And no this isn't just a one time oddity. This has been an ongoing problem since they brought this dumb format in.

Name the other times, please, when the top three teams in the league were all in one division.

And by the way, this year doesn’t even count as one, because last I heard, the playoff seeding was not based on the standings at Christmas.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Name the other times, please, when the top three teams in the league were all in one division.

And by the way, this year doesn’t even count as one, because last I heard, the playoff seeding was not based on the standings at Christmas.

I can't off the top of my head point to a year where all 3 top teams in the league were in one division. However, it doesn't need to rise to that level for it to be a problem.

I can think of times where the coilers got an easy pass to the conference finals due to the format. The last 2 years for instance.

I'm sure there were a bunch of other times when the top 3 in one division were far better than the top 3 in the other division in the same conference. Can't be bothered to spend more time on a debate that only the two of us are reading at this point.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I can't off the top of my head point to a year where all 3 top teams in the league were in one division. However, it doesn't need to rise to that level for it to be a problem.

I can think of times where the coilers got an easy pass to the conference finals due to the format. The last 2 years for instance.

I'm sure there were a bunch of other times when the top 3 in one division were far better than the top 3 in the other division in the same conference. Can't be bothered to spend more time on a debate that only the two of us are reading at this point.

So in other words, you have no actual facts, but you want to bitch at the league for not fixing their entire playoff schedule to your personal satisfaction because the Oilers win too many games. Got it.

Talk about imaginary problems.

[Mathgod]

No, there's been plenty of times where one division's top 3 was far superior to the other division's top 3. I just don't have time to go through the history of it to find all the specific examples to satisfy you.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

No, there's been plenty of times where one division's top 3 was far superior to the other division's top 3. I just don't have time to go through the history of it to find all the specific examples to satisfy you.

In other words, you are moving the goalposts, and then handwaving rather than supply evidence even for your altered position. A real math god would have the numbers already on hand, because he would have looked up those facts before forming an opinion about them.

[Mathgod]

Jesus H f*ing christ, do you ever have an obsession with this or what.

I'm telling you I've kept a loose mental track of this stuff over the years, I know what I'm talking about, I didn't keep some database of this stuff as the years have gone by because I don't dedicate my life to making sure I win over some Jay Random on the internet who is, it seems, hell bent on distrusting me and turning his nose up at anything I say no matter what.

I trust my own judgement on this. If you don't, oh well. IDGAF honestly.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to you sir.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Jesus H f*ing christ, do you ever have an obsession with this or what.

I have this quirk that I don’t like letting people get away with total BS. Congratulations, you’re the prize BS artist of the day.

I'm telling you I've kept a loose mental track of this stuff over the years, I know what I'm talking about,

If all you have done is keep a loose mental track, then you do not, in fact, know what you are talking about. The NHL standings for every year are trivially easy to look up, but you can’t be arsed to do that. You have no time for facts but all the time in the world to congratulate yourself on always being right.

I didn't keep some database of this stuff as the years have gone by

There is a database for this stuff. It’s called nhl.com. You might try taking five minutes to examine the facts before you sound off.

because I don't dedicate my life to making sure I win over some Jay Random on the internet who is, it seems, hell bent on distrusting me and turning his nose up at anything I say no matter what.

Wait a sec. Are you trying to insinuate that your opinion is worth more than mine because you have a pretentious username and I don’t? Good Lord, I thought I’d seen all the chowderheaded arguments on the internet, but that takes the cake.

I trust my own judgement on this. If you don't, oh well. IDGAF.

I don’t trust your judgement, especially when you admit you haven’t actually looked up the facts.

Your username definitely does not check out.

[Mathgod]

Why would I have to look up the facts when I already know them? Yes I have examined the evidence over the years. I know there have been many examples of when one division has had a far better top 3 than the other. I know this to be true and I don't need your half-wit validation. And I certainly see no need to waste my time going back and digging up the numbers just to try to win someone over who has zero interest in having his mind changed.

And you're a hypocrite when you're not willing to spend time gathering and putting together the numbers either.