Playoff Format Complaint Thread

[troutman]

So the owners will charge less for tickets earlier in the year?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

The point I was trying to make in this thread is that the current format does not take the CURRENT best 8 teams from each conference, it takes 8 teams from each conference based on a blended average of results spread out over 6 months. I think it's a ridiculous way of determining who should be in and who should be out. That being said, admittedly, people will tend to defend the status quo simply because they are accustomed to it.

It's not defending it because it's the status quo.

It's defending it because you haven't provided an alternative that makes any sense.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by blender

@mathgod. Ok, you're thread is stupid.

Better?

Compelling as ever.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

The Lightning were decimated by injuries this season. The Stamkos injury was the headline, but it only begins to tell the story http://www.foxsports.com/nhl/tampa-b...-team-injuries
http://nhlinjuryviz.blogspot.ca/2016...reakdowns.html

When healthy, I think it's fair to say they have one of the league's best rosters, as evidenced by 1) how they ended off the season and 2) how well they played in last year's playoffs (they pushed the Penguins harder than the Sharks or even the Caps did). If they were healthier this year I fully believe they would have given the Habs a run for the division crown.

Would the Flames have made the playoffs (or even finished within a point of a playoff spot) if Gaudreau had missed most of the season? Not likely.

The point I was trying to make in this thread is that the current format does not take the CURRENT best 8 teams from each conference, it takes 8 teams from each conference based on a blended average of results spread out over 6 months. I think it's a ridiculous way of determining who should be in and who should be out. That being said, admittedly, people will tend to defend the status quo simply because they are accustomed to it.

You could have just done what the others in this thread did and simply suggest that it's "silly" or "stupid" to criticize the status quo, but you took the next step and took a backhanded, ignorant, and ill-informed personal swipe at me. Well done.

So you want the league to ignore the results of 82 games and award playoff spots to teams that have the best rosters on paper? Lightning had bad luck on the injury front but that's the way it goes in all sports.

[stang]

Originally Posted by blender

@mathgod. Ok, you're thread is stupid.

Better?

Really?

[Roof-Daddy]

Injuries are a part of it. You can't just give the Lightning credit for having a better roster on paper.

That is subjective.

Actually playing games and using the results is not subjective.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

So you want the league to ignore the results of 82 games and award playoff spots to teams that have the best rosters on paper? Lightning had bad luck on the injury front but that's the way it goes in all sports.

I'd like to see the playoff format expanded to include more teams.

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.)

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Actually playing games and using the results is not subjective.

I'm not suggesting that games shouldn't be played.

[blender]

Originally Posted by stang

Really?

Come on.
His thread idea is ridiculous. It's not even coherent, as other posters have illustrated.

I'll stop now though.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I'd like to see the playoff format expanded to include more teams.

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.)


I'm not suggesting that games shouldn't be played.

I take it you are a huge proponent of participation ribbons.

[Jason14h]

Why not make the early games count for more when there is a better chance the teams are healthy ?

Or weight games for how many injured players each team has.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I'd like to see the playoff format expanded to include more teams.

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 since it would probably be too complex for the average hockey fan to appreciate.

No that just can't work. You would have teams resting players in the first half of the season and all sorts of other shenanigans. All games have to be worth the same amount of points. I don't understand why you think the 2nd half of the season somehow means more than the first half.

[stang]

Originally Posted by blender

Come on.
His thread idea is ridiculous. It's not even coherent, as other posters have illustrated.

I'll stop now though.

I was meaning if you say something is stupid, try and make sure you're using the right words

[stang]

What if Stamkos got hurt in the second half? Would you want the first half to count for more?

[smiggy77]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

I'd like to see the playoff format expanded to include more teams.

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.)


I'm not suggesting that games shouldn't be played.

What??? Why don't they just make the season 20 games and see who gets in? Or make the season 50 pre-season games and 30 actual games.

Every game matters, that's what makes winning and losing at any point in the season matter, otherwise no one would care.

Also, players get injured. Should the league give bonus points to any team who loses their stars to injuries? C'mon man.

Your complaints make zero sense and it sounds like you should go watch the KHL if that's the hockey you want.

[smiggy77]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Injuries are a part of it. You can't just give the Lightning credit for having a better roster on paper.

That is subjective.

Actually playing games and using the results is not subjective.

lol it's like whoever has the most talent in the league should be awarded points.

Might as well have all the stars on one team, take pay cuts to fit in the cap, and then automatically be awarded the Stanley Cup lol

This isn't fantasy hockey.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by stang

What if Stamkos got hurt in the second half? Would you want the first half to count for more?

No.

I think a better question is if Gaudreau had missed most of the season and was on the verge of returning just in time for the playoffs, and the Flames had missed the playoffs by one point (finishing the season 20-6-4 even without Gaudreau), would the reaction to this thread be the same as it is now?

Originally Posted by smiggy77

What??? Why don't they just make the season 20 games and see who gets in? Or make the season 50 pre-season games and 30 actual games.

Every game matters, that's what makes winning and losing at any point in the season matter, otherwise no one would care.

Also, players get injured. Should the league give bonus points to any team who loses their stars to injuries? C'mon man.

Your complaints make zero sense and it sounds like you should go watch the KHL if that's the hockey you want.

My main suggestion is to expand the playoffs to include more teams. So far no one has made a counter argument to it.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

No.

I think a better question is if Gaudreau had missed most of the season and was on the verge of returning just in time for the playoffs, and the Flames had missed the playoffs by one point (finishing the season 20-6-4 even without Gaudreau), would the reaction to this thread be the same as it is now?

Yes

[calf]

But injuries, flukes and adversity is part of sports and why you play the game. The winner shouldn't be your best starting roster but the best team, which includes depth and how those players play when on the roster. Otherwise you're just letting the stats guys decide a winner instead of the players and team.

If you only look at a teams best rosters as having value to standings, maybe only the best goals too? Like a flukey goal doesn't count as much as one where the player calls the shot before hand?

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

[smiggy77]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

No.

I think a better question is if Gaudreau had missed most of the season and was on the verge of returning just in time for the playoffs, and the Flames had missed the playoffs by one point (finishing the season 20-6-4 even without Gaudreau), would the reaction to this thread be the same as it is now?

Yes.

That's how sports works.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

My main suggestion is to expand the playoffs to include more teams. So far no one has made a counter argument to it.

More than half the league already makes the playoffs. You want the league to be like the CFL where bad teams make the playoffs?