06-18-2018, 11:55 PM
|
#441
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
|
Be prepare for the glut of articles from the experts on predicting and/ or asking the question as to if Seattle can do what Vegas did.
Answer is a pretty safe, “no”. Won’t stop some of the so called experts revising history I’m sure about thier Vegas predictions this year when talking about Seattle.
Then the head scratching from the same press on why Seattle didn’t even make the playoffs the first year.
Related to that, never forget how many idiots that have legit press credentials and some who even vote for the Conn Smythe, picked the Oilers to be in the Cup this past year.
|
|
|
06-19-2018, 05:12 AM
|
#442
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Boca Raton, FL
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by browna
Be prepare for the glut of articles from the experts on predicting and/ or asking the question as to if Seattle can do what Vegas did.
Answer is a pretty safe, “no”. Won’t stop some of the so called experts revising history I’m sure about thier Vegas predictions this year when talking about Seattle.
Then the head scratching from the same press on why Seattle didn’t even make the playoffs the first year.
|
Of course not, only because they are picking 2nd, and so most of the good players that would be available in expansion drafts are now taken. Teams will be a little more crafty in their protection schemes. Vegas managed to get some great players because of some individual team circumstances that likely won't happen again (Fleury from Pittsburgh, Marchesseault and Reilly from Florida, Tuch and Haula from Minnesota). Plus, consider that the talent pool is ever so diluted with a new team and you're not going to see the same situation in Seattle. They'll probably be ok competitively, but the roster will be very thin and a key injury or two will probably sink the team. Think Vancouver surprising everyone in the first half of last year and then falling apart as the best case scenario.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ResAlien
If we can't fall in love with replaceable bottom 6 players then the terrorists have won.
|
|
|
|
06-19-2018, 07:11 AM
|
#443
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by getbak
That makes no sense. They don't need to add teams to the East.
The league will almost-certainly not split up the Flames and Oilers and would probably prefer them to be in the same Division as the Canucks too.
The two most-likely scenarios would see either Arizona move into the Central with Seattle in the Pacific (even easier if the Coyotes were to move to Houston); or Colorado moves into the Pacific and the Flames and Oilers move into the Central.
Either way, the Pacific Division would have 6 Pacific Time Zone teams and 2 Mountain Time Zone teams; and the Central would have 6 Central Time Zone teams and 2 Mountain Time Zone teams. The advantage of keeping Arizona in the Pacific is that because Arizona doesn't go on DST, their time is in-sync with the Pacific for the first and last months of the season as well as all of the playoffs. The advantage of moving Arizona to the Central is that it keeps the 3 Canadian teams in the same Division and disrupts the fewest existing teams from the current status quo.
|
I know that time zones are important but I would consider a North/South realignment.
Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Seattle, Minnesota, Colorado, Chicago. The rest go into the south.
|
|
|
06-19-2018, 04:35 PM
|
#444
|
Won the Worst Son Ever Award
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sherwood Park
|
realignment NFL style: 2 conferences, 8 divisions
Campbell Conference
Canadian:
Calgary
Edmonton
Vancouver
Winnipeg
Pacific:
Anaheim
Los Angeles
San Jose
Seattle
Southwest:
Arizona
Colorado
Dallas
Vegas
Midwest:
Chicago
Minnesota
Nashville
St Louis
Wales Conference:
Southeast:
Carolina
Florida
Tampa
Washington
New York:
Buffalo
New Jersey
Islanders
Rangers
Northeast:
Boston
Montreal
Ottawa
Toronto
Blue Collar:
Columbus
Detroit
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Last edited by krazycanuck; 06-19-2018 at 04:38 PM.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to krazycanuck For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-19-2018, 04:37 PM
|
#445
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Cowtown
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by krazycanuck
realignment NFL style: 2 conferences, 8 divisions
Campbell Conference
Canadian:
Calgary
Edmonton
Seattle
Winnipeg
Pacific:
Anaheim
Los Angeles
San Jose
Seattle
|
I'm really liking this no canucks NHL.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilboimcdavid
Eakins wasn't a bad coach, the team just had 2 bad years, they should've been more patient.
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PaperBagger'14 For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-19-2018, 04:38 PM
|
#446
|
Won the Worst Son Ever Award
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sherwood Park
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaperBagger'14
I'm really liking this no canucks NHL.
|
relegate the ********
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to krazycanuck For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-20-2018, 06:36 AM
|
#447
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Chicago
|
What does 4 teams Z 8 divisions look like for playoffs?
2 from each, no wildcard.
1 from each, 4 wc per conference.
Something else?
|
|
|
06-20-2018, 06:42 AM
|
#448
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Paradise
|
Would have to be 1 from each 4 wild card.
|
|
|
06-20-2018, 08:40 AM
|
#449
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samonadreau
Would have to be 1 from each 4 wild card.
|
I don't think I'd mind 2 from each division. It would eliminate the need for a perfectly balanced schedule across each conference, and only within each division.
While we're playing fantasy, I'd go to 3 pt games out of division (2 OT/SOW, 1 OT/SOL), and 5 pt games in division (4 OTW, 3SOW, 2 SOL, 1 OTL).
Sure, it's complicated as hell, but it amps up division rivalry and keeps teams in contention for longer.
|
|
|
06-20-2018, 08:41 AM
|
#450
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: I'm right behind you
|
What would be wrong with simply taking the top four in each division; having them have to play their way out of the division with the two winners per conference meeting for the right to go to the finals?
__________________
Don't fear me. Trust me.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Reaper For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-20-2018, 08:42 AM
|
#451
|
Franchise Player
|
^ And I forgot - #1 seed in each division gets in; #2 & 3 have a 1 game playoff.
Eliminates the break days between reg season and playoffs. Keeps 24 teams in contention.
4 must-watch playoff games to kick off the playoffs.
|
|
|
06-20-2018, 08:47 AM
|
#452
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by krazycanuck
realignment NFL style: 2 conferences, 8 divisions
...
|
Almost perfect.
The only complaints you would get (from the teams - not from me) would be:
- Vancouver would want to be in a division with Seattle. They've been talking about the 'natural rivalry' for years.
- Boston would complain about being the only US team in their division.
Vancouver can go pound sand. The league would prefer to appease Boston though.
__________________
I like to quote myself - scotty2hotty
|
|
|
06-20-2018, 08:51 AM
|
#453
|
Franchise Player
|
^ Trading Buffalo and Boston might be a reasonable solution
|
|
|
06-20-2018, 09:51 AM
|
#454
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper
What would be wrong with simply taking the top four in each division; having them have to play their way out of the division with the two winners per conference meeting for the right to go to the finals?
|
This.
These proposals seem a lot more complicated than it needs to be.
With 32 teams, it would be exactly half the league making the playoffs. That's fine.
And then with 4 divisons in total, just have the top 4 teams in each division play it out, and go from there.
Divisional Semifinals > Divisional Finals > Conference Finals > Stanley Cup Final
|
|
|
06-20-2018, 10:12 AM
|
#455
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joborule
This.
These proposals seem a lot more complicated than it needs to be.
With 32 teams, it would be exactly half the league making the playoffs. That's fine.
And then with 4 divisons in total, just have the top 4 teams in each division play it out, and go from there.
Divisional Semifinals > Divisional Finals > Conference Finals > Stanley Cup Final
|
Problem is the players won't agree to that. That was originally proposed in the current format and their concern is a team getting in with significantly less points than another team in the same conference.
|
|
|
06-20-2018, 03:59 PM
|
#456
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751
Problem is the players won't agree to that. That was originally proposed in the current format and their concern is a team getting in with significantly less points than another team in the same conference.
|
It was more of an issue of imbalanced schedules and imbalanced divisions. Your odds of making the playoffs were worse in the East (though perhaps a fair tradeoff for easier travel schedules throughout the year)
|
|
|
06-20-2018, 07:11 PM
|
#457
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
|
I came up with this alignment a few months ago...
Quote:
Originally Posted by getbak
Two Conferences of 16 teams. Two Divisions of 8 teams in each Conference. Two Groups of 4 teams in each Division...
WESTERN CONFERENCE
PACIFIC DIVISION
PAC NORTH GROUP- Calgary
- Edmonton
- Seattle
- Vancouver
PAC SOUTH GROUP- Anaheim
- Los Angeles
- San Jose
- Vegas
CENTRAL DIVISION
CEN NORTH GROUP- Chicago
- Minnesota
- St Louis
- Winnipeg
CEN SOUTH GROUP- Arizona
- Colorado
- Dallas
- Nashville
EASTERN CONFERENCE
GREAT LAKES DIVISION
GLA NORTH GROUP- Buffalo
- Montreal
- Ottawa
- Toronto
GLA SOUTH GROUP- Columbus
- Detroit
- Philadelphia
- Pittsburgh
ATLANTIC DIVISION
ATL NORTH GROUP- Boston
- New Jersey
- NY Islanders
- NY Rangers
ATL SOUTH GROUP- Carolina
- Florida
- Tampa Bay
- Washington
For scheduling, you play: - 1 Home / 1 Away vs all teams outside your own Division (2 x 24 = 48)
- 2 Home / 2 Away vs the other Group in your own Division (4 x 4 = 16)
- 3 Home / 3 Away vs your own Group (6 x 3 = 18)
48 + 16 + 18 = 82 game season
Playoffs: - 24 of 32 teams make the playoffs
- Winner of each Group gets a bye to the second round
- 2nd & 3rd place teams in each Group play a Best-of-5 first round series
- Winner of first round series plays the Group winner in the second round
- Group series winners within each Division play in the third round
- Division series winners within each Conference play in the fourth round
- Conference series winners play in the Stanley Cup Final
|
Figuring out the best way to split up the eastern teams is harder than the western. There's no perfect answer that will make everyone happy.
An expanded playoff has been talked about for a long time now. Expanding to 32 teams, and having 24 teams qualify for the playoffs seems like a good way to do it (and it's about the same percentage of teams making the playoffs as it was when 16 of 21 teams made it). Personally, I don't like series that are less than a best-of-5, but a best-of-3 could also work for the first round (a one-game play-in seems like a waste).
They could do an accelerated schedule in the first round (2 - travel - 2 - travel - 1 -- done in 7 days / a best-of-three could be done in 4 days) and start the second round once the match-ups are set, even if all the first round series aren't done. The extra rest is just a perk of winning your Group.
If they limit the number of breaks in the other rounds too, the season won't need to end any later than it already does.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to getbak For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-20-2018, 11:43 PM
|
#458
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by powderjunkie
It was more of an issue of imbalanced schedules and imbalanced divisions. Your odds of making the playoffs were worse in the East (though perhaps a fair tradeoff for easier travel schedules throughout the year)
|
But the wild-card system does nothing to address the imbalance between East and West. There are still eight playoff teams in each conference. Only a fool would have supported wild cards for that reason.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
|
|
|
06-21-2018, 08:22 AM
|
#459
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
The amount of teams that makes the playoffs is fine, adding teams just puts more mediocre teams into the playoffs and extends the season to July. I suppose adding teams would be a revenue generator for the owners, that being said when the NHL had 16 teams making it out of 21 there was really no reason to watch hockey until the playoffs.
Certainly regular season attendance has gone way up since those days. My experience has been that when nearly all the teams make it in the regular season becomes effectively meaningless.
Last edited by Flamenspiel; 06-21-2018 at 08:31 AM.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
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 04:15 AM.
|
|