• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Majsheppard

Realignment decided - 4 Conferences

Rate this topic

187 posts in this topic

This is what I understand: 4 Conferences, teams play ALL teams in other conference twice home and away. Which would be 44 games leaving (is it an 82 game or 80 game season?) 36 or 38 games to play in-conference. Not sure the amount of games, but since there are only 7 teams in two of the conferences that makes it a little uneven in the two that have 8. So not quite sure how the in-conference games are going to be played.

from nhl.com....

"In the seven-team Conferences, teams would play six times -- three home, three away -- for a total of 36 inter-division games. In the eight-team Conferences, teams would play either five or six times in a season on a rotating basis -- for a total of 38 inter-division games.The teams in the seven-team Conferences will have 46 out-of-conference games, including 23 at home and 23 on the road. The teams in the eight-team Conferences will have 44 out-of-conference games evenly split between home and away."

Edited by amato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm with you. As I was reading how Bettman got this passed, I was thniking, if only Obama had those kind of skills. But I digress

...not that I am saying Obama is a good President, but are you saying that Bettman would be a great United States President? Just kidding, I know what ya meant! :lol:

I agree, outside of just moving a team to the old East, this is the best scenario. I like it, especially less travel to the west coast for us. Only playing as far west as Winnipeg more than once is great. I also like the chance of a SCF with two former Western conference teams. Would've been awesome to play the Avs back in the day in the SCF! I would say Bettman got this one as close to right as it's gonna get and only having 7 teams in two of the conferences lets him eye up future expansion.

Weird thing is going to have to get used to not calling a team an Eastern Conference or Western Conference team. But again, I do like it.

from nhl.com....

"In the seven-team Conferences, teams would play six times -- three home, three away -- for a total of 36 inter-division games. In the eight-team Conferences, teams would play either five or six times in a season on a rotating basis -- for a total of 38 inter-division games.The teams in the seven-team Conferences will have 46 out-of-conference games, including 23 at home and 23 on the road. The teams in the eight-team Conferences will have 44 out-of-conference games evenly split between home and away."

Sounds good to me...82 games. Just have to get rid of the 1 point for a loss in OT and all will be well!

Rick D likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Extremely excited for this realignment. No more 2nd round playoff outings to San Jose. I really like the idea of playing every team in the league at least 2 times a year. That is a very good change and also I'm not complaining about the conference we are in. The idea of divisional playoffs excites me more than the current system. We will be playing against divisional rivals every year to attempt to make it to the semi-finals. I could see the rivalry with Chicago heating up a lot..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman... did something right?

I love this four conference system. They've got Chicago, St. Louis, and Detroit together. They also have Toronto, Boston, and Montreal together, which is also pretty cool.

The only people that got screwed were the Florida teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Extremely excited for this realignment. No more 2nd round playoff outings to San Jose. I really like the idea of playing every team in the league at least 2 times a year. That is a very good change and also I'm not complaining about the conference we are in. The idea of divisional playoffs excites me more than the current system. We will be playing against divisional rivals every year to attempt to make it to the semi-finals. I could see the rivalry with Chicago heating up a lot..

agreed. there will be a lot of rivalry type first and second round matchups and it'll hype up the playoffs more..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would you do it then. It's a geography problem. The 2 Florida teams are to far away from the cluster of the other teams in the East. The only other way to do it is group them with other teams in the south like they are currently. If you do that though, you end up splitting up the teams along the Eastern seaboard. Yes, the Florida teams have more travel but it's in the same time zone. PLUS, they get to have Montreal and Toronto play in Florida regularly and those will attract big audiences.

I think that it is about as fair as it can be. As far as riding your bike to away games, do you remember when a few years ago, teams played there division foes EIGHT TIMES a year. And that was because Lou Lamrillo wanted the Devils to be able to walk to their home games in MSG and on the Island. Now that was unfair.

I was obviously kidding about riding bikes to games, but Conference D has a pretty perfect travel situation.

How are the Florida teams too far away from the teams in the East? They're even further from the ones in their new Conference.

To me the more practical solution is to include the Florida teams with the more southern of the eastern teams. It's not strange to you that a team that plays outside Miami Florida is in the same conference as Ottawa, even though there are 7 other clubs that are closer by hundreds of miles?

Edited by haroldsnepsts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was obviously kidding about riding bikes to games, but Conference D has a pretty perfect travel situation.

How are the Florida teams too far away from the teams in the East? They're even further from the ones in their new Conference.

To me the more practical solution is to include the Florida teams with the more southern of the eastern teams. It's not strange to you that a team that plays outside Miami Florida is in the same conference as Ottawa, even though there are 7 other clubs that are closer by hundreds of miles?

Yes, I agree it is strange but how else would you do it? If you have 4 conferences then the southern one would be Florida, Tampa, Washington, Carolina and who else - you need at least 7. Pittsburgh? Philly? One of the New York teams? If you do that then you have teams that are less than 50 miles apart in different conferences. Philly and Pittsburgh are not very close to south Florida.

The geography doesn't work

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here's some data I calculated for the new conferences

tab1.gif

first three columns: average number of point of teams in the conference per year

middle three columns: average number of points for all except two best conference teams (best in this 3 year span)

last three columns: average number of points for all "non-playoff teams" (3 or 4 worst team in the conference throughout 2009, 2010 and 2011 seasons)

analysis:

B is the conference that can potentially produce most diversity in terms of playoff teams. Wings and Hawks look like safe bets but remaining 2 seats can be filled by almost any other team. D on the other hand looks like fixed choice.

as for conference "toughness"... D and A look like strongest of all, with the advantage to D.

now let's take a look at another set of data - a score of playoff success of conference teams:

tab2.gif

explanation:

PO total - scores for all teams in conference

PO poteams - scores for 4 best playoff teams in conference

first score is in the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 model (1 point for making playoffs, 2 for winning 1st round, ... , 5 for SC champ)

second score is for 1, 3, 6, 10, 15 model (a model that emphasizes deeper playoff runs)

analysis: teams in conference D had most success. for B it's the Wings and Hawks but these both teams run up the score significantly. for the rest... C looks like Bruins title to lose and A is Canucks vs Sharks, whoever is better at the moment.

in short: it looks like West could be Wings/Hawks against Sharks/Canucks, while in East it's Bruins against whomever survives D...

take it FWIW and don't read to much into the data...

Edited by akustyk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I agree it is strange but how else would you do it? If you have 4 conferences then the southern one would be Florida, Tampa, Washington, Carolina and who else - you need at least 7. Pittsburgh? Philly? One of the New York teams? If you do that then you have teams that are less than 50 miles apart in different conferences. Philly and Pittsburgh are not very close to south Florida.

The geography doesn't work

Well then they need to expand to Mississippi and Alabama and Kentucky. Then they can have the two florida teams, Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Nashville and Kentucky. :lol:

here's some data I calculated for the new conferences

2011 2010 2009 2011 2010 2009 2011 2010 2009 A 92,75 95,00 89,75 86,67 90,00 83,50 80,50 87,00 82,75 B 91,13 92,25 92,00 87,67 87,33 86,67 85,50 83,50 85,00 C 89,86 86,29 89,00 84,60 82,00 82,80 77,00 81,67 85,67 D 93,86 94,14 95,00 88,80 87,00 90,20 82,33 89,67 87,33

first three columns: average number of point of teams in the conference per year

middle three columns: average number of points for all except two best conference teams (best in this 3 year span)

last three columns: average number of points for all "non-playoff teams" (3 or 4 worst team in the conference throughout 2009, 2010 and 2011 seasons)

analysis:

B is the conference that can potentially produce most diversity in terms of playoff teams. Wings and Hawks look like safe bets but remaining 2 seats can be filled by almost any other team. D on the other hand looks like fixed choice.

as for conference "toughness"... D and A look like strongest of all, with the advantage to D.

now let's take a look at another set of data - a score of playoff success of conference teams:

PO all PO best A 23 38 20 35 B 21 43 20 42 C 20 38 19 37 D 27 50 23 46

explanation:

PO all - scores for all teams in conference

PO best - scores for 4 best playoff teams in conference

first score is in the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 model (1 point for making playoffs, 2 for winning 1st round, ... , 5 for SC champ)

second score is for 1, 3, 6, 10, 15 model (a model that emphasizes deeper playoff runs)

analysis: teams in conference D had most success. for B it's the Wings and Hawks but these both teams run up the score significantly. for the rest... C looks like Bruins title to lose and A is Canucks vs Sharks, whoever is better at the moment.

in short: it looks like West could be Wings/Hawks against Sharks/Canucks, while in East it's Bruins against whomever survives D...

take it FWIW and don't read to much into the data...

:blink: I don't think this turned out the way you were seeing it in your head....I'm confused. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:blink: I don't think this turned out the way you were seeing it in your head....I'm confused. :lol:

try again...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For everyone saying the Florida teams got screwed, the longest straight line distance in that new conference is Florida (Miami) to Montreal (1388.9 miles) That basically the same as Edmonton to Phoenix in the new format (1387.4 miles).

http://www.sportmapworld.com/map/ice-hockey/north-america/nhl/

Yeah but almost all of the other teams in Florida's conference (other than the opposing Florida team obviously) are extremely far away. Additionally, it is obvious that the Florida teams are being screwed because there is an entire conference between themselves and the other teams in their conference.

Edit: Looking that the breakdown you are right about Edmonton having to travel just about as much as the Florida teams but I still think the key difference is that it is the best Edmonton could have and still stay in their time zone. Florida teams just got screwed because they are Florida teams as they could have had a much better arrangement.

Edited by Frozen-Man

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW you can look here to find a break down of the average distance that each team travels to all of its conference foes.

Florida Panthers are screwed the worst with an average travel distance of 1,083 miles of travel per conference foe

Philadelphia Flyers have it the best with an average travel distance of 164 miles of travel per conference foe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

try again...

Ok, cool, but one thing. You are still thinking East/West when it comes to the end. You say could be Wings/Hawks vs Canucks/Sharks when it's already been said that all teams will reseed for the "final four." So if Wings come out of their Conference and Sharks come out of theirs, doesn't mean they will play each other in the next round. Lets say the final four are Wings/Sharks/Bruins/Caps, re-seeding according to points it could very well be Wings/Bruins and Sharks/Caps in the third round, giving way to a possible Wings/Sharks or Bruins/Caps SCF. This is what I like most about this realignment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW you can look here to find a break down of the average distance that each team travels to all of its conference foes.

Florida Panthers are screwed the worst with an average travel distance of 1,083 miles of travel per conference foe

Philadelphia Flyers have it the best with an average travel distance of 164 miles of travel per conference foe.

Like I said before, Conference D got a pretty great deal out of this whole thing. An average distance for the conference of 222 miles. The next closest is the one the Wings are in with 595.

Tampa and Florida both have an average travel miles above 1,000. The absolutely got screwed on this deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said before, Conference D got a pretty great deal out of this whole thing. An average distance for the conference of 222 miles. The next closest is the one the Wings are in with 595.

Tampa and Florida both have an average travel miles above 1,000. The absolutely got screwed on this deal.

Well, there's many benefits from playing in Florida.

Nice weather, no taxes, girls in G-strings walking around.

Gotta make some sacrifices as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see what the big deal is about the Florida teams. North-south travel isn't that bad. If they flew 1,000 miles west than they'd have a legit gripe. You know they'll just schedule longer road trips to save on travel costs. Plus now Boston, Toronto, and montreal play in their arenas 3 times each and if they make they playoffs they'll most likely get national coverage playing those 3 teams=more exposure, higher attendance, more money. I think you guys are over exaggerating about the Florida teams. Just my 2 cents.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, cool, but one thing. You are still thinking East/West when it comes to the end. You say could be Wings/Hawks vs Canucks/Sharks when it's already been said that all teams will reseed for the "final four."

is it really already decided? if I understood Gary correctly, this very point is still subject to discussion...

So if Wings come out of their Conference and Sharks come out of theirs, doesn't mean they will play each other in the next round. Lets say the final four are Wings/Sharks/Bruins/Caps, re-seeding according to points it could very well be Wings/Bruins and Sharks/Caps in the third round, giving way to a possible Wings/Sharks or Bruins/Caps SCF. This is what I like most about this realignment.

ditto on liking. what I'm not sold on is that the inter-conference rounds will emphasize shallow conferences, where only one team

is of decent caliber - think: Bruins in their new conference: if nothing changes, and I certainly doubt Maple Laughs will introduce big

change inb the picture, the Bruins will be perennial competitor in round 3 for years to come. and for another two conferences it may be

a two dog fight (Wings/Hawks, Sharks/Canucks). there's still chance for an underdog winner and some playoff cinderella story,

but the new format looks to be more prone to creating "dynasties"... I'm not sure I don't like the though (think: Bruins-Habs playoff

feuds in recent years) but I sure did like the cinderella teams and upsets...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall, I like it a lot.

The stars are back in a division with the Blues, Wings and Hawks...just like the Norris days.

I'm happy Detroit didn't go to the East (sorry)...I like the games between the Blues and Wings.

It's fun to hate you guys. ;) And we owe you big time...you can't run to the east before we get some revenge for over a decade of dominance.

For those who don't like the playoffs the way they will be next year, you're nuts. It's far better than seeding 1-8 in the conference.

The playoff format is the way it should be now. 1st vs. 4th, 2nd vs. 3rd in each division and then the winners play each other in round 2.

That's the way it used to be, and it was much better. Rivalries are heightened and more intense when you face similar teams in the playoffs more often, and you are guaranteed to face a division team in the first two rounds. Awesome. :clap:

I don't care about Winnipeg being in the division...but oh well.

And the Wild always bored me...but we'll see how it goes.

It would have been nice to have 7 teams in the division and not 8.

Other than that, I love it. :thumbup:

Ram likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone seriously think the league was going to put the West's most successful and profitable franchise of the last 20 years in the East?

This is about as close as they were going to get. And other than having to play Minnesota in our own division, I'm content with it. Fewer games at 10:00 and less San Jose.

Ram likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah but almost all of the other teams in Florida's conference (other than the opposing Florida team obviously) are extremely far away. Additionally, it is obvious that the Florida teams are being screwed because there is an entire conference between themselves and the other teams in their conference.

Edit: Looking that the breakdown you are right about Edmonton having to travel just about as much as the Florida teams but I still think the key difference is that it is the best Edmonton could have and still stay in their time zone. Florida teams just got screwed because they are Florida teams as they could have had a much better arrangement.

I dont think it's the same to compare North-South to East-West travel. I think the biggest problem teams had with heavy travel was more about playing and travelling in different time zones. Obviously the distance plays into things as it creates longer flights etc. but ultimtaely wouldnt you rather travel 500 miles south than 500 miles west?

Also, for the Florida teams it was a trade off. The increased level of travel in order to get the popular (in that area) teams such as the Leafs and Canadiens in their building three times per year as opposed to just once. Plus, if the schedule is done in such a way once the Bolts/Panthers get up to Boston they could play Buffalo, Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal without travelling much. It's only the initial distance (and return to Florida distance) that is of concern. Compare that with Dallas (Im sure there are even worse examples) who swings through the Central area teams then has to hike up to Winnipeg before making the long trip back to Dallas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is it really already decided? if I understood Gary correctly, this very point is still subject to discussion...

ditto on liking. what I'm not sold on is that the inter-conference rounds will emphasize shallow conferences, where only one team

is of decent caliber - think: Bruins in their new conference: if nothing changes, and I certainly doubt Maple Laughs will introduce big

change inb the picture, the Bruins will be perennial competitor in round 3 for years to come. and for another two conferences it may be

a two dog fight (Wings/Hawks, Sharks/Canucks). there's still chance for an underdog winner and some playoff cinderella story,

but the new format looks to be more prone to creating "dynasties"... I'm not sure I don't like the though (think: Bruins-Habs playoff

feuds in recent years) but I sure did like the cinderella teams and upsets...

...well after listening last night, I guess it isn't decided, but when Ken Daniels was talking about it a few games ago that is what he said was on the table with this realignment format and this is the one that he was talking about and it was chosen. If we aren't going to have an East/West anymore and have a true 4 conference setup, then that is how is should be, the only other way to not be that way is to put two conferences in a mega-group? That makes no sense, we may as well have the word division back and have 4 of them in 2 conferences again. If this is truly 4 separate conferences, then the re-seeding is the only way to go. Keeping groups I & II together and III & IV together defeats the purpose of this setup. Of course this realignment, so far, has been great for the fans, so I guess Gary can screw it up somehow, and by separating the 4 into 2 would be that way. I think the re-seeding gives the NHL some excitement that it hasn't had in a long, long time! It also gives it a uniqueness that no other league has. Having the chance that Boston can play Montreal for the Cup is epic. Imagine the Lions playing Green Bay in the Super Bowl or the Tigers against the Yankees for the World Series, instead of just a first or second round series...the MLB wold LOVE a Yankees/Red Sox World Series, eh? This ormat would bring that kind of excitement back into a league that, well, needs something to bring up the excitement level a notch and I hope they adopt the re-seeding of the final four in the spring, if not, then I think this was all just a waste of time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone else see Bettman talking about the realignment on the NHL network? They asked him about the NHLPA's opinion and involvement. I wish I had the exact quote but his demeanor and attitude sounded basically like "they can have opinion as long as they're not ridiculous about it." He was so smug and condescending towards them. It's no friggin wonder we had a lockout when your contempt for the union is so obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone else see Bettman talking about the realignment on the NHL network? They asked him about the NHLPA's opinion and involvement. I wish I had the exact quote but his demeanor and attitude sounded basically like "they can have opinion as long as they're not ridiculous about it." He was so smug and condescending towards them. It's no friggin wonder we had a lockout when your contempt for the union is so obvious.

Ya, he and Dave Bing should hook up...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...well after listening last night, I guess it isn't decided, but when Ken Daniels was talking about it a few games ago that is what he said was on the table with this realignment format and this is the one that he was talking about and it was chosen. If we aren't going to have an East/West anymore and have a true 4 conference setup, then that is how is should be, the only other way to not be that way is to put two conferences in a mega-group? That makes no sense, we may as well have the word division back and have 4 of them in 2 conferences again. If this is truly 4 separate conferences, then the re-seeding is the only way to go. Keeping groups I & II together and III & IV together defeats the purpose of this setup. Of course this realignment, so far, has been great for the fans, so I guess Gary can screw it up somehow, and by separating the 4 into 2 would be that way. I think the re-seeding gives the NHL some excitement that it hasn't had in a long, long time! It also gives it a uniqueness that no other league has. Having the chance that Boston can play Montreal for the Cup is epic. Imagine the Lions playing Green Bay in the Super Bowl or the Tigers against the Yankees for the World Series, instead of just a first or second round series...the MLB wold LOVE a Yankees/Red Sox World Series, eh? This ormat would bring that kind of excitement back into a league that, well, needs something to bring up the excitement level a notch and I hope they adopt the re-seeding of the final four in the spring, if not, then I think this was all just a waste of time...

I agree, not re-seeding for round 3 would be dumb.

However, Boston and Montreal are in the same conference. They could never meet each other beyond the 2nd round. Nor could Detroit/Chicago, Philly/Pittsburgh or Pitt/Washington or any other intra-conference rivals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now