• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
SouthernWingsFan

Playoff seeding & Divison winners

Rate this topic

40 posts in this topic

There is a point to winning the division because it means you automatically get a top seed.... That's the point. If they got rid of that than there's really no point for divisions. Just get rid of them and have two fifteen team conferences. The whole reason we have divisions is because it adds meaning to more games since more than just the top two teams and the 8th/9th teams are fighting for anything of significance. It also adds meaning to games earlier in the season since division games are crucial if you want to clinch your division.

Right now people are just mad at it because it's hurting us. But it has helped us a lot in the past and I'm sure people had no problem with it then.

I've always criticized the division seeding, even when the Wings were on top. You sort of make my argument. There really is no need for divisions, other than for scheduling purposes (guaranteeing certain teams play certain teams enough times). And lately it hasn't seemed to matter much, because we haven't seen a terribly weak division in a few years. But this year is reminding everyone how flawed the system is.

To be honest, I've never seen this importance of division games early in the season. They're just two points to most teams. They may say they're important but watching the games, there's no extra benefit to it other than that. I'm just going back to first principles, that being divisions don't need to exist except as a scheduling tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Change it. Why a team in one division has more points than a team in another but that other team his higher seeded just becasue they are leading their divison is stupid. Congrats to Divisonal Champs and all but the team with the most points SHOULD be the higher seed. If it means getting rid of the divisons than so be it. The way the league was supposed to be structured for next season until the NHLPA said no was going to be better anyways. I say get rid of the divisons and let the points be the deciding factor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eliminate the divisions and make it just the 2 conferences. 1 plays 8, 2 plays 7, 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5. Teams ranked according to points. Get rid of the loser point. Games end in a tie after 60 minutes. No overtime. Save that for the playoffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question about playoff seeding: Let's say the Sharks win their division and finish 3rd, with fewer points than Detroit. If we were to face them in the 2nd or 3rd round, would they have home ice even though we had more points?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question about playoff seeding: Let's say the Sharks win their division and finish 3rd, with fewer points than Detroit. If we were to face them in the 2nd or 3rd round, would they have home ice even though we had more points?

Correct. It is based on seeding. Division winners trump teams above them who have more points because they won their division.

One thing I am not sure about is this...lets say Detroit and Florida met in the Cup Final. Which team gets home ice? Florida who won its division? Or Detroit who has more points. I'm not sure what the criteria is when its teams in opposite Conferences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eliminate the divisions and make it just the 2 conferences. 1 plays 8, 2 plays 7, 3 plays 6, 4 plays 5. Teams ranked according to points. Get rid of the loser point. Games end in a tie after 60 minutes. No overtime. Save that for the playoffs.

That's a whole other issue, but I hate ties, too. Sports is about winning and losing and there's nothing more frustrating than having a game end in a tie. I do agree we should get rid of the loser point. A loss is a loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always criticized the division seeding, even when the Wings were on top. You sort of make my argument. There really is no need for divisions, other than for scheduling purposes (guaranteeing certain teams play certain teams enough times). And lately it hasn't seemed to matter much, because we haven't seen a terribly weak division in a few years. But this year is reminding everyone how flawed the system is.

To be honest, I've never seen this importance of division games early in the season. They're just two points to most teams. They may say they're important but watching the games, there's no extra benefit to it other than that. I'm just going back to first principles, that being divisions don't need to exist except as a scheduling tool.

You're right in saying that if divisions don't get automatic top seeds than there's no point in having divisions. However, think about what the divisions bring to the table and the consequences of removing them. Division races make for exciting hockey. Especially at the end of the season. Why? Look at the Pacific and Southeast divisions right now. Teams are STILL vying for their playoff lives with only a few games left.

If you take away the divisions than what do you have? Meaningless hockey in a league where there is already too many games. Besides the top two seeds fighting for dominance you are going to have the other six basically coasting into the playoffs because the risks of injuring key players far outweighs gaining one seed in a league where seeding really doesn't matter that much aside from do you get to stay home an extra game.

It basically comes down to this: Would you rather help the wings out in a once in a while strange off year at the cost of making hockey games down the stretch a lot less entertaining every year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a whole other issue, but I hate ties, too. Sports is about winning and losing and there's nothing more frustrating than having a game end in a tie. I do agree we should get rid of the loser point. A loss is a loss.

I'd sooner have the shootout winner get the 2 points and the losing team get none. Right now, too many teams rely on the overtime and shootout to get their points. Eliminating the garbage point would make teams try harder to win more games in regulation and in the overtime. Heck when the game was 1-1, you could see Florida playing for the guaranteed point. They've played the entire season that way. They've actually lost more games than they have won and they are a #3 seed.

Edited by Hatethedrake!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with getting rid of the extra point. Or else make wins worth 3 points. Like the CCHA does, I would be in favor of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remove the automatic seeding of division winners. Period. Stupid rule.

You can have your division winner banner all you want, but being the best team in the worst division shouldn't automatically give you home ice over a better team, no matter what the logic is.

Basically sums up my feelings on it. I can see why the divisions are there for scheduling purposes but when it comes to the playoffs teams should be seeded based on points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This happens almost every single year to at least one side of the conference, it's just that this year the discrepancy is very pronounced.

2011 - Boston got 3rd seeding when they should have been 4th or 5th

2010 - Buffalo got 3rd when they should have been 4th, Van got 3rd when they should have been 4th

2009 - Van got 3rd when they should have been 4th

2008 - Wash got 3rd when they should have been 6th, Minnesota got 3rd when they should be 4th

etc.

etc.

I think when the seeding is 1 off, nobody cared but when the difference is between 3rd or 7th ... it really stands out.

Edited by RedWingsRox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The main problem with divisional winners getting 1-2-3 isn't so much that it's unfair, but that it undermines the whole ranking system. The whole idea of seeding teams 1-8 is so that the "best" team in the conference (seed 1) has the advantage of playing the "worst" team (seed 8). That's their reward for being ranked 1st. Or the 8th seed's hurdle for finishing in the lowest position. By putting "worse" teams at 4, it ruins this system by saying "hey, you weren't great but you still get a lower ranked opponent"

Just think of the number of puppies being squirted out by the owners of pro sports teams on this side of the pond if we were to introduce the relegation system that the EPL uses :lol:

Edited by F.Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just think about it like this. There's 3 top seeded division winners, and then 5 wild cards. they are than ranked in their own respective categories while staying separate from the other. Than combined at the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not familiar with the NBA system, but whats the point of calling them a 4th seed if they're not getting home advantage anyway? might as well call them the 5th seed unless I'm missing something

Yes you are right, but remember that 4th seed gets to at least face the 5th seed in the first round, instead of being a bottom 3 and having to face 1st, 2nd or 3rd seeders.

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0