Playoff Format Needs to be Changed

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

The Capitals and Penguins had the two best records in the East.  They are playing each other in the second round.  Meanwhile, the other series in the East involves the teams with the 5th and 6th best records, in New York and Ottawa.  Does this make sense to anyone besides Bettman and his cabinet of fools?

In the West, it's likely a mess.  The Ducks are the highest seed left, yet instead of playing the 8 seed Predators, they are playing a higher seeded Edmonton team.  

[Datsyukian-Deke 722]

10 minutes ago, GMRwings1983 said:

The Capitals and Penguins had the two best records in the East.  They are playing each other in the second round.  Meanwhile, the other series in the East involves the teams with the 5th and 6th best records, in New York and Ottawa.  Does this make sense to anyone besides Bettman and his cabinet of fools?

In the West, it's likely a mess.  The Ducks are the highest seed left, yet instead of playing the 8 seed Predators, they are playing a higher seeded Edmonton team.  

Yea the switching over to the other bracket is BS. They should reseed after each round. Washington shouldn't have to play Pitt in the 2nd round after winning the Presidents Trophy.

[greenrebellion 415]

Agreed

[DickieDunn 2,571]

The whole divisional format is garbage.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk

[Dabura 12,232]

I was tempted to make this thread earlier today.

[Barrie 900]

I agree, it was fine the way it was with 6 divisions.

[Gordie Howe hat trick 110]

Yeah, it is a foolish way to do it.

[Euro_Twins 4,485]

The rangers also had more points than ottawa but don't get home ice lol 

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

22 minutes ago, Euro_Twins said:

The rangers also had more points than ottawa but don't get home ice lol 

Now that's really odd.  The Senators did not win their division.  Can the league just have a do-over and reseed right now?  

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

14 hours ago, DickieDunn said:

The whole divisional format is garbage.

Sent from my LGLS676 using Tapatalk
 

The league wanted to create division rivalries.  However, we just witnessed an amazing series between the Caps and Leafs, which don't play in the same division. The NHL playoffs don't need divisional matchups to be interesting.  

Also, do teams play that many more games against their division than they do against the other division in the Conference?  I thought regular season games were pretty evenly split against teams within your division vs teams in the other division in the same Conference.  I could be wrong, though.  

Edited April 24, 2017 by GMRwings1983

[NerveDamage 4,176]

Definitely, I agree, I think they need to re-think the whole playoff bracket, and the Wild card stuff so you can have a top team vs a bottom one in the second round.

[Euro_Twins 4,485]

1 hour ago, GMRwings1983 said:

The league wanted to create division rivalries.  However, we just witnessed an amazing series between the Caps and Leafs, which don't play in the same division. The NHL playoffs don't need divisional matchups to be interesting.  

Also, do teams play that many more games against their division than they do against the other division in the Conference?  I thought regular season games were pretty evenly split against teams within your division vs teams in the other division in the same Conference.  I could be wrong, though.  

Since the 2013–2014 season, the NHL regular season formula was adjusted to account for the new conference alignments. Each team, through the 2016-17 season, plays either four or five games against the other teams in its division (a total of 29 games in the Western Conference, 30 games in the Eastern Conference) as well as playing all non-divisional teams in their own conference three times (21 games in the west, 24 games in the east). The remaining games of the season are inter-conference play (32 in the west, 28, will be 30 next season-in the east), allowing every team in the league to play every other team twice

[Ram 240]

Agreed. I think the NHL was trying to have the conference finals be representatives of each region of the countries to have locations involved, but with parody it does not make sense to me, should just do 1-8 in each conference, do not overcomplicate things

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

19 minutes ago, Euro_Twins said:

Since the 2013–2014 season, the NHL regular season formula was adjusted to account for the new conference alignments. Each team, through the 2016-17 season, plays either four or five games against the other teams in its division (a total of 29 games in the Western Conference, 30 games in the Eastern Conference) as well as playing all non-divisional teams in their own conference three times (21 games in the west, 24 games in the east). The remaining games of the season are inter-conference play (32 in the west, 28, will be 30 next season-in the east), allowing every team in the league to play every other team twice

Thanks for that.   That makes this playoff scheme seem even dumber.  

[wings_fanatic 677]

And even more ridiculous is the sens and rangers. Rangers have more points and yet sens get home ice advantage... What a joke!

[Wing Across The Pond 196]

This caught the press eye over here in the UK last month, in that they were talking about how the Rangers could actively look to lose in order to gain a playoff spot that pitched them against an Atlantic team rather than a Metro. Teams at the bottom tanking, teams at the top (mini) tanking lol.

Genuine question... I know likely nothing needs to change, but what happens next year with the lopsided conferences (with the addition of LV)? Will the West play more games? I mean technically it reduces odds of making the playoffs from around 1-in-1.9 to 1-in-2 chance. But not for the East. Small difference so probably doesn't matter but still.

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

2 hours ago, Wing Across The Pond said:

This caught the press eye over here in the UK last month, in that they were talking about how the Rangers could actively look to lose in order to gain a playoff spot that pitched them against an Atlantic team rather than a Metro. Teams at the bottom tanking, teams at the top (mini) tanking lol.

Genuine question... I know likely nothing needs to change, but what happens next year with the lopsided conferences (with the addition of LV)? Will the West play more games? I mean technically it reduces odds of making the playoffs from around 1-in-1.9 to 1-in-2 chance. But not for the East. Small difference so probably doesn't matter but still.

You sure they weren't talking about Rangers Football Club?   

[Euro_Twins 4,485]

2 hours ago, Wing Across The Pond said:

This caught the press eye over here in the UK last month, in that they were talking about how the Rangers could actively look to lose in order to gain a playoff spot that pitched them against an Atlantic team rather than a Metro. Teams at the bottom tanking, teams at the top (mini) tanking lol.

Genuine question... I know likely nothing needs to change, but what happens next year with the lopsided conferences (with the addition of LV)? Will the West play more games? I mean technically it reduces odds of making the playoffs from around 1-in-1.9 to 1-in-2 chance. But not for the East. Small difference so probably doesn't matter but still.

Its already lopsided. East has 16 teams. West has 14, so now it will be less lopsided 

[Buppy 1,720]

2 hours ago, Wing Across The Pond said:

Genuine question... I know likely nothing needs to change, but what happens next year with the lopsided conferences (with the addition of LV)? Will the West play more games? I mean technically it reduces odds of making the playoffs from around 1-in-1.9 to 1-in-2 chance. But not for the East. Small difference so probably doesn't matter but still.

Conferences have been lopsided for the last 4 years. The addition of LV makes them less lopsided. 

[kipwinger 8,756]

7 hours ago, GMRwings1983 said:

The league wanted to create division rivalries.  However, we just witnessed an amazing series between the Caps and Leafs, which don't play in the same division. The NHL playoffs don't need divisional matchups to be interesting.  

Also, do teams play that many more games against their division than they do against the other division in the Conference?  I thought regular season games were pretty evenly split against teams within your division vs teams in the other division in the same Conference.  I could be wrong, though.  

I don't think they wanted to create divisional rivalries as much as they wanted to utilize divisional rivalries to entice fans to watch the first couple rounds of the playoffs.  People usually don't pay that much attention to other teams until the conference finals.  I think having Pens/Caps (for example) earlier in the playoffs was just a way to get people to tune in to the earlier rounds.

[Dabura 12,232]

10 hours ago, kipwinger said:

I don't think they wanted to create divisional rivalries as much as they wanted to utilize divisional rivalries to entice fans to watch the first couple rounds of the playoffs.  People usually don't pay that much attention to other teams until the conference finals.  I think having Pens/Caps (for example) earlier in the playoffs was just a way to get people to tune in to the earlier rounds.

I would say it's that + "parity." Like GMR said...

The Capitals and Penguins had the two best records in the East.  They are playing each other in the second round.  Meanwhile, the other series in the East involves the teams with the 5th and 6th best records, in New York and Ottawa.

The previous system -- 1-8, 2-7, etc. -- made it hard for lower seeds to go on a deep run. With the current system, they still have it tough -- but not as tough. And I suspect that's by design.

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

9 hours ago, Dabura said:

I would say it's that + "parity." Like GMR said...

The Capitals and Penguins had the two best records in the East.  They are playing each other in the second round.  Meanwhile, the other series in the East involves the teams with the 5th and 6th best records, in New York and Ottawa.

The previous system -- 1-8, 2-7, etc. -- made it hard for lower seeds to go on a deep run. With the current system, they still have it tough -- but not as tough. And I suspect that's by design.

The NHL must be the only league in sports that enjoys low ratings and the idea of teams from cities nobody cares about advancing into the deeper playoff rounds.

I hope we see an Ottawa vs. Nashville final just to see how much Bettman sweats when he's interviewed about it.  

[chaps80 1,591]

The playoff format is pure stupidity. It used to be:

1 vs. 8

2 vs. 7

3 vs. 6

4 vs. 5

That is the fair and proper format to reward teams who did well in the regular season. If your just gonna jumble it up and have the two top seeds and two bottom seeds play each other, then why even play a regular season? Let's just have all of the 31 teams involved in the playoffs and have each team captain draw from a pail of numbered pucks in Bettman's living room to see who plays who. Make each series a best of 13, first to 7 wins.

[Buppy 1,720]

Even in the previous system it was possible for the team with the 2nd best record to be a 4 seed, and face the best team in the 2nd round. Also would have been possible (albeit unlikely) for the 2 and 3 seeds to be two of the worst teams in the playoffs.

Personally, I like the divisional format, and I don't think a matchup like Caps-Pens is diminished at all coming in the 2nd round instead of the 3rd. 

[GMRwings1983 8,803]

9 hours ago, Buppy said:

Even in the previous system it was possible for the team with the 2nd best record to be a 4 seed, and face the best team in the 2nd round. Also would have been possible (albeit unlikely) for the 2 and 3 seeds to be two of the worst teams in the playoffs.

Personally, I like the divisional format, and I don't think a matchup like Caps-Pens is diminished at all coming in the 2nd round instead of the 3rd. 

Except, in the previous system, if the top two teams played in the second round, you wouldn't have a 5 and 6 seed playing in the other series.