Playoff format question????

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from watchtower. Show watchtower's posts

    Playoff format question????

    I understand the quarter-final set up. Who plays who (which seed) in the semi-finals?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    Top seed to advance plays the lowest seed to advance. Second best seed to advance plays third best seed to advance.

    Example if the playoffs started today and the Rangers Bruins Panthers and Pens all won the first round the Bruins would play the Cats, and Rangers would play the Pens. If say the Rangers were upset by the Caps, then the Bruins would play the Caps, and the Panthers would play the Pens.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]I understand the quarter-final set up. Who plays who (which seed) in the semi-finals?
    Posted by watchtower[/QUOTE]

    I don't understand this playoff setup at all.  Yah, you want to give motivation for winning your division, but come on now, this is out of hand.  the bruins are ahead of the Pens but have 9 less points.  I hate that.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from watchtower. Show watchtower's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]Top seed to advance plays the lowest seed to advance. Second best seed to advance plays third best seed to advance. Example if the playoffs started today and the Rangers Bruins Panthers and Pens all won the first round the Bruins would play the Cats, and Rangers would play the Pens. If say the Rangers were upset by the Caps, then the Bruins would play the Caps, and the Panthers would play the Pens.
    Posted by red75[/QUOTE]

    Thanks Red. (I've been perusing the menu's of the professional-on-line-scalpers lately, trying to come up with possible scenarios and prices. Wow! I'll be printing money in the basement again!)

    P.S.  My mother worked on the ailerons in the B-29's wing section during WWll.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Playoff format question???? : I don't understand this playoff setup at all.  Yah, you want to give motivation for winning your division, but come on now, this is out of hand.  the bruins are ahead of the Pens but have 9 less points.  I hate that.
    Posted by BadHabitude[/QUOTE]

    I agree Badhab...the B's get rewarded for playing in a weaker division.  If I'm a Pens fan and the B's end up playing them with home ice advantage, I would be ticked off.  Change the rule and seed the teams 1-15 and get rid of the divisions.

     
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from watchtower. Show watchtower's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Playoff format question???? : I don't understand this playoff setup at all.  Yah, you want to give motivation for winning your division, but come on now, this is out of hand.  the bruins are ahead of the Pens but have 9 less points.  I hate that.
    Posted by BadHabitude[/QUOTE]

    Not a good system. But the B's were on the other side of the equation in years past.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    It's debatable whether teams are getting rewarded for playing in a weaker division by getting a higher seed than they deserve based on points. Maybe the Bruins would have more points if the weak teams in their division weren't so tough. I would argue that Vancouver has benefited from having 4 weak teams in its division for a couple years now, falsely propelling it to a great record. The NHL has an unbalanced schedule where you play your own division more.  You could argue that the NE would have 3 or 4 teams in the post-season if Boston wasn't in the division, since the Bruins manhandled everyone else. The Bruins in turn struggled against the SE for unknown reasons while all the teams in the Atlantic feasted on the southerners and padded their record. The Atlantic teams (outside of the Flyers and Devils) are actually pretty average against the NE, however, so perhaps the NE is actually better (though Philly and NJ struggled within their division).  Who knows, but the bottom line is comparing division to division is really apples and oranges, and for that reason, I think it's important that division winners are seeded 1-2-3.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]It's debatable whether teams are getting rewarded for playing in a weaker division by getting a higher seed than they deserve based on points. Maybe the Bruins would have more points if the weak teams in their division weren't so tough. I would argue that Vancouver has benefited from having 4 weak teams in its division for a couple years now, falsely propelling it to a great record. The NHL has an unbalanced schedule where you play your own division more.  You could argue that the NE would have 3 or 4 teams in the post-season if Boston wasn't in the division, since the Bruins manhandled everyone else. The Bruins in turn struggled against the SE for unknown reasons while all the teams in the Atlantic feasted on the southerners and padded their record. The Atlantic teams (outside of the Flyers and Devils) are actually pretty average against the NE, however, so perhaps the NE is actually better (though Philly and NJ struggled within their division).  Who knows, but the bottom line is comparing division to division is really apples and oranges, and for that reason, I think it's important that division winners are seeded 1-2-3.
    Posted by OatesCam[/QUOTE]
    Totally agree here, Nucks being the only team from their division to make the playoffs as it stands right now.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    Agreed Oc - it's so difficult to compare between the divisions, and what the records would be like if teams were moved around, there's not much choice but to seed the 1-2-3. You can look at say the Atlantic teams having more points than the Bruins and Panthers, but how can you do an objective comparison. How would Philly, for example, have faired in the SE this season, when they were constantly being bulldozed over whenever they played the Jets? Tough, with the current conference and division structure and the unbalanced schedule, to really objectively compare points records.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    I have a way that (at least in principal) lets you do a comparison between divisions relatively fairly.  Essentially it works out the number of points a division (or conference) has earned outside of itself versus points lost (with no points awared for any loss).  The result is a point differential.  These are the numbers for this year:

    NE:   -16
    ATL: +45
    SE:   -30
    NW:  -16
    CEN: +26
    PAC:   -9

    East: -1; West: +1

    So in terms of performance against the rest of the league, the Atlantic division is far and away the best.  Getting to beat up on the Southeast division certainly pads that number, though.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : I agree Badhab...the B's get rewarded for playing in a weaker division.  If I'm a Pens fan and the B's end up playing them with home ice advantage, I would be ticked off.  Change the rule and seed the teams 1-15 and get rid of the divisions.  
    Posted by hangnail[/QUOTE]
    Unless they're going to come up with a perfectly balanced schedule then this is as fair as it gets. I'd love to see the old-style 1 vs. 16 come back.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : Unless they're going to come up with a perfectly balanced schedule then this is as fair as it gets. I'd love to see the old-style 1 vs. 16 come back.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    I would support a balanced schedule.  I would even support eliminating inter-conference play.  I know it's not a popular position on here, but it would go a long way to re-establishing rivalries...it would also cut down significantly on travel which I'm sure the players would like.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : I would support a balanced schedule.  I would even support eliminating inter-conference play.  I know it's not a popular position on here, but it would go a long way to re-establishing rivalries...it would also cut down significantly on travel which I'm sure the players would like.
    Posted by hangnail[/QUOTE]

    I get your point, but that would cause riots in Canada - fans in the West would freak about never seeing the Habs, Leafs, Bruins, Rangers, Sens etc., with the Eastern Canadian teams going beserk about never seeing the Hawks, Wings, Canucks, Flames, Oilers and if they ever get around to putting them in the right damn conference the Jets.

    It's bad enough that, barring a trip to the SCF, I only get to see the Bruins out here once every three years.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : I would support a balanced schedule.  I would even support eliminating inter-conference play.  I know it's not a popular position on here, but it would go a long way to re-establishing rivalries...it would also cut down significantly on travel which I'm sure the players would like.
    Posted by hangnail[/QUOTE]

    How can you have a balanced schedule without inter-conference play?

    It's bad enough right now, with teams outside of each conference only meeting once a year, eliminating IC play would make it worse.

    For one thing, you wouldn't have a SC rematch game, like the Canucks-Boston epic in January. 

    I think the league should just go with 2 15-team divisions, with each team playing each division rival 3 times (alternate 2-1 home ice year to year), and each team in the other division twice (home & home).  That produces a 72 game schedule (I think we'd all agree that the regular season is too long), and allows the Cup to be presented before June.  It also guarantees that every team has at least one home game against every other team in the league (not so presently).

    And while this will result in more travel, it will have the effect of levelling the playing field, at least a bit, in terms of travel disparity between east & west based teams.  Currently, the west teams are logging 18,000 miles more (on average) per team than those in the Boston-Washington corridor.  The other teams that have it pretty rough are the two FLA teams.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : How can you have a balanced schedule without inter-conference play? It's bad enough right now, with teams outside of each conference only meeting once a year, eliminating IC play would make it worse. For one thing, you wouldn't have a SC rematch game, like the Canucks-Boston epic in January.  I think the league should just go with 2 15-team divisions, with each team playing each division rival 3 times (alternate 2-1 home ice year to year), and each team in the other division twice (home & home).  That produces a 72 game schedule (I think we'd all agree that the regular season is too long), and allows the Cup to be presented before June.  It also guarantees that every team has at least one home game against every other team in the league (not so presently). And while this will result in more travel, it will have the effect of levelling the playing field, at least a bit, in terms of travel disparity between east & west based teams.  Currently, the west teams are logging 18,000 miles more (on average) per team than those in the Boston-Washington corridor.  The other teams that have it pretty rough are the two FLA teams.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    And the Jets.

    Also, they won't decrease the length of the schedule - that would mean each team losing five home dates a year - that's enough of a loss of revenue to put a bunch of teams into the red and a few into bancruptcy.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : I get your point, but that would cause riots in Canada - fans in the West would freak about never seeing the Habs, Leafs, Bruins, Rangers, Sens etc., with the Eastern Canadian teams going beserk about never seeing the Hawks, Wings, Canucks, Flames, Oilers and if they ever get around to putting them in the right damn conference the Jets. It's bad enough that, barring a trip to the SCF, I only get to see the Bruins out here once every three years.
    Posted by red75[/QUOTE]

    Personally I think the pros outweigh the cons...plus with satellite & internet you can pretty much see any team any time.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : How can you have a balanced schedule without inter-conference play? It's bad enough right now, with teams outside of each conference only meeting once a year, eliminating IC play would make it worse. For one thing, you wouldn't have a SC rematch game, like the Canucks-Boston epic in January.  I think the league should just go with 2 15-team divisions, with each team playing each division rival 3 times (alternate 2-1 home ice year to year), and each team in the other division twice (home & home).  That produces a 72 game schedule (I think we'd all agree that the regular season is too long), and allows the Cup to be presented before June.  It also guarantees that every team has at least one home game against every other team in the league (not so presently). And while this will result in more travel, it will have the effect of levelling the playing field, at least a bit, in terms of travel disparity between east & west based teams.  Currently, the west teams are logging 18,000 miles more (on average) per team than those in the Boston-Washington corridor.  The other teams that have it pretty rough are the two FLA teams.
    Posted by 49-North[/QUOTE]

    Easy...play the other 14 teams in your conference 6 times (ok, that's 84 games, so knock off 2 arbitrarily each year...no big deal)
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : Personally I think the pros outweigh the cons...plus with satellite & internet you can pretty much see any team any time.
    Posted by hangnail[/QUOTE]

    The CBC and TSN would never go for it in a million years, and they'd use all their influence to stop it. Their biggest revenue games are inter-Canadian games, and you're proposing a scenario where half of the teams (assuming we go up to 8 with Quebec and the Jets move West) never play the other half. Leaving aside all those Western Canadian Leafs and Habs fans who would burn Bettman in effigy ( and would possibly try to burn the real thing too), you're hammering revenue streams for both the networks and the teams (biggest draws and ticket prices in the West are for When the Leafs and Habs, or the others in the Original 6 come to town). I get the idea, but there is no way the pros outweigh the cons.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : And the Jets. Also, they won't decrease the length of the schedule - that would mean each team losing five home dates a year - that's enough of a loss of revenue to put a bunch of teams into the red and a few into bancruptcy.
    Posted by red75[/QUOTE]

    A shortened schedule would require pro-rated reductions in the salary cap and all contracts.  For example, a $3.0million salary becomes $2.63mil.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Neecic. Show Neecic's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    Is home ice still decided by seeding in the SCF or is it by record?  Ie 4th seed Nashville plays 2nd seed Boston but Nashville had more points, who gets home ice?

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : The CBC and TSN would never go for it in a million years, and they'd use all their influence to stop it. Their biggest revenue games are inter-Canadian games, and you're proposing a scenario where half of the teams (assuming we go up to 8 with Quebec and the Jets move West) never play the other half. Leaving aside all those Western Canadian Leafs and Habs fans who would burn Bettman in effigy ( and would possibly try to burn the real thing too), you're hammering revenue streams for both the networks and the teams (biggest draws and ticket prices in the West are for When the Leafs and Habs, or the others in the Original 6 come to town). I get the idea, but there is no way the pros outweigh the cons.
    Posted by red75[/QUOTE]

    True enough red.  I didn't say it would be perfect, I would just rather more games against less opponents. But from a travel and rivalry perspective, it does make sense.  There is clearly no easy answer though.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from asmaha. Show asmaha's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    I have no problem with the 6 divisions, especially since it divides well with 15E/15W = 30 total teams. I just want everyone to play by the same rules through a balanced schedule.

    30 games: Schedule a home-and-home against every team in the opposing conference. That way, Bruins home fans get a chance to see every team in the West once, and they get to see the Bs once.

    30 games: 3 games against every team in the Atlantic and SE.

    20 games: 5 games against every team in division.

    2 games: everyone plays 2 specialty games (outdoor, overseas, midnight new years eve, neutral site, whatever...just make it equal that everyone has to play 2 alternatively scheduled games outside of the normal comfort zone)
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BlazeTrailer. Show BlazeTrailer's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : I would support a balanced schedule.  I would even support eliminating inter-conference play.  I know it's not a popular position on here, but it would go a long way to re-establishing rivalries...it would also cut down significantly on travel which I'm sure the players would like.
    Posted by hangnail[/QUOTE]


    Rubbish to this idea, I would never get to see the Bruins in person. In fact I was excited when the schedule was proposed that would have Bruins play in every city at least once every year.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from hangnail. Show hangnail's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Re: Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Playoff format question???? : Rubbish to this idea, I would never get to see the Bruins in person. In fact I was excited when the schedule was proposed that would have Bruins play in every city at least once every year.
    Posted by BlazeTrailer[/QUOTE]


    Rubbish for you.  Gold for me.  Que sera sera.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wheatskins. Show Wheatskins's posts

    Re: Playoff format question????

    In Response to Playoff format question????:
    [QUOTE]I understand the quarter-final set up. Who plays who (which seed) in the semi-finals?
    Posted by watchtower[/QUOTE]

    In each conference, first-round playoff match-ups are set as follows:

  26. The three division winners are seeded 1-2-3.
  27. The next five best teams are ranked 4-5-6-7-8, according to total regular season points.
  28. Home-ice is granted to those teams seeded 1-2-3-4.
  29. Teams are matched up using a "top-to-bottom" formula:
    #1 vs. #8
    #2 vs. #7
    #3 vs. #6
    #4 vs. #5

    In later playoff rounds, teams are re-seeded according to the same criteria as the opening round. Division winners are seeded 1-2-3 for as long as they survive and all other teams line up behind them according to point total. Higher-seeded teams have home-ice advantage.


 
Sections
Shortcuts

Share