HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

The new playoff format - specifically, the wildcard/crossover rule

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-27-2013, 04:57 PM
  #51
Henkka
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 8,686
vCash: 528
Quote:
Originally Posted by patnyrnyg View Post
Where else would they go? So if LA got moved to the Midwest for the play-offs and won the first round, then what? Should they go back to the Pacific and have a 3-team round-robin while the winner of the 2-3 series in the Midwest just gets a bye to the next round?
They go through the Mid-West both rounds and against the Pacific champ at Conference finals.

As a Wild Card team you can win your neighbour division.

Henkka is offline  
Old
02-27-2013, 05:03 PM
  #52
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henkka View Post
They go through the Mid-West both rounds and against the Pacific champ at Conference finals.

As a Wild Card team you can win your neighbour division.
I know that. I was responding to a complaint about it.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-27-2013, 05:16 PM
  #53
tsanuri
Registered User
 
tsanuri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Grants Pass OR
Country: United States
Posts: 2,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henkka View Post
They go through the Mid-West both rounds and against the Pacific champ at Conference finals.

As a Wild Card team you can win your neighbour division.
Which is where the true parity comes into play on the travel side. If you are in one of the east conferences you will NEVER leave the east before the finals. But if you are in one of the other conferences you could end up, in theory, going across 2 times zones the whole way and then having to go coast to coast in the finals. So you might have an easier time making the playoffs but once there your going to be tired.

tsanuri is online now  
Old
02-27-2013, 05:42 PM
  #54
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 5,770
vCash: 500
The idea is the 4 wild cards gets assigned to one of the 4 brackets and stays there. Just like what happens in Soccer.

If the 4th team earns a spot they stay in the division....

If a 5th team stels a 4th places spot then they replace them.

the scenario that I wonder about....

What if you have 2 divisions have only 3, 2 divisions have 5....those divsiona re in the same conference....

How will it be decided who plays who?

1. Would it be lowere 5th place play higher 1st place?

2. Would higher 1st place get to choose which team they play?

Alternate...with the 4th and 5th place in the playoffs would they all stick in the same divsion or can the first place team in division A be highest and opt to play 4th place division B team instead of their divisions 4th team (who also earned a spot)

Djp is offline  
Old
02-27-2013, 05:52 PM
  #55
MuzikMachine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 676
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker McDonald View Post
From ESPN:


http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/89...ns-source-says

I don't understand this. Let's say last year went like this:

Atlantic
NY Rangers - 109
Pittsburgh - 108
Philadelphia - 103
New Jersey - 102
Washington - 92


Central
Detroit - 102
Boston - 100
Florida - 94


Wouldn't that article suggest that Detroit would have to play New Jersey while Boston would play Florida? How does that make any sense?
I agree. It seems the NHL is wanting their divisional playoffs but this Wild Card scenario is turning this into a hybrid conference/divisional matchup. The only guaranteed matchup is 2 & 3 in each division. If the objective is to have divisional matchups, then the interdivisional playoff rounds for the first two rounds should be kept to a minimum.

Here's another flaw to this proposal. In 2010-11 the Western standings were as follows (adjusted to represent the current realignment and only showing playoff temas):

MID-WEST
Nashville - 99
Chicago - 97
Dallas - 95

PACIFIC
Vancouver - 117
San Jose - 105
Phoenix - 99
Anaheim - 99
Los Angeles - 98

In the actual 2010-11 final standings, Anaheim finished ahead of Nashville in the Western Conference standings, however under this proposal Anaheim would play Nashville with Nashville having home ice advantage even though Anaheim finished higher due to tie breakers. Should it not be Nashville vs Los Angeles? Then the 5th seeded team still qualifies but has to do the more travel than than the higher seeded wild card team.

MuzikMachine is offline  
Old
02-27-2013, 06:12 PM
  #56
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
The idea is the 4 wild cards gets assigned to one of the 4 brackets and stays there. Just like what happens in Soccer.

If the 4th team earns a spot they stay in the division....

If a 5th team stels a 4th places spot then they replace them.

the scenario that I wonder about....

What if you have 2 divisions have only 3, 2 divisions have 5....those divsiona re in the same conference....

How will it be decided who plays who?

1. Would it be lowere 5th place play higher 1st place?

2. Would higher 1st place get to choose which team they play?

Alternate...with the 4th and 5th place in the playoffs would they all stick in the same divsion or can the first place team in division A be highest and opt to play 4th place division B team instead of their divisions 4th team (who also earned a spot)
can't happen it is per conference. The 5th place atlantic team can bump the 4th place central team, but not the 4th place midwest or pacific team.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-27-2013, 06:15 PM
  #57
Shockmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,600
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by G Dawg View Post
What do you mean "that's why they came up with the wild card idea"? The wildcard doesn't address the unbalanced conferences AT ALL and it barely addresses the issue of teams with fewer points making the playoffs ahead of teams with more points.

It's just dumb.
Were fans this miserable in 1993-94?

Shockmaster is offline  
Old
02-27-2013, 06:40 PM
  #58
Fayne Gretzky
Registered User
 
Fayne Gretzky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,452
vCash: 500
Wait, maybe this was asked but....

What happens when:

PACIFIC

A - 115 pts
B - 100 pts
C - 100 pts
D - 90 pts
E,F,G - 70 ptsish

Central
Z - 110 pts
Y - 100 pts
X - 100 pts
W - 85 pts
T, U, V - 70 ptsish

Team A gets Team W from the other Conference?? Shouldn't in cases where there are 4 and 4 teams in the Western Conferences, they keep them together?

We could potentially have only 50% of the games be inter-conference in the first round if there's a double crossover.

Fayne Gretzky is offline  
Old
02-27-2013, 07:58 PM
  #59
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,729
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolboarder View Post
This is not how it works here, buddy. Look at my most recent post.
I know it's not how it works. In my post earlier, I didn't ask you guys here where you came up with these things, I asked: "Where do 'they' (meaning the League) come up with these things?"

So technically, with the way the League is planning it, a Pacific team crossovered to the Central could then eliminate all the Central teams, and thus essentially be a so-called Central champ (small "c").

You know, again this is idiocy. Every time this League does something reasonably good, it then does it in such a way to **** it up. It did that with the 6-Divisions, they were ****ed up right from the beginning. They're doing it now with this new "Central Division" that includes Florida teams, and now with this ridiculous Playoff seeding format.

Each of these 4 big Divisions should have a representative in the Final 4.


Last edited by MoreOrr: 02-27-2013 at 08:06 PM.
MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-27-2013, 10:28 PM
  #60
Screw You Rick Nash
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
 
Screw You Rick Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 27,279
vCash: 3000
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoingGoingGagner View Post
Wait, maybe this was asked but....

What happens when:

PACIFIC

A - 115 pts
B - 100 pts
C - 100 pts
D - 90 pts
E,F,G - 70 ptsish

Central
Z - 110 pts
Y - 100 pts
X - 100 pts
W - 85 pts
T, U, V - 70 ptsish

Team A gets Team W from the other Conference?? Shouldn't in cases where there are 4 and 4 teams in the Western Conferences, they keep them together?

We could potentially have only 50% of the games be inter-conference in the first round if there's a double crossover.
The bigger problem would be this:

PACIFIC

A - 115 pts
B - 110 pts
C - 107 pts
D - 102 pts
E,F,G - 70 ptsish

Central
Z - 110 pts
Y - 100 pts
X - 100 pts
W - 85 pts
T, U, V - 70 ptsish

Under the proposal, the division leader with the most points will play the wildcard team with the least amount of points, and the other division leader will play the other wildcard team.

This would mean that Team A (115 pts) will play Team W (85 pts) which is fair. The major problem is that Team Z (110 pts) will play Team D (102 pts) while Team Y (110 pts) gets to play Team X (who also has 110 pts). Team Z, the team who should have an advantage over Team Y because they have more points, will play the team with more points than Team Y's opponent.

Team A (115) vs Team W (85)
Team B (110) vs Team C (107)

Team Z (110) vs Team D (102)
Team Y (100) vs Team X (100)

__________________
++++++++++[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<
-]>++++++.>+.+++++++++++++++.>+++++++++.<-.
>-------.<<-----.>----.>.<<+++++++++++.>-------------
-.+++++++++++++.-------.--.+++++++++++++.+.>+.>.

New and improved Hockey Standings
"A jimmie for a jimmie makes the whole world rustled." -31-
Screw You Rick Nash is online now  
Old
02-28-2013, 01:26 AM
  #61
coolboarder
Registered User
 
coolboarder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I know it's not how it works. In my post earlier, I didn't ask you guys here where you came up with these things, I asked: "Where do 'they' (meaning the League) come up with these things?"

So technically, with the way the League is planning it, a Pacific team crossovered to the Central could then eliminate all the Central teams, and thus essentially be a so-called Central champ (small "c").

You know, again this is idiocy. Every time this League does something reasonably good, it then does it in such a way to **** it up. It did that with the 6-Divisions, they were ****ed up right from the beginning. They're doing it now with this new "Central Division" that includes Florida teams, and now with this ridiculous Playoff seeding format.

Each of these 4 big Divisions should have a representative in the Final 4.
I really liked the 4 conference plan but they decides to add wild card to further complicate things. I was looking forward to the round 3 match-up with the east and have the best team remaining rather than the best teams playing in the semi-finals and have the worst team possible from the west. Remember, Minnesota/Pittsburgh series from the 1991 playoffs under the old format. It was a mis-match from the start of the series and we all could see that Pittsburgh is going to win the cup anyways. If we ever had the round 3 with no east/west, just the whole semi-finals then, we could see the best team in the SCF maybe Edmonton or Boston-Pittsburgh finals if they scrap the two conference plan with the 4 conference that time.

There are a lot of possibilities and I believe 1993 playoffs was the last time it happened with the divisional playoff format. The best playoff I ever remember was the divisional playoff format rather than the conference format.

coolboarder is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 05:21 AM
  #62
Oobz
Registered User
 
Oobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Marquette, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 864
vCash: 500
The more proposals I keep reading about this wildcard the more I think it would just be best to live with the fact the divisions/conferences are uneven and just do top 4 in each group. I think thats an easier pill to swallow than having a random team from another conference come in and compete for your own conference title.

Oobz is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 06:16 AM
  #63
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolboarder View Post
I really liked the 4 conference plan but they decides to add wild card to further complicate things. I was looking forward to the round 3 match-up with the east and have the best team remaining rather than the best teams playing in the semi-finals and have the worst team possible from the west. Remember, Minnesota/Pittsburgh series from the 1991 playoffs under the old format. It was a mis-match from the start of the series and we all could see that Pittsburgh is going to win the cup anyways. If we ever had the round 3 with no east/west, just the whole semi-finals then, we could see the best team in the SCF maybe Edmonton or Boston-Pittsburgh finals if they scrap the two conference plan with the 4 conference that time.

There are a lot of possibilities and I believe 1993 playoffs was the last time it happened with the divisional playoff format. The best playoff I ever remember was the divisional playoff format rather than the conference format.
Minnesota-Edmonton was also a mismatch that year, and Minnesota wiped the floor with them. Also, I believe Boston had more points than Pitt that year. Would have been Bos-Min, Edm-Pit in the semis. Secondly, that series went 6 games and Minnesota had a 2-1 lead. We have seen Finals with alleged better teams that turned out to be much worse mismatches. 95, when Detroit was the best team in the East, got swept.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 06:17 AM
  #64
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shockmaster View Post
Were fans this miserable in 1993-94?
I certainly wasn't! Of course, the Rangers wound up playing THREE division teams in the play-offs that year. Isles in the first round, Caps in the 2nd, and Devils in the 3rd.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 06:22 AM
  #65
heutZe
Registered User
 
heutZe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Norway
Country: Norway
Posts: 1,096
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oobz View Post
The more proposals I keep reading about this wildcard the more I think it would just be best to live with the fact the divisions/conferences are uneven and just do top 4 in each group. I think thats an easier pill to swallow than having a random team from another conference come in and compete for your own conference title.
Agreed. Just go with the divisional playoffs. Some teams in a strong division will not make the playoffs despite having more points than playoff-bound teams, but guess what? There are often teams missing the playoffs despite having more points than playoff-bound teams with today's format as well.

The biggest issue with the divisional playoffs was that in the mid-to-late 80's, the Smythe Division Finals basically was the Stanley Cup Finals. However, with the salary cap and the parity today we will most likely never face that issue.

heutZe is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 09:49 AM
  #66
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,398
vCash: 500
Parker, similar things happen with the current set up.

Carolina has 19 points and would host a team with 24.

Two teams with 26 points would play one another in the 4-5 match.

Thats why the crossover is useless. Schedule should be weighted towards your division, and playoffs should all be determined by division. Some divisions will have teams with less points, buy that's fine because the point is to win your division and then play the other division champions.

No different than in baseball when they only had four divisions and you had to win your division to make the playoffs. Some divisions were better than others.

The CyNick is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 10:08 AM
  #67
Rupertslander
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 65
vCash: 500
The proposal as described on the League website sounds very similar to the CFL crossover rule. Too similar, IMHO. It only works by screwing the Eastern teams, and I'm not going to say this alignment is acceptable because it screws the East and not the West.

Rupertslander is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 11:12 AM
  #68
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,729
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupertslander View Post
The proposal as described on the League website sounds very similar to the CFL crossover rule. Too similar, IMHO. It only works by screwing the Eastern teams, and I'm not going to say this alignment is acceptable because it screws the East and not the West.
How does the Playoff seeding idea screw the East more than it does the West? At least in the East any crossover would still be in the same Time Zone.

Still say that it should be like this:
If a crossover is required because the 5th place team in one Division has a better record than the 4th place team in the other Division, then:
1 vs 3
----
1 vs 5
2 vs 4
----
2 vs 3 (crossover matchup, home-ice going to the team with the better record)

And if 2 wins vs 3, then the 2nd Round has pure Divisional matchups. If 3 wins vs 2, then again there is one crossover matchup in the 2nd Round in that Conference.
It's the simplest, and it produces a winner for each Division going into the final-4.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 11:27 AM
  #69
MrTaterSalad
Registered User
 
MrTaterSalad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 112
vCash: 500
I think you should just pick the top 16 teams in the league, regardless of conference, seed them 1-16 and let them duke it out until the very end.

MrTaterSalad is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 11:40 AM
  #70
Buck Aki Berg
My pockets hurt
 
Buck Aki Berg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,750
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrTaterSalad View Post
I think you should just pick the top 16 teams in the league, regardless of conference, seed them 1-16 and let them duke it out until the very end.
Yeah, who wants to see established rivalries in the playoffs when we can see pairings like Ottawa/Dallas and Tampa/Colorado?

Buck Aki Berg is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 11:47 AM
  #71
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,729
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Aki Berg View Post
Yeah, who wants to see established rivalries in the playoffs when we can see pairings like Ottawa/Dallas and Tampa/Colorado?
It should be a bit of both, if I express my opinion about it. I want the top-16 best teams, but the travel issue should be minimized. Doing the Top-8 is the next best thing to the top-16. But then if you can match Playoff teams up as much as possible by Divisional groupings, then you can give opportunity in the 1st Round and perhaps also the 2nd Round to geographical rival matchups.

I don't agree with focusing on more than the other; a compromise, a bit of both, is the best option, IMO.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 12:17 PM
  #72
Screw You Rick Nash
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
 
Screw You Rick Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 27,279
vCash: 3000
Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick View Post
Parker, similar things happen with the current set up.

Carolina has 19 points and would host a team with 24.

Two teams with 26 points would play one another in the 4-5 match.

Thats why the crossover is useless. Schedule should be weighted towards your division, and playoffs should all be determined by division. Some divisions will have teams with less points, buy that's fine because the point is to win your division and then play the other division champions.

No different than in baseball when they only had four divisions and you had to win your division to make the playoffs. Some divisions were better than others.
But if they are doing a crossover, they could just do this. Have the division leader with the better record face the wildcard team with the worse record and just have the other wildcard team go to the other division. Once the other wildcard team is added, then have the division leader face the team with the worse record--and not strictly the wildcard team.

Screw You Rick Nash is online now  
Old
02-28-2013, 12:22 PM
  #73
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker McDonald View Post
But if they are doing a crossover, they could just do this. Have the division leader with the better record face the wildcard team with the worse record and just have the other wildcard team go to the other division. Once the other wildcard team is added, then have the division leader face the team with the worse record--and not strictly the wildcard team.
I dunno its just odd to me

What if the two western divisions have better records than the east. You still have an imbalance. If you accept that an imbalance will always exist, just remove the wildcard option and stick to the 1-4, 2-3 format. Yes some teams with more points may miss, but there its no reasonable scenario to prevent that unless they have one single table.

The CyNick is offline  
Old
02-28-2013, 12:30 PM
  #74
Screw You Rick Nash
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
 
Screw You Rick Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 27,279
vCash: 3000
Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick View Post
I dunno its just odd to me

What if the two western divisions have better records than the east. You still have an imbalance. If you accept that an imbalance will always exist, just remove the wildcard option and stick to the 1-4, 2-3 format. Yes some teams with more points may miss, but there its no reasonable scenario to prevent that unless they have one single table.
But the west is pretty much separated from the east except for the SCF.

If people really want a strict first two rounds of the playoffs where it has to exactly 4 teams in each division, then why do they even play games against other divisions?

Screw You Rick Nash is online now  
Old
02-28-2013, 01:58 PM
  #75
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,398
vCash: 500
In an ideal world you want to play every team in the league, just so every star theoretically comes to your building. For example if you are a fan in san jose its nice to know you get to see crosby, ovi, and stamkos at least once a year.

So if it were me, I would do home and home against everyone, and then fill all remaining schedule with divisional games. None of this play one division 3 times, your own 4, the opposite conference twice. Just make it as simple as possible.


Last edited by The CyNick: 02-28-2013 at 02:26 PM.
The CyNick is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:20 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.