HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
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
03-04-2013, 04:39 PM
  #101
Henkka
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 8,964
vCash: 500
4 Division format is just great, but I would make slight change to that playoff-entry.

We should have 4 Wild Card teams, but points are counted through the league. TOP4 in points would enter the playoffs behind those all Division 1-2-3 leaders.

So, this could mean that there's for example 7 playoff teams from Western divisions and 9 teams from Eastern divisions. Fair system, othervise that 9th best Eastern team would drop out in current proposed system with in-conference Wild Cards.

If that's the case (9 teams from East and 7 from West) and there's no easy 8-8 split, then the worst Wild Card team from Eastern Divisions would go to play against Midwest regular season winner. Then there's only 1h difference in time zones. Somebody has to travel, the weakest team travels.

If Midwest Division has 4 playoff teams and Pacific only 3, then the weakest Midwest Wild Card team would go to Pacific playoffs and Weakest Eastern to Midwest. Only 2h difference at Timezones, not good, but better than we have had in the past.

That's the way to avoid EST timezone meeting Pacific Timezone. But entering to playoffs would be more fair from either East or West, no matter what the division size or conference size is.

4 Wild Card teams throughout the league makes it pretty sure that 16 best teams will enter to playoffs.

Henkka is offline  
Old
03-04-2013, 09:49 PM
  #102
RussianFive
Rookie User
 
RussianFive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 17
vCash: 500
Love the idea of returning to divisional playoffs. Not so keen on the wildcard/crossover.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goalie_Bob View Post
1. Growing up a child of the Patrick division. I never remember any *****ing about how it was unfair that the division had 6 teams and every other division had 5. So I don't understand it now for one conference to have 14 and the other 16. People will get used to it.
Completely agree. It's a stop-gap, if nothing else. I've already noticed the Steckel being quoted in The Globe and Mail that the players want the wildcard system to give them more chances at entering the playoffs because:

Quote:
“From a player standpoint, some [new] contracts are earned in the playoffs,” he said. “A lot of guys would rather be in the playoffs working for their next contract, rather than seeing one or two less regular-season road trips."
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle9284129/

RussianFive is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 08:10 AM
  #103
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBCnutcase View Post
Don't like the divisional playoff format. Instead of the top 3 teams in each div get a playoff spot, how about top 2 teams in each div and then let the other 4 best teams make the playoffs. It can allow 6 teams from one div and 2 from the other but that would be more fair. You know if that were to happen next season where the top 3 make it in and a 6th place team has more points, the change would happen quickly.
In the 12 years of divisional play-offs from 82-93, you had 1 division with 6 teams and they never had a situation where the 6th place team would have finished 3rd in the Adams. The 6th place team finished with more points than the 4th place team from the Adams only once in 88. It was the Penguins, but even with conference play-offs, they would have been 9th and still on the outside looking in.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 08:11 AM
  #104
patnyrnyg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,695
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henkka View Post
4 Division format is just great, but I would make slight change to that playoff-entry.

We should have 4 Wild Card teams, but points are counted through the league. TOP4 in points would enter the playoffs behind those all Division 1-2-3 leaders.

So, this could mean that there's for example 7 playoff teams from Western divisions and 9 teams from Eastern divisions. Fair system, othervise that 9th best Eastern team would drop out in current proposed system with in-conference Wild Cards.

If that's the case (9 teams from East and 7 from West) and there's no easy 8-8 split, then the worst Wild Card team from Eastern Divisions would go to play against Midwest regular season winner. Then there's only 1h difference in time zones. Somebody has to travel, the weakest team travels.

If Midwest Division has 4 playoff teams and Pacific only 3, then the weakest Midwest Wild Card team would go to Pacific playoffs and Weakest Eastern to Midwest. Only 2h difference at Timezones, not good, but better than we have had in the past.

That's the way to avoid EST timezone meeting Pacific Timezone. But entering to playoffs would be more fair from either East or West, no matter what the division size or conference size is.

4 Wild Card teams throughout the league makes it pretty sure that 16 best teams will enter to playoffs.
The whole purpose of bringing back divisional play-offs is to help the division rivalries become even more intense. Cross-overs will just hurt that ambition.

patnyrnyg is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 11:38 AM
  #105
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by patnyrnyg View Post
The whole purpose of bringing back divisional play-offs is to help the division rivalries become even more intense. Cross-overs will just hurt that ambition.
One crossover matchup out of 4 isn't going to be that damaging; and that's if it happens, which in some cases it won't.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
03-05-2013, 04:42 PM
  #106
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,874
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
One crossover matchup out of 4 isn't going to be that damaging; and that's if it happens, which in some cases it won't.
and those franchises will indeed vote to dump the crossover ASAP, MO, no matter if it is one out of four...

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 09:46 PM
  #107
Crayton
Registered User
 
Crayton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FLORIDA
Posts: 488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
and those franchises will indeed vote to dump the crossover ASAP, MO, no matter if it is one out of four...
1 of 4? Won't it be 1 of 8?

Plus, if it is that egregious, wouldn't the current format have been dumped after last year when 4/6 of the Western Conference's first two round playoff series crossed multiple timezones?

1) STL-SJ 2) PHX-CHI 3) STL-LA 4) PHX-NSH

With last year's seeds you could get something more geographically natural like this:
1 Vancouver vs. 8 Los Angeles
2 St. Louis vs. 6 Chicago
3 Phoenix vs. 7 San Jose
4 Nashville vs. 5 Detroit

3 Phoenix vs. 8 Los Angeles
2 St. Louis vs. 4 Nashville

Crayton is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 10:23 PM
  #108
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,874
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crayton View Post
1 of 4? Won't it be 1 of 8?

Plus, if it is that egregious, wouldn't the current format have been dumped after last year when 4/6 of the Western Conference's first two round playoff series crossed multiple timezones?

1) STL-SJ 2) PHX-CHI 3) STL-LA 4) PHX-NSH

With last year's seeds you could get something more geographically natural like this:
1 Vancouver vs. 8 Los Angeles
2 St. Louis vs. 6 Chicago
3 Phoenix vs. 7 San Jose
4 Nashville vs. 5 Detroit

3 Phoenix vs. 8 Los Angeles
2 St. Louis vs. 4 Nashville
Crayton:

that's why a crossover is an abject failure..... and one major reason why the AHL finally adopted the 3 division alignment in each conference, after having 2 divisions of which one division had 7 and then 8 in a division necessitatating a cross-over, in which two teams from the same division ended up playing each other in the CF, and precisely why Binghamton got the paved road to win the Atlantic Division DESPITE BEING THE 5 SEED in the East Division, Lowell relocated to Albany and switched from the Atlantic to the East, necessitating a cross-over in that division as which the Atlantic had that issue the previous year as did the West Division in the Western Conference.

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 10:34 PM
  #109
MNNumbers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,222
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
Crayton:

that's why a crossover is an abject failure..... and one major reason why the AHL finally adopted the 3 division alignment in each conference, after having 2 divisions of which one division had 7 and then 8 in a division necessitatating a cross-over, in which two teams from the same division ended up playing each other in the CF, and precisely why Binghamton got the paved road to win the Atlantic Division DESPITE BEING THE 5 SEED in the East Division, Lowell relocated to Albany and switched from the Atlantic to the East, necessitating a cross-over in that division as which the Atlantic had that issue the previous year as did the West Division in the Western Conference.
And, this is the reason for so much of the tension between the 2 sides, the PA and the NHL. The crossover doesn't really work that well as a 2 round system, so have these 2 possibilities:

1) Have conferences of 7.7.8.8 and force the PA to accept what looks like uneven playoff possibilities, or a mini-playoff between the 4 and 5 seeds in the 2 ETZ conferences, or

2) Force either DET or CMB (and maybe both if PHX goes to QUE) to stay in the west, go to a 7.8.7.8. Now, force the NHL to accept conferences playoffs all the way up. You have a 15.15 structure, and the league loses $$ because you don't get as good of local TV start times in Rounds 1 and 2.

And, if we all can't agree as to what is best, how are the NHL and PA supposed to agree? No wonder it's a fight.

MNNumbers is online now  
Old
03-06-2013, 11:12 PM
  #110
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
Crayton:

that's why a crossover is an abject failure..... and one major reason why the AHL finally adopted the 3 division alignment in each conference, after having 2 divisions of which one division had 7 and then 8 in a division necessitatating a cross-over, in which two teams from the same division ended up playing each other in the CF, and precisely why Binghamton got the paved road to win the Atlantic Division DESPITE BEING THE 5 SEED in the East Division, Lowell relocated to Albany and switched from the Atlantic to the East, necessitating a cross-over in that division as which the Atlantic had that issue the previous year as did the West Division in the Western Conference.
Who cares who a Division winner is in the Playoffs? Very few even care who the Conference winner is, other than the fact that a Conference winner then has the chance to win what people do care about, the Stanley Cup. Conference Champs don't even want to touch the trophy these days.

Divisions serve the purpose of rivalry matchups during the Regular Season, and can also be used for that purpose in the Playoffs as much as a top-8 will allow, which can be 6/8 matchups or as much as 8/8 matchups in the 1st Round, and at minimum 3/4 of the matchups in the 2nd Round. Beyond that, a Division champ is as about as meaningful as, you know the saying, **** on a bull.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
03-06-2013, 11:43 PM
  #111
Crayton
Registered User
 
Crayton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FLORIDA
Posts: 488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Who cares who a Division winner is in the Playoffs? Very few even care who the Conference winner is, other than the fact that a Conference winner then has the chance to win what people do care about, the Stanley Cup. Conference Champs don't even want to touch the trophy these days.

Divisions serve the purpose of rivalry matchups during the Regular Season, and can also be used for that purpose in the Playoffs as much as a top-8 will allow, which can be 6/8 matchups or as much as 8/8 matchups in the 1st Round, and at minimum 3/4 of the matchups in the 2nd Round. Beyond that, a Division champ is as about as meaningful as, you know the saying, **** on a bull.
Yeah, this is my sentiment as well. If it helps remove the 'tinge' of what might be Anaheim winning the Atlantic Conference then don't bracket the playoff. The NHL doesn't bracket the first round now anyway. Bracketing is foolish if you include a cross-over. Bettman will keep the CC and PW trophies, but beyond that there is no need. (Though Bettman [not necessarily the BOG] would prefer 2 conferences)

And my point earlier was that if whether a series is divisional is of THAT much importance, then why weren't people crying foul last year at all those PTZ/CTZ series! Well, I guess I did hear some; so by "people" I mean the "people" in charge.

Crayton is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:32 AM
  #112
Jakomyte
Registered User
 
Jakomyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,134
vCash: 500
Here's my proposal for the playoffs in the proposed 4 uneven division format:

For each division, whether 7-team or 8-team, the top 3 teams make the playoffs.

Of the remaining 18 teams league wide, the 4 next teams with the highest points also make the playoffs, regardless of conference/division, etc. This gives you your 16 playoff teams.

Now, you rank all the playoff teams from 1-16. Team #1 gets to choose its first round opponent from teams #9-16, then Team #2 picks its opponent from the remaining teams #9-16 (not picked by team #1), etc. This goes on until Team #8 is left with the last team remaining from #9-16. Now you have your first round matchups. Teams #1-8 get home ice advantage, and they get to pick their opponent, which is an added incentive to get into the top 8. Also, they can't ***** about their travel schedule, because they get to pick their opponent. This also allows for all possible matchups in the playoffs, and eventually SCFs. Heck, I'm sure TSN could find a way to do another "PLAYOFF SEEDING NIGHT" where GMs will announce their opponents one by one, much like the draft lottery.

For rounds 2 and 3, you can either setup more picks from the upper seeded teams, or just match up the remaining teams based on points (i.e. 1v8, 2v7, etc.).

I like this idea because:

1) I think it solves the wildcard issue, with emphasis on getting to top 3 in your division, but also allowing for the last 4 teams to come from any division, whether 7-team or 8-team.

2) For the most part, it throws the argument of 'bad travel' out of the door, because top teams will pick their opponents. Want a good travel schedule? Don't pick an opponent from across the continent.

3) It gives higher seeded teams a choice in deciding who they think their easiest opponent is, instead of the standings. For example, even though the Kings were seeded 8th last year, maybe St. Louis would have avoided them in round 2 based on how they took out the Canucks in round 1. Maybe you are the top seed, but have trouble against the bottom seed team for whatever reason. Teams get a bit more control over their destinies as a reward for a good regular season.

Jakomyte is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:02 AM
  #113
Buck Aki Berg
My pockets hurt
 
Buck Aki Berg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,086
vCash: 500
The biggest problem with a crosover/wildcard/whatever is that it presupposes that a fifth-place team in one division that has a better record than a fourth-place team in the opposite division would still have that better record if they were in that division.

Suppose New Jersey finishes fifth in their division, and has a better record than Boston, who finishes fourth in theirs - their records can't be stacked against one another because Boston has played 40-45 games against their division, while New Jersey has only played 15-20 games against Boston's division.

Buck Aki Berg is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:18 AM
  #114
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
The proposed wildcard system is completely absurd. It doesn't make the chances of making the playoffs equal, it reduces the number of division playoff matches, and potentially creates travel headaches.

Two options that make sense. Keep it in division. Yes the east divisions will be at a disadvantage, but as many pointed out, it happened before with the patrick, and is only temporary till we get to 32 teams.

East has a play in. From a percentage chance of making the playoffs this is the most logical. teams 4 and 5 in each of the eastern divisions play a one game play in. it creates another destination viewing night for the nhl and its tv partners, and it balances the odds. Downside its you have to play one extra game. Eventually when we get to 32 teams, you have the play in for every division.

The CyNick is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 11:34 AM
  #115
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick View Post
The proposed wildcard system is completely absurd. It doesn't make the chances of making the playoffs equal, it reduces the number of division playoff matches, and potentially creates travel headaches.

Two options that make sense. Keep it in division. Yes the east divisions will be at a disadvantage, but as many pointed out, it happened before with the patrick, and is only temporary till we get to 32 teams.

East has a play in. From a percentage chance of making the playoffs this is the most logical. teams 4 and 5 in each of the eastern divisions play a one game play in. it creates another destination viewing night for the nhl and its tv partners, and it balances the odds. Downside its you have to play one extra game. Eventually when we get to 32 teams, you have the play in for every division.
Completely agree with the bolded part. The rest, not so much.
First, it doesn't reduce the number of Division matchups, it simply has the potential to reduce maximum 1/4 of the matchups. And as for travel headaches, there's no way that they could be any where as severe as they currently are, because, with primarily Divisional matchups, the number of potential travel headaches will be significantly reduced.
Secondly, they can allow for the possibility of crossovers not continuing into the 2nd Round if they don't use a wildcard format and not permanently peg a wildcard team into another Division. Just use a top-8 format, with a minimum 3 teams per Division guaranteed a Playoff spot.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 12:36 PM
  #116
Jakomyte
Registered User
 
Jakomyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Aki Berg View Post
The biggest problem with a crosover/wildcard/whatever is that it presupposes that a fifth-place team in one division that has a better record than a fourth-place team in the opposite division would still have that better record if they were in that division.

Suppose New Jersey finishes fifth in their division, and has a better record than Boston, who finishes fourth in theirs - their records can't be stacked against one another because Boston has played 40-45 games against their division, while New Jersey has only played 15-20 games against Boston's division.
But that argument can be made no matter what the format. You can currently argue that if a team finishing in the 7/8 spot in the East were to actually play more games vs. the West, that they wouldn't make the top 8 in the West.

Unless every team plays each other team the same number of times, this will always be an issue.

Jakomyte is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 12:42 PM
  #117
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakomyte View Post
But that argument can be made no matter what the format. You can currently argue that if a team finishing in the 7/8 spot in the East were to actually play more games vs. the West, that they wouldn't make the top 8 in the West.

Unless every team plays each other team the same number of times, this will always be an issue.
It is an issue, but there's no reason to compound it further. And apparently the PA doesn't want it compounded further either.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 02:00 PM
  #118
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crayton View Post
Yeah, this is my sentiment as well. If it helps remove the 'tinge' of what might be Anaheim winning the Atlantic Conference then don't bracket the playoff. The NHL doesn't bracket the first round now anyway. Bracketing is foolish if you include a cross-over. Bettman will keep the CC and PW trophies, but beyond that there is no need. (Though Bettman [not necessarily the BOG] would prefer 2 conferences)

And my point earlier was that if whether a series is divisional is of THAT much importance, then why weren't people crying foul last year at all those PTZ/CTZ series! Well, I guess I did hear some; so by "people" I mean the "people" in charge.
Just to follow up this topic with a final comment:
If you have 4-Conferences then appropriately you should have 4 3rd Round finalists, one from each Conference. If you have 4-Divisions, you don't need to have 1 finalist from each Division in the 3rd Round.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:20 PM
  #119
Crayton
Registered User
 
Crayton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: FLORIDA
Posts: 488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Just to follow up this topic with a final comment:
If you have 4-Conferences then appropriately you should have 4 3rd Round finalists, one from each Conference. If you have 4-Divisions, you don't need to have 1 finalist from each Division in the 3rd Round.
I think I am picking up what you're putting down.

Solution: 2 conferences: One 8-team Western Conference & One 22-team Eastern Conference.

Crayton is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 09:39 PM
  #120
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crayton View Post
I think I am picking up what you're putting down.

Solution: 2 conferences: One 8-team Western Conference & One 22-team Eastern Conference.
LOL, Not really. You're picking up something, but it's not what I'm putting down.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
03-07-2013, 10:11 PM
  #121
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Completely agree with the bolded part. The rest, not so much.
First, it doesn't reduce the number of Division matchups, it simply has the potential to reduce maximum 1/4 of the matchups. And as for travel headaches, there's no way that they could be any where as severe as they currently are, because, with primarily Divisional matchups, the number of potential travel headaches will be significantly reduced.
Secondly, they can allow for the possibility of crossovers not continuing into the 2nd Round if they don't use a wildcard format and not permanently peg a wildcard team into another Division. Just use a top-8 format, with a minimum 3 teams per Division guaranteed a Playoff spot.
It potentially reduces the divisonal matchups. If you just have seedings based on division, you have 8 divisional matchups in the first round and 4 in the second. Thats guaranteed.

Again, yes travel headaches are reduced, but they could be all but eliminated without the wildcard. As it is now, Nashville could play Vancouver in the first round. And then Vancouver could play Chicago in the second. If you do all in division, there's no chance of that.

The CyNick is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 12:15 AM
  #122
NorthernILHawksFan
Registered User
 
NorthernILHawksFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: IL
Country: United States
Posts: 269
vCash: 500
I don't like the whole wild-card system, but I understand it was put in to make the union happy. Here's one gripe, if the wild card teams are from separate divisions, can they at least keep them in their regular division for the postseason, regardless of seed?

NorthernILHawksFan is offline  
Old
03-08-2013, 12:17 PM
  #123
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,530
vCash: 500
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1370181

Discussion migrated.

LadyStanley 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 10:41 AM.

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.