I can't imagine the teams want anything to do with this. If team 1 picks team 8 and loses in the first round the optics are horrible. Everyone would be all over the teams for "making the wrong decision" even if it wasn't and a team just got lucky or hot.
I think they would much rather just leave it as it is.
Yeah the drama would be awesome. This is so much better of an idea than what the current pro sports in North America have.
Don't like this. 7 game playoff series are perfect for this sport and do wonders for the creation and sustenance of rivalries. I also hate how winning teams are rewarded with high draft picks. Success should be enough of a reward. The draft is in place to help out the franchises in need of it, not to widen the talent gap between the top and bottom teams. I'm just trying to think of what Chicago would be like right now if they still got to pick high from 2010 onwards.
Good points xD theyd probably continue to roll everyone over i guess.
This is exactly the same idea that I had for the playoffs! I think it would be amazing. Create instant rivalries and the media and fans would go nuts over it.
The only thing you'd have to think about is what if seed 1 picks seed 3? Then seed 3 loses home ice advantage and a lesser team would end up getting home ice. I guess you could make it so The top 4 teams have to pick from the bottom 4 teams ensuring that all top 4 teams get home ice advantage. Team in the no. 4 seed doesn't really get to pick but just get what's left over.
A team that has had injury issues gets less points and gets picked by a top seed, lower seeded team with *injured* star players who are missing time make miraculous recovery and play the first round, top seeded team gets eliminated because they just got trolled and fell for the injury reports.
Lots of room for cheating and lying. I like it!
Also, can you imagine a coach or management picking a team and then getting swept? Lots of heads would roll and it would be hilarious. Your idea is awesome op.
I think it's unfair for the teams ranked 2-7 in each conference.
Your system gives absolute power to teams ranked 1st. The team ranked 2nd still earned a lot of points, so they earned the right to play at best seed #7. But in your system, they could face the team ranked 1st in the first round.
Same for let's say team #6. They earned more points than #7 & #8, so they earned the right to an "easier" opponent than them.
Basically there are 2 components to your system:
1. Teams ranked 1st have absolute power
2. Regular season means nothing as long as you're top 8 in your conference.
I like this idea. As someone mentioned, just tweak it so the teams ranked 1-4 have to pick from 5-8. It makes teams not only want to be top 4 to avoid having to be picked by the 1 seed, but also to be higher in the top 4 because they then get increasing amount of options to pick from. Problem is that there would be no incentive to be ranked higher in 5-8, except maybe to accumulate more point to scare off the teams ranked 1st or 2nd.
Can't we just go back to top 8 per conference. Why the **** is that so hard. Best 8 teams make it per conference, same old format that we had for years. 1v8, 2v7 etc. Don't understand why the hell it's necessary for each division to be represented. If you suck, you suck and don't deserve to be in the playoffs. Should be best 8 period. NHL tries to do too much to "accomodate" new fans, they forget about all their old fans that helped them get to where they are.
This is very similar to my preferred option OP. The main change I would make is that in each round you can only choose an opponent from the bottom half of the seeds. For example, 1 can pick 5/6/7/8. 2 then picks from the remaining three options, 3 from the remaining two, and 4 gets the team that is left. It adds more value to being a higher seed but keeps the decision element.
Also, I would prefer all 16 teams being in one seeding group (1-16) so it's possible to have finals like BOS/MTL, LAK/ANA, TBL/FLA etc. You also then add travel considerations into the selection process.