Toggle sidebar

Around the League '16-'17 Road Trip Blues Edition

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not exactly a shock, handwriting on the wall once Ramo began practicing with them, now he's gotten clearance to play and Enroth is on waivers


Elliotte Friedman ‏@FriedgeHNIC 36m36 minutes ago

Enroth (TOR) on waivers


and this was pretty funny when you read it...how many times does this happen???

Alan Saunders
‏@ASaunders_PGH

Jaromir Jagr gets excused from attending the 25-year reunion of his second Stanley Cup because he has a game that night. What a legend.


According to this, some other forwards (other than Spooner) being shopped are Benoit Pouilot, Kulemin, and Jimmy Hayes


http://www.prohockeyrumors.com/2016/12/garriochs-islanders-canadiens.html
 
Last edited:
deeshamrock said:
that's not a cup of voodoo, they (and not the only team_) got off to a slow start , they are stabilizing. Losing Johnny Hockey for ten games hurt them and Monahan was on of a few players struggling early on.
They and the Oilers changed the complexion of the Pacific and are both threats for a playoff spot .
Click to expand...

Yes they are, although both have played 2-3 more games than anyone else in our division so far. Still not sold on Johnson, right now he's on a hot streak, one bad game and Elliots back in. No way you can let him sit for the amount they're paying him.At least Johnson didn't start his streak against the Kings.
 
Last edited:
Ken Holland wants to add a Wild Card play-in game. I guess that's one way to keep your bubble teams 20 plus year playoff streak going.

“I’m all for an extra team in each conference qualifying for the playoffs and having a wild- card play-in game,” said Holland. “It would add excitement down the stretch for many more teams fighting for the additional wild-card spot and two extra teams would be involved in the playoffs. Those play-in games would be dramatic.”
Click to expand...


http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2016/12/05/ken-holland-is-all-for-expanding-playoff-format-to-include-wild-card-play-in-game/


So a team from the west might have to fly to say... Winnipeg to play a wild card game , then fly back and start a series a few days later. Sure makes sense for his team located in the mid-west.
 
Last edited:
kingsfan28 said:
Ken Holland wants to add a Wild Card play-in game. I guess that's one way to keep your bubble teams 20 plus year playoff streak going.




http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2016/12/05/ken-holland-is-all-for-expanding-playoff-format-to-include-wild-card-play-in-game/


So a team from the west might have to fly to say... Winnipeg to play a wild card game , then fly back and start a series a few days later. Sure makes sense for his team located in the mid-west.
Click to expand...

Well once you get out of the West when being an ETZ team, a lot of ideas work.

That play-in game would be fun, but baseball did it because they have so few teams that make the playoffs. The NHL is still over 50%. Not the 76% it was in the 80's, and no team can make the playoffs with the 2nd worst record in the league like Toronto did that one time, but over half the teams is a good enough number.
 
Play-in game makes more sense for baseball. I like giving incentive to the division winners in that the play-in teams might have to burn their #1/2 starter to get through.

But for funsies, here's what it would have looked like in recent season:

2015-16: Boston@Detroit; Colorado@Minnesota
2014-15: Boston@Pittsburgh; Los Angeles@Winnipeg
2013-14: Washington@Detroit; Phoenix@Dallas
 
I would actually be way down for this scenario:

Top three teams in each division auto qualify like they do now
The next four teams with the most points play a Best-of-Three
The two winners are seeded exactly like the WCs are currently seeded.

Reasoning:

Round 1 is the best round of the playoffs. Under this scenario, the Round 1 excitement has just been expanded by adding a super intense best-of-three.

You are now rewarded even more--in theory--for finishing at the top of your division by getting to play a team that just had to play at least two additional, high-intensity games. The best-of-three would provide a week of rest to those teams that finished well enough to avoid the play-in series.

Regular season means more due to the above, plus the added push to avoid having to play in one of the Wild Card series. Also, the fact that a team can miss the playoffs even with more points than the 3rd place team in the other division at present would be lessened since a team in this scenario would most likely get to play in one of the WC series and still have a fighting chance.

I'm not thinking about logistics and whatnot but rather what would lead to more exciting hockey. Would not be bad for the brand to basically be adding two more teams to the post-season party, even if it could only be for possibly two games.

Scratch the World Cup and the Olympics so the added week of hockey wouldn't be a huge problem.
 
Currently 16/30 teams make the playoffs don't need to make it 18/30.

In MLB with the current system only 10 teams make the playoffs. So adding those two teams from 8 isn't a bad thing.
 
tsanuri said:
Currently 16/30 teams make the playoffs don't need to make it 18/30.

In MLB with the current system only 10 teams make the playoffs. So adding those two teams from 8 isn't a bad thing.
Click to expand...

I don't really care about the numbers in regards to how many teams currently make it. An additional three game series would be exciting and would be more playoff hockey for a sport that has long touted how playoff hockey is leaps and bounds better than the regular season.

It would generate more opportunities for fans to attend and/or watch playoff style hockey. That's good for the sport. The league also has attempted to create more rivalries by guaranteeing division playoff match-ups. Well, here we would have more opportunities to foster those rivalries.

Granted, you can't just do a play-in tournament with every team but I don't think that giving two additional teams from each conference a chance to be in the mix lessens the importance of the regular season. I actually think it would amplify it.
 
There's years like 2015 when the Kings missed, but would have made it in most other seasons based on points. Then there's years like 2014 or 2016 where there was a steep drop off after the top 7. Some years play-ins are more justified than others.

Personally I think it's fine the way it is.

The only playoff expansion I would find palatable would be:

Top 3 in each division make it, 6 teams.

#7-#10 in conference - 3 or 5 game series.
#8-#9 in conference - 3 or 5 game series.

#8-#9 Winner plays #1.
#7-#10 Winner plays #2.
#3-#6
#4-#5

The top 6 teams get a little recovery time, yet aren't penalized money-wise by having fewer games. the lower seeded teams have to do more work to get to the later rounds.

The divisional system would have to be somewhat scrapped for this to work, which I don't think the NHL would do. That will be the real barrier to playoff expansion.
 
BigKing said:
I don't really care about the numbers in regards to how many teams currently make it. An additional three game series would be exciting and would be more playoff hockey for a sport that has long touted how playoff hockey is leaps and bounds better than the regular season.

It would generate more opportunities for fans to attend and/or watch playoff style hockey. That's good for the sport. The league also has attempted to create more rivalries by guaranteeing division playoff match-ups. Well, here we would have more opportunities to foster those rivalries.

Granted, you can't just do a play-in tournament with every team but I don't think that giving two additional teams from each conference a chance to be in the mix lessens the importance of the regular season. I actually think it would amplify it.
Click to expand...

That isn't what's being even offered. It's a one game play in.
But I wouldn't even be for a 3 game series.

I do care that it would raise the percentage of teams making the playoffs by almost 7% raising it to 60%. Granted it's not as bad as when 16/21 teams but in my mind it's not much better.
 
tsanuri said:
That isn't what's being even offered. It's a one game play in.
But I wouldn't even be for a 3 game series.

I do care that it would raise the percentage of teams making the playoffs by almost 7% raising it to 60%. Granted it's not as bad as when 16/21 teams but in my mind it's not much better.
Click to expand...

I don't like a one-game play in but was just referencing the series idea I posted earlier.

I get where you are coming from, but 53% to 60% isn't horrible in comparison to the benefits I think it would provide.

Getting additional playoff hockey would trump the increase, which is slight. You could also spin it that they aren't even making the playoffs so there is no increase over the current 16: they are only qualifying for a series that determines if you make the playoffs or not.

I just think the excitement it would provide is of more importance than an arbitrary number in regards to how many teams qualifying is too much.

Of course, I'm not saying there needs to be a change. Just think a three game series would be infinitely better than a play-in game.
 
Fishhead said:
There's years like 2015 when the Kings missed, but would have made it in most other seasons based on points. Then there's years like 2014 or 2016 where there was a steep drop off after the top 7. Some years play-ins are more justified than others.

Personally I think it's fine the way it is.

The only playoff expansion I would find palatable would be:

Top 3 in each division make it, 6 teams.

#7-#10 in conference - 3 or 5 game series.
#8-#9 in conference - 3 or 5 game series.

#8-#9 Winner plays #1.
#7-#10 Winner plays #2.
#3-#6
#4-#5

The top 6 teams get a little recovery time, yet aren't penalized money-wise by having fewer games. the lower seeded teams have to do more work to get to the later rounds.

The divisional system would have to be somewhat scrapped for this to work, which I don't think the NHL would do. That will be the real barrier to playoff expansion.
Click to expand...

This.

I would re-seed for Round 1 though with the #1 seed playing whichever lower seed makes it out of the play-in series.
 
over 50% of teams in the league get into the playoffs as is. Anymore and it takes away the significance of the regular season IMO.
 
YP44 said:
over 50% of teams in the league get into the playoffs as is. Anymore and it takes away the significance of the regular season IMO.
Click to expand...

I agree, but how significant is it right now? Situations like the Kings missing the playoffs with 95 points are uncommon. Isn't there some stat about how rare it is to fall out if you are in a playoff spot by Thanksgiving? And even once you get in, home ice isn't that big of an advantage. Matchups are far more important.

It's hard to think of a way to make the season mean more in hockey. The best reward for a great regular season would be a bye round, but that results in a hit in revenue and NHL teams can't afford that as much as other leagues. That's the main reason I mentioned play-in rounds, top teams would get some well-earned rest.
 
YP44 said:
over 50% of teams in the league get into the playoffs as is. Anymore and it takes away the significance of the regular season IMO.
Click to expand...

I have a theory that some of the reason the 80's were as open and crazy as they were, was because you really had to suck to miss the playoffs, or just be in the wrong division in any given year. Then to miss the playoffs for consecutive seasons, that's even worse. Today, it's easy to get lost in the wilderness. 3 years with no playoffs? Not that hard. A couple teams have gone damn near a decade.

The regular season has almost never meant more in NHL history than it does today, both in terms of money and the number of teams/playoff spots available, which plays a part in how conservative the game has gotten.
 
Darren Dreger ‏@DarrenDreger · 26m26 minutes ago

We've talked about the Habs issues at centre. Galchenyuk and Desharnais out for 6-8 weeks with knee injuries adds to the pressure big time.


that's rough... not very high on Desharnais but he'd have at least been familiar with their system and could move up and fill in. Losing Galchenyuk that long really hurts. I wonder if they go after Holland or Hanzel...depending on the price. If the Avs were serious abouit Duchene, MB might overpay

losing center depth like that hurts esp for a team that has little of it to begin with.
 
I wonder if Doughty ever watches Burns and Karlsson shoot the puck, and consistently get it on net without getting blocked. I hope he's watching tonight.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom