Playoff Seeding With a 1-8 Format

[x Tame Impala]

Using a 1-8 seeding system...

WEST

1. Colorado: 119 pts
2. Minnesota: 113 pts
3. Calgary: 111 pts
4. St. Louis: 109 pts
5. Edmonton: 104 pts
6. Los Angeles: 99 pts
7. Dallas: 98 pts
8. Nashville: 97 pts

WESTERN PLAYOFF BRACKET:

1. AVS vs 8. NSH
2. WILD vs 7. DAL
3. CGY vs. 6. LAK
4. STL vs. 5. EDM

EAST

1. Florida: 122 pts
2. Carolina: 116 pts
3. Toronto: 115 pts
4. Tampa: 110 pts 49 ROW
5. New York: 110 pts 48 ROW
6. Boston: 107 pts
7. Pittsburgh: 103 pts
8. Washington: 100 pts

EASTERN PLAYOFF BRACKET:

1. FLA vs 8. WSH
2. CAR vs 7. PIT
3. TOR vs 6. BOS
4. TBL vs 5. NYR



In each conference the 1. and 8. seeds still play each other but for the remaining 6 matchups i think we get a much better first round of the playoffs. I don't like seeing all of these teams knock eachother out in the first round anymore. We shouldn't have the Western #2 Seed playing the #4. Same with the East, #3 seed Toronto shouldn't be punished by playing the #4 seed in the first round. Not to mention that a huge aspect of switching to the current divisional format was to ensure broader and more accessible viewership in the first two rounds, which is nonsense when CST teams routinely have to start their games at 8:45pm local time.

There is more parity in the league now but these current seeding matchups look silly to me.

 

[tucker3434]

Winning the division is a massive advantage. I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

 

[DickSmehlik]

Yeah, but “something something rivalries” - Gary Bettman.

 

[Mr Positive]

It's for time zones and travel

But yeah that basically makes divisions pointless in the East. So maybe they should do that. Have two western divisions and one big eastern one

 

[Anglesmith]

This would have favoured Calgary and disadvantaged Edmonton. I like it.

 

[aceofpace]

Pros and cons for both formats. In the end I don't think it makes that much of a difference.

 

[Artemi Panarin]

“Please no” - Edmonton

 

[North Cole]

This would have favoured Calgary and disadvantaged Edmonton. I like it.

We'll have to see how the next 3 games go for each team. If we both lose then I think the format is the least of our worries.

 

[Anglesmith]

We'll have to see how the next 3 games go for each team. If we both lose then I think the format is the least of our worries.

True enough. Grass is always greener I suppose.

 

[Paranoid Android]

Pros and cons for both formats. In the end I don't think it makes that much of a difference.

What’s a con for 1-8?

 

[ThatGuy22]

Winning the division is a massive advantage. I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

I'd have zero issue with it if it weren't for the Wild card. It neuters the principle of divisional playoffs.

If they went strict top 4 in each division, I'd be on board. Wanna win the cup, gotta get through your division to get to conference finals.

 

[harmonica]

Either system works. Not a big deal.

 

[c9777666]

CGY would get the 2 over MIN based on winning the division.

 

[yada]

This would have favoured Calgary and disadvantaged Edmonton. I like it.

Crazy, we may find out if this is true. Will Calgary really win this matchup?

 

[Nasti]

The old system would have had the Flames as the second seed since they won their division. So it would still be a Flames/Stars first round while Minnesota would play LA.

 

[unassisted]

4. Tampa: 110 pts 49 ROW
5. New York: 110 pts 48 ROW

Actually the first tiebreaker is RW, then ROW.
So NYR would be 4th seed with 44 RW, while TB had 39 RW.

 

[Summer Rose]

This would have favoured Calgary and disadvantaged Edmonton. I like it.

At least you admit where your loyalties lie.



(I'm just giving you a hard time. )

 

[The Red Line]

I preferred the old format and divisions, but this one really isn't that bad or really all the different.

 

[Dr Pepper]

They really should go back to the division seeds going 1-2, and then 3-8 filled out in order.

So simple, yet it remains ignored by the NHL powers that be.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Would have deprived us of the St Louis - Minnesota series.

 

[Ivan eht Demidov]

Winning the division is a massive advantage. I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

Except when it isn't. By forcing the division winner to play a wild card team, they might have to play a team with a better record than the 2nd/3rd place team in their own division, or for Western Conference teams, this often forces them to play vs a team 2 time zones away, which is a huge disadvantage. This has happened before, check out the 2017 (MTL vs NYR, not OTT or BOS), 2016 (FLA vs NYI, not DET) and 2015 (ANA vs WPG, not CGY) playoffs.

What’s a con for 1-8?

1. The schedule is not balanced for a conference format. It should have every team in each conference play each other the same number of times during the regular season, otherwise, it's unclear whether or not a team has actually earned their seeding position in the conference (because they have a different number of games vs the same groups of opponents, and there may be a big difference in the strength of that group). That said, this current schedule format is the most balanced for a conference format than at any other point (just 1 game difference, and only for 5 opponents), so it's actually the divisional / wild card formats that don't make sense to have along with this schedule.

2. Lack of support for rivalries. In a conference format, it would be much less likely to have rival teams meet in the playoffs, because, for example, if you're the Rangers, your chance of playing the Islanders is exactly the same as playing the Senators, who would likewise much rather play the Leafs or Habs, etc.... Yes, this does come at the cost of some degree of fairness, but you can argue that making the series more relevant overall is still better.

3. For Western Conference teams: time zone travel. There are currently 6 teams in the Central time zone, and 7 in the Pacific time zone (Arizona is, during the playoffs, because the state doesn't shift to daylight savings time), with no restrictions on a team from each time zone playing each other in a 1-8 conference format, whereas the current format, because of the forced divisional series, makes it significantly less likely. A purely divisional format would kill this problem entirely, except for Arizona, who gets the shaft by being in the Central. But nah, making Central teams play their games at 8:30 local time is totally the solution there!

 

[bobholly39]

Using a 1-8 seeding system...

WEST

1. Colorado: 119 pts
2. Minnesota: 113 pts
3. Calgary: 111 pts
4. St. Louis: 109 pts
5. Edmonton: 104 pts
6. Los Angeles: 99 pts
7. Dallas: 98 pts
8. Nashville: 97 pts

WESTERN PLAYOFF BRACKET:

1. AVS vs 8. NSH
2. WILD vs 7. DAL
3. CGY vs. 6. LAK
4. STL vs. 5. EDM

EAST

1. Florida: 122 pts
2. Carolina: 116 pts
3. Toronto: 115 pts
4. Tampa: 110 pts 49 ROW
5. New York: 110 pts 48 ROW
6. Boston: 107 pts
7. Pittsburgh: 103 pts
8. Washington: 100 pts

EASTERN PLAYOFF BRACKET:

1. FLA vs 8. WSH
2. CAR vs 7. PIT
3. TOR vs 6. BOS
4. TBL vs 5. NYR



In each conference the 1. and 8. seeds still play each other but for the remaining 6 matchups i think we get a much better first round of the playoffs. I don't like seeing all of these teams knock eachother out in the first round anymore. We shouldn't have the Western #2 Seed playing the #4. Same with the East, #3 seed Toronto shouldn't be punished by playing the #4 seed in the first round. Not to mention that a huge aspect of switching to the current divisional format was to ensure broader and more accessible viewership in the first two rounds, which is nonsense when CST teams routinely have to start their games at 8:45pm local time.

There is more parity in the league now but these current seeding matchups look silly to me.

I like the concept of a 1 vs 8 seeding.

But if you're asking about the best/most entertaining matchups for round 1 this year specifically - what we ended up with is a lot better than what a pure 1vs8 would have been.

 

[tucker3434]

Except when it isn't. By forcing the division winner to play a wild card team, they might have to play a team with a better record than the 2nd/3rd place team in their own division, or for Western Conference teams, this often forces them to play vs a team 2 time zones away, which is a huge disadvantage. This has happened before, check out the 2017 (MTL vs NYR, not OTT or BOS), 2016 (FLA vs NYI, not DET) and 2015 (ANA vs WPG, not CGY) playoffs.



1. The schedule is not balanced for a conference format. It should have every team in each conference play each other the same number of times during the regular season, otherwise, it's unclear whether or not a team has actually earned their seeding position in the conference (because they have a different number of games vs the same groups of opponents, and there may be a big difference in the strength of that group). That said, this current schedule format is the most balanced for a conference format than at any other point (just 1 game difference, and only for 5 opponents), so it's actually the divisional / wild card formats that don't make sense to have along with this schedule.

2. Lack of support for rivalries. In a conference format, it would be much less likely to have rival teams meet in the playoffs, because, for example, if you're the Rangers, your chance of playing the Islanders is exactly the same as playing the Senators, who would likewise much rather play the Leafs or Habs, etc.... Yes, this does come at the cost of some degree of fairness, but you can argue that making the series more relevant overall is still better.

3. For Western Conference teams: time zone travel. There are currently 6 teams in the Central time zone, and 7 in the Pacific time zone (Arizona is, during the playoffs, because the state doesn't shift to daylight savings time), with no restrictions on a team from each time zone playing each other in a 1-8 conference format, whereas the current format, because of the forced divisional series, makes it significantly less likely. A purely divisional format would kill this problem entirely, except for Arizona, who gets the shaft by being in the Central. But nah, making Central teams play their games at 8:30 local time is totally the solution there!

There downsides to every system. I guess Carolina would’ve preferred to play Pittsburgh instead of Boston, but in hindsight I’m sure they’re okay with it. The divisions tend to be close enough where it’s going to work itself out.

Travel always sucks in the west. Nashville and Winnipeg are in the same division. It just is what it is. TV scheduling is what screws up the start times. It isn’t the Avs fault the game in Nashville had an 8:50 local puck drop. Any team in the western conference is just going to have to play after the Easter conference games finish.

 

[Ivan eht Demidov]

There downsides to every system. I guess Carolina would’ve preferred to play Pittsburgh instead of Boston, but in hindsight I’m sure they’re okay with it. The divisions tend to be close enough where it’s going to work itself out.

Travel always sucks in the west. Nashville and Winnipeg are in the same division. It just is what it is. TV scheduling is what screws up the start times. It isn’t the Avs fault the game in Nashville had an 8:50 local puck drop. Any team in the western conference is just going to have to play after the Easter conference games finish.

I hear you, but the start times thing is obviously a manipulation by TV networks to support viewers who want to watch as much of every game as possible (and that includes myself), but at the expense of what best supports the local fans, especially those attending the games. I don't think it's worth it, especially with how easily accessible highlight packages and whatnot have become.

As for "travel always sucks in the west", well, I would argue that is a matter of degrees. Consider, for instance:

David Barter | Time Zone Grouping Format

Interaction Designer | Researcher | Writer | Problem Solver

www.davidbarter.net

Or:

David Barter | Three Conference Format

Interaction Designer | Researcher | Writer | Problem Solver

www.davidbarter.net

(As always, like you said, advantages and disadvantages...)

 

[westc2]

Winning the division is a massive advantage. I don’t think that’s a bad thing.

It's not though...it just happened to work out for the division winners this season. What if Dallas and Nashville happened to have around around 105 points each. They'd still be the Wild Card teams, and the two lowest teams in the division (EDM/LAK in this case) would play each other in the first round.

The playoff format should not even allow this as a possibility.

And when people try to bring up the time zone thing for teams from different divisions playing in the first round, that clearly doesn't matter to the broadcasters, since every evening game in the MIN/STL series has started at 8:30pm local time, so the divisional format is definitely outdated.