The current playoffs format is BROKEN

[RevengeOfTheDrai]

Rigged is the wrong word. I think we're commonly not getting the best teams squaring off in the final four. The old format allowed for that more consistently.

If we’re not getting the best teams squaring off in the final four, maybe those ‘best teams’ that constantly get eliminated aren’t actually the best?.

 

[KingsFan7824]

1-16 is too much to ask for. 1-8 is reasonable, I mean, Pacific travelling to the East and to Central division doesn't make any difference. Majority of the Central division teams does not travel that far to the East when compared to travelling to the West coast. IT is like 2 hour difference in the flight to their destination. The league should consider first round being divisional only with 1 v 2 in a 4-teams divisions all across and that way we'd have some balanced travel for first round perspectives. With that, we still have 4 rounds to the Cup.

This is why I'm in favor of getting crazy with it.

Get the 10 teams in the PTZ/MTZ in a conference, go 1-4 in the playoffs. Get the 22 teams in the CTZ/ETZ, go 11 team divisions, two 6's and two 5's, whatever, and go 1-12 for the playoffs. 40% of teams in the West, 55% of teams in the East. The eastern half gets a better chance of making the playoffs. The more teams from the ETZ and CTZ, the more eyes are watching. Better for everyone. The greater good.

3rd rd gets re-seeded. If the 1st seed is in the ETZ, and the 4th seed is in the WTZ, the top seed gets to choose if they want to play the 4th or 3rd seed.

This would still keep things somewhat contained, but, also allow for almost any matchup in the Final. You just couldn't get Oilers/Flames, or any other two teams from the far west. You could get Bruins/Habs, you could get Rangers/Islanders, Hawks/Wings, etc.

Should note in here that the re-seed era saw a higher percentage of 5 or less game conference finals than the division bracket era post 2014. And most of that was between 2006-2013 post salary cap implementation.

I don't have the energy to check this, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's true. I'm giving it a hesitant like, because I don't have it in me to see if you're wrong.

It's still pretty funny right now with the Colts somehow being in the AFC South lmao.

The NFL is the league that is least held to the gravity of geography. They play one day a week. They could put all 32 teams in a hat, make random 4 team divisions every year, and it damn near wouldn't make any difference.

 

[NotCommitted]

People seem to ignore the regular season standings and just go with their perceived "top teams". Fact is entering the playoffs, top teams were WPG in the west and WSH in the east. By that Carolina for example faced the 2nd best team in the league in the 2nd round. How is that supposed to be "easy".

Seems to me a big part of the "problem" is regular season standings not translating all that well into who wins in the playoffs. Changing the playoff format doesn't really change that and it's down to luck pretty much what format would've resulted in the "best" playoff brackets as judged by people with the benefit of hindsight.

Maybe the seedings should follow last years results from the playoffs for the teams that were in and new arrivals would always be bottom seeds. Or have them weighted, splitting regular season points with previous years playoffs 50/50 or something. But no matter what you do, people are always going to complain.

To be honest, ignoring travel I'd ditch the whole east / west thing, no reason why two teams from the same conference shouldn't meet in the SCF if they happened to be the best teams. But in reality a cup format is always going to be imperfect, so much is always going to be down to luck and how you happen to match up with an opponent.

 

[Chairman Maouth]

I was beginning to wonder if the season was over and I slept through the finals.

The worst-run league in professional sports.

 

[coolboarder]

I would be in much favor of having top seed choosing their opponent to optimized the match-up even it might motivate the lesser seed teams just for first round. Sometimes their opponent having their number in first round but having a bad regular season in their standard.

 

[Fatass]

Any playoff format where the Leafs are out early is a good one.

 

[Pucklington]

Just in the East, here's how round 1 would have played out if it was 1 to 8 instead of this long in the tooth division rivalry crap:


- WSH (1) vs MTL (8) : Unchanged, WSH wins.

- TOR (2) vs NJD (7) : Fresh matchup, TOR likely wins.

- TBL (3) vs OTT (6) : Fresh matchup, TBL likely wins.

- CAR (4) vs FLA (5) : Fresh matchup, the eternal pretenders are exposed much sooner and likely out in round one.


Instead:

- We had the lopsided EDM vs LAK matchup for the thirteenth time in a row.
- Two legit contenders facing off in round 1 (x2) in TBL vs FLA and DAL vs COL.
- A brutal team like the Canes sneaking into the conference finals.
Etc. Etc.

Why is the league hell bent on this terrible format? And why is there not more noise about it among execs, media and fans?

1 v. 8 would have had Edmonton v. Dallas in round 1. That is even worse.

The matchups were fine. Edmonton and Florida just happen to be much stronger teams.

 

[Riseonfire]

That’s false, with the wild card and a 5 from one division and 3 from another. It definitely can happen with the crossover.

Good catch.

I should have said “strongly discouraged”.

 

[JKG33]

People seem to ignore the regular season standings and just go with their perceived "top teams". Fact is entering the playoffs, top teams were WPG in the west and WSH in the east. By that Carolina for example faced the 2nd best team in the league in the 2nd round. How is that supposed to be "easy".

Seems to me a big part of the "problem" is regular season standings not translating all that well into who wins in the playoffs. Changing the playoff format doesn't really change that and it's down to luck pretty much what format would've resulted in the "best" playoff brackets as judged by people with the benefit of hindsight.

Maybe the seedings should follow last years results from the playoffs for the teams that were in and new arrivals would always be bottom seeds. Or have them weighted, splitting regular season points with previous years playoffs 50/50 or something. But no matter what you do, people are always going to complain.

To be honest, ignoring travel I'd ditch the whole east / west thing, no reason why two teams from the same conference shouldn't meet in the SCF if they happened to be the best teams. But in reality a cup format is always going to be imperfect, so much is always going to be down to luck and how you happen to match up with an opponent.

Say what you will about the RS standings, I like the creative idea to "fix" that but ultimately theres no reason to lock teams into quadrants of the bracket. Thats the real problem here

1 v. 8 would have had Edmonton v. Dallas in round 1. That is even worse.

The matchups were fine. Edmonton and Florida just happen to be much stronger teams.

Reality is a 1st round of Dallas vs Edmonton being the "worst" thing about a 1v8 format would be a pretty good problem to have.

I'm of the belief Colorado would've given Edmonton a much harder series, but just for whatever reason cant beat Dallas

 

[Pucklington]

Say what you will about the RS standings, I like the creative idea to "fix" that but ultimately theres no reason to lock teams into quadrants of the bracket. Thats the real problem here

Reality is a 1st round of Dallas vs Edmonton being the "worst" thing about a 1v8 format would be a pretty good problem to have.

I'm of the belief Colorado would've given Edmonton a much harder series, but just for whatever reason cant beat Dallas

Everyone thought Vegas would. Then it was Dallas.

Colorado lost to Dallas, who got smoked by Edmonton. It is more likely Colorado would have faced similar fate.

 

[JKG33]

Everyone thought Vegas would. Then it was Dallas.

Colorado lost to Dallas, who got smoked by Edmonton. It is more likely Colorado would have faced similar fate.

Maybe youre right. But I also would've had Colorado beating Winnipeg in 4, that was a nightmare matchup for the Jets.

Also its hard to do worse than Dallas did vs Edmonton

 

[Pucklington]

Maybe youre right. But I also would've had Colorado beating Winnipeg in 4, that was a nightmare matchup for the Jets.

Also its hard to do worse than Dallas did vs Edmonton

Vegas managed it.

 

[obZen]

Just have the fans vote on match-ups for the first round. Wouldn't be any worse than what we currently have.

 

[connellc]

I have no idea why the switched 1 v 8, that made the most sense. It just reinforces my belief that playoff seeding is meaningless. I hardly watch regular season, unless you're a bubble team fighting tooth and nail.

Playoff hockey really is a completely different animal. Staying healthy is more important than seeding and home ice now (especially your last 10 games or so). I see no advantage to having a very strong regular season.

This has been my belief since the 2012 Kings. Just make it in the playoffs healthy, hot goaltender and without your key pieces injured.

 

[AvroArrow]

If we’re not getting the best teams squaring off in the final four, maybe those ‘best teams’ that constantly get eliminated aren’t actually the best?.

Maybe 2 or 3 of them are in the same division and forced to play one another, guaranteeing one gets eliminated early in the current format ?

 

[coolboarder]

I have no idea why the switched 1 v 8, that made the most sense. It just reinforces my belief that playoff seeding is meaningless. I hardly watch regular season, unless you're a bubble team fighting tooth and nail.

Playoff hockey really is a completely different animal. Staying healthy is more important than seeding and home ice now (especially your last 10 games or so). I see no advantage to having a very strong regular season.

This has been my belief since the 2012 Kings. Just make it in the playoffs healthy, hot goaltender and without your key pieces injured.

If staying healthy is more important, the NHL should consider do away with 82 game schedule and reduce to a reasonable 70-72 games schedule and eliminate back-to-back games to give players some rest and recover but length of season should reduce slightly by a week or two so it can end by Memorial Day weekend.

 

[connellc]

If staying healthy is more important, the NHL should consider do away with 82 game schedule and reduce to a reasonable 70-72 games schedule and eliminate back-to-back games to give players some rest and recover but length of season should reduce slightly by a week or two so it can end by Memorial Day weekend.

the league is to profit motivated...Less games mean less revenue. NHL doesn't care at all about entertainment value or keeping up with the other sports. As long as they grow at a decent pace, the owners are OK with it. That's why you saw all the expansion.

Since the lockout 20 years ago everyone in the NHL brass has won except for the who the fans that are paying for an overpriced regular season tickets. Again, this is why I only catch highlights/scores during the season and only start watching 1st round. I also stopped going to live games for entertainment 2 years ago.. Major Junior tickets in my area are only 30 dollars, and the entertainment value is on par with the NHL. Although OHL has watered down its product, at least it's affordable.

What makes sense, is that teams shouldn't grind their stars too much at the end of the season and put their depth guys in unfamiliar situations in the last 10 games.

 

[MiscBrah]

30 games - mini playoffs with the top 8 teams (2 from each division), big pot of money for those teams. 30 more reg season games, stanley cup playoffs. This way there is a natural break in the season to mimic olympics for 4 nations or whatever other cup they want to come up with.

Too many meaningless regular season games when what people want to see is the best on best. I don't need to see san jose play nashville 3-4x a season.

 

[Curufinwe]

If staying healthy is more important, the NHL should consider do away with 82 game schedule and reduce to a reasonable 70-72 games schedule and eliminate back-to-back games to give players some rest and recover but length of season should reduce slightly by a week or two so it can end by Memorial Day weekend.

The owners will happily do that so long as all the lost revenue comes out of the players share. I'm sure the players wouldn't taking a 13% pay cut for playing 13% fewer games.

 

[Mandar]

Any playoff format where the Leafs are out early is a good one.

that pretty much happens in all playoff formats....

 

[Slats432]

Maybe because I am a hockey fan, but to me it seems like no sports fanbase complains as much about everything as hockey fans. Or is it the same in every other sport?

 

[GIN ANTONIC]

Any playoff format where the Leafs are out early is a good one.

That is any format it would seem

 

[Golden_Jet]

If staying healthy is more important, the NHL should consider do away with 82 game schedule and reduce to a reasonable 70-72 games schedule and eliminate back-to-back games to give players some rest and recover but length of season should reduce slightly by a week or two so it can end by Memorial Day weekend.

You’d have to get the players to take 10-15% off their salaries to have a 72 game season again. To make the cap work, not sure if they would or not.

 

[avocadosmoothie]

LA should have been in the WCF

 

[Slats432]

LA should have been in the WCF