Around the NHL 2018-2019

[shrader]

8 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

Get with the times!!!

It's not politically correct to make the lesser teams actually have to work hard to get a trophy, LOL.

Years ago my bowling league gave a trophy to the last place team....it was the back-end of mule. 

I hope you still display that trophy proudly.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

15 hours ago, pi2000 said:

Quennville to SEA.   E5

He is going to the EPL?  Cool!

[PASabreFan]

Two suggestions I am pulling out of my arse as usual: 1. Is the format consistent with the league's (every league's?) desire for parity? It makes it easier for teams lower in the standings to make a run to at least the conference final. 2. The early-round matchups certainly are more dynamic and interesting than the usual 1-8, 2-7 setup.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Just now, PASabreFan said:

Two suggestions I am pulling out of my arse as usual: 1. Is the format consistent with the league's (every league's?) desire for parity? It makes it easier for teams lower in the standings to make a run to at least the conference final. 2. The early-round matchups certainly are more dynamic and interesting than the usual 1-8, 2-7 setup.

Your arse nailed it this time.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

27 minutes ago, shrader said:

I hope you still display that trophy proudly.

Actually I don't have any of them anymore...but yes I did. We won the league the next year.....maybe proof that it motivated us rather than hurting our feelings.

[Taro T]

58 minutes ago, Eleven said:

So, they would have been "easy pickings" for Vegas two rounds later?  Didn't we get an entertaining Final as it was?

No league that has conferences does this cross-conference stuff.  Beat your opponents, win the championship, the order of things shouldn't matter.

Yea! A 5 game final.  Pretty sure the league would rather have 2 evenly matched teams that get to at least game 6, if not the preferred suspense of the winner take all Game 7.

And before hockey went to playoffs, no other sport did so.  There was the World Series in baseball to determine which LEAGUE champion was the best one, but they didn't hold playoffs to determine who got to playinit.  They played 148 or so games to decide who was the best.  Why shouldn't the NHL lead the way on something again?  Hockey started the practices of playoffs, handing out their trophies in public, and acknowledging captains on their uniforms before other NA leagues did so.  Why not lead the way on another front?

And, no idea why basketball goes through conference championships but the reason baseball comes up on different sides is they still have 2 separate leagues.  The NFL Conferences are remnants of 2 separate leagues also vying for overall interleague supremacy.  The NHL hasn't acknowledged a rival on its own level for close to 100 years now.  The East & West conferences brought about by expansion backin '67 didn't even last a decade before everything went 1-12 & then 1-16.  The historical importance & distinction of having the playoffs separated into conferences is not nearly as strong in hockey as it is in the other big 3 sports.

And even while the East & West conferences were still a thing, they flipped midway through the playoffs.

The only semilegit reason to force the playoff tourney to accomodate division, conference, then league supremacy IMHO is to accomodate playoff bracket pools.  That is not, again IMHO, as compelling a reason for setting up the playoffs as having the best teams in the finals & making the regular season have meaning/importance.

Edited December 18, 2018 by Taro T

[PASabreFan]

8 minutes ago, New Scotland (NS) said:

Your arse nailed it this time.

Tanks for the kiss of death!

[Sabres Fan in NS]

1 minute ago, PASabreFan said:

Tanks for the kiss of death!

Pucker up, Nancy.

[Taro T]

54 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

Get with the times!!!

It's not politically correct to make the lesser teams actually have to work hard to get a trophy, LOL.

Years ago my bowling league gave a trophy to the last place team....it was the back-end of mule. 

And the format I've proposed always gives the more successful team from the regular season within the previous round's bracket the theoretically easier opponent to face in thst next round.  You want to sneak into the playoffs, ok buttercup, but you have a much harder row to hoe as you will have to run the gauntlet of top teams to come out on top.

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, shrader said:

 But is Tampa's 113 points really any worse than the Jets' 114, or even Nashville's 117?  It goes right back to the imbalanced schedules thing.  Allowing for crossover across conferences like that opens up a huge can of worms.  Do you really want to do that to account for what is going to be a fairly rare scenario.

Fairly rare?  It happened last year & could easily happen again this season.  Assuming Tampa doesn't tail off next year we'd be looking at 3 in a row when Buffalo starts to put it all together.  ;)

And what can of worms are you suggesting are opened?  IF Nashville's & Winnipeg's records wereinflated due to the rest of their division's teams being significantly inferior, then they'd get knocked out in the 2nd or 3rd rounds when they go against the teams from other divisions.  Not sure how giving an edge to the teams that earn it over 82 games is opening a can of worms.

[shrader]

 

18 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

Actually I don't have any of them anymore...but yes I did. We won the league the next year.....maybe proof that it motivated us rather than hurting our feelings.

I'd put the thing on my desk at work if I ever got one.  Ugly trophies are far better than the typical office stuff.

 

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

And the format I've proposed always gives the more successful team from the regular season within the previous round's bracket the theoretically easier opponent to face in thst next round.  You want to sneak into the playoffs, ok buttercup, but you have a much harder row to hoe as you will have to run the gauntlet of top teams to come out on top.

The leagues are ruled by the almighty tv dollar.  Time zones are a bitch.  They're going to do everything they can to avoid that cross country audience fracturing matchup and cater to the east coast as much as possible.  Any realignment done by this league, the primary motivation will never be about leveling the playing field.  It will always be about $$$.

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

8 minutes ago, Taro T said:

And the format I've proposed always gives the more successful team from the regular season within the previous round's bracket the theoretically easier opponent to face in thst next round.  You want to sneak into the playoffs, ok buttercup, but you have a much harder row to hoe as you will have to run the gauntlet of top teams to come out on top.

The problem is more that the wildcard team could actually be the best team. May have snuck into playoffs because of early season injuries or other events that caused them to end season on a good note.

[shrader]

5 minutes ago, Taro T said:

Fairly rare?  It happened last year & could easily happen again this season.  Assuming Tampa doesn't tail off next year we'd be looking at 3 in a row when Buffalo starts to put it all together. ?

And what can of worms are you suggesting are opened?  IF Nashville's & Winnipeg's records wereinflated due to the rest of their division's teams being significantly inferior, then they'd get knocked out in the 2nd or 3rd rounds when they go against the teams from other divisions.  Not sure how giving an edge to the teams that earn it over 82 games is opening a can of worms.

The can of worms is calling one team better than another even though they played completely different schedules.  Like I said in what you quoted, a one point difference between Tampa and Winnipeg really doesn't mean all that much because of that.  I'm not willing to say Nashville and the Jets were the two best teams in the league, making that the idea final matchup due to that.  Allowing the crossover makes for artificial 1-4, 2-3 matchups where we don't really have any idea if those are actually the 1st and 4th best teams.

If I really wanted to create an ideal situation, I'd completely break off the the east and the west pre-interleague play MLB-style.  But that completely violates the money motivation, so it will never happen.

Edited December 18, 2018 by shrader

[Taro T]

5 minutes ago, shrader said:

 

I'd put the thing on my desk at work if I ever got one.  Ugly trophies are far better than the typical office stuff.

 

The leagues are ruled by the almighty tv dollar.  Time zones are a bitch.  They're going to do everything they can to avoid that cross country audience fracturing matchup and cater to the east coast as much as possible.  Any realignment done by this league, the primary motivation will never be about leveling the playing field.  It will always be about $$$.

The biggest money making sport in the US by FAR is NFL football.  Their 2 conferences are spread across the country without regard to timezone & their playoffs routinely have teams traipsing across the country.

The 2 baseball leagues are also spread across the country & don't worry about timezones for their playoffs either.  

Which leaves bounceyball.  Seriously, of all the people on this board, you're going to consider a practice of bonceyball that the NHL follows to be sacrosanct?

[LTS]

You gotta win to win it all.  Whether you beat the best team in the first round or the last round.

If the owners were worried about other things they'd modify the playoff format.  It's not happening, yet.  It probably will be modified again but the same holds true. If a team with 155 points loses in the first round then that's just too bad.  If you want to use the regular season to determine the best teams then you remove the playoffs entirely and let the top two teams play each other.

As long as there are playoffs the "best" team is the one who survives the playoffs.

[shrader]

2 minutes ago, Taro T said:

The biggest money making sport in the US by FAR is NFL football.  Their 2 conferences are spread across the country without regard to timezone & their playoffs routinely have teams traipsing across the country.

The 2 baseball leagues are also spread across the country & don't worry about timezones for their playoffs either.  

Which leaves bounceyball.  Seriously, of all the people on this board, you're going to consider a practice of bonceyball that the NHL follows to be sacrosanct?

The NHL is much more of a niche sport than any of the others.  I'm definitely not going to compare them (or any other sport for that matter) to the NFL.  Their setup is so insanely easy to market and they exist on a completely different plane.

Sadly bounceyball is the most comparable since their team numbers and games played are pretty much the same.  I really don't have a clue what they do for their playoffs though and hopefully I can keep it that way.?

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

16 minutes ago, shrader said:

 

I'd put the thing on my desk at work if I ever got one.  Ugly trophies are far better than the typical office stuff.

 

The leagues are ruled by the almighty tv dollar.  Time zones are a bitch.  They're going to do everything they can to avoid that cross country audience fracturing matchup and cater to the east coast as much as possible.  Any realignment done by this league, the primary motivation will never be about leveling the playing field.  It will always be about $$$.

Haha.....kinda like the "ugly" X-MAS sweater.

[Taro T]

7 minutes ago, shrader said:

The can of worms is calling one team better than another even though they played completely different schedules.  Like I said in what you quoted, a one point difference between Tampa and Winnipeg really doesn't mean all that much because of that.  I'm not willing to say Nashville and the Jets were the two best teams in the league, making that the idea final matchup due to that.  Allowing the crossover makes for artificial 1-4, 2-3 matchups where we don't really have any idea if those are actually the 1st and 4th best teams.

Allowing crossover allows for the top team to come out of each division to not have to face each other until the Semifinals at the earliest & quite possibly not until the SCFs.

I'm not saying they necessarily were the 2 best either.  But mine is the only system that gives them the opportunity to prove that they were.  And, considering that system gives Nashville the reward of getti g the lower seeded team each round relative to the one the Jets finishing only 1 point lower have to face, there is no taking any games off in the regular season.

And, this system is the ONLY one, except for the 1-16 format that most agree has issues of its own (travel, unbalanced regular season schedules, etc.) that allows for ANY combination of teams from original divisions to be in the finals.  My system only slightly adds to playoff travel relative to the current system & naturally accounts for skewing of regular season results due to unbalanced schedules by the way the teams advance.  If Nashville & the Jets had artificially inflated records, then they both should have gotten ousted in the next round or 3rd round at the latest.

And this system doesn't prevent a 16th overall team from winning it all it just (nearly) guarantees it'll have the toughest road to accomplish that task.  Which is right.  The regular season should mean something.

[Taro T]

15 minutes ago, LTS said:

You gotta win to win it all.  Whether you beat the best team in the first round or the last round.

If the owners were worried about other things they'd modify the playoff format.  It's not happening, yet.  It probably will be modified again but the same holds true. If a team with 155 points loses in the first round then that's just too bad.  If you want to use the regular season to determine the best teams then you remove the playoffs entirely and let the top two teams play each other.

As long as there are playoffs the "best" team is the one who survives the playoffs.

So why not have 1 play 2 in the 1st round & 3 play 4?  Shouldn't matter who you play when; you've got to beat them all, right?

And I disagree with your premise for regular season determining all.  The regular season has a purpose; it knocks out 1/2 of the teams (literally starting for playoffs '22) & seeds the teams.  Is the seeding perfect?  Obviously not, but barring some other system it is the best proxy for team strength we have.  And shouldn't the teams that have shown themselves to be the best teams get the easiest road to the championship?  If not, please see my 1st Q again.  ;)

And I've said earlier, I know the league will never go back to this format; but it gives (short of 1v16) the best chance of having the 2 best teams meet in the finals as literally any 2 teams that win their 1st round series can meet in the finals.

[SwampD]

Has there ever been a playoff system for anything that people didn't complain about or think could be improved?

[LTS]

3 minutes ago, Taro T said:

So why not have 1 play 2 in the 1st round & 3 play 4?  Shouldn't matter who you play when; you've got to beat them all, right?

And I disagree with your premise for regular season determining all.  The regular season has a purpose; it knocks out 1/2 of the teams (literally starting for playoffs '22) & seeds the teams.  Is the seeding perfect?  Obviously not, but barring some other system it is the best proxy for team strength we have.  And shouldn't the teams that have shown themselves to be the best teams get the easiest road to the championship?  If not, please see my 1st Q again. ?

And I've said earlier, I know the league will never go back to this format; but it gives (short of 1v16) the best chance of having the 2 best teams meet in the finals as literally any 2 teams that win their 1st round series can meet in the finals.

My point about the regular season is that it's not used to determine who the best team is.... so finishing with 117 or 94 points is irrelevant as long as you get in.  In theory the 117 point team should win... but we know better.

As for the easiest route to the championship, let me try this a different way.  Disregarding the other conference...

Your team plays the teams that finished 8, 4, 2 and gets to the championship.

Your team plays the teams that finished 2, 4, 8 and gets to the championship.  

What was the easier road?  They are technically the same although most people would say the first is easier.  I would say that the first provides the most likely opportunity to move into each successive round, but when amassed as the entire path the difficulty remains the same.  You played the same 3 teams and had to beat them. I am not accounting for financials and a desire to play more games.

Examine the first scenario... a common rebuttal would be that 4 could get taken out by 5 and then you;'d play 5.  Well, if that's the case would you consider 5 a tougher team than 4?  I mean, they just beat them.

In the end... you have to beat the best team or hope they lose along the way.  If they lose, are they the best team?

[Marions Piazza]

3 minutes ago, LTS said:

My point about the regular season is that it's not used to determine who the best team is.... so finishing with 117 or 94 points is irrelevant as long as you get in.  In theory the 117 point team should win... but we know better.

As for the easiest route to the championship, let me try this a different way.  Disregarding the other conference...

Your team plays the teams that finished 8, 4, 2 and gets to the championship.

Your team plays the teams that finished 2, 4, 8 and gets to the championship.  

What was the easier road?  They are technically the same although most people would say the first is easier.  I would say that the first provides the most likely opportunity to move into each successive round, but when amassed as the entire path the difficulty remains the same.  You played the same 3 teams and had to beat them. I am not accounting for financials and a desire to play more games.

Examine the first scenario... a common rebuttal would be that 4 could get taken out by 5 and then you;'d play 5.  Well, if that's the case would you consider 5 a tougher team than 4?  I mean, they just beat them.

In the end... you have to beat the best team or hope they lose along the way.  If they lose, are they the best team?

it depends. a hot goalie can really make a difference. I think if the 99 Sabres. They were a joke on offense, decent on defense with in-human goaltending. I do not think we were the best team to come out of the East, but alas, we did under amazing goaltending. The best teams can lose in the quarter finals or whatever they are called now.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

10 minutes ago, SwampD said:

Has there ever been a playoff system for anything that people didn't complain about or think could be improved?

Champions League is pretty good, although they follow the infinate wisdom of FIFA and use the 'draw' system to group teams.

Oh well, I tried.  Forget it.

In answer to your question ... No.

[WildCard]

38 minutes ago, LTS said:

You gotta win to win it all.  Whether you beat the best team in the first round or the last round.

That's not necessarily true. There are plenty of playoffs paths that don't involve beating the best team in the league

[LTS]

1 minute ago, Marions Piazza said:

it depends. a hot goalie can really make a difference. I think if the 99 Sabres. They were a joke on offense, decent on defense with in-human goaltending. I do not think we were the best team to come out of the East, but alas, we did under amazing goaltending. The best teams can lose in the quarter finals or whatever they are called now.

Well, then how do you define who the best team is?  

People say the best team should have won.  I say, if the team won, they were the best.  There's really no other way to put it.  Any reason for that specific series points to the team that won doing things (or having less fragile players, etc.) than the other team.  They were the best at that moment in time and the reality is, that's the best we can do.  If you want to begin to break down every factor that goes into it, you can.  But the outcome remains the same.