Bodee Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 This is a bit of musing because I am pissed off and still thought we would be in the SC at this stage. So go easy. Is it right that we place so much importance on the Cup Competition? Should the regular season be so long if it is so undervalued? As someone fairly new to the NHL it strikes me (and I'm becoming like the rest of you) that we plough through 82 games which seem to be more and more looked on as a starter before the main course. We fight our way to the Presidents Trophy ( some people don't even care) to get home advantage and we are out in 5 games. Now the point is we were arguably the best team this year and yet we were crocked anyway...........before we even got started. Something strikes me as wrong about that. This post is a selfish one on my behalf because I am 66 years of age and I would like to see a SC win before my end game. (or at least more regular finals) I don't know the answer and I admit the present format is exciting when it is your team going all the way. Here is one suggestion though. Why not make the SC a final of the two conference leaders AFTER the top 8 in each Conference have played a round robin best of 3 with the top 4 in each conference having the 3rd game home advantage. (21 games) The SC Final of both conference leaders is then a best of 7. (Total 28 games) The main plus is that the conference leader has to triumph over ALL the other 7 teams (not just a hit or miss best of 7 against one team) That team could be a team of bruisers who even if you get past in a best of 7 they have crippled most of your players. The other plus is that most teams would be in it a lot longer ( I think. I am basing that on how close the conferences can end up) So what I am saying is the best team o/a is more likely to contest the final and most of the teams are in the competition for a lot longer. I maintain that unlike the present format the best team would be more likely to win......though not guaranteed. Would it work?..............would it be any good?.............would it be better than present.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
etsen3 Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 No need for radical changes. It's perfect the way it now. 7 game series, 4 rounds. I love the intensity and rivalries involved in the current format, I wouldn't want to see the playoffs become more like the Olympics or something like that. The only change I would like to see is to have the regular season either shortened or moved up by a few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Would make the President's trophy more meaningful, but i don't see the league making any change to lower the amount of games ie. money taken in. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thad Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 The Stanley cup wouldn't be as meaningful if you took away the 4 best of 7 wars to get it. Save the round robins for international hockey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted May 15, 2012 Author Share Posted May 15, 2012 Fair enough. Another question then. ........................How would you describe the team that wins the Stanley Cup as opposed to the team that wins the President's Trophy? Lucky? Tough? Best? Most injury free? Our team was not markedly different in the last two seasons. They won the President's Trophy in both. However their performance in the SC was at opposite ends of the scale. All the talk was how experienced we would be this year but in fact it was more like the other way round. Was it all down to the loss of Daniel and the injuries to Kes and Bieksa? If it was I wonder what Boston's excuse was.........although they were not PT winners. In my scenario above, Daniel's injury would hardly have been a factor. Kesler would/could surely have been replaced and Bieksa could either have been rested to come back later or replaced. Our bad start "might" have been overcome. Last question. If we win the PT for the next 3 years (unlikely I know, but possible) how would we feel if we go out in 4/5 in the first round each time.............how would people/fans look back on that team? Would that team be considered the greatest ever hockey team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bd71 Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 The playoffs are the best. I've been watching the Stanley Cup playoffs for more than 30 years and it is still the greatest challenge in team sports as far as I'm concerned. The President's trophy doesn't really mean much because the schedule isn't balanced and likely won't ever be so it's never a true representation of which team is best. However, the reality is that the first overall team does win the cup more often than any other place and for the most part a team that is seeded in the top 4 wins the cup. The regular season is long for one reason. Revenue. Don't forget that 14 teams get no playoff dates at all and another 8 teams only get a couple of home playoff games. Plus you do have to qualify for the top 8 in your conference so it's not meaningless. The Canucks have been spoiled of late because their division is mostly in a down cycle. In the next couple of years it is going to get a lot tougher for Vancouver because the teams in the northwest are getting better. If you don't win the division the playoffs are no guarantee in the West. Dallas was leading the Pacific for a long time and missed the playoffs by a tiny margin. Two of the teams they battled with are now in the conference finals. That's how close it can be. I love the playoffs and have never understood the soccer system even though this past weekend was pretty amazing. Having to beat a team 4 times in a couple of weeks with travel and no gimmicks like shoot-outs or 4-4 overtime is a very difficult task. Doing that 4 times in 2 months makes you worthy of hoisting the greatest trophy on earth! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted May 15, 2012 Author Share Posted May 15, 2012 I agree with all of what you say except for the reference to soccer. What I was suggesting doesn't exist in soccer. What I was trying for was a halfway house that took a lot of the "luck of the bounce" and "injury misfortune" out of the format. If these factors are acceptable and in some way responsible for making the SC more exciting, then you could argue the same for the different standards/relaxing of the rules/adjudication............which causes much head scratching and not a few threads on here. I suppose what has motivated this thread was the overall feeling that the Canucks were imo no way inferior to some of the teams that have progressed, that's all. But I appreciate the responses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bd71 Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 A lot of what you say does make sense but I think that those factors are just a part of it all. Injuries are part of sports. Suspensions as well. I think the reason why we love the playoffs is the intensity that it brings. And it is really, really hard to win. Look at the first expansion in 1967. Kings, Seals, Penguins, Flyers, Blues and Northstars. Penguins and Flyers have 5 cups but only the Stars once they moved to Dallas have one of the other four teams. Then we all know the history of the Sabres and Canucks! The Jets/Coyotes haven't won. It is a very hard championship to win. And I know a lot of the reason people want change is because their team didn't do well and you mention that initially. In LA, New Jersey and Phoenix I'm pretty sure no one is currently advocating a change and next year they very well could be! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 The way I look at it, is the whole thing is just one big tournament and the only real goal is the Stanley Cup. So to me, the President's trophy is almost no different from the Campbell Bowl or Prince of Wales trophy. It's just a half-way recognition, but the ultimate goal is the Stanley Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 I've been thinking about this a little more. Here's another perspective of sorts... If you look up in the rafters at the Bell Centre in Montreal, there are no division banners or conference banners. If they had ever won a President's trophy, I am sure they would not raise a banner for it either. All you will find up there are retired jerseys and Stanley Cup banners. The President's trophy has only been around since 1986. Kids don't dream of winning the President's trophy, only the Stanley Cup. So to say that the team fights it way to the President's Trophy is a little inaccurate. I believe the only thing they are looking to accomplish there is home ice advantage. Some people claim it isn't worth it, but over the 26 President's Trophy winners, 7 won the Stanley Cup. That's a little better than 25% which is a pretty good rate of success. As for the OP's suggestion... a few years ago, the WHL tried having a round robin in their playoff system. They did this because at the time they chose to have 6 teams make the playoffs and it doesn't work well to have brackets when there are only 6 teams. Now I can't remember exactly (they changed it a few times) but it was either a round-robin to get from 6 to 4 teams, or a 2nd round round-robin to get from 3 to 2 teams. either way, it was hugely unpopular. It seemed easier for a lesser team to advance than with a bracket playoff system. Another suggestion you hear frequently is to reward regular season performance with a first round bye. The problem with this is (besides revenue), would the two-week break be too long for teams to wait for their next game? What I think might happen is this... With the new CBA we will see some version of the divisional realignment that the NHLPA shot down. But, I think that 5 teams from each division will make the playoffs and there will be a preliminary round (maybe best of 3 or 5) where the 4th seed plays the 5th seed. In that way the top 3 teams in the division get a bit of a reward for regular season success, and more teams make the playoffs which the owners would love the revenue from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raph Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 It's up to management to weigh the pros and cons of persuing the President's Trophy. Obviously, our team felt it was necessary to play Kesler and Bieksa 20 mins a game despite being able to easily make the playoffs. And despite the fact that we have the likes of Hodgson and Tanev to fill in more minutes to give our injured guys a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted May 15, 2012 Author Share Posted May 15, 2012 It's up to management to weigh the pros and cons of persuing the President's Trophy. Obviously, our team felt it was necessary to play Kesler and Bieksa 20 mins a game despite being able to easily make the playoffs. And despite the fact that we have the likes of Hodgson and Tanev to fill in more minutes to give our injured guys a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvandude Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 I have been asking myself this similar question with more frequency the more playoff hockey I watch. It's great. It's exciting. It's tradition. But it's NOT the fairest system. There is no way that a team beating another team over 7 games can be considered more fair than a team beating another team and many others over 82 games. The current system is more fair than a 1 game playoff or a best of 3 or 5. But statistically/common sense-wise, 82 games represents a team's stregnth more than a best of 7 series, or even 4 best of 7 series... the weaker/tougher schedules shouldn't make a big difference over 82 games given the salary cap and the "parity" among NHL games. Over the whole season, the 2011/2012 Canucks or Rangers or Pittsburgh ARE better teams than 2011/2012 columbus and oilers, and there is no way that over 82 games these weaker teams can come on top of the better teams... but in any one game, they can beat even the best team... and even over 7 games... all it takes is a couple of lucky bounces, a key injury, some bad ref calls, and the "momentum" could easily change. Again, in my opinion, and I believe supported by most facts and common sense, a regular season 82-game champion represents the best team overall, better than a 4 best of 7 series can. But it is less exciting, and hence brings in less money and tv ratings, which is afterall what is important for a business that is NHL. Nothing wrong with that of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvandude Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 But I still think there can be improvements made to the system that values the regular season and also keeps the exciting playoffs format. My vote would be: - 2 conferences, no divisions, everyone plays 4 times vs conference teams and 1 time vs non-conference teams = 71 games (11 less regular season games) - every team makes the playoffs, with higher seed having home ice advantage (additional 4-7 games for each team) - #1 seeds get a bye in the first round (to make the brackets work, #2 vs #15, so on) - for every 10 or so points difference in the standing, the team with the higher points starts the series with an extra win, with maybe a maximum of 2 win advantage (if # 2 seed has over 20 points more than the #15 seed, then they start the seires at 2-0 and only need to win 2 games to advance) This system hits a lot of the points that people argue about: - the exciting playoff system exists, and every team in the league has a chance to participate (should be better for revenues too) - regular season is shortened a bit, which is what most people want, and the extra 4-7 games in the playoffs should make up for at least part of the revenue lost due to the slightly shorter season - regular season games and ranking become more important since now, the more you win and the more points you get, the more advantage you'll have in the playoffs. Given the higher importance of the regular season, I bet the revenues would even increase, specially towards the end... and the excitement (instead of the current system where the end of the season is usually only exciting for the teams close to making/missing the playoffs) - the no division, no lame 3rd seed system also makes the regular season more fair. In addition, playing 4 games instead of 6 games against your current division rivals shouldn't make a big difference in the whole "manufactured rivalry" thing the nhl is trying to do (again for money reasons), since actual rivalries are so much more meaningful anyway (e.g. Canucks vs Hawks @ 4 games/year, Canucks vs. Leafs @ 2 games/year, Canucks vs Bruins @ 1 game/year compared to the lame Canucks vs Avs/Wild "rivalry" @ 6 games/year). I really do think such a system would be the best balance between fairness, excitement, money making for the league. The only issue is that it's a huge change to the current system, and won't bode well with the traditionalists..... But I myself was never much for traditions; if things can be improved, they should be improved (in my opinion!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWhom Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 More and more the SC is becoming less and less meaningful/important. And the more often that the best teams don't play for the SCF the less it will mean. The current playoff format of letting 16 teams play is stupid since all it does is it rewards mediocrity and says that playing well over a long season means zip. The best model is that used in MLB where to make the playoff you need to win your division, or be the one best 2nd place team, but the NHL will never do this because they think that the more teams that play the more money they make. The Kings are playing amazing but after sleepwalking through the season they should never have been in a position to steam roll the two best teams in the league plus (presumably) the Coyotes on their way to the final. Top4 from each conference into the playoffs is the only fair way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlayStation Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 More and more the SC is becoming less and less meaningful/important. And the more often that the best teams don't play for the SCF the less it will mean. The current playoff format of letting 16 teams play is stupid since all it does is it rewards mediocrity and says that playing well over a long season means zip. The best model is that used in MLB where to make the playoff you need to win your division, or be the one best 2nd place team, but the NHL will never do this because they think that the more teams that play the more money they make. The Kings are playing amazing but after sleepwalking through the season they should never have been in a position to steam roll the two best teams in the league plus (presumably) the Coyotes on their way to the final. Top4 from each conference into the playoffs is the only fair way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrWhom Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Disagree, while yes I've lost interest for the most part with this years Stanley Cup Playoffs, but it can also be very exciting to see an underdog story. The 8th place team isnt necessarily mediocre as you put it, they could of been battled with injuries all season till playoff time, and finally start dominating teams. Theres lots of different factors, such as your division. Some divisions are stacked, some are weak Ex North West Division, would it be fair to allow a team like Philly to miss out of the playoffs because they finished 3rd in a tight division, but on the other hand have a team like San Jose finish first because their division was a pile of garbage? That goes against your rant about mediocre teams making it in, while a great team misses out. The formats great as it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 The current playoff format of letting 16 teams play is stupid since all it does is it rewards mediocrity and says that playing well over a long season means zip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 If it ain't broke don't fix it. Just have two conferences. Top 8 teams in each conference gets in. Each team plays the other teams in the conference 4 times. (14x4=54) They play each team in the other conference twice (30) = 84 game schedule. This stops the garbage of teams in the East avoiding travel, and every team gets to see all the teams each season. Start training camp in September, have 4 games for pre-season, and start first week of October and end in March. Have the playoffs April and May. That way it's June/July/and part of August off) (Ideally I'd nuke two teams Phoenix and one other team, and have 28 teams, a supplemental draft, then the interlocking schedule works even better. 13x4= 52 games + 2x14= 28= 80 game season. But that will never happen.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodee Posted May 16, 2012 Author Share Posted May 16, 2012 Disagree, while yes I've lost interest for the most part with this years Stanley Cup Playoffs, but it can also be very exciting to see an underdog story. The 8th place team isnt necessarily mediocre as you put it, they could of been battled with injuries all season till playoff time, and finally start dominating teams. Theres lots of different factors, such as your division. Some divisions are stacked, some are weak Ex North West Division, would it be fair to allow a team like Philly to miss out of the playoffs because they finished 3rd in a tight division, but on the other hand have a team like San Jose finish first because their division was a pile of garbage? That goes against your rant about mediocre teams making it in, while a great team misses out. The formats great as it is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.