Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Discussion] NBA Style Mid season Tournament

Rate this topic


Provost

Recommended Posts

The NBA is discussion some form of mid-season tournament that would break up a long season.  The reported plan is one that would award a trophy and earn players $1 million each for winning it.

 

I have long thought we needed something mid-season as the dog days of Jan/Feb get pretty dreary and unwatchable.

 

I would propose something like clustering all the in division games into a mini tourney with some trophy awarded (Cascadia Cup style) and having the winning players split pots of cash between themselves and their charity of choice.

 

It would resolve a few playoff chases before the trade deadline and spur some extra movement there and incentivize players to not phone it in mid-season when the regular season games tend to be the worst.

 

Not adding games to the schedule, just formatting a segment of games within the regular season into a mini tournament.

Edited by Provost
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stay the course, the only change I would like is to start training camps sooner in September and start the regular season on October 1st every year and aim to have playoffs done a bit earlier than they have been.

 

Usually for me when June rolls around I am no longer interested in watching hockey unless of course.......the Canucks are in the finals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a laundry list of changes I'd love to impose on this corrupt league, if I were puck Gawd for a spell - but this doesn't target my main beefs.

 

Drudgery of reg season was a real challenge in the 1980's. About 80% of all teams waltzed into the PO's. Now that it's a 50/50 matter, most games seem to have some gravity to them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terrible idea IMO for both NBA and NHL.
Bad enough stopping for a meaningful tournament like the Olympics. 

NHL playoffs is one of the great tournaments in pro sport, the season is already too much of a grind and could easily be shortened by 10-20 games.

I think the idea of expanding the playoffs is better, drop to 72 game season and add a round of playoffs or a play in round like in bubble. 

Edited by DrJockitch
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Iron Fist said:

64 games and 5 rounds of playoffs would be better. more markets involved in playoffs

Players play with broken hands, feet or torn ligaments already in the playoffs.  Adding another round would end up with Finalists playing with 4-5 AHL caliber players or players playing at 50-75% of their capabilities.  You don't want that for the finals.

 

Not to mention that 4 round, 16 playoffs teams is the perfect number.  Adding byes or play-ins round would just add to the grueling schedule.  Playoffs are already tough on players as it is, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

51 minutes ago, timberz21 said:

Players play with broken hands, feet or torn ligaments already in the playoffs.  Adding another round would end up with Finalists playing with 4-5 AHL caliber players or players playing at 50-75% of their capabilities.  You don't want that for the finals.

 

Not to mention that 4 round, 16 playoffs teams is the perfect number.  Adding byes or play-ins round would just add to the grueling schedule.  Playoffs are already tough on players as it is, IMO.

32 teams now compared to 24. 50% of the league missing the playoffs seems like oversight.  Maybe a wildcard round or play in round while top seeds get a by for 1 round

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Provost said:

The NBA is discussion some form of mid-season tournament that would break up a long season.  The reported plan is one that would award a trophy and earn players $1 million each for winning it.

 

I have long thought we needed something mid-season as the dog days of Jan/Feb get pretty dreary and unwatchable.

 

I would propose something like clustering all the in division games into a mini tourney with some trophy awarded (Cascadia Cup style) and having the winning players split pots of cash between themselves and their charity of choice.

 

It would resolve a few playoff chases before the trade deadline and spur some extra movement there and incentivize players to not phone it in mid-season when the regular season games tend to be the worst.

 

Not adding games to the schedule, just formatting a segment of games within the regular season into a mini tournament.

The great thing about the Cascadia Cup is that it's not additional games, but just an extra tourney within the boundaries of the regular season. If something like what you're suggesting were to be implemented, this would be ideal. That means no extra games, but extra to play for when they're already playing.

 

Let's start with a mini point counting tourney for eliminated teams from the playoffs, as has been suggested often over the years, with the prize being 1OA. The team with the most points after their official elimination is the winner. It keeps things interesting for teams outside of playoffs, promotes winning, reduces tanking, and it doesn't add extra games.

Edited by We Are All Cucks
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Iron Fist said:

 

32 teams now compared to 24. 50% of the league missing the playoffs seems like oversight.  Maybe a wildcard round or play in round while top seeds get a by for 1 round

You also had way less parity at that time.  1 vs 16 was a joke.  I'd be curious to see how many 1-2 seeds were knocked off in the first round compared to pre and post 2000s.  I'm assuming there should be a big differences in %.  With the parity we have now, the push for the final playoffs spots are quite interesting IMO, just as much as a 5th round playoffs.  There is usually a bunch of teams around 92pts (+/- 4pts) fighting for these last playoffs spots.

 

MLB - 30 teams, 10 teams making the playoffs.

NBA - 32 teams, 16 making the playoffs, unless they make that play-in round permanent.

NFL - 32 teams, recently upgraded to 14 teams instead or 12.

 

NHL is already the most inclusive playoffs from the big four (with the NBA).  I think it's fine as it is.  You are removing (if my math is correct 288 regular season games) for a handful of playoff games, that will hurt teams IMO, especially the rich ones/big market.  

 

The only 5th round I would see happening would be like the NBA play-in round.  7 vs 8 single play-in game (winner makes the playoffs, loser plays winners 9-10 for last spot).  Hockey is such a grueling game, I don't think it's fair for team to have bye weeks.  Unlike football where a bye week is only 1 game or 1 week off, with 3 out of 5 or 4 out of 7 playoffs series a bye would make a team rest for potentially 10 to 14 days (long-term advantage but short-term disadvantage with the rust)

 

Edited by timberz21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So like a one week mid season tourney?

Each division all to themselves. All teams play each other once. All games at a neutral site, divisions at 4 neutral sites, possibly indoor baseball stadiums so maximum crowds. They could be like the bubble, 2 games per day(obviously not 2 games for one team on the same day). Everyone plays 5 games in 7 days.

4 separate mini trophies awarded based on points gained with some tie breakers based on goals for/against etc.

Charities involved with the monetary winnings, of course. ie: each team plays for a certain charity...Canuck Place etc. 

Use this to replace the all star fiasco. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, We Are All Cucks said:

The great thing about the Cascadia Cup is that it's not additional games, but just an extra tourney within the boundaries of the regular season. If something like what you're suggesting were to be implemented, this would be ideal. That means no extra games, but extra to play for when they're already playing.

Yes, no additional games, just a special cluster of regular season games… just a way to inject some life into the dullest part of the season for both players and fans.

 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, timberz21 said:

You also had way less parity at that time.  1 vs 16 was a joke.  I'd be curious to see how many 1-2 seeds were knocked off in the first round compared to pre and post 2000s.  I'm assuming there should be a big differences in %.  With the parity we have now, the push for the final playoffs spots are quite interesting IMO, just as much as a 5th round playoffs.  There is usually a bunch of teams around 92pts (+/- 4pts) fighting for these last playoffs spots.

 

MLB - 30 teams, 10 teams making the playoffs.

NBA - 32 teams, 16 making the playoffs, unless they make that play-in round permanent.

NFL - 32 teams, recently upgraded to 14 teams instead or 12.

 

NHL is already the most inclusive playoffs from the big four (with the NBA).  I think it's fine as it is.  You are removing (if my math is correct 288 regular season games) for a handful of playoff games, that will hurt teams IMO, especially the rich ones/big market.  

 

The only 5th round I would see happening would be like the NBA play-in round.  7 vs 8 single play-in game (winner makes the playoffs, loser plays winners 9-10 for last spot).  Hockey is such a grueling game, I don't think it's fair for team to have bye weeks.  Unlike football where a bye week is only 1 game or 1 week off, with 3 out of 5 or 4 out of 7 playoffs series a bye would make a team rest for potentially 10 to 14 days (long-term advantage but short-term disadvantage with the rust)

 

NBA only has 30 teams, they're expanding in the next couple of years. they need 28 teams or 26 teams, different league, no parity

Edited by Iron Fist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the idea of a mid-season tourney, and I think the OP's idea is a logical starting place for brainstorming how to implement it.

 

that said, in addition to money for players and charity, I'd like to see something involving home ice advantage or first round picks, or something with weight for the teams and fans. if the idea, I guess, is to act as a mid-season pressure relief valve for the players and staffs, that makes it more challenging to balance -- draft pick rewards would probably be easier to implement than home ice advantage rewards, since current players couldn't care less about draft picks, so the pressure to win wouldn't be as high internally as it would be if home ice advantage was on the line. 

 

you could make picks 33-36 (or maybe even picks 14-17) in the draft supplemental, as in round 2 starts at pick 37, and award each of those 4 picks to the winners of the the 4 divisional tournaments. you could dole them based on current league standings (higher winning percentage gets higher pick), or goal differential throughout the tournament. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, grumpyone said:

So like a one week mid season tourney?

Each division all to themselves. All teams play each other once. All games at a neutral site, divisions at 4 neutral sites, possibly indoor baseball stadiums so maximum crowds. They could be like the bubble, 2 games per day(obviously not 2 games for one team on the same day). Everyone plays 5 games in 7 days.

4 separate mini trophies awarded based on points gained with some tie breakers based on goals for/against etc.

Charities involved with the monetary winnings, of course. ie: each team plays for a certain charity...Canuck Place etc. 

Use this to replace the all star fiasco. 

I like this idea if, as mentioned, the games are part of the regular season standings, too. With 4 divisions instead of 6 it's a bit harder to pull off, but having 2 weeks of only intradivisional play and the winner gets the rights to home ice in the playoffs (providing they make it), or something along those lines. I think it would be fun - probably a scheduling nightmare, but that's not my job, so I don't care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change the way the lottery works first. Instead of last place getting best odds at #1, give them to the teams that barely missed the playoffs to get them over the hump. That way teams cant outright tank and are forced to make strong business/personnel decisions on their roster. 

 

Its getting pretty ridiculous that teams like arizona and buffalo are gifted high draft picks year after year, yet they seem to get worse instead of better. 

 

Its no coincidence that the good teams are consistently good, albeit with a bad year or two. Good drafting and development is how you win and stay competitive for long periods of time. 

 

Edmonton and buffalo are living proof that first overalls and strings of top five picks mean very little. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MystifyNCrucify said:

Change the way the lottery works first. Instead of last place getting best odds at #1, give them to the teams that barely missed the playoffs to get them over the hump. That way teams cant outright tank and are forced to make strong business/personnel decisions on their roster. 

 

Its getting pretty ridiculous that teams like arizona and buffalo are gifted high draft picks year after year, yet they seem to get worse instead of better. 

 

Its no coincidence that the good teams are consistently good, albeit with a bad year or two. Good drafting and development is how you win and stay competitive for long periods of time. 

 

Edmonton and buffalo are living proof that first overalls and strings of top five picks mean very little. 

That doesn’t really have anything to do with the thread at all… but thanks for the rant.

 

Maybe you could have made a little effort and tied it in to the topic?

 

The lottery odds could be ranked by the placement of the mini tourney.  The better you do in the tourney, the higher your odds in the draft lottery for the teams that missed the playoffs.

 

It leaves some randomness in the process with surprise non-contending teams doing well in the tourney, and still using a lottery odds system but it would incentivize winning rather than losing.

 

Home playoff in the first round could be the reward for the playoff teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Provost my point being,  if the idea is to make the midseason games more interesting, promote the idea that losing games not only hurts your chances at getting a high pick, but winning games still gets you closer to the playoffs. 

 

As it stands, for some teams theres an obvious conflict of interest. Players dont want to lose, but you cant honestly tell me arizona is actively trying to win. 

 

I hardly think its a good idea to institute a silly circus act tournament. What happens if an elite player for a bubble team gets injured? So much for that playoff race. 

 

Injury/insurance issues aside, a lot of players are playing for bonuses so your bounty system is already flawed, not to mention the teams most likely to win are bubble teams anyway. 

 

What happens if the standings are like when the kings or blues won the cup? Kings barely made it in the playoffs and steamrolled to the cup. The blues went on a huge tear as well. 

 

Im sorry if you think my “rant wasnt on topic”. 

 

Edited by MystifyNCrucify
Apparently i tagged a second provost instead of the original?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...