Yesterday we uploaded the new "Reveries" code to the Buzztron 9000. This new update will make the most accurate hockey predictions in the world!!
- twiztedmike

Please refer to the computer as it's proper name, Electric Phillip. Thank you.

Blue Jackets over Penguins will not happen in the playoffs unless they have to call up the entire WBS roster to replace all of the injured Penguins WILL NOT HAPPEN
They are not ready yet to dethrone the CHAMPS

Please refer to the computer as it's proper name, Electric Phillip. Thank you.
- eichiefs9

and you are my electric boogaloo

Let's look at something interesting.
(you know... other than the Buzztron 9000's inability to pick at even .500)
The current playoff format really doesn't reward winning as well as it should.
What if we took the top 8 from both conferences and re-ranked them 1-16 for the playoffs.
Here is what we would have if it started today:
East - WSH, PITT, CLB, NYR, MTL, OTT, TOR, BOS
West - CHI, MIN, SJ, ANA, EDM, CAL, STL, NSH

Upon re-ranking 1-16 by total points (I know not all teams are even in games... but just for discussion) we would have the following matchups in round one:
WSH vs BOS
PITT vs TOR
CLB vs NSH
CHI vs STL
MIN vs CAL
NYR vs EDM
SJ vs OTT
MTL vs ANA

Pros:
Using this format changes the fact that a team like MTL who finished first in their division is rewarded in the first round (normally) playing a worse team. This year is not the case with the Rangers or Blue Jackets the most likely match up. WSH would get the same matchup, but PITT would get a much better draw than playing another good team from the Metro, same goes for CLB.

Cons:
East vs West mathups for TV and travel.

Thoughts?
- mlindsay

Most creative idea I've heard for this was on the radio the other day. Though I know it would never happen, it was suggested the top teams CHOOSE their opponents one by one. So Washington picks who it wants to play, then Pittsburgh etc. It makes divisional records completely irrelevant, but certainly makes conference seeding more important. Besides, it would cause some serious nastiness as teams fight for revenge against the team that WANTED to face them.

Let's look at something interesting.
(you know... other than the Buzztron 9000's inability to pick at even .500)
The current playoff format really doesn't reward winning as well as it should.
What if we took the top 8 from both conferences and re-ranked them 1-16 for the playoffs.
Here is what we would have if it started today:
East - WSH, PITT, CLB, NYR, MTL, OTT, TOR, BOS
West - CHI, MIN, SJ, ANA, EDM, CAL, STL, NSH

Upon re-ranking 1-16 by total points (I know not all teams are even in games... but just for discussion) we would have the following matchups in round one:
WSH vs BOS
PITT vs TOR
CLB vs NSH
CHI vs STL
MIN vs CAL
NYR vs EDM
SJ vs OTT
MTL vs ANA

Pros:
Using this format changes the fact that a team like MTL who finished first in their division is rewarded in the first round (normally) playing a worse team. This year is not the case with the Rangers or Blue Jackets the most likely match up. WSH would get the same matchup, but PITT would get a much better draw than playing another good team from the Metro, same goes for CLB.

Cons:
East vs West mathups for TV and travel.

Thoughts?
- mlindsay

I think this is what will end up happening in the future. Going back to the 1-16 format. Having the Caps and Pens face each other in the second round is ridiculous. Of course I recall when Detroit and Colorado was the real Stanley Cup in 96, 97 and 02 in the WCF. As for the travel, it might be tough if a #1 seed like say Washington were to draw a #16 seed say LA. Is this fair for the Caps in this scenario? No. But ideally the NHL should go back to 2 points for any win and 0 points for any loss. Make regular seasons worth something again. Right now there's too many teams who think they're better than they are because they are awarded loser points. At least with the 1-16 playoff format, the best seeded teams get to play the worst seeded teams.

If you want to take geography out of the equation so a top seed isn't screwed, you can always go back to the Conference seeding of 1 playing 8 but no crappy team winning it's division getting a 2 seed. Just go back to the best teams in each conference and rank it 1 thru 8.

The Red Wings used to be punished playing in the Western conference every playoffs even though they are an eastern time zone.

Most creative idea I've heard for this was on the radio the other day. Though I know it would never happen, it was suggested the top teams CHOOSE their opponents one by one. So Washington picks who it wants to play, then Pittsburgh etc. It makes divisional records completely irrelevant, but certainly makes conference seeding more important. Besides, it would cause some serious nastiness as teams fight for revenge against the team that WANTED to face them.
- oldstyle

It sounds interesting... but.. I think the picking team really wouldn't want that. As you stated... it would really just give the picked team far too much poster board material; and likely account for a lot of upsets.

I think this is what will end up happening in the future. Going back to the 1-16 format. Having the Caps and Pens face each other in the second round is ridiculous. Of course I recall when Detroit and Colorado was the real Stanley Cup in 96, 97 and 02 in the WCF. As for the travel, it might be tough if a #1 seed like say Washington were to draw a #16 seed say LA. Is this fair for the Caps in this scenario? No. But ideally the NHL should go back to 2 points for any win and 0 points for any loss. Make regular seasons worth something again. Right now there's too many teams who think they're better than they are because they are awarded loser points. At least with the 1-16 playoff format, the best seeded teams get to play the worst seeded teams.

If you want to take geography out of the equation so a top seed isn't screwed, you can always go back to the Conference seeding of 1 playing 8 but no crappy team winning it's division getting a 2 seed. Just go back to the best teams in each conference and rank it 1 thru 8.

The Red Wings used to be punished playing in the Western conference every playoffs even though they are an eastern time zone.
- gergeswillems

Totally agree with the no loser point. (and my Habs have benefitted from it this year!)
I think if you go 1-16 they'd also have to balance the schedule for the regular season. This way you don't have a weak conference propping up points due to the strong conference not facing a crappy (ie-Colorado this year) more than the other conference.
I'd be fine with the 1-8 on either side... but I don't like the re-seeding every round. If a number 8 beats a #1... don't they deserve a better second round matchup on the merits of beating a team that grossly outranked them?

Totally agree with the no loser point. (and my Habs have benefitted from it this year!)
I think if you go 1-16 they'd also have to balance the schedule for the regular season. This way you don't have a weak conference propping up points due to the strong conference not facing a crappy (ie-Colorado this year) more than the other conference.
I'd be fine with the 1-8 on either side... but I don't like the re-seeding every round. If a number 8 beats a #1... don't they deserve a better second round matchup on the merits of beating a team that grossly outranked them?
- mlindsay

The "loser point" exists because 3on3 and shootouts aren't hockey. I look at it as a "bonus point" for the winner of the tie.

There really are only two options to properly award points.

1. Make all games worth 3 points.
2. Eliminate the gimmick wins and end games in a tie.