Looking forward to next season, the fake playoffs not so much.

A big fat giant....


- Glak18

That's it? Will you keep reminding us every chance you get in the future?

These were the 2 teams who were vehemently against the 24 team playoff format:



Tampa - no surprise they'd be against more competition, they choke in the playoffs as is


and



*drum roll please* ....... Carolina....






- Komisaurus Rex

Yes. Martinook stated it was because he didn't think it was in their best interests to play in this format.

I tend to agree. You play the regular season games to get playoff seeding and your reward is that now you have to play a best of 5 series against a team 2 points behind you to even get into the real playoffs?

Nah. That's dumb and decreases your odds of being able to actually win the damn thing.

You think 24 teams is reasonable?
Why not have 24 teams EVERY year? You know - so ALL the crappy teams have a chance.

Heck - let's roll back to the exapnsion era and set up a Conference for the bottom dwellers so one of them automatically makes the SCF. Sounds awesome - right?
- Nasty_Duck

Let’s drop the Conference play if NHL has playoffs and roll with the top 16 teams.

Why are people so, stupid.

There is no 24 team payoffs. The playoffs are exactly the same as before 16 teams, 4 rounds, 7 game series'.

The play in rounds/bye rounds/round robin games are there just to decide how the season ends and how to seed all teams. It's sole purpose is to seed teams eliminate bubble teams and get it down to 16 teams, SO THEY CAN HAVE A REGULAR PLAYOFFS.

Why is this so hard to grasp.

Of course we would all like them to just finish the season, but this is not possible if the league needs to utilize the "hub city" idea. Too many teams still have road trips in the opposite conference and you just wont have the ability to play all of the remaining games against all of the remaining clubs. Just too much travel.

So, they come up with so the play in idea. Is it perfect? No. Is it fair? Likely as fair as they can make it, under the circumstances. If you don't want it, don't watch it. I'll let you know when next year starts.

Yes. Martinook stated it was because he didn't think it was in their best interests to play in this format.

I tend to agree. You play the regular season games to get playoff seeding and your reward is that now you have to play a best of 5 series against a team 2 points behind you to even get into the real playoffs?

Nah. That's dumb and decreases your odds of being able to actually win the damn thing.
- BINGO!

He should just go ahead and shorten his name to Mook. If you don't think your team can beat the team that's 2 points behind them how are they going to beat the ones that are 8+ points ahead of them.

Yes. Martinook stated it was because he didn't think it was in their best interests to play in this format.

I tend to agree. You play the regular season games to get playoff seeding and your reward is that now you have to play a best of 5 series against a team 2 points behind you to even get into the real playoffs?

Nah. That's dumb and decreases your odds of being able to actually win the damn thing.
- BINGO!

I have to agree. I don't understand why the 'pre'-playoff' round had to be structured like that. There is a big difference between being #5 and being #12 in a conference. Now, there are no pre-season games, dubious practice, very rusty players, no home ice advantage except last change and neutral ice faceoffs, and then a best of 5.

In other words, you are throwing away all the hard work done in the season for the higher seeds like 5-8, and treating #5 and #16 as equivalent, and then essentially rolling a die.

I think a fairer version would have been to play this best of 5, but then instead of treating it as an elimination series, recompute p/g of the bottom 8 teams in each conference after each series is complete, with the numerator all points attained in season + this 'pre-playoff' round, and denominator all games played in reg season + in the 5 'pre-playoff' games. This weighs the regular season in, and gives the higher seeds the appropriate advantage their better record deserves.


Seeds 1-4 should remain as before, even if some lower team leapfrogs it in p/g (else too complicated). But seeds 5-8 are determined by the structure in the previous paragraph.

EDIT: If 5 games are not enough to ensure any chance of say #12 getting in by p/g method, then do 50% of reg season p/g and 50% of 'pre-playoff' games.

Bottom line: give some weight to superiority/inferiority of reg season record.

Yes. Martinook stated it was because he didn't think it was in their best interests to play in this format.

I tend to agree. You play the regular season games to get playoff seeding and your reward is that now you have to play a best of 5 series against a team 2 points behind you to even get into the real playoffs?

Nah. That's dumb and decreases your odds of being able to actually win the damn thing.
- BINGO!

The Canes were reeling after the Trocheck and Skjei trades, they never really gelled since. How much of that goes into what he said?

He should just go ahead and shorten his name to Mook. If you don't think your team can beat the team that's 2 points behind them how are they going to beat the ones that are 8+ points ahead of them.
- Nelson19777

it's not just about that round, it's about the rounds after that as well.

You could argue that the team coming out of that round would be at a competitive disadvantage from playing extra games, risking injury.

You could also argue the teams with a bye would be at a disadvantage because the round robin games wouldn't be as competitive and those teams wouldn't be up to speed.

End of the day, we all know the only reason this format is happening is because if they just use points percentage then Montreal, Chicago, NYR are all done for the season and the league wants to make sure those markets are engaged, otherwise there's no point to not just starting the postseason.

The Canes were reeling after the Trocheck and Skjei trades, they never really gelled since. How much of that goes into what he said?
- Komisaurus Rex

They had just won 3 straight when the season was shut down.

Part of it definitely is facing the Rangers though. 0-4 vs them this year and historically just can't beat them for some reason.

You think 24 teams is reasonable?
Why not have 24 teams EVERY year? You know - so ALL the crappy teams have a chance.

Heck - let's roll back to the exapnsion era and set up a Conference for the bottom dwellers so one of them automatically makes the SCF. Sounds awesome - right?
- Nasty_Duck

At this point it all sounds awesome

At this point it all sounds awesome
- just69sayin

It certainly does. I watched Tom Brady and Peyton Manning golfing yesterday. Nuff said.

Looking forward to next season, the fake playoffs not so much.

A big fat giant....


- Glak18

Just keep that in mind if the unthinkable happens - the Flyers wining this tournament and the Cup .

It certainly does. I watched Tom Brady and Peyton Manning golfing yesterday. Nuff said.


- gergeswillems

Manning looks like a big doof, but he does have a pretty great personality. When asked who his ideal caddie would be, first he joked about his brother. Then he turned and looked at Brady and said maybe Foles would be even better to have backing him up.

Even Brady had to give him that burn.

I have to agree. I don't understand why the 'pre'-playoff' round had to be structured like that. There is a big difference between being #5 and being #12 in a conference. Now, there are no pre-season games, dubious practice, very rusty players, no home ice advantage except last change and neutral ice faceoffs, and then a best of 5.

In other words, you are throwing away all the hard work done in the season for the higher seeds like 5-8, and treating #5 and #16 as equivalent, and then essentially rolling a die.

I think a fairer version would have been to play this best of 5, but then instead of treating it as an elimination series, recompute p/g of the bottom 8 teams in each conference after each series is complete, with the numerator all points attained in season + this 'pre-playoff' round, and denominator all games played in reg season + in the 5 'pre-playoff' games. This weighs the regular season in, and gives the higher seeds the appropriate advantage their better record deserves.


Seeds 1-4 should remain as before, even if some lower team leapfrogs it in p/g (else too complicated). But seeds 5-8 are determined by the structure in the previous paragraph.

EDIT: If 5 games are not enough to ensure any chance of say #12 getting in by p/g method, then do 50% of reg season p/g and 50% of 'pre-playoff' games.

Bottom line: give some weight to superiority/inferiority of reg season record.
- PT21

The other thing to consider from the Canes perspective is "If Carolina and Montreal were to swap spots in the standings, would this play-in scenario be happening? Would Carolina get a chance to play a 5 game series vs Pittsburgh to make the playoffs?"

The answer is probably not, which makes it a tough pill to swallow. Fighting off injuries to your goaltenders, best overall player, etc. and then being put on nearly equal footing with a team 10 points behind you in the standings kind of stinks.

Just keep that in mind if the unthinkable happens - the Flyers wining this tournament and the Cup .
- PghPens668771

The asterisk is BS. the winner is the winner. It won’t be on the Cup, so it won’t be on my mind. I don’t care if the penguins win it. I will not consider an asterisk.

If my team won it, I wouldn’t want an asterisk in everybody else’s head. So I’ll give the same respect in return.

I have to agree. I don't understand why the 'pre'-playoff' round had to be structured like that. There is a big difference between being #5 and being #12 in a conference...........In other words, you are throwing away all the hard work done in the season for the higher seeds like 5-8, and treating #5 and #16 as equivalent, and then essentially rolling a die............give some weight to superiority/inferiority of reg season record.
- PT21

What are you rambling about? They used the regular season points percentage to seed the pay in round, therefore giving weight to the regular season.

What are you rambling about? They used the regular season points percentage to seed the pay in round, therefore giving weight to the regular season.


- Nelson19777

The question is "Why bother with a play-in round" other than to give air time to some bigger markets?

The other thing to consider from the Canes perspective is "If Carolina and Montreal were to swap spots in the standings, would this play-in scenario be happening? Would Carolina get a chance to play a 5 game series vs Pittsburgh to make the playoffs?"

The answer is probably not, which makes it a tough pill to swallow. Fighting off injuries to your goaltenders, best overall player, etc. and then being put on nearly equal footing with a team 10 points behind you in the standings kind of stinks.
- BINGO!

And why not then by the same logic have teams 1-4 play each other not for elimination but for playoff seeds?

I wonder who benefits and who loses from the long layoffs. Unlike end of season layoffs, here players have not even been able to skate, go to gyms, etc. They should be more rusty than they probably ever have been in their professional lives. My suspicion is that teams under a new system and/or with youngish players will find it harder. This should be a boon to veteran teams.

The other thing to consider from the Canes perspective is "If Carolina and Montreal were to swap spots in the standings, would this play-in scenario be happening? Would Carolina get a chance to play a 5 game series vs Pittsburgh to make the playoffs?"

The answer is probably not, which makes it a tough pill to swallow. Fighting off injuries to your goaltenders, best overall player, etc. and then being put on nearly equal footing with a team 10 points behind you in the standings kind of stinks.
- BINGO!

What are you rambling about? They used the regular season points percentage to seed the pay in round, therefore giving weight to the regular season.


- Nelson19777

This weighting has very little significance really, besides last line change and center ice last stick down in f/o.

Say you are a #5 team after over 80% of season is done. Your chances of making the playoffs must be pretty high. Say you are #12. Your chances must be pretty low.

Now suddenly, after a huge layoff, you play each other in a best of 5 in a strange arena with no fans. That's a total gamble. If I am a #12 team, I take those odds every time. If I am #5, I never take them.

This weighting has very little significance really, besides last line change and center ice last stick down in f/o.

Say you are a #5 team after over 80% of season is done. Your chances of making the playoffs must be pretty high. Say you are #12. Your chances must be pretty low.

Now suddenly, after a huge layoff, you play each other in a best of 5 in a strange arena with no fans. That's a total gamble. If I am a #12 team, I take those odds every time. If I am #5, I never take them.
- PT21

Yea, we all know there is no real advantage to last line change,

You aren't on team 5 or team 12, you are just some random guy typing on his computer (so am I). They are professional athletes out there tying to prove that their team is the the best of the best. If they are the best they will beat the rest. PERIOD. They all have to put up with some adversity this year.

The question is "Why bother with a play-in round" other than to give air time to some bigger markets?
- BINGO!

I must have missed where I was asked this question.

Yea, we all know there is no real advantage to last line change,

You aren't on team 5 or team 12, you are just some random guy typing on his computer (so am I). They are professional athletes out there tying to prove that their team is the the best of the best. If they are the best they will beat the rest. PERIOD. They all have to put up with some adversity this year.
- Nelson19777

I am happy they are playing. But I think the format could be better. Pens with 86 points may not end up getting into playoffs. Montreal with 71 points in 2 more games played may eliminate them. That's absurd. You want the condensed format to be as close to typical regular seasons as possible (that's the goal btw, not to manufacture a new tournament). In such typical regular seasons teams with 11 games to play don't beat out teams 15 points ahead of them and with 2 games in hand.

And if the 13th team in the East was Toronto/NY/Boston etc. instead of Sabres, you can guarantee there would have been 26 teams in this format.

I am happy they are playing. But I think the format could be better. Pens with 86 points may not end up getting into playoffs. Montreal with 71 points in 2 more games played may eliminate them. That's absurd. You want the condensed format to be as close to typical regular seasons as possible (that's the goal btw, not to manufacture a new tournament). In such typical regular seasons teams with 11 games to play don't beat out teams 15 points ahead of them and with 2 games in hand.

And if the 13th team in the East was Toronto/NY/Boston etc. instead of Sabres, you can guarantee there would have been 26 teams in this format.
- PT21

I suppose the format was always going to be a problem. Personally, I would have liked if they retroactively cut the season at the number of games to the amount that the franchise with the least amount of games played and just created a field of 16 from there. Still, I get that teams surging towards the playoff line woulda been shafted in that instance.

Fact is, they were never gonna make everyone happy. Wasn’t possible.

But at least we’re getting playoff hockey back! I’m trying to stay positive about it, even though it’s obvious that something could come back and bite me throughout the process.

Yea, we all know there is no real advantage to last line change,

- Nelson19777

WHAT???

Is this sarcasm?