Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Nhl Standing System


cammy12334

Recommended Posts

Guest HABSrulzzz

I find that the current format where we have the top 3 division leaders ahead of everyone else should be gone. Some teams are certainly better than others but yet the first 3 seeds go to the top division leaders. Just wondering what you all though. If this already exists mods delete I couldn't find this so I made a new topic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ComeBackStanley

yeah i've also thought of this...especially with the sched we have now...we often see one division with a leader that has far less points than the other two leaders and sometimes far less than the fourth seed. I guess we'll have to see what it gives with the new schedual but i don't know. I guess if there was waaaay more teams this would be okay but i think they should just seperate it by the two divisions. east and west. And also, some teams go from like 9th to third or whatever really easily (if they're lets say 8 points behind most teams but 2 points behind their division leader)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Koivu Fan

I really agree. The division leaders SHOULD be guaranteed a playoff spot, but not the 3rd seed. If they are 10th in the East (like Carolina has been at points) they should not be 3rd by default, that gives an advantage to finishing 6th vs 5th or 4th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find that the current format where we have the top 3 division leaders ahead of everyone else should be gone. Some teams are certainly better than others but yet the first 3 seeds go to the top division leaders. Just wondering what you all though. If this already exists mods delete I couldn't find this so I made a new topic

It's a nice idea in theory that the NHL has, but the problem is that divisions aren't equal most of the time. Sometimes it works okay (like last season), but this season it's just screwing up the standings and making it better to come in 6th place than 5th.

I can see why it's there, but I'd get rid of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest HabsBegin63
It's a nice idea in theory that the NHL has, but the problem is that divisions aren't equal most of the time. Sometimes it works okay (like last season), but this season it's just screwing up the standings and making it better to come in 6th place than 5th.

I can see why it's there, but I'd get rid of it.

its kinda sad too because carolina for instance, plays washington, tampa bay, florida and atlanta 32 times a year. you'd think they should be able to muster some points against teams like those, or one of the other teams maybe. could you imagine if there was 1 good team in that division? they could earn a lot of easy points.

right now a total of 80 games are played between teams in a division so no matter what happens, 160 pts, not even including ot/so losses, is automatically given to that division, which obviously averages to 32 pts/team. the best team in that division should get around 50 pts which is more then half the number needed to make the playoffs in 32 games :o . and yet right now carolina should not even be in the playoffs. :lol: what a joke

i actually think it could get even worse next year when they dont play each other as many times. not sure whether to laugh or be mad :mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 77Bourque77

1 word

STUPID

it makes no sense to seed a team that leads its divison with less points then another team in the confrence.If we were in an easer divison then i wouldnt care but the south east is just burtal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest habs fan #1
It's a nice idea in theory that the NHL has, but the problem is that divisions aren't equal most of the time. Sometimes it works okay (like last season), but this season it's just screwing up the standings and making it better to come in 6th place than 5th.

I can see why it's there, but I'd get rid of it.

Or if they didn't want to get rid of it adjust it so if division Leaders who right now are placed in 2nd and third give them 7th and 8th they still make the playoffs but no home Ice advantage

Just my opinion any thoughts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Lafleurfan2

excellent topic last year after my Rangers elimnated Atlanta 4 games to 0 I was talking to my friend who

is an Islander fan and we were talking about who was the best team the Thrashers , Canadiens ,Leafs

and Islanders even though Atlanta had a better record he was telling me all 3 of the teams were better than

Atlanta. the final game of the Rangers serise was 7-0 and except for game 2 of that serise with the bad

bounce Atlanta was never in the serise. just because a certain team Atlanta or Carolina has a better record

than Toronto or Montreal doesn't mean there a better team I feel they play an easier schedule. like what

Obgamer said there wont be any changing. lets say Atlanta were to win there division with 102 points

and Toronto ended up in third with 102 points I feel Toronto should get the higher seating because of the

tougher schedule .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Guest Cenner Hice

I didn't know where to post a thought I've had, but this thread seems the most appropriate:

We are now (19th March 2008) in second place in the East behind the Devils, on the same points, but they have more wins (and two games in hand, but that's not relevant to my point).

Here's how the NHL sorts out a tie:

Tie Breaking Procedure

If two or more clubs are tied in points during the regular season, the standing of the clubs is determined in the following order:

1. The fewer number of games played (i.e., superior points percentage).

2. The greater number of games won.

3. The greater number of points earned in games between the tied clubs. If two clubs are tied, and have not played an equal number of home games against each other, points earned in the first game played in the city that had the extra game shall not be included. If more than two clubs are tied, the higher percentage of available points earned in games among those clubs, and not including any "odd" games, shall be used to determine the standing.

4. The greater differential between goals for and against for the entire regular season

The second category is the one I don't understand as it contradicts the others...

To me it seems odd that you could be in a situation where one team is placed ahead of another in the standings if they are tied on points but the team ahead has more wins. It follows that that team will also have more outright losses and it could therefore be argued that they are actually a worse team.

Looking at point 1:

The team with more ties has actually come away from more games with points - so a superior points percentage per game.

Looking at point 3:

Seems straightforward between two clubs. But applying it to the season as a whole, each team will have scored the same percentage of available points. But the team with more ties has come away from more games with points.

Looking at point 4:

You could assume that an outright loss is one where you lose by a 2 goal difference, say. That means that your total season differential is less (or worse) than the team being placed below you (as a loss resulting from a regulation tie will only ever give a goal differential of -1 to the losing team).

Just seems like an anomaly to me (not a sub-space anomaly, dear Trekkies - just an everyday anomaly).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest powerplay2009

i dont like it, but the divisions need some effect. an automatic playoff spot. speaking of divisions... i live in muchigan so im sick of hearing that detroits the best team when they are in the 1st or 2nd worst division. they are not the best, they just have 32 gimmes, let aline other western losers like the kings. of course they cant win all of them. but that cant be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest powerplay2009

i dont like it, but the divisions need some effect. an automatic playoff spot. speaking of divisions... i live in muchigan so im sick of hearing that detroits the best team when they are in the 1st or 2nd worst division. they are not the best, they just have 32 gimmes, let aline other western losers like the kings. of course they cant win all of them. but that cant be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest powerplay2009

i dont like it, but the divisions need some effect. an automatic playoff spot. speaking of divisions... i live in muchigan so im sick of hearing that detroits the best team when they are in the 1st or 2nd worst division. they are not the best, they just have 32 gimmes, let aline other western losers like the kings. of course they cant win all of them. but that cant be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest powerplay2009

i dont like it, but the divisions need some effect. an automatic playoff spot. speaking of divisions... i live in muchigan so im sick of hearing that detroits the best team when they are in the 1st or 2nd worst division. they are not the best, they just have 32 gimmes, let aline other western losers like the kings. of course they cant win all of them. but that cant be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest powerplay2009

i dont like it, but the divisions need some effect. an automatic playoff spot. speaking of divisions... i live in muchigan so im sick of hearing that detroits the best team when they are in the 1st or 2nd worst division. they are not the best, they just have 32 gimmes, let aline other western losers like the kings. of course they cant win all of them. but that cant be fixed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LarryRobinson
I find that the current format where we have the top 3 division leaders ahead of everyone else should be gone. Some teams are certainly better than others but yet the first 3 seeds go to the top division leaders. Just wondering what you all though. If this already exists mods delete I couldn't find this so I made a new topic

Lets assume the 3 divisions are staying in place. Because, lets face it...they are.

My suggestions for improving the way the system works:

1. Divisional winners are guaranteed a playoff spot, but home ice is guaranteed to the top 4 point getters. This removes a false reward, namely Carolina playing in a weak division gets home ice when one of the Sens, Pitts, Devils, Habs finishes with a better record in a harder division and is stuck on the road. Carolina would not get the 3 seed they'd fall wherever their point total put them. If they were below the eight top teams in points at the end of the year, they'd get the 8th seed and bump the rightful eighth place team.

2. The highest conference point total i.e. Detriot in the West this year, gets an extra home game in the first round. The series would be 5 home 2 away. I know, I know the counterarguments, namely that Detroit's schedule might not be as difficult as San Jose's. With schedule changes next year, the schedules will be more balanced. Winning the conference should be rewarded. The eight seed would be forced to win 2 playoff road games. Some may say this is too big a reward, but how else can you make the regular season race more valuable. By placing value on the top seed, you force the top teams to keep playing even after theyve clinched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Wayne

with a 472-page legal doc such as the CBA, especially one you're trying to read online, you often find interesting tidbits... look at this gem:

16.2 Playoff Games. The NHLPA has consented to granting the League, either in the

2005-06 NHL Season, or, alternatively, in the 2006-07 NHL Season, the option to

institute in any League Year a "Playoff Qualification Round" preliminary to the Playoffs,

which will consist of one (1) round involving four (4) Clubs in each Conference, with

each series in the round having a maximum of three (3) games, with the winner of each

series advancing to the Playoffs. If the League institutes a Playoff Qualification Round

in either 2005-06 or 2006-07, the parties agree to thereafter jointly evaluate and discuss

such experience. If the League desires to implement a Playoff Qualification Round with

respect to future NHL Season(s), it may only do so with the consent of the NHLPA,

which shall not be unreasonably withheld. The Playoffs will consist of four (4) rounds,

with each series in each round having a maximum of seven (7) games.

now that sounds interesting... my interpretation of this paragraph is it would have meant, for each conference, 6 teams would have automatically qualified for the playoffs, 4 more teams would have paired off in a pair of best-of-three series and the winners would have advanced to the playoffs proper, more like the NCAA's March Madness 'play-in' game than the NFL's wildcard games...

oh well, I guess it was never really considered since I don't think it was ever publicly discussed as a possibility...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Wayne
with a 472-page legal doc such as the CBA, especially one you're trying to read online, you often find interesting tidbits... look at this gem:

16.2 Playoff Games. The NHLPA has consented to granting the League, either in the

2005-06 NHL Season, or, alternatively, in the 2006-07 NHL Season, the option to

institute in any League Year a "Playoff Qualification Round" preliminary to the Playoffs,

which will consist of one (1) round involving four (4) Clubs in each Conference, with

each series in the round having a maximum of three (3) games, with the winner of each

series advancing to the Playoffs. If the League institutes a Playoff Qualification Round

in either 2005-06 or 2006-07, the parties agree to thereafter jointly evaluate and discuss

such experience. If the League desires to implement a Playoff Qualification Round with

respect to future NHL Season(s), it may only do so with the consent of the NHLPA,

which shall not be unreasonably withheld. The Playoffs will consist of four (4) rounds,

with each series in each round having a maximum of seven (7) games.

now that sounds interesting... my interpretation of this paragraph is it would have meant, for each conference, 6 teams would have automatically qualified for the playoffs, 4 more teams would have paired off in a pair of best-of-three series and the winners would have advanced to the playoffs proper, more like the NCAA's March Madness 'play-in' game than the NFL's wildcard games...

oh well, I guess it was never really considered since I don't think it was ever publicly discussed as a possibility...

Interesting find Wayne.

And lately that division thing has been benefiting us, since we've often been in 2nd when the 2nd best team (Pittsburgh or NJ) slipped to 4th.

I guess there are two problems with such a scheme... first, it would push the opening round back about a week and I'm already itching for the playoffs to start before Wednesday or Thursday...

and it would increase the number of teams to make it into post-season play and therefore 1) seem like a cash grab -- more revenue for the owners, but not more pay for the players; and 2) dilute the importance of the regular season... currently, the NHL and NBA both allow 16 of 30 teams to make the playoffs, the NFL 12 of 32, MLB only 8 of 30...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest powerplay2009

i agree. good concept, especially if we have up to 32+ teams because then it would add another dimension to the playoff race.but right now, bad idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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