35 replies to this topic

[Nuclear Dish]

Does anyone else feel a bit queasy that the NHL regular season is so meaningless. I know that playoff hockey is amazing, but seriously? This is getting ridiculous.

We're left right now with the following:

(1 seed or 7 seed) vs. 6 seed
8 seed vs. 3 seed

It seems every year, we get a couple of hot teams that didn't prove themselves worthy over the whole season.

2011: 1, 2, 3, 5
2010: 1, 2, 7, 8
2009: 2, 4, 4, 6
2008: 1, 2, 5, 6

So it's been since 2007 that both #1 seeds made even the conference finals. If the Caps win Game 7, it would be the second time in 4 years that neither #1 seed made it that far.

If the Caps win, 9 of the 20 teams (45%) to make the conference finals in the past 5 years will have been 5-seeds or lower, and 11 of the 20 (55%) will have been 4-seeds or lower.

Why bother playing the long season? The seeds are absolutely meaningless.

This ins't just the past 5 years, too. If you go back farther, it's similar. The last time 2 #1 seeds met in the finals was 2002. Only twice has the President's Cup winner taken home the Stanley Cup in the past 10 years.

[bhrusty]

Let's do your math again.

Last five years (before this one, which hasn't been decided yet)

2011: 1, 2, 3, 5
2010: 1, 2, 7, 8
2009: 2, 4, 4, 6
2008: 1, 2, 5, 6
2007: 1, 1, 2, 4

Let's break that down by seed. 1(5 times) 2 (5 times) 3 (one time) 4 (3 times) 5 (two times) 6 (two times) 7 (one time) and 8 (one time)

So, 50% of 1 and 2 seeds make the final 4, which seems pretty fair distribution to me.

Now, keep in mind that three seeds are the lowest qualifying division champ and fourth seeds can be as high as the second highest qualifier.


Let's look at it year by year. In 2007 the "upset" 4th seeded Ottawa actually scored 8 more points in the regular season than the 3rd seed, and only two points fewer than the 2nd seed.

In 2008 the 6th seed Flyers were the 4th place team in their own division, and scored more points than the 3rd seed. the 5th seed Stars had a similar situation (though they were 1 point behind the 3rd seed)

In 2009 the 6th seeded Hurricanes were the 6th best team, while the 4th seeded Pens and 4th seeded Blackhawks made the semi's without a real upset (the Pens beat 2nd seed Caps, Chi beat the Canucks, who had a worse regular season).

In 2010 the Eastern division was nutty as the 7 and 8 both advanced thanks to upsets.

In 2011 the 5 seed advanced by beating the top seed (again, the Caps).


So, in five years there are by my count four "upset" teams to make the final four. That seems expected.


Besides, who is to say that the "hot team" that doesn't deserve it is the team that goes on the playoff run rather the team that jumps up a couple seeds by going on a run in the regular season?

Other factors can be injuries or midseason trades. Teams that add or lose players during the season can not be expected to have a playoff run that mirrors their regular season. A significant injury during the regular season by a star player can cost a team enough points to lower their seed, if that player returns for the playoffs is it really an upset if they beat a higher ranked team?

I think that the numbers, if anything, argue for the elimination of top seeds for division winners, since the 3rd seed has rarely advanced and rarely merits it based on record.

[KRL224]

My bigger gripe is the point system, though I haven't really had the time to look back and see how it would have impacted the seeding in recent seasons. I'm pretty sure we still would have ended up behind Florida using the 3/2/1 system. It just makes far more sense to me to reward the regulation wins if you are going to reward an OT loss.

[Nuclear Dish]

But look at the NBA in comparison:

2011: 1,2,3,4
2010: 1,2,3,4
2009: 1,1,2,3
2008: 1,1,2,3
2007: 1,2,3,4

Nothing lower than a 4 seed, #1 seeds have qualified 7 out of 10 possible times, and #2 seeds have qualified 5 out of 10 possible times.

Which is more stable?

How about the NFL?

2012: 1,2,2,4
2011: 2,2,6,6
2010: 1,1,2,5
2009: 2,4,6,6
2008: 1,2,3,5

I would expect the NFL to have more variance, because it's a one-and-done format, it's only 6 teams (therefore the quality of the teams is overall stronger), and it's quite common for a wild card team to be stronger than even two of the division champs.

And yet, 10 of the 20 teams are 1 and 2 seeds, the same as the NHL (and the NHL's number will change this year to being worse over 5 years).

In the 5 years you showed (which ignores the fact that we will either have 1,3,6,8 or 3,6,7,8 this year) the NHL had almost as many instances of 6, 7, and 8 seeds making the conference finals as the NBA had 2 seeds.

Whether it's because upsets are more likely or because the regular season is just a poor predictor of playoff success, it seems to me that if you're a fan of a high seed in the NHL playoffs, you should be nervous.

[Nuclear Dish]

My bigger gripe is the point system, though I haven't really had the time to look back and see how it would have impacted the seeding in recent seasons. I'm pretty sure we still would have ended up behind Florida using the 3/2/1 system. It just makes far more sense to me to reward the regulation wins if you are going to reward an OT loss.

I agree with you.

[JeremyStrain]

Not at all, that's just hockey if you really understand it. A hot goalie in the playoffs trumps everything, it's just how it is. The reg season is a large enough sample size that teams that don't make it shouldn't be there, but upsets happen because it's the only sport that can be controlled by one player on the ice.

At this point in the playoffs check the goalie stats, it always shows who is still in it. A great reg season team with a goalie that can't handle pressure will fail every time, see PHI.

[Oriole85]

Not at all, that's just hockey if you really understand it. A hot goalie in the playoffs trumps everything, it's just how it is. The reg season is a large enough sample size that teams that don't make it shouldn't be there, but upsets happen because it's the only sport that can be controlled by one player on the ice.

At this point in the playoffs check the goalie stats, it always shows who is still in it. A great reg season team with a goalie that can't handle pressure will fail every time, see PHI.

Half the teams make the playoffs, that's ridiculous. The regular season should stand for something. If a hot goalie of a number 8th seed can trump a number one on a regular basis something is wrong with that.

In 3 of the last 5 years, the team that won the President's Trophy has lost in the first round. If the seeding matters so little, maybe they should consider other changes like giving that team 5 (potential) home games.

Why watch the regular season or play hard if it doesn't matter much in the end?

[Oriole85]

Does anyone else feel a bit queasy that the NHL regular season is so meaningless. I know that playoff hockey is amazing, but seriously? This is getting ridiculous.

We're left right now with the following:

(1 seed or 7 seed) vs. 6 seed
8 seed vs. 3 seed

It seems every year, we get a couple of hot teams that didn't prove themselves worthy over the whole season.

2011: 1, 2, 3, 5
2010: 1, 2, 7, 8
2009: 2, 4, 4, 6
2008: 1, 2, 5, 6

So it's been since 2007 that both #1 seeds made even the conference finals. If the Caps win Game 7, it would be the second time in 4 years that neither #1 seed made it that far.

If the Caps win, 9 of the 20 teams (45%) to make the conference finals in the past 5 years will have been 5-seeds or lower, and 11 of the 20 (55%) will have been 4-seeds or lower.

Why bother playing the long season? The seeds are absolutely meaningless.

This ins't just the past 5 years, too. If you go back farther, it's similar. The last time 2 #1 seeds met in the finals was 2002. Only twice has the President's Cup winner taken home the Stanley Cup in the past 10 years.

Yeah I keep hearing how hockey is the "best" playoffs of any of the major sports. By the same token, it's the "worst" regular season when the difference between seedings matter so little.

The Caps are a perfect example of that, they get top seeds every year recently but this one and can't get out of the 2nd round. All their hard work in the regular season seems to matter little come April.

What I would suggest for the NHL, although it would likely not happen is going down to four seeds would make the regular season much more compelling. If they really wanted to six seeds and a few play-in games.

I must say this whole thing soured me on regular season hockey this year.

[Oriole85]

My bigger gripe is the point system, though I haven't really had the time to look back and see how it would have impacted the seeding in recent seasons. I'm pretty sure we still would have ended up behind Florida using the 3/2/1 system. It just makes far more sense to me to reward the regulation wins if you are going to reward an OT loss.

I would probably eliminate the OT loss point. Maybe make penalty shot and/or OT losses part of the tiebreakers. No other sport rewards losing like this. Maybe baseball could award extra inning losses?

[Oriole85]

6th versus 8th seed for Lord's Stanley Cup, how does everyone feel about that?

[Brobey]

6th versus 8th seed for Lord's Stanley Cup, how does everyone feel about that?

The Devils weren't an awful team and having to go up against NYR, Philly, & Pitt in their division and you can argue all three of those teams were considered the "best team I hockey" at one pout or another during the year. Even with that they still had 102 points. So while they were the 6th seed, they were probably the 4th best team in the East.

The Kings are a different story...if they would've scored in the regular season like they have in the playoffs they would've been a top 3 seed. With Quick in net, if they scored any goals, they had to be a top team in the West and that is exactly what happened. The trade the Kings made to get Carter has now paid off huge dividends for the Kings!

[Oriole85]

6th versus 8th seed for Lord's Stanley Cup, how does everyone feel about that?

The Devils weren't an awful team and having to go up against NYR, Philly, & Pitt in their division and you can argue all three of those teams were considered the "best team I hockey" at one pout or another during the year. Even with that they still had 102 points. So while they were the 6th seed, they were probably the 4th best team in the East.

The Kings are a different story...if they would've scored in the regular season like they have in the playoffs they would've been a top 3 seed. With Quick in net, if they scored any goals, they had to be a top team in the West and that is exactly what happened. The trade the Kings made to get Carter has now paid off huge dividends for the Kings!

I get the power rankings argument, that's more college sports if you ask me. I get that these are not "awful" teams, but it's kind of just like make the playoffs and anything can happen. Not as much incentive as other sports for playing a good regular season if you ask me.

[Brobey]

True, but say you let in only the Top 6, the devils still make it and have a good chance to repeat their success. Kings don't likely make a big move at the deadline and isn't there so then you'd be looking at either St Louis or Phoenix in the Stanley Cup.

I think the biggest thing, which gets mentioned a lot is that hockey playoffs are more contingent upon one player ( the goalie) than any other team sport.

[bhrusty]

The deadline is a big deal in this case. The fact is, the Kings improved themselves greatly going into the playoff push and while they didnt get a higher seed they were playing better than a 8th seed at the end of the season (and benefited from a lack of injury as well)

[Oriole85]

The deadline is a big deal in this case. The fact is, the Kings improved themselves greatly going into the playoff push and while they didnt get a higher seed they were playing better than a 8th seed at the end of the season (and benefited from a lack of injury as well)

Move up the deadline?

[Nuclear Dish]

Ultimately, the NHL regular season is about only one thing: making the playoffs. Seeding is meaningless. If you get in, you've got as much of a shot as anyone else, whether you're the 8-seed or the 1-seed in your conference.

And that, to me, is a pathetic reason to have a regular season.

The NHL is the only league in which seeding is beside the point. In my opinion, a smart team will bust their butt to make the playoffs, then rest their key players so they are healthy and fresh for the playoffs.

[JeremyStrain]

Ultimately, the NHL regular season is about only one thing: making the playoffs. Seeding is meaningless. If you get in, you've got as much of a shot as anyone else, whether you're the 8-seed or the 1-seed in your conference.

And that, to me, is a pathetic reason to have a regular season.

The NHL is the only league in which seeding is beside the point. In my opinion, a smart team will bust their butt to make the playoffs, then rest their key players so they are healthy and fresh for the playoffs.

Well seeing that this year is an NHL record for lowest seeds making the finals, and the next lowest besides this was an 8 seed and a #2, I think that's a little reactionary.

A best of 7 series pretty much eliminates a fluke victory, if a team wins it, they deserved it. That being said I wouldn't say teams in the bottom seeds have as much chance as the higher seeds. Coming off a long season there are tons of reasons, whether key players were injured for long stretches resulting in lower seeds (Caps fall here), or teams made trades to improve from non-playoff to playoff team late (Kings fall here), there are lots of variables.

[Oriole85]

Regardless of what we all think of the NHL "meaningless" regular season, I don't think this is going to change. I think the NHL loves all these upsets and gets the casual fans more interested, which means more for their bottom line. Anyone disagree?

In fairness to the NHL(and NBA), 2/3 (or more) used to make the playoffs pre-recent expansions. So going down to half as pathetic as that sounds is actually an improvement. But hey MD state high school playoffs, atleast public schools, allow all teams in with the exception of football. And the seeding I believe other than the top ones is more random(granted I haven't really followed since I was in high school almost a decade ago).

[SportsGuy]

I'm not a hockey fan at all but the run the Kings are on is extremely impressive.

[Nuclear Dish]

I'm not a hockey fan at all but the run the Kings are on is extremely impressive.

Agreed. After 20 years, the "Curse of Marty McSorley's Stick" is almost dead. Wonder whether that means a Canadian team will finally win the Stanley Cup next year? My wife is sure hoping so (since Vancouver would be the most logical candidate, although as I've bemoaned, nobody is ever really a favorite in the NHL playoffs).