| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| jetflames |
Posted - 04/10/2010 : 15:32:06
Currently the Dallas Stars ranked 12th in the west would be in playoff contention in the east. Should something be done to even the odds? For example a crossover like the CFL, or have the top 16 teams make the playoffs. In other suggestions.
Also I was shocked to find that other than Washington the top teams in the east could finish as low as 8th in the west. |
| 7 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/12/2010 : 13:53:50
It is no different than at times in the 80's when Edmonton and Calgary were often the 2 best teams in hockey through the regular season and had to beat each other at some point to make it to the finals.
Some times the East is better than the West, some times the Pacific is really strong, it's all relative. Look at the NE. Last season, only 2 of the teams made the Playoffs. This season they have 4 teams in the playoffs.
It really doesn't matter in the end. The team that wins the Cup still has to produce 90+ points in the regular season, then win 16 of a potential 28 games against the stiffest competition in the sport.
|
| jetflames |
Posted - 04/12/2010 : 13:44:54
I think the disparity between the East and West has been around for awhile, but it doesn't always translate into more Cup wins for the West. I guess when you have to fight your way out of the very tough West, a team may be a bit more worn down?
It would be interesting to see how far east teams could go if there was a top 16 team format. Doubt we would see many teams deep in the playoffs especially because of the increased physicality. Although this would be a reason why they wouldn't adopt such a format. Less playoff time in the east would not make the fans too happy.
I wonder if teams like Carolina and Tampa Bay would have won cups if they would have had to play a few more tough western teams to make the finals. |
| Beans15 |
Posted - 04/12/2010 : 13:31:16
The thing is that as time goes on, good teams should eventually get bad and bad teams eventually will get good.
As Fat Elvis suggested, Washington in their conference today is similar to the Red Wings 5ish year ago when Chicago, CBJ, Nashville, and St. Louis were cellar dwellars.
After the 78 expansion, the NHL did do the 1-16 thing with conferences/divisons not meaning a whole lot. I loved it. Personally, with the travel and the fact that many teams have their own cartered aircraft, there is no reason why this can't happen today.
I would rather see the best 16 teams than 13 of the best teams and 3 that got in because their competition is weaker.
I would also like to see the overall schedule change so there is at least a home and away with every team in the league. |
| fat_elvis_rocked |
Posted - 04/12/2010 : 13:05:22
quote:
Originally posted by Guest4271
Think theres more parity in the East, the West has some pretty weak teams that everyone beats up on. In the East, anyone can win, and although there a few weaker teams, they have shown great improvment over the year, and some top teams are struuggling since the Olympic break in the West........LA comes to mind, as well as Colorado. These teams started very strong, and have managed to hang on to playoff spots
Florida
Tampa Bay
NY Islanders
Toronto
Carolina
Atlanta.....
These are strong teams? Not weak like the West? Why do you think Washington is the new Detroit, 4 of these teams are in their division. The weaker west ideology doesn't seem to make sense with these duds in the east....IMO.
|
| Guest4178 |
Posted - 04/12/2010 : 12:41:58
The Western conference teams have 69 more points than the Eastern conference teams. (When totalling up the points of all teams in each conference.) The Western teams average 94.3 points each, while the Eastern teams average 89.7 points each. This is a huge difference, especially since teams play more teams in their own division or conference. I don't know what the deeper stats are, but I suspect when East meets West, the western teams win most of the time.
This is even more remarkable when you think of the difference in team travel. Western teams travel approximately twice as much as Eastern teams, when measured in air miles travelled.
I think the disparity between the East and West has been around for awhile, but it doesn't always translate into more Cup wins for the West. I guess when you have to fight your way out of the very tough West, a team may be a bit more worn down?
|
| Guest4271 |
Posted - 04/12/2010 : 03:16:16
Think theres more parity in the East, the West has some pretty weak teams that everyone beats up on. In the East, anyone can win, and although there a few weaker teams, they have shown great improvment over the year, and some top teams are struuggling since the Olympic break in the West........LA comes to mind, as well as Colorado. These teams started very strong, and have managed to hang on to playoff spots |
| Hugh G. Rection |
Posted - 04/10/2010 : 18:59:36
News flash, the West is deeper than the East. Has been for a while. This year the difference is pretty insane, actually, but that's the nature of the beast.
Some have offered that teams should be ranked 1-16 based on the entire league, and re-seeded in the playoffs regardless of geographic region. (So Washington would play.. Dallas or whoever is 16th highest ranked by points). This would be more equitable of course but would somewhat throw the whole division-system into the air. (being in a weak division would be an even greater advantage than it is now).
I say keep it as is, with the only wrinkle that the top seeds get to 'pick' the opponent they face. Take this year, if Detroit finished 8th and San Jose could pick Nashville or someone else, they would. Not only does it give the team that's 'picked' some chalkboard material, it also guards against good teams that are hideously under-seeded. |
|
|
