OT: Bruins & TB

[aluminum seats]

I guess as a result of not being a huge hockey guy, I’m a little confused why the Bruins are playing Tampa Bay already? How do the first and second seeds play each other in the second round?

 

[maust]

The NHL changed it's format a few years ago. It's no longer a 1-8 in each conference seeding scenario, now it's done in a bracket style setup with 4 groups of 4 (2 per conference) with the top 3 in each bracket based on division finish and the 4th being one of the 2 wildcard teams based on overall finish.

 

[Brick27]

Great question. The NHL thought it’d be a good idea to throw away the 1-8 format, and instead place more emphasis on the divisions. This involves putting 1-3 in a given division on one half of the bracket, 1-3 on the other, and then filling in with two wild cards. A thought with this is that it will make the first round or two more meaningful with “division rivalries” compared to what it might have been in the past. But what it really does cheapen the latter rounds when the best teams have the potential to matchup earlier. Breaks down as follows:

1: TB
WC2: NJ

2: Boston
3: Toronto

1: Washington
WC1: Columbus

2: Pitt
3: Philly

So yes, TB and Boston finished 1 and 2 in the entirety of the East, but because of this format they can’t meet in the East finals like they might have with the old format.

Same thing is happening in the West where they’ve got Nashville and Winnipeg meeting in the second round.

 

[maust]

A few years ago the league changed their seeding format from 1-8 in each conference to two groups of 4 done bracket style. The top 3 teams in each division make up teams 1-3 and the 4th is one of the 2 wildcards based in finish. If it seems like a convoluted way to eliminate a couple of better teams before their time, keep in mind it favored Pittsburgh at the time and still does.

Edit: Brick27 apparently we were answering at the same time, did not see your post when creating mine

 

[aluminum seats]

Thanks guys. Yeah, questionable approach for sure

 

[signbabybrady]

Great question. The NHL thought it’d be a good idea to throw away the 1-8 format, and instead place more emphasis on the divisions. This involves putting 1-3 in a given division on one half of the bracket, 1-3 on the other, and then filling in with two wild cards. A thought with this is that it will make the first round or two more meaningful with “division rivalries” compared to what it might have been in the past. But what it really does cheapen the latter rounds when the best teams have the potential to matchup earlier. Breaks down as follows:

1: TB
WC2: NJ

2: Boston
3: Toronto

1: Washington
WC1: Columbus

2: Pitt
3: Philly

So yes, TB and Boston finished 1 and 2 in the entirety of the East, but because of this format they can’t meet in the East finals like they might have with the old format.

Same thing is happening in the West where they’ve got Nashville and Winnipeg meeting in the second round.

Andy is that you?

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

Thanks guys. Yeah, questionable approach for sure

Whatever, man.

As long as they don't adopt David Stern's fatal, insane 2-3-2 series format, it'll be watchable at least.

 

[maust]

Whatever, man.

As long as they don't adopt David Stern's fatal, insane 2-3-2 series format, it'll be watchable at least.

As boneheaded a thing as ever contrived in Pro Sports outside of maybe trying to place an NHL team in Atlanta not just once but twice

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

As boneheaded a thing as ever contrived in Pro Sports outside of maybe trying to place an NHL team in Atlanta not just once but twice

Very simply, it ruined the NBA Finals for me for over thirty years.

Before 1985, I watched every year, even if the Celts weren't in it.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

As boneheaded a thing as ever contrived in Pro Sports

(Uh-oh) Speaking of...I hate this guy

 

[maust]

Don't go there APF. I hated that carpetbagging bastid with a passion as well but, all due respect, this isn't the thread for it

 

[RobertWeathers]

Whatever, man.

As long as they don't adopt David Stern's fatal, insane 2-3-2 series format, it'll be watchable at least.

I hate David Stern. He screwed the Celtics every chance he got

 

[aluminum seats]

Whatever, man.

As long as they don't adopt David Stern's fatal, insane 2-3-2 series format, it'll be watchable at least.

Agree that the 2-3-2 format is horrible. And pointless...to save travel?

Game 5 is such a key game, and that format gives it to the underdog. And if the favorite doesn’t hold serve the first two games, they’re at a big disadvantage. Not sure what the numbers have been over the years with that though.

 

[Actual Pats Fan]

Agree that the 2-3-2 format is horrible. And pointless...to save travel?

Game 5 is such a key game, and that format gives it to the underdog. And if the favorite doesn’t hold serve the first two games, they’re at a big disadvantage. Not sure what the numbers have been over the years with that though.

Well, back when the NBA was a fledgling new league struggling to survive and Walter Brown, Red and the team were barnstorming up and down the east coast in the offseason to promote the sport, it was understandable with financial and logistical limits in, say '58 when it was Syracuse vs. Fort Wayne in the Finals.

I remember the exact moment I heard on the radio in '84 that Stern made the change. I got that angry scowl and bitter mood that I get when I'm pissed off. Basketball is not baseball. There was no excuse.

Congratulations, you've got home advantage in the Finals. Oh, and if you don't sweep the first two games, you may not have any more home games this season. Good luck!!

So you're in the Finals, without home advantage. In order for you to JUST win your games at home, you must defeat the best team in the other conference

Three

Straight

Times.

It's hard to beat anybody 3 games in a row. Anyway, good luck!

By the way, fans? As usual, you're screwed!!


I'll forgive Stern just as soon as I forgive Orthwein. Never.