PDA

View Full Version : Playoff Format



BrooklynBoy89
04-14-2016, 12:25 AM
Twitter people bashing the Playoff system, and I have to agree.. It's a shame one of the Hawks/Blues has to lose in the 1st round. This system BLOWS hard. These teams should not be meeting in the 1st round, just like a few in the East. It's a shame a team like Tampa gets a Home series when they have the 6th most points in the Eastern Conference.. The system rewards teams for being good within their own division, no matter how terrible that division may be. The SIXTH best team in the East is taking on the EIGHTH best team in the East in the Red Wings. It's a joke. Surely there has to be a better system, what that is, who knows. But as a guy living in Tampa, it kind of sickens me to see these fair-weather fans have a Home Ice advantage over a team that finished with the worst record to make the Playoffs. The system is flawed. The old system had its flaw, in the automatic division winner getting the 1-3 seed, so surely, there has to be another way.

Just a topic for conversation, while waiting for this OT to start lol.

Mike
04-14-2016, 12:41 AM
Lets go back to the real old school ... 1 vs. 16, 2 vs. 15, etc.

Caps vs. Wild
Stars vs. Wings
Blues vs. Predators
Pitt vs. Philly
Hawks vs. Lightning
Ducks vs. Sharks
Fla vs. Isles - ironic
Kings vs. Rangers

BrooklynBoy89
04-14-2016, 01:10 AM
At this point Mikey, I'd take anything. It just didn't sit right with me seeing my Tampa friends here at the game tonight, when they had a pretty average season, finished 6th in the East, and then get a Home Series with the 8th best record in the East. Plus, I'd love some fresh match ups. Some of those are great, Rematches of the past 2 Cups, Pitt vs Philly as well.

Anything but this, rewarding teams for being in a bad division?
I mean that Pacific Division has 4 teams with less than 80 points.. Only 2 teams in the entire East had less than 80 points. Figure out a way that the schedule is balanced, and do 1 vs. 8 with no "First Round Home Ice" for division winners.. If everyone plays the same amount of games against every other team in their conference, divisions wouldn't matter. I know there are problems with every system, but this one just seems really, really flawed.

Blue Heaven
04-14-2016, 08:49 AM
Lets go back to the real old school ... 1 vs. 16, 2 vs. 15, etc.

Caps vs. Wild
Stars vs. Wings
Blues vs. Predators
Pitt vs. Philly
Hawks vs. Lightning
Ducks vs. Sharks
Fla vs. Isles - ironic
Kings vs. Rangers

Would love this but NHL wouldnt go back to it. NHL want to cut travel, and owners want to cut costs, and players would probably hate it b/c of the extra wear on their body b/c of the more traveling.

Pete
04-14-2016, 09:03 AM
Why shouldn't teams be rewarded for being successful against the teams they play the most.

Mike
04-14-2016, 09:33 AM
Would love this but NHL wouldnt go back to it. NHL want to cut travel, and owners want to cut costs, and players would probably hate it b/c of the extra wear on their body b/c of the more traveling.

Of course. That's why it was changed in the first place. I just thought it would be fun to see the matchups. Plus, I really had nothing better to do.

Morphinity
04-14-2016, 09:39 AM
Sorry, this playoff format is awesome. Creates/breeds rivalries and makes for an interesting playoff push.

BrooklynBoy89
04-14-2016, 10:46 AM
Why shouldn't teams be rewarded for being successful against the teams they play the most.

That's my whole issue.. Why SHOULD teams be rewarded for playing in a crap ass division. Good, u can beat up on nobodies, and therefore get home ice against a team who played in a better division AND had a better record. Makes zero sense to reward that. And as I also said, change the schedule to make every Conference team play each other an equal amount of times.

BrooklynBoy89
04-14-2016, 10:49 AM
Sorry, this playoff format is awesome. Creates/breeds rivalries and makes for an interesting playoff push.

Having teams tank at the end of the season to avoid playing within their own division doesn't make anything interesting. The Flyers were gifted a playoff spot by playing 2 teams who rested most of their stars the last 2 games, and we all know what the Isles did to avoid Pitt. If this were 1-8, most games would have meaning all the way up until the end, as far as seeding goes. Maybe it was just a fluke year, but I hate that teams benefited from tanking. And rivalries are already there based on vicinity alone, playing them year after year in the Playoffs doesn't make me hate them any more than I already do. I'd like to play someone new for once and create some new bad blood, as well as the bad blood we have with our usual rivals.

AmericanJesus
04-14-2016, 11:18 AM
This is how bad this system is. If we have a Detroit - Philadelphia Conference Finals, their paths could be:

Detroit (93 points) beats Tampa (97 points), The Islanders (100 points)

Flyers (96 points) beats the Capitals (120 points) and the Penguins (104 points)


That could actually happen this year. The Flyers with a better regular season record than Detroit would have to go through a combined 224 standing points to Detroit's 197 even though they finished ahead of them in the regular season. The first round match up alone is a 23 point disadvantage for the Flyers.

Blue Heaven
04-14-2016, 11:21 AM
Sorry, this playoff format is awesome. Creates/breeds rivalries and makes for an interesting playoff push.

Sick and tired of seeing the Penguins/Caps in the playoffs EVERY SINGLE YEAR! It would be nice to start creating a rivalry against the Leafs/Wings/Sabres/Bruins/MTL (when some of those teams get to be good again) rather then the Caps/Pens which would happen almost every year with the divisional series. Just go back to 1-8 and none of this stupid bracket challenge that the NHL is promoting. The reason the format is like this is the NHL wants to be different than the other leagues, and it creates talk, and promotion.

Morphinity
04-14-2016, 11:35 AM
Having teams tank at the end of the season to avoid playing within their own division doesn't make anything interesting. The Flyers were gifted a playoff spot by playing 2 teams who rested most of their stars the last 2 games, and we all know what the Isles did to avoid Pitt. If this were 1-8, most games would have meaning all the way up until the end, as far as seeding goes. Maybe it was just a fluke year, but I hate that teams benefited from tanking. And rivalries are already there based on vicinity alone, playing them year after year in the Playoffs doesn't make me hate them any more than I already do. I'd like to play someone new for once and create some new bad blood, as well as the bad blood we have with our usual rivals.

The Flyers were "gifted" only one game against the Penguins. The Islanders game mattered for neither team. That would happen in any playoff system you can concoct. In game 81 or 82, sometimes there is no chance for you to move up or down because of separation in the standings. Shit happens. I mean, fuck, the Capitals could have rested their stars starting at Game 70 or whenever they clinched the President's Trophy if they wanted.

But the system makes sense. The division leaders should be rewarded by playing weak opponents. That's even how it was in the old system. The division winners got the 1, 2, 3 seed and they played 8, 7, 6, respectively. And then 4 and 5 played each other.

Now, this is better because it makes sure there are two divisional matchups (2 v. 3 in each). That breeds rivalries, which is what the NHL wants more than anything.

Future
04-14-2016, 12:03 PM
Sorry, this playoff format is awesome. Creates/breeds rivalries and makes for an interesting playoff push.
Agreed.

There really is no playoff system where some team doesn't get a harder/easier path than they probably should, and someone always feels slighted.

BrooklynBoy89
04-14-2016, 01:09 PM
The Flyers were "gifted" only one game against the Penguins. The Islanders game mattered for neither team. That would happen in any playoff system you can concoct. In game 81 or 82, sometimes there is no chance for you to move up or down because of separation in the standings. Shit happens. I mean, fuck, the Capitals could have rested their stars starting at Game 70 or whenever they clinched the President's Trophy if they wanted.

But the system makes sense. The division leaders should be rewarded by playing weak opponents. That's even how it was in the old system. The division winners got the 1, 2, 3 seed and they played 8, 7, 6, respectively. And then 4 and 5 played each other.

Now, this is better because it makes sure there are two divisional matchups (2 v. 3 in each). That breeds rivalries, which is what the NHL wants more than anything.

Well technically in a 1-8 system, the Islanders would have had to play their stars to try to get the 4 seed.. I am fine with the Divisions staying the same, and the Winners getting 1 and 2 seeds, but then just seed out the rest. The fact that the Bolts (6th best) get home ice versus the Wings (8th best) is crap. The fact that the Bolts MAY get 2 rounds of home ice depending on the outcome of other series, is a joke. In no system should the 6th best team in the East get 2 rounds of home ice. This system rewards teams for being better than the rest of their crap ass division, which shouldn't be the case. That's all I'm saying, don't reward teams for playing in horrible divisions.. Instead, reward the ones who play in tough divisions and still put up better records than those in the bad divisions.

Mike
04-14-2016, 01:19 PM
Well technically in a 1-8 system, the Islanders would have had to play their stars to try to get the 4 seed.. I am fine with the Divisions staying the same, and the Winners getting 1 and 2 seeds, but then just seed out the rest. The fact that the Bolts (6th best) get home ice versus the Wings (8th best) is crap. The fact that the Bolts MAY get 2 rounds of home ice depending on the outcome of other series, is a joke. In no system should the 6th best team in the East get 2 rounds of home ice. This system rewards teams for being better than the rest of their crap ass division, which shouldn't be the case. That's all I'm saying, don't reward teams for playing in horrible divisions.. Instead, reward the ones who play in tough divisions and still put up better records than those in the bad divisions.

I agree. I don't think Tampa should have the same luxuries as Pittsburgh. An overall 6 seed in the conference has no business having home ice advantage unless they play the 7th or 8th eventually.

SaveByRichter35
04-14-2016, 10:50 PM
I understand your frustrations but you're looking at it wrong. You can't look at it as 1-8 anymore because that's no longer how the league is seeding. Tampa is getting home ice because they're the second best team in their division, not the 6th best team in the conference. What they should do is stop with the wild card bullshit. I know the reason it was adopted is because of the unbalanced conferences but it is what it is. Get rid of the wild card and make it 1v4 and 2v3 in every division and you won't have to worry about teams trying to tank to play in the easier division's bracket like what the Islanders were alleged to have done this year. That's a true playoff. You have to win your division to play for the conference. You have to win your conference to play for the Cup. Based on this season we'd have...
Metro
WSH - NYI
PIT - NYR
Atlantic
FLA - BOS
TPA - DET
Sorry Philadelphia.

Either do the divisional thing 100% or go back to a 1-8 conference seeding. This half and half thing is dumb in my opinion. If the league was to go back to 1-8 I'd like to see them do what I wanted them to do with the 1-8 seeding before they changed it to the present format. I was fine with giving the three division winners an automatic spot but not an automatic top seed. Seed them where they should be. All of those years when the Southeast Division winner was 3rd just because they won the division but they should have been 6th due to their point total then put them at 6. If they were actually the worst team of the 8 then seed them at 8th. You can do the same now except you only have to have 2 spots guaranteed instead of 3. Based on this season we'd have...
*WSH - DET
PIT - PHI
*FLA - TPA
NYR - NYI

Florida is guaranteed a spot but not the 2nd seed, they were seeded where they should be based on their points. In this instance, 3rd.

Pete
04-15-2016, 07:23 AM
I just feelike this entire thread wouldn't exist if the Rangers handled their business and had home ice playing Florida.

It's sour grapes.

Dunny
04-15-2016, 09:00 AM
Is there a good reason why the Islanders and Florida play back to back while the Rangers and Pens get 2 nights off, and then 2 nights off again? Is it MSG availability?

Pete
04-15-2016, 09:07 AM
Is there a good reason why the Islanders and Florida play back to back while the Rangers and Pens get 2 nights off, and then 2 nights off again? Is it MSG availability?
NBC dictates scheduling I believe.

Dunny
04-15-2016, 09:34 AM
Ahhh.. Are they paying for broadcasting rights yet?

Travis Bickle
04-15-2016, 09:38 AM
I just feelike this entire thread wouldn't exist if the Rangers handled their business and had home ice playing Florida.

It's sour grapes.

That would have been sweet.

BrooklynBoy89
04-15-2016, 10:14 AM
To SaveByRichter... They can't get rid of the Wild-Card.. If they did, you would have a team in the Pacific with 70 some points playing in the Playoffs and a team in the East with 90 some points missing out. That can't happen, ever.

As for the Sour Grapes.. I don't believe there was ever an option of playing Florida and having Home Ice, and that was never the issue regardless. Do I hate that we have to play the hottest team in the league? Sure. But that's just how it goes sometimes. That also can't be controlled bc we didn't handle our shit. What can be controlled is the system, and the system failed this year. Only in its second year and you already have a terribly balanced Playoff Bracket. I can only imagine it will happen again and again down the road, where a team with an average record gets home ice over teams who are more successful. In the old days, even if the 3 seed was terrible, they usually played a 6 seed that had more points then them, so at least it was balanced sometimes. Now, you can get home ice and play a team worse than you as long as you do better than most of your crappy division. I just don't like it.

BrooklynBoy89
04-15-2016, 10:16 AM
And yes, I get that it's all a moot point now, and there's nothing that can be done. But I just wish they would consider adopting a 1-8 again, and giving the 2 division winners the top 2 seeds. That would be fine with me. As for divisional rivalries, I'm sure they would still happen relatively often in that type of system.

Future
04-15-2016, 11:26 AM
That would have been sweet.
But impossible. FLA won their division, sot hey were going to get home ice regardless of who they were playing.

Mike
04-15-2016, 01:10 PM
I just feelike this entire thread wouldn't exist if the Rangers handled their business and had home ice playing Florida.

It's sour grapes.

I don't think so. And how would the Rangers have home ice vs. Fla? It really is ridiculous that a team that finished 6th in the conference has opening round home ice and is 1 upset away from having it through the first 2 rounds. I like the way basketball does it. 1-8, with no guarantee who you play next. The higher seeds will face the lower seeds all the way through. Reward the top teams while making the lower seeds earn it.

Blue Heaven
04-15-2016, 01:32 PM
I don't think so. And how would the Rangers have home ice vs. Fla? It really is ridiculous that a team that finished 6th in the conference has opening round home ice and is 1 upset away from having it through the first 2 rounds. I like the way basketball does it. 1-8, with no guarantee who you play next. The higher seeds will face the lower seeds all the way through. Reward the top teams while making the lower seeds earn it.

In the NBA doesnt the division winners automatically get the 1 and 2 seeds then its reseeded after that based on record. So the #2 seed could have a worse record than the 3 seed.

Mike
04-15-2016, 01:43 PM
In the NBA doesnt the division winners automatically get the 1 and 2 seeds then its reseeded after that based on record. So the #2 seed could have a worse record than the 3 seed.

There's 3 divisions in each conference. So it goes division winners (which is fair) and then 4-8 accordingly. Fwiw it's legit 1-8 in both conferences this season. But if the results after the first round are:
1 over 8
7 over 2
6 over 3
4 over 5 ... Then rd 2 is:

1 vs 7
4 vs 6

Blue Heaven
04-15-2016, 01:47 PM
There's 3 divisions in each conference. So it goes division winners (which is fair) and then 4-8 accordingly. Fwiw it's legit 1-8 in both conferences this season. But if the results after the first round are:
1 over 8
7 over 2
6 over 3
4 over 5 ... Then rd 2 is:

1 vs 7
4 vs 6

There is 3 divisions in each conference in the NBA? since when? That just showed how much of the NBA I have followed since the Nets were a good team in NJ.

Mike
04-15-2016, 01:52 PM
There is 3 divisions in each conference in the NBA? since when? That just showed how much of the NBA I have followed since the Nets were a good team in NJ.

Yeah, and if you look at every team in each division, it's spot on.

ThirtyONE
04-16-2016, 11:57 AM
I don't care that good teams have to bow out, but this format almost makes the regular season worthless. Teams who play well aren't rewarded in good divisions. Like you said, there's no reason a team like Tampa should have home ice advantage.

SaveByRichter35
04-17-2016, 10:38 AM
I just feelike this entire thread wouldn't exist if the Rangers handled their business and had home ice playing Florida.

It's sour grapes.
That wouldn't have been possible.

To SaveByRichter... They can't get rid of the Wild-Card.. If they did, you would have a team in the Pacific with 70 some points playing in the Playoffs and a team in the East with 90 some points missing out. That can't happen, ever.

As for the Sour Grapes.. I don't believe there was ever an option of playing Florida and having Home Ice, and that was never the issue regardless. Do I hate that we have to play the hottest team in the league? Sure. But that's just how it goes sometimes. That also can't be controlled bc we didn't handle our shit. What can be controlled is the system, and the system failed this year. Only in its second year and you already have a terribly balanced Playoff Bracket. I can only imagine it will happen again and again down the road, where a team with an average record gets home ice over teams who are more successful. In the old days, even if the 3 seed was terrible, they usually played a 6 seed that had more points then them, so at least it was balanced sometimes. Now, you can get home ice and play a team worse than you as long as you do better than most of your crappy division. I just don't like it.
The only reason they implemented the wild card was because of the unbalanced conferences. They didn't want one conference to have an 8 out of 16 chance of making it and the other an 8 out of 14 chance(1/8 or 1/7 for the divisions).

As for your 70pt team vs 90 pt team you can absolutely have it happen if you use a true divisional playoff format. Teams don't always stay dominant. Eventually good teams start to fall and the bad ones start to rise, look at Florida. With that, the competitiveness of the divisions will also change. Look at the NFL East. It was for a long time the toughest division in the league, now its a joke. I know it has nothing to do with hockey but the idea still remains. Right now the Atlantic looks easy. Part of that is because Carey Price was out for majority of the season so Montreal sucked and Boston, a usually dominant team, is on its decline. That would be a much tougher division if Price wasn't hurt and Boston didn't bomb the last month.


I don't think so. And how would the Rangers have home ice vs. Fla? It really is ridiculous that a team that finished 6th in the conference has opening round home ice and is 1 upset away from having it through the first 2 rounds. I like the way basketball does it. 1-8, with no guarantee who you play next. The higher seeds will face the lower seeds all the way through. Reward the top teams while making the lower seeds earn it.
But they didn't finish 6th in the conference, they finished 2nd in their division. So they did earn their home ice.

There's 3 divisions in each conference. So it goes division winners (which is fair) and then 4-8 accordingly. Fwiw it's legit 1-8 in both conferences this season. But if the results after the first round are:
1 over 8
7 over 2
6 over 3
4 over 5 ... Then rd 2 is:

1 vs 7
4 vs 6
Which is the way the NHL used to be. I'd be fine with it going back to that. But like I said earlier, I would like for them to take it a step farther.

BrooklynBoy89
04-17-2016, 11:17 AM
As for your 70pt team vs 90 pt team you can absolutely have it happen if you use a true divisional playoff format. Teams don't always stay dominant. Eventually good teams start to fall and the bad ones start to rise, look at Florida. With that, the competitiveness of the divisions will also change. Look at the NFL East. It was for a long time the toughest division in the league, now its a joke. I know it has nothing to do with hockey but the idea still remains. Right now the Atlantic looks easy. Part of that is because Carey Price was out for majority of the season so Montreal sucked and Boston, a usually dominant team, is on its decline. That would be a much tougher division if Price wasn't hurt and Boston didn't bomb the last month.


I know it "Can" happen, I was saying it like, "Theres no way in hell the NHL should ever let it happen." In no format whatsoever should a 70 pt team in one Conference make the Playoffs over a 90 point team in another Conference. That's why they have the Wild Card. But it still has it's flaws. Like I said, leave it as 1-8, 2 division winners get the top 2 seeds, and seed the rest out from there. This season it still would have been the same 8 teams in each Conference making it, but you would have had much more deserving Home Ice teams. And look, it would only effect 2 teams in this years Playoff..

With a 1-8 and 2 division winners with home ice, you'd have..
Caps-Wings
Panthers-Flyers
Pens-Bolts
Rangers-Islanders

Stars-Wild
Ducks-Preds
Blues-Sharks
Hawks-Kings

So in reality 2 teams would flip flop home Ice, We would have Home Ice and not the Bolts. Hawks would have Home Ice and not the Kings. It's subtle changes, but it makes the regular season mean more than just being good in your shitty division. And it rewards teams for being good in the good divisions.

Respecttheblue
04-17-2016, 12:05 PM
Would love this but NHL wouldnt go back to it. NHL want to cut travel, and owners want to cut costs, and players would probably hate it b/c of the extra wear on their body b/c of the more traveling.

They make enough money.
They dealt with it before.

Make one wonder what the next standard to be eroded will be.

Rewarding teams for beating up on nobodies in a weak division makes no sense to me, and neither does a playoff matchup system full of complexities that you have to research to explain to casual outsiders. The old 1 vs 15, 2 vs. 15 required no research and makes sense, just doesn't suite the owner's pocket books. A team that has put in the effort and developed the skill to get the most points deserves a matchup with an "easier" (in theory) opponent, even if that was not always the case in practice (more so when the game's rules rewarded thuggery and clutch and grab, but those days are in the rear view mirror for the most part.).

SaveByRichter35
04-17-2016, 12:05 PM
I know it "Can" happen, I was saying it like, "Theres no way in hell the NHL should ever let it happen." In no format whatsoever should a 70 pt team in one Conference make the Playoffs over a 90 point team in another Conference. That's why they have the Wild Card. But it still has it's flaws. Like I said, leave it as 1-8, 2 division winners get the top 2 seeds, and seed the rest out from there. This season it still would have been the same 8 teams in each Conference making it, but you would have had much more deserving Home Ice teams. And look, it would only effect 2 teams in this years Playoff..

With a 1-8 and 2 division winners with home ice, you'd have..
Caps-Wings
Panthers-Flyers
Pens-Bolts
Rangers-Islanders

Stars-Wild
Ducks-Preds
Blues-Sharks
Hawks-Kings

So in reality 2 teams would flip flop home Ice, We would have Home Ice and not the Bolts. Hawks would have Home Ice and not the Kings. It's subtle changes, but it makes the regular season mean more than just being good in your shitty division. And it rewards teams for being good in the good divisions.
Dude, one team in one conference has no bearing on a team in another conference. You're not going to take one team from the east and put them in the west because they have more points than a team in the west. That makes no sense. Did you mean to say division? If yes then I can understand your grievance but otherwise it doesn't matter.

I get what you're saying, I already outlined all of that earlier. They're no longer seeding 1-8 so its moot. For what its worth, I'd rather them either go back to 1-8 or just do true divisional brackets. 1-4 in each division with no wild card.

BrooklynBoy89
04-17-2016, 03:31 PM
Dude, one team in one conference has no bearing on a team in another conference. You're not going to take one team from the east and put them in the west because they have more points than a team in the west. That makes no sense. Did you mean to say division? If yes then I can understand your grievance but otherwise it doesn't matter.

I get what you're saying, I already outlined all of that earlier. They're no longer seeding 1-8 so its moot. For what its worth, I'd rather them either go back to 1-8 or just do true divisional brackets. 1-4 in each division with no wild card.

I'm not talking about one conference having a bearing on another conference, I'm simply saying that in MY OPINION, there should NEVER be a team with 70 points in the Playoffs over a team with 90 points. Regardless of conference, regardless of Division, just no matter what, it shouldn't happen. It can't happen in the NFL, NBA, or MLB, why should it happen in the NHL. Besides Division winners, everyone else must make it based on Record alone. This new format does not fit that mold, it is simply the Top 3 from each division, WHICH IN THEORY could mean a team with 70 points, makes the Playoffs. In my first example, I simply used the Pacific as my 70 point team and the Bruins, or any 90 point team as the other.

It's obviously all what if, but what if 6 Metro teams had 90+ points and the Atlantic had 5 70 point teams, yet one of those teams gets to be in the Playoffs because they finished 3rd in their own division, yet one of the 90 point Metro team misses out because of their stacked division that year. It's all hypothetical, I know, but it all goes back to the system rewarding mediocrity and being good in a shitty division. I think we are mostly on the same page, my first example just confused the process.

SaveByRichter35
04-17-2016, 05:53 PM
Well the way you're saying it just makes no sense dude. If the 9th place team in the East has 90 points and the 8th place team in the West has 70 guess what, that 90 point team is shit out of luck because their point total has no bearing on what teams in the West make the playoffs or not. So it does matter how you say it, which is why I asked if you meant to say division instead of conference. NFL, NBA, and MLB don't use points they use winning % and games back so again, your argument is moot.

BrooklynBoy89
04-17-2016, 06:25 PM
Well the way you're saying it just makes no sense dude. If the 9th place team in the East has 90 points and the 8th place team in the West has 70 guess what, that 90 point team is shit out of luck because their point total has no bearing on what teams in the West make the playoffs or not. So it does matter how you say it, which is why I asked if you meant to say division instead of conference. NFL, NBA, and MLB don't use points they use winning % and games back so again, your argument is moot.

I'm going to give this one last try.. It DOESNT matter how I say it, because it's all MY OPINION. I know what the rules are, I've played hockey my entire life, and follow the NHL like it's the only thing that matters. I GET how it works. I just don't agree with the way it's currently set up. Since the start of this entire thread, it has been opinion based. Everyone has agreed, for the most part, that it is BS a team with a shitty record has Home Ice. I simply stated that I don't agree with the setup and would like to see it changed, because it doesn't make sense. I then said I don't agree that a team in the West can make the Playoffs with 70 points, because there IS a way for that to happen EVEN WITH a team in the WEST with a better record then them. So there, I made it to your standards of same Conference, and the problem still exists. Regardless of Conference, I just don't like that it can happen in general. I like to see all of the best teams in the Playoffs, from each Conference.

And to your NFL, NBA, and MLB no points argument.. They are still based on RECORD. Which is what the Points in the NHL are based on. If you have a lot of points... Chances are, you have a good record. Record is the most important stat for seeding purposes in every sport, besides the NHL. So the argument isn't moot, its simply transitioned from Points to Wins. More Points = Better Seeding, in other sports More Wins = Better Seeding. However you want to argue it, the team with the better Record gets the higher seed in all other sports, because they don't do the stupid Division Playoff BS. It's Division winners, and everyone else after that.

Damn dude, I even said I think we are on the same page, and you are still picking shit to argue over. If you like this format, where teams can be rewarded for being in a shitty division, that's all good. I don't agree.

SaveByRichter35
04-18-2016, 12:19 PM
Chill man. No one is arguing. The only one who seems to be getting a bit of an attitude is you. I was just trying to help you make better sense of what you were saying because the way you were writing it just didn't make any.

Future
04-18-2016, 02:07 PM
Unless you get rid of divisions entirely, then there is always going to be teams with fewer points getting in. The only way to have a true, unequivocally fair playoffs is to seed 1-16, have no divisions, and all teams play the same number of games against everybody.

That isn't going to happen, so restructuring anything in the playoffs is merely changing the aesthetic, and doing nothing to change the fact that, some years, teams get unlucky.

BrooklynBoy89
04-18-2016, 03:08 PM
Chill man. No one is arguing. The only one who seems to be getting a bit of an attitude is you. I was just trying to help you make better sense of what you were saying because the way you were writing it just didn't make any.

Didn't mean to sound like I was getting an attitude, just thought all the "Dude you make no sense" stuff was you coming at me haha.. No worries. I'm glad you helped me clear it up, and as I said, I know we are on the same page with things.. Over and done with, its all good.

As for Future... I know with the Divisions, anything can happen, as far as shitty teams making it in over more deserving teams.. I agree 100% that there shouldn't be Divisions, or that they shouldn't matter other than the Division winner getting a top 2 seed. Make every team in the same Conference play each other an equal amount of times.. Send one team from the East over to the West to make even conferences. Hopefully with the Expansion this will all be fixed. Until then, I guess we will have to just hope teams like Tampa don't get rewarded year after year for being in a shitty Division.

Could just be a flukey year, only time will tell until there is a bigger sample size. As of right now, looking like the 6th best team could be getting 2 Home Ice Playoff rounds..

SaveByRichter35
04-18-2016, 03:44 PM
Didn't mean to sound like I was getting an attitude, just thought all the "Dude you make no sense" stuff was you coming at me haha.. No worries. I'm glad you helped me clear it up, and as I said, I know we are on the same page with things.. Over and done with, its all good.

As for Future... I know with the Divisions, anything can happen, as far as shitty teams making it in over more deserving teams.. I agree 100% that there shouldn't be Divisions, or that they shouldn't matter other than the Division winner getting a top 2 seed. Make every team in the same Conference play each other an equal amount of times.. Send one team from the East over to the West to make even conferences. Hopefully with the Expansion this will all be fixed. Until then, I guess we will have to just hope teams like Tampa don't get rewarded year after year for being in a shitty Division.

Could just be a flukey year, only time will tell until there is a bigger sample size. As of right now, looking like the 6th best team could be getting 2 Home Ice Playoff rounds..

Nah I didn't mean it like that at all. Its just the way I talk, I say bro and dude a little too much I guess lol.

In my opinion you have to have divisions or else the league is a mess. It would be stupid to have just one big league without somehow separating everyone. Divisions keep everything neat and tidy. I don't understand why you're singling out Tampa though. They've been a good team for a while now. It's not a fluke that they're as good as they are. Its a fluke that Montreal was as bad as they were due to losing Price, and you could even say that Florida finishing first was a fluke. Maybe its not though. Maybe Florida is on the rise and will be more competitive in that division for a few years to come. Everything changes. Just because one division is weak this season doesn't mean it will be next season as well. It's only the 3rd year we've been in this format, give it a chance.

BrooklynBoy89
04-18-2016, 06:36 PM
Nah I didn't mean it like that at all. Its just the way I talk, I say bro and dude a little too much I guess lol.

In my opinion you have to have divisions or else the league is a mess. It would be stupid to have just one big league without somehow separating everyone. Divisions keep everything neat and tidy. I don't understand why you're singling out Tampa though. They've been a good team for a while now. It's not a fluke that they're as good as they are. Its a fluke that Montreal was as bad as they were due to losing Price, and you could even say that Florida finishing first was a fluke. Maybe its not though. Maybe Florida is on the rise and will be more competitive in that division for a few years to come. Everything changes. Just because one division is weak this season doesn't mean it will be next season as well. It's only the 3rd year we've been in this format, give it a chance.

Only reason I singled them out was because this year they finished 6th in the Conference.. I just went back and looked at the last 2 years of how the Playoffs went, and this is the first time that a (technically) 6th seed is playing an 8th seed. So it is all new, and I know that. It is also the first time that a team with less points could host a team with more points, if the Islanders win, they (100 points) would be the road team in the series against the Bolts (97 points).

So yes, it's only happened once in 3 years, but the anomaly that could take place is pretty unfair for a team like us or the Pens in all honesty. Having to beat each other and then play Washington, whereas the Bolts could theoretically play the 8th seed overall and the 5th seed. If we win and the Caps win, we would have beaten the 3rd overall seed and then play the 1st overall seed. I know it's all moot, but just something to think about in the future, when more teams are involved and what not.

And I know in the old format a team could have Home Ice against a team with more points, but that could only happen if that team won their Division.

Like you said, I'm all for having Divisions, I just think the Conferences should be equal.. Play everyone in your own Conference the same amount of times, 2 division winners get 1 & 2 seed, and then seed out from there. I'd also love if they reseeded like other sports do.

SaveByRichter35
04-18-2016, 07:41 PM
Only reason I singled them out was because this year they finished 6th in the Conference.. I just went back and looked at the last 2 years of how the Playoffs went, and this is the first time that a (technically) 6th seed is playing an 8th seed. So it is all new, and I know that. It is also the first time that a team with less points could host a team with more points, if the Islanders win, they (100 points) would be the road team in the series against the Bolts (97 points).

So yes, it's only happened once in 3 years, but the anomaly that could take place is pretty unfair for a team like us or the Pens in all honesty. Having to beat each other and then play Washington, whereas the Bolts could theoretically play the 8th seed overall and the 5th seed. If we win and the Caps win, we would have beaten the 3rd overall seed and then play the 1st overall seed. I know it's all moot, but just something to think about in the future, when more teams are involved and what not.

And I know in the old format a team could have Home Ice against a team with more points, but that could only happen if that team won their Division.

Like you said, I'm all for having Divisions, I just think the Conferences should be equal.. Play everyone in your own Conference the same amount of times, 2 division winners get 1 & 2 seed, and then seed out from there. I'd also love if they reseeded like other sports do.

They reseeded with the last format. Its been that way since 1994. Prior to that they went by legit division playoffs like I described earlier. 1-4 in each division. You have to get out of your division bracket to play for the conference and you have to win your conference to play for the Cup. I don't know how long it was that way before the prior change, I don't remember much before the 91-92 season, I was 9. The only reason you have a team with less points hosting a team with more points is because of the wild card. If they just did 1-4 in each division that wouldn't happen. That's why I'd like to see them go back to that or just go back to 1-8 in the conference.

Like we said, this is the first time this problem has come up. Maybe if it keeps happening they'll change it again. Or, maybe we're making a big deal out of nothing lol.

SaveByRichter35
04-18-2016, 07:55 PM
I went back and looked at old standings prior to 1994 where they used divisional brackets. In 1991-92, the entire Patrick Division had more points than the 4 seed from the Adams Division and the 5 seed from the Smythe Division had more than the 4 seed from the Norris so it did happen. It also happen in 1990-91, granted, back in those days there were less teams in the league so that certainly plays a role too.

BrooklynBoy89
04-19-2016, 11:19 AM
http://www.tsn.ca/mondaymustread-the-search-for-the-perfect-playoff-format-1.473661

Funny how NHL players and GM's seem to be on board with changing things as well. Just thought this fit well in this thread. Glad to see that some Pens want it changed. I know it's been said, but it really is sad the 3rd or 4th best Eastern team will be out in the First round, as well as one of the Blues (3rd Best Record in NHL) and Hawks (5th Best NHL).

As far as going back and looking, thanks for doing the research. I know there really is no perfect solution, kind of funny to hear Zatkoff say the 1-16 wouldn't be that difficult, since teams are used to traveling lol. Not sure its realistic, but it would create some awesome series, as the article states. Theres also just some misc. facts at the bottom of that article that I loved reading.

Mike
04-19-2016, 12:45 PM
It's going to be impossible to have the 2 best teams playing each other in either conference final. That's ridiculous. To have the Blues and Hawks playing each other in round 1 is a shame. The 3rd and 5th best teams in the league and 2nd and 3rd best in the conference meeting in round 1 proves there's a flaw.

The league wanted to create rivalries, and it worked !! So fuckin what? It's dumb. Congratulations, their master plan turns the playoffs into a system that eliminates the best teams as early as possible. Bravo.

Morphinity
04-19-2016, 12:51 PM
Rivalries make the regular season interesting. Otherwise, it's not that interesting to casual fans, who the NHL wants to desperately turn into big fans.

Blue Heaven
04-19-2016, 01:03 PM
Every game within a division is a rivalry for the most part. No need to create more of it for the first 2 rounds of the playoffs. Let it happen naturally. Having a playoff format 1-8, IMO would create more rivalries, it would be more inter-conference rivalries.

Mike
04-19-2016, 01:20 PM
Leave divisions and conferences exactly where they are. I'm fine with division winners being 1-2 automatic seeds even if one division winner is realistically 3-4 in conference. Go with division winners 1-2 and the 3-8 fall where they may. If they don't want to re-seed that's fine too, although a re-seed is a true high/low match up. What's the point of an 82 game season if you're going to allow the lesser teams to benefit from not doing what the better teams did, which is win more games. Win more games, get the reward. Simple.

Vodka Drunkenski
04-19-2016, 01:23 PM
^ what he said ^

SaveByRichter35
04-19-2016, 03:11 PM
I don't like the 1-16 idea but I am fine with going back to 1-8. I'd really like to see them seed correctly regardless if you won the division though. That should just guarantee you a spot, not a seed. For example, this year Florida would be the 3 seed instead of 2. With the league moving to 4 divisions from 6, it won't be as big of a deal as it was with 3 division winners.

BrooklynBoy89
04-19-2016, 03:17 PM
Leave divisions and conferences exactly where they are. I'm fine with division winners being 1-2 automatic seeds even if one division winner is realistically 3-4 in conference. Go with division winners 1-2 and the 3-8 fall where they may. If they don't want to re-seed that's fine too, although a re-seed is a true high/low match up. What's the point of an 82 game season if you're going to allow the lesser teams to benefit from not doing what the better teams did, which is win more games. Win more games, get the reward. Simple.

Spot on. I really can't see any reason not to try this after this years mess. And you are right about the reseed, I honestly believe the NHL thinks their whole Bracket Challenge thing is fun for the fans (I don't give 2 shits about it) and that's why they have created this bracket style tourney. So whether they leave that or not, I guess I really don't care, but I'd rather the reseed take place.

As for rivalries.. I don't care about rivalries when we play the same teams every year anyways. Old style, new style, haven't we played the Caps enough lol. Rivalries happen in any format.

Mike
04-19-2016, 03:29 PM
The whole thing about creating new rivalries is bullshit. Rivalries should be created on their own, and not be forced. Exactly like the Wings and Avs back in the day. The Rangers/Caps is a rivalry now too. Just let shit happen. It'll come.

Morphinity
04-19-2016, 04:15 PM
Nothing is being forced. No one is forcing these teams to play each other. I really don't get the big deal that the Hawks and Blues or the Rangers and Penguins are playing each other in the first round. Who the fuck cares? They're entertaining series.

Hey Blues, don't want to face the Hawks in the first round? Do better and win the division. Then you can face the shit ass Wild.

Mike
04-19-2016, 04:29 PM
Nothing is being forced. No one is forcing these teams to play each other. I really don't get the big deal that the Hawks and Blues or the Rangers and Penguins are playing each other in the first round. Who the fuck cares? They're entertaining series.

Hey Blues, don't want to face the Hawks in the first round? Do better and win the division. Then you can face the shit ass Wild.

It is being forced. They created a situation where at least 2 series have 2 division teams play each other, with the likelihood of 3 and the possibility of all 4 in the 1st round with no care about how good the other teams were after playing 82 games.

This has nothing to do with the Blues, Hawks, Rangers, or Penguins. It has to do with the fact that none of the above teams are being rewarded properly for their regular season success. No other sport has it set up this way, nor should they.

Morphinity
04-19-2016, 04:51 PM
Who says a team has to be rewarded for regular season success? Anyway, better teams are rewarded by playing opponents that finished below them in the standings within their division. They're not the worst available qualified teams, but, again, I don't see the big deal.

If you don't think of the league as a 30 team league, or even a two conference league, but instead as a 4 division league, then it makes perfect sense. The whole point is to make divisional races interesting.

Really, the argument here is over the old 3v6, 4v5 series. And it seems like a lot of commotion over just that little nuance. 1v8 and 2v7 is the same.

Mike
04-19-2016, 06:03 PM
Because they play the regular season for a reason, so it should mean something more than to just the division winners. Also, they're not going by 4 division leaders. If that was the case then Boston would be in. A team should be rewarded for going through a grueling 82 game schedule. We as fans should have the opportunity to see the best 2 teams in each conference at least have the opportunity to meet in the conference finals.

Morphinity
04-19-2016, 06:30 PM
Because they play the regular season for a reason, so it should mean something more than to just the division winners. Also, they're not going by 4 division leaders. If that was the case then Boston would be in. A team should be rewarded for going through a grueling 82 game schedule. We as fans should have the opportunity to see the best 2 teams in each conference at least have the opportunity to meet in the conference finals.

You lost me here.

The reward is the playoffs. And teams are rewarded for playing well. They play the lesser opponent in their division, except in this year's case, it's not enough of a reward?

Mike
04-19-2016, 06:38 PM
You lost me here.

The reward is the playoffs. And teams are rewarded for playing well. They play the lesser opponent in their division, except in this year's case, it's not enough of a reward?
I meant the top 4 in each division. With more teams on each division, there's not much of a difference in how many times they play division opponents vs. the other division or even the other conference ! So why reward a team like Tampa with home ice when everyone in the conference plays a similar schedule ? You like it, that's fine. I think a team with more points should have the luxury of home ice over a team with less points.

Morphinity
04-19-2016, 06:47 PM
Look, in the regular season (in the East) a team plays 30 games against divisional opponents, 24 against non-divisional conference opponents, and 28 against Western Conference opponents. When you play a plurality of your games against divisional opponents, you should be rewarded within your division if you can get more points than them. The reward is home ice, in the first round at least. It makes perfect sense.

Mike
04-19-2016, 06:51 PM
Look, in the regular season (in the East) a team plays 30 games against divisional opponents, 24 against non-divisional conference opponents, and 28 against Western Conference opponents. When you play a plurality of your games against divisional opponents, you should be rewarded within your division if you can get more points than them. The reward is home ice, in the first round at least. It makes perfect sense.
6 more games warrants home ice ? Not in my opinion.

Morphinity
04-19-2016, 06:54 PM
That's 12 points, means a lot in the standings. 12 points separated Buffalo and Detroit this year.

Mike
04-19-2016, 07:01 PM
That's 12 points, means a lot in the standings. 12 points separated Buffalo and Detroit this year.

When there was 3 divisions the division opponents played each other 6 times a year for 24 total games and 30 total for the other 2 divisions, 15 each. It made more sense to reward top division teams then rather than now ! 24 to 15 rather than 30 to 24. Also, playing each other 6 times vs 4 is more of rewarding situation division wise.

BrooklynBoy89
04-19-2016, 10:53 PM
Who says a team has to be rewarded for regular season success?

WHAT? Why even play then? It's exactly the reason the Islanders didn't play down the stretch. Because with this new stupid ass setup, you ARE NOT rewarded for regular season success. You should, in no way, be rewarded for playing a shittier division. It creates an unbalanced league, where teams can do what the Isles do, where teams can be like the Lightning and get Home Ice without even finishing in the top half of the Playoff teams. It makes no sense whatsoever why a team should be rewarded for being in a bad division.

As for the Blue and Hawks, and that the Blues should try to win the Division.. They did, so much so that they ended up with the 3rd best record in the league.. Their reward? The 5th best team in the NHL. 1 or 2 stacked divisions severely hinders the quality of the Playoffs team left down the road, and in turn, will lead to less exciting series in the end. Who wants to see the Isles play the Lighting in the Semis of the EC? The 5th and 6th best teams in the Conference. And lets reward that 6th best team with home ice, and not only that, but a cakewalk First Round by playing the 8th seed. Could these two teams have met in the old system? Yes. But it would have taken multiple upsets to happen.

Future
04-20-2016, 10:55 AM
WHAT? Why even play then? It's exactly the reason the Islanders didn't play down the stretch. Because with this new stupid ass setup, you ARE NOT rewarded for regular season success. You should, in no way, be rewarded for playing a shittier division. It creates an unbalanced league, where teams can do what the Isles do, where teams can be like the Lightning and get Home Ice without even finishing in the top half of the Playoff teams. It makes no sense whatsoever why a team should be rewarded for being in a bad division. .
That is exactly what happens if you go to a straight 1-8 seed. The team that gets to play in the shittiest division - i.e. Vancouver in the Northwest in 2011 - has a huge leg up at getting a top seed. When you play a huge chunk of your schedule against bad teams (CGY, COL, MIN, EDM) but a team from the Central, STL, has to play CHI, NSH, DET, who all made the playoffs, all year, VAN is rewarded with a top seed. It's easy to make the argument that playing against shitty teams 4 times a year gives them the extra two points that allowed them to get the top spot. That year, I think you could argue that it's all that separated them from the top three teams in the central.

Mike
04-20-2016, 11:06 AM
That is exactly what happens if you go to a straight 1-8 seed. The team that gets to play in the shittiest division - i.e. Vancouver in the Northwest in 2011 - has a huge leg up at getting a top seed. When you play a huge chunk of your schedule against bad teams (CGY, COL, MIN, EDM) but a team from the Central, STL, has to play CHI, NSH, DET, who all made the playoffs, all year, VAN is rewarded with a top seed. It's easy to make the argument that playing against shitty teams 4 times a year gives them the extra two points that allowed them to get the top spot. That year, I think you could argue that it's all that separated them from the top three teams in the central.

You can't fault the winner of a division if the rest of it is shit, so it's fair to give that team one of the top 2 seeds. At the same time, you can't reward the "2nd place" division winner with home ice advantage over 2-3 other teams that have more points than they do.

Future
04-20-2016, 11:56 AM
You can't fault the winner of a division if the rest of it is shit, so it's fair to give that team one of the top 2 seeds. At the same time, you can't reward the "2nd place" division winner with home ice advantage over 2-3 other teams that have more points than they do.
I'm not faulting anybody, I don't blame Vancouver for winning.

I just don't really have much of a problem giving a #2 divisional seed home ice over a #3 when the latter has more points. I don't think that's more problematic than a team beating up on a bunch of scrubs all year and getting a #1.

Mike
04-20-2016, 12:20 PM
I'm not faulting anybody, I don't blame Vancouver for winning.

I just don't really have much of a problem giving a #2 divisional seed home ice over a #3 when the latter has more points. I don't think that's more problematic than a team beating up on a bunch of scrubs all year and getting a #1.

The team that finishes #1 deserves it. They can only play the schedule in front of them. If you finish 2nd in that crappy division then shame on you. You don't deserve home ice advantage. Your reasoning is backwards. Fuck Florida for winning division ... Good job Tampa for finishing 2nd.

Future
04-20-2016, 12:27 PM
The team that finishes #1 deserves it. They can only play the schedule in front of them. If you finish 2nd in that crappy division then shame on you. You don't deserve home ice advantage. Your reasoning is backwards. Fuck Florida for winning division ... Good job Tampa for finishing 2nd.
Why does the team that finishes #1 by playing in a terrible division deserve it more than a team that wins a difficult division but has 2 fewer points? Say the same thing about the #2 seed.

Using that 2011 reference, lets say the West finished Van (110) Chi (109) CGY (108) STL, NSH, DET (107). There's stlil a huge advantage to being the #2 team in a crappy division, and they're getting the home ice that their getting now while still being an inferior team to the next three.

Mike
04-20-2016, 12:47 PM
Why does the team that finishes #1 by playing in a terrible division deserve it more than a team that wins a difficult division but has 2 fewer points? Say the same thing about the #2 seed.

Using that 2011 reference, lets say the West finished Van (110) Chi (109) CGY (108) STL, NSH, DET (107). There's stlil a huge advantage to being the #2 team in a crappy division, and they're getting the home ice that their getting now while still being an inferior team to the next three.

Because there's no way to hand something to a team or remove something from a team based on how bad everyone thinks a division is.

SaveByRichter35
04-20-2016, 12:51 PM
You guys lost me now.

Mike
04-20-2016, 01:15 PM
You guys lost me now.

I think we changed ideas at some point. Lol

Good points by everyone though.

BrooklynBoy89
04-20-2016, 01:44 PM
That is exactly what happens if you go to a straight 1-8 seed. The team that gets to play in the shittiest division - i.e. Vancouver in the Northwest in 2011 - has a huge leg up at getting a top seed. When you play a huge chunk of your schedule against bad teams (CGY, COL, MIN, EDM) but a team from the Central, STL, has to play CHI, NSH, DET, who all made the playoffs, all year, VAN is rewarded with a top seed. It's easy to make the argument that playing against shitty teams 4 times a year gives them the extra two points that allowed them to get the top spot. That year, I think you could argue that it's all that separated them from the top three teams in the central.

But that same team has to be good again the other NHL teams to obtain the top record.. That's exactly my point regarding Tampa.. THEY WERENT VERY GOOD. They beat up on their own shitty division, did eh, decently against the rest of the NHL and now have Home Ice for potentially 2 rounds.. At least in the old days, you could clean house on your division, but you still had to beat most of the other teams to finish ahead of them. And we aren't talking just a couple of points here for the Bolts, they finished a solid 7 points behind Pitt.. What is Pitts reward for doing much better, in a much tougher division? The Rangers. It just doesn't make any sense..

If you are already being rewarded in a way, by playing in a shitty division, you shouldn't then be rewarded again when you can't even compile a good record, all while playing those shitty teams on a regular basis, with home ice. I just don't see the logic. If a team can't finish with a better record than 4 teams from the other division, all while playing inferior teams all year, then they shouldn't be rewarded in the Playoffs. There has to come a certain point where the line is drawn. What if Tampa lost 1 more game this year, they'd have finished below the Flyers lol. That's brutal for a team to have home ice even though they finished behind both WC teams. Again, its an anomaly, I know, but it can happen in this format.

SaveByRichter35
04-20-2016, 02:49 PM
For what it is worth, Tampa did not beat up on their own shitty division. They had the 6th best record in their division, against the division(15-12-3). They played less games against the Met but had a better winning % against that division(15-9). Same goes for against the Pacific(10-4), but they were 6-6-2 against the Central. It doesn't help my argument here but it puts down yours. They aren't getting rewarded for beating up their division. They did well enough against everyone else and did "eh" against their division.

BrooklynBoy89
04-20-2016, 04:43 PM
For what it is worth, Tampa did not beat up on their own shitty division. They had the 6th best record in their division, against the division(15-12-3). They played less games against the Met but had a better winning % against that division(15-9). Same goes for against the Pacific(10-4), but they were 6-6-2 against the Central. It doesn't help my argument here but it puts down yours. They aren't getting rewarded for beating up their division. They did well enough against everyone else and did "eh" against their division.

Well all it really proves is that they couldn't take advantage of their shitty division.. And when you can't even do that, why should you get home ice over teams who obviously did better against everyone else? So once again I say, why should we reward Tampa with home ice, for compiling an OK record, playing in a shit division, in which they did pretty average? Let's give that team home ice over teams who did better overall and probably faired roughly the same against their own, tougher division mates.

There's just no consistency. The logic of being rewarded for doing well in your division doesn't apply.. The logic of doing well in the conference doesn't apply.. It simply comes down to which division you are lucky enough to be in. Tampa is lucky to be in a bad division, and therefore benefits greatly from it. It can change every year, division to division, so why not go 1-8 and division winners with byes.

SaveByRichter35
04-24-2016, 08:20 PM
They get home ice because they finished with the 2nd most points in their division. Its as simple as that.