Official NHL playoffs thread.

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
142
106
Wow, didn't imagine the Bruins in the #6 seed getting home ice during the playoffs. Really amazing that the bottom three teams knocked off the top three teams.

This is further proof that a) NHL point system is flawed and as a result b) Too many teams are let into the playoffs.

As an aside, a buddy just told me that Crosby is still living with Mario Lemieux in his basement. WTF?
 

MiniDoom

Diamond Member
Jan 5, 2004
5,305
0
71
duh, who would want to buy a house in Pittsburgh. he probably takes the first plane out when the season ends.
 

bignateyk

Lifer
Apr 22, 2002
11,288
7
0
This is further proof that a) NHL point system is flawed and as a result b) Too many teams are let into the playoffs.

As an aside, a buddy just told me that Crosby is still living with Mario Lemieux in his basement. WTF?

How is that proof that they let too many teams into the playoffs? It's just the opposite. If the bottom 4 teams NEVER won, then that would be proof that too many teams were let in.

Don't be bitter because you're team is a playoff choker like the sharks and devils.
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
How is that proof that they let too many teams into the playoffs? It's just the opposite. If the bottom 4 teams NEVER won, then that would be proof that too many teams were let in.

Don't be bitter because you're team is a playoff choker like the sharks and devils.

Devils didn't choke this year, they played a team they couldn't even beat in the regular season. It was a bad matchup for them. They should have let the Sabres win the last game of the season.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
142
106
How is that proof that they let too many teams into the playoffs? It's just the opposite. If the bottom 4 teams NEVER won, then that would be proof that too many teams were let in.

Don't be bitter because you're team is a playoff choker like the sharks and devils.

It's pretty obvious the point system needs to be revamped to make the regular season mean something. Out of the top 16 teams, teams 4-11 (Pho, Van, NJ, Det, Pitt, LA, Nashville, Buff) were separated by SEVEN points (100 through 107). That's clearly overinflation of a team's value. You're telling me that this is the best gauge of performance among those 8 teams? That they're virtually identical and within 3.65% of one another (3/82 games) in talent/performance? Get the hell out of here.

Teams receiving a point for losing in OT is fcking retarded, they lost so why are they getting a point? Teams receiving the same amount of points for winning in OT vice regulation is fcking retarded because teams should be rewarded more for winning in regulation. Go to a 3-2-0 system and you'll actually see what a team is really worth (try it with your fav team and see how they fare). Also, if the NHL removes the dumb shootout and goes to indefinite playoff sudden death OT then maybe reward them with a point for an OT loss. Otherwise, no team should be getting a point for losing b/c they didn't earn a thing. No other sport awards a team for LOSING a game.

Yes, too many teams making the playoffs, allowing 53.3% of the teams into the playoffs is just stupid. Why even bother having a longass regular season if over HALF are going to have a chance to play for the Cup? It devalues what juggernaut teams like the Caps have done over the reg season (e.g. dominating the Pens). There's no point to playing that many reg season games when you only have to beat < half the league to get into the playoffs. Here is where MLB > NHL. Take the 3 division winners + 1 wildcard in each conference and cut the fat. Teams like Montreal shouldn't even be in the playoffs... you're awarding a team that finished FOURTH in its division to the playoffs? Hell, the third place team (Bruins) in that division now has home ice. No other sport is as fail as this except for the NBA (but at least they aren't rewarding teams for losing in OT). If you can honestly say that the reg season means as much in the NHL as sports such as the NFL or MLB then nobody is going to change your mind.

Actually my team is Philly but I follow the Caps b/c I live here and go to the games. Morons shouldn't speak of things they know nothing about.
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Teams receiving a point for losing in OT is fcking retarded, they lost so why are they getting a point? Teams receiving the same amount of points for winning in OT vice regulation is fcking retarded because teams should be rewarded more for winning in regulation. Go to a 3-2-0 system and you'll actually see what a team is really worth (try it with your fav team and see how they fare). Also, if the NHL removes the dumb shootout and goes to indefinite playoff sudden death OT then maybe reward them with a point for an OT loss. Otherwise, no team should be getting a point for losing b/c they didn't earn a thing. No other sport awards a team for LOSING a game.

WTF?! These are some terrible ideas.

"Teams receiving the same amount of points for winning in OT vice regulation is fcking retarded because teams should be rewarded more for winning in regulation."

Really? Baseball, football and basketball all count a win in OT the same as a win in regulation. If you're going to say that a win in OT is worth less than a win in regulation, then how can you say that losing in OT is not worth more than losing in regulation? 3-2-1 makes a lot more sense than 3-2-0.

Getting rid of the shootout and extending OT to 10, 15, maybe 20 minutes would be alright. Indefinite OT in the regular season makes no sense when both teams will probably have to play against someone else the next day or two days later.


3-2-1 would be fine, and the old 2-1 system with games ending in a tie would be alright. Neither system would have made much difference in the standings. Teams didn't end up close in the standings because they were within 3.65&#37; in talent and performance or because the point system inadequately reflects their performance. They ended up close in the standings because talent doesn't win every game. Teams like New Jersey and Pittsburgh played well below their potential for the last half of the season.

You get one point for an overtime loss because no one likes to see a game end in a tie. When a game ends in a tie they let both teams keep their 1 point that they would have earned if the game ended then, but they let them keep playing for the additional point. That's fine by me.
 
Last edited:

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,670
6,246
126
I like the 3-2-1 Point system Idea. Makes Winning during Regulation Time much more important.
 

Michael

Elite member
Nov 19, 1999
5,435
234
106
Since the last expansion wave, the regular season actually does matter now. They used to play a whole season to eliminate 5 teams. Now the regular season means something.

As for Montreal winning, if Washington was so much better, it never should have gone to game 7.

Michael

As for the people whining about the call, here are the highlights. Around 6:10-6:15 into the clip you'll see that he was in the crease and made contact as the shot arrived.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20092010,3,117
 
Last edited:

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
142
106
Really? Baseball, football and basketball all count a win in OT the same as a win in regulation. If you're going to say that a win in OT is worth less than a win in regulation, then how can you say that losing in OT is not worth more than losing in regulation? 3-2-1 makes a lot more sense than 3-2-0.

They still LOST. They did not win, therefore they get nothing. How is that hard to understand? The "time" factor of getting 3 points in reg vs 2 in OT means they were able to dominate the other team IN FIVE VS FIVE and not FOUR VS FOUR. Last I checked, real hockey is 5 on 5 right? Not a shootout, not 4 on 4. That's why an extra point is awarded.

Getting rid of the shootout and extending OT to 10, 15, maybe 20 minutes would be alright. Indefinite OT in the regular season makes no sense when both teams will probably have to play against someone else the next day or two days later.

These players are getting paid millions of dollars to be in the top 1&#37; of physical conditioning and skill. If they cannot close out an opponent swiftly and have to play the next day, tough sht... they will be penalized for it in the form of soreness. Again, this makes the regular season games mean something and have incentive to play to win when it matters. They either play hard for those points or go home with nothing. Do you hear playoffs teams whining about having to play so soon after winning epic 3OT games? Of course not... that's a winner's mindset and winners usually have worked harder than the others in the weightroom and on the ice. The better team will have better conditioning/stamina, period.


Neither system would have made much difference in the standings.

Like hell it wouldn't have. On my lunch break I just calculated the difference between Montreal's "bonus overtime points" vs the Caps. Original point totals? 121 to 88. With my new system: 151 vs 102. Yes, a difference of 33 vs 49 which means the Caps not only won more games overall but won more games 5 on 5 (real hockey). Hence my viewpoint that teams are making the playoffs who haven't earned the right to be there by playing real hockey (5v5). They made it by getting awarded for losing (OT) and/or playing 4 on 4 hockey which is stupid IMO.

More stats: Montreal won only 23 out of 82 games in regulation (real 5v5 hockey). Washington won 43 of 82 games. Montreal won 15 games in OT/SO vs 11 for Washington.

My 3/2/0 point system much more accurately weights 5v5 in the point totals which is how it should be. The 4th highest point total team in each conference would earn the 4th "wildcard" spot for whichever team did not win their division. If I have time later I'll convert the teams that didn't win their division to see who would have earned this last slot in each conference under this point system.
 
Last edited:

rh71

No Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
52,844
1,049
126
As for the people whining about the call, here are the highlights. Around 6:10-6:15 into the clip you'll see that he was in the crease and made contact as the shot arrived.

http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20092010,3,117

Did you also notice how at 5:45 (live action) the ref pointed to the net as if it's a goal, then noticed Halak on his ass complaining and waived it off? He never saw Knuble's right foot touch Halak from his (the ref's angle) yet he waived it off emphatically after pointing at the net signaling a goal.

Replay showed he indeed made "incidental contact" but is the rule only for incidental contact or does it need to inhibit the goalie from making the save? Halak would not have saved that anyway. "In the crease" does not matter per today's rules.

here it is: http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26480

Since replay is not allowed on these, he should not reverse his own call which he probably could not see from his angle, especially in a game 7. He could've _thought_ he saw Knuble's ass bump Halak backwards for all we know...

You wanna know what's worse? 2 years ago the Caps lost game 7 in OT to the Flyers when someone bumped and most definitely inhibited the goalie from making the save. No call on something obvious yet this was called...
 
Last edited:

Michael

Elite member
Nov 19, 1999
5,435
234
106
The incidental contact rule you are citing only applies if it happens outside the crease:

"Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, "

If you contact a goalie in the crease, the goal will be disallowed if you initiated it. The Washington player clearly contacted the goalie in the crease before the goal was scored and not because he was shoved into the goalie by another Montreal player. you don't need to judge that the goalie would have been beaten anyways. The call is not subject to video review.

The call was made right away and it was the right call.

Michael
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
Maybe you should find someone who would actually like to see 4 teams make the playoffs in each conference or 3-2-0 points before you spend your time calculating point totals. When I said neither system would have made much difference in the standings I was referring to the two systems that I mentioned - the two systems that a lot of people would prefer over the current system. I don't care if 3-2-0 would have made a bigger difference in the standings, because I think 3-2-0 is inferior to the alternatives.

Your whole argument that there should be more distance between the Capitals and the Canadiens in the standings looks pretty silly considering that the Canadiens just beat the Capitals in a 7 game series. And that was the biggest point gap between any two teams in the playoffs. The Canadiens still would have won if 50 points separated them. So you want to take them out of the playoffs entirely because they apparently didn't deserve to be there. I think they just proved they deserved it.

If it's 5v5 that you care so much about then a better solution is to change OT back to 5v5. That would be much better than this 3-2-0 point system.
 

murphy55d

Lifer
Dec 26, 2000
11,542
5
81
The caps problems go far beyond Mike Knuble's disallowed goal. Score more than 1 goal on your PP and it is a non-issue. Washington is *NOT* built for playoff hockey. Too many slippery forwards who won't pay the price in front of the net. And outside of the crease.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
142
106
Maybe you should find someone who would actually like to see 4 teams make the playoffs in each conference or 3-2-0 points before you spend your time calculating point totals. When I said neither system would have made much difference in the standings I was referring to the two systems that I mentioned - the two systems that a lot of people would prefer over the current system. I don't care if 3-2-0 would have made a bigger difference in the standings, because I think 3-2-0 is inferior to the alternatives.

Your whole argument that there should be more distance between the Capitals and the Canadiens in the standings looks pretty silly considering that the Canadiens just beat the Capitals in a 7 game series. And that was the biggest point gap between any two teams in the playoffs. The Canadiens still would have won if 50 points separated them. So you want to take them out of the playoffs entirely because they apparently didn't deserve to be there. I think they just proved they deserved it.

If it's 5v5 that you care so much about then a better solution is to change OT back to 5v5. That would be much better than this 3-2-0 point system.

3-2-0 is clearly superior and I wrote a good paragraph on why, mainly b/c it favors 5 on 5 hockey wins which are > 4v4/SO. Since you have no rebuttal other than "I think it's inferior" and "it's only fair to break the tie" then you have no argument. You clearly believe that 4v4/SO hockey is better than 5v5 and want to reward a team for losing 4v4/SO hockey in overtime, something I think is absolutely fcking retarded. We will just have to agree to disagree but I bet if you put up a poll you would be in the minority.

There's nothing silly about taking an example and analyzing it. Montreal didn't earn the right to be in the playoffs and got in on the 2nd to last day of the season. While it's exciting to see a goalie stop 131/134 shots it belies the point that he never performed to that level during the regular season. Which is why the regular season should be weighted more in the points system and they shouldn't be letting in 53.3&#37; of the teams. This is mainly why I don't watch much regular season unless it's a good rivalry (and I know the teams will try). If it was changed to a Division winner + wildcard = playoffs then you can bet your ass the regular season will mean as much as the NFL/MLB.
 
Last edited:

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
This is further proof that a) NHL point system is flawed and as a result b) Too many teams are let into the playoffs.
According to you, the vastly inferior Montreal team just beat a vastly superior Washington team in a seven game series. This isn't the NFL where its one and done. How exactly is this proof that MTL didn't deserve to be there?

As an aside, a buddy just told me that Crosby is still living with Mario Lemieux in his basement. WTF?
Yeah I know, lucky bastard.
 

Sentrosi2121

Platinum Member
Aug 8, 2004
2,567
2
81
I see the Caps as being like the Red Wings of the late 80s-early 90s. Tons of talent, but no team concept. That's why they do well during the regular season. But in the playoffs it's different. You get a change in leadership there, and watch out Pittsburgh. There's going to be a new Wales Conference champion.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
142
106
According to you, the vastly inferior Montreal team just beat a vastly superior Washington team in a seven game series. This isn't the NFL where its one and done. How exactly is this proof that MTL didn't deserve to be there?


Yeah I know, lucky bastard.

Washington was vastly superior? Compare the goalie stats and get back to me (hint: .924 vs .911). Look at the defensive stats and get back to me. Compare both teams' speed/skating acceleration and get back to me. About the only the thing the Caps were better: faceoffs and SOG/goals/points which doesn't mean a thing when your whole team is offense. How many blocked shots did the Caps have in the reg season? Steals? Believe it or not, defense actually matters in the playoffs. Judging by their regular season offense, they should have been superior. And the amount of shots they put up was superior, but a good goalie and defense can trump all of that.

In a nutshell, they need to get rid of their "offensive defensemen" and get back to basics... rebuild their defense for the Cup and not the President's Trophy.
 

mugs

Lifer
Apr 29, 2003
48,920
46
91
3-2-0 is clearly superior and I wrote a good paragraph on why, mainly b/c it favors 5 on 5 hockey wins which are > 4v4/SO. Since you have no rebuttal other than "I think it's inferior" and "it's only fair to break the tie" then you have no argument. You clearly believe that 4v4/SO hockey is better than 5v5 and want to reward a team for losing 4v4/SO hockey in overtime, something I think is absolutely fcking retarded. We will just have to agree to disagree but I bet if you put up a poll you would be in the minority.

I'll say again - if your issue is that hockey should be 5v5 as opposed to 4v4, then the obvious solution would be to go back to having 5v5 in overtime.

I've already explained why I think 3-2-0 is inferior, but I'll do it one more time. If you're going to say that a win in regulation is better than a win in OT, then a losing in regulation must be worse than losing in OT. That's why many people prefer 3-2-1. Each game would be worth exactly 3 points; you take one point away from the team that failed to win in regulation and give it to the team that managed to not lose in regulation. Otherwise adding a point for winning in regulation is arbitrary and undeserved.

You got this crazy idea that I favor 4 on 4 hockey from poor logic. You get the extra point for an OT loss because you didn't lose after 60 minutes of "superior" 5 on 5 hockey. It's not a reward for losing in OT, it's a reward for not losing in regulation.

I actually don't care one way or the other with regard to 5 on 5 or 4 on 4. Coincidental minors happen often enough that teams need to be good at both.

If you made a poll with these four options:
1. 2 points for a win, 1 point for a tie, 0 points for a loss
2. 2 points for a win, 1 point for an OTL, 0 points for regulation loss
3. 3-2-1
4. 3-2-0
I'd be surprised if 3-2-0 got very many votes.

It's not that I think the current system is the best, it's that I think your suggestion is the worst.

If it was changed to a Division winner + wildcard = playoffs then you can bet your ass the regular season will mean as much as the NFL/MLB.

1. AL East
2. 2008 New England Patriots and San Diego Chargers

If want to make a case for reducing the playoffs to four teams in each conference, then ignore the divisions and just go by records.
 

uclaLabrat

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2007
5,629
3,039
136
The incidental contact rule you are citing only applies if it happens outside the crease:

"Incidental contact with a goalkeeper will be permitted, and resulting goals allowed, when such contact is initiated outside of the goal crease, "

If you contact a goalie in the crease, the goal will be disallowed if you initiated it. The Washington player clearly contacted the goalie in the crease before the goal was scored and not because he was shoved into the goalie by another Montreal player. you don't need to judge that the goalie would have been beaten anyways. The call is not subject to video review.

The call was made right away and it was the right call.

Michael
Same thing happened to the ducks last year against the wings in their game 7. I think it was datsyuk who had his stick under Hiller's pad, so he couldn't get his leg down, no call by refs, wings took the series.
 

KeithTalent

Elite Member | Administrator | No Lifer
Administrator
Nov 30, 2005
50,231
118
116
I am officially cheering for Boston to come out of the East. Go Rask!!

KT
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |