Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucla-cs.ARPA
Path: utzoo!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!trwrb!trwrba!cepu!ucla-cs!lor
From: lor@ucla-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: NHL Playoff format
Message-ID: <4917@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 21-Apr-85 03:21:04 EST
Article-I.D.: ucla-cs.4917
Posted: Sun Apr 21 03:21:04 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 22-Apr-85 10:16:11 EST
References: <4856@ucla-cs.ARPA>
Reply-To: lor@ucla-cs.UUCP (Kar-Wing Lor)
Distribution: na
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Lines: 55
Summary: 

>I think it is clear that the NHL playoffs are not very good. 80 games to
>eliminate 5 teams makes the regular season meaningless. There is not enough
>incentive to work hard to finish first when all you are guaranteed is an
>extra game in the first round of the playoffs. 

	This is another suggestion of playoff format. The goal
is to make the regular season more meaningful, and also give the
division winners better chance to advance:

Keep the current format; four teams in each division qualify
for the playoffs. The #2 team plays the #3 team as it is. The #1
team also plays the #4 team, but give the #1 team an advantage
bigger than just one extra home game. Let the #1 team win the
first game by default. In other words, this series is just
a four-game series. The #1 team needs only two victories to
advance, while the #4 team needs three. The home ice distribution 
is: #1, #4, #4, #1.

** This is not fair. **
No, it isn't. But if the division champ is 40+ points better than
the #4 team (Flyers - Rangers), doesn't it deserve an unfair advantage 
going into the playoffs? The #1 team is usually more than 10 points
ahead of the 4th team.  In the current system, the #1 team just get
an extra home game, which isn't fair enough. In the past 2 years, 
two the #4 teams easily swept the division winners in the first round 
(Montreal - Boston in 1984, Minnesota - St. Louis in 1985), 
which hurt the gate and demean the regular season. Montreal and Minnesota
had awful regular seasons but lucked out in the playoffs.
If the top seeded team is one game ahead from the beginning, 
these series might have different outcomes.

** How does it make the regular season more interesting? **
The #2 team will fight for #1 to get the default win;
the #3 team will fight for #2 to get the home ice advantage, as usual;
the #4 team will fight for #3 to avoid the default lost.

** The owners will object because they get one game less revenue. **
In that case, make it a six-game series, with the #1 team needs
3 wins while the #4 team needs 4. Of course, the players will
oppose because they have to play one more game. Anyway, either
a 4-game or 6-game series is fine. Both provides the unfair
advantage.

** This idea is too outrageous, it has no precedence. **
Yes, it has. Remember the format in the Olympics: two teams from
each preliminary group qualify, with the first round result between 
the two teams (from the same group) carried into the medal round.
In our case, we just carry a little bit of the regular season outcome 
into the playoffs.

-- 
					Eddy Lor
					...!ucbvax!ucla-cs!lor
					lor@ucla-locus.arpa