"What if...?" brought to you by:
Hockey Den: The Premier Hockey Card and Memorabilia Destination
Visit us at
www.hockeyden.net, watch the 06-07 ITG Heroes and Prospects box break, and enter to win your choice of any card from the break!
________________________________________________________________________
What if…: The NHL Had a Cross-Conference Playoff Structure?
FACTS: The year was 1967. The NHL has just doubled in size through expansion, having 12 teams instead of six. In what could be called a lapse of planning, the six new teams, built primarily through the expansion and amateur drafts, are all placed in the same division. Under the existing playoff format (Quarter and Semi-final play occurring within division, each division sending a team to the finals) it is guaranteed that one of these teams will make the Stanley Cup finals. For the first three post-expansion playoffs the St. Louis Blues represent the Western Division, playing Montreal, Montreal and Boston, respectively in those series. They are swept in each of their appearances.
This was obviously not the kind of product the NHL wished to showcase for the biggest event of their season. Change was needed, and quickly, especially in light of the fact that an additional two expansion teams (Vancouver and Buffalo) had just been introduced into the league. After a slight re-alignment (Chicago moved to the West Division after the addition of Buffalo and Vancouver to the East) came the introduction of modern inter-conference play in the playoffs outside of the finals. The structure was as outlined below:
1970-71 Season:
a) Eight of the 12 teams make the playoffs
b) In each division, first place played third place and second place played fourth place.
c) Winner of first vs third in one division played the winner of second vs forth from the other, and vice versa.
d) The two remaining teams play for the cup
The outcome? Still an East vs West final, but it went 7 games with Montreal beating Chicago in 7 games. Now one can argue the shift of Chicago to the West had more of an effect than the playoff system, but at the same time the structure of the system saw only one of the “weaker” expansion teams (Minnesota) coming through to the semis, alleviating the overwhelming problem of the previous system. For the next season, a slight tweak in the structure that held into the 1973-74 playoffs:
1971-72 Season to 1973-74 Season:
a) Eight of the 12 teams make the playoffs
b) In each conference, first place played fourth place and second place played third place.
c) Winner of first vs fourth in one conference played the winner of second vs third from the other, and vice versa.
d) The two remaining teams play for the cup
The outcome? An all East final, with Boston beating the Rangers in 6 games. Now here’s the intriguing aspect of the crossover system: One could argue that it allows the two best teams in the league to meet by not quota filling the finals by division/conference. I mean, what if the two best teams are truly in one conference? Shouldn’t the possibility exist that they could meet in the finals? Hard to argue against this.
Another change came with the 74-75 season. Further expansion to 16 teams necessitated expanding the playoffs and re-structuring the seeding and matching of teams. This season saw the introduction of the conference structure in the NHL, containing the Campbell and Prince of Wales Conferences, the former containing the Adams and Norris divisions while the latter contained the Patrick and Smythe divisions. The following structure was implemented up to and including the 76-77 playoffs:
1974-75 Season to 1976-1977 Season:
a) The 4 division leaders get byes into Quarter Finals
b) Teams 5-12 overall (consisting of the number 2 and 3 team in each division) play in Quarter Finals via a Preliminary Round Best of 5 series
c) Each round teams are seeded and matched according to their points total for the season, with highest seed playing lowest seed throughout playoffs
In the first two seasons of this structure a Campbell vs Prince of Wales final occurred, while the 76-77 finals gave an all Prince of Wales battle between Original 6 rivals Boston and Montreal, with the Habs sweeping the Bruins. What do we see with this? While not every year is going to produce a finals representing only one conference, the prospect of it occurring when appropriate shouldn’t be viewed as a negative. Boston and Montreal folks? Can’t complain there.
For the 1977-78 season, another slight tweak was in order:
1977-78 Season to 1978-79 Season:
a) The 4 division leaders get byes into Quarter Finals
b) Teams 5-12 overall (consisting of the number 2 team in each division and the four “wild card” teams in the league with the highest points totals that did not come in first or second in their division) play in Quarter Finals via a Preliminary Round Best of 5 series
c) Each round teams are seeded and matched according to their points total for the season, with highest seed playing lowest seed throughout playoffs
These two seasons? First season, an intra-conference rematch between the Habs and Bruins, with Montreal once again coming out on top in six games. Second season, an inter-conference match-up between the Habs and Rangers with Montreal again drinking from the chalice.
But just when they thought they had things figured out….welcome to the NHL the four surviving WHA teams! With the addition of the Edmonton Oilers, Winnipeg Jets, Quebec Nordiques and Hartford Whalers to the league, playoff formats needed a major re-adjustment. Playoffs now became a 16 team endeavour, much as they are today. However, the NHL of 1979 had this REALLY bizarre idea of having the best 16 teams in the playoffs, with no division quotas to fill, and a seeding procedure reliant on total points in a season. This was made possible in this 21 team league with a balanced 80 game schedule where each team played the other 20 four times. In one of the simpler playoff systems ever produced, the NHL implemented this:
1979-80 & 1980-81 Season:
a) Top 16 teams in league based on season points total
b) Each round teams are seeded and matched according to their points total for the season, with highest seed playing lowest seed throughout playoffs
In a word: beautiful. Everyone plays everyone else, the cream rises to the top and the best play it out. In the 1980 playoffs, not only do we have teams from the same conference playing, but from the same division!! The New York Islanders win the first of four consecutive Stanley Cups over the Philadelphia Flyers in 6 games. In 1981, the Campbell Conference Isles are back at it again, beating the Prince of Wales Conference Minnesota North Stars in a 5 game series.
Alas, this was the end of the crossover playoff structure. The 1982 playoffs had four teams from each division making the post-season, with one team from each division eventually meeting its cross conference division rival for the conference championship, resulting again in one team from each conference meeting for the cup. The playoff structure has remained similar into the present in the sense that we are still dealing with intra-conference play until the finals with 8-teams per conference vying to represent the conference in the finals. One has to ask, however, are the best two teams always getting into the finals? Did the league lose out on a chance to better represent its talented teams by not continuing with an inter-conference/crossover style of playoffs? Is there marketing being lost out on by not allowing for the possibility of two teams from the East or West playing each other in the finals? Imagine a Toronto-Montreal finals. Golden! A Colorado-Detroit finals in the mid-90s? A Pittsburgh-Washington finals this past year?
Let’s just play with the 16-team format of the 1980 and 1981 seasons using this year as an example. I know the balanced schedule isn’t there anymore, but let’s ignore that and just entertain the possibilities. Here’s what the match-ups would have looked like this year in the first round:
San Jose (1st; 117 pts) vs Columbus (16th; 92 pts)
Boston (2nd; 116 pts) vs St. Louis (15th; 92 pts)
Detroit (3rd; 112pts) vs Florida (14th; 93 pts)
Washington (4th; 108 pts) vs Montreal (13th; 93 pts)
New Jersey (5th; 106 pts) vs NY Rangers (12th; 95 pts)
Chicago (6th; 104 pts) vs Carolina (11th; 97 pts)
Vancouver (7th; 100 pts) vs Calgary (10th; 98 pts)
Pittsburgh (8th; 99 pts) vs Philadelphia (9th; 99 pts)
The only series remaining the same is Pittsburgh and Philly. Also, Anaheim is out and the Panthers come into play. We get five series remaining between teams in the same conference, while three go between conferences. All I know is this: Jersey vs Rangers, Canucks vs Flames and Pens vs Flyers. I’ll take that! And who knows what happens beyond this as re-seeding takes place round by round! All East or all West final? It’s a possibility.
I’ve thrown out enough for you to chew on. Here’s the question:
WHAT IF #8: The NHL Had a Cross-Conference Playoff Structure?
Give me you thoughts and ideas on this one, as well as what the logistics would have to be. Do we balance the schedule with 87 regular season games (3 against each of the 29 teams) and shorten the first round to a best of 5? Or what other options are available? Creativity is encouraged here folks!
Cheers!
Shawn Gates
[email protected]
Twitter: ShawnHockeybuzz
Facebook: Shawn Gates
_________________________________________________________________________
Remember to visit
www.hockeyden.net, watch the 06-07 ITG Heroes and Prospects box break, and enter to win your choice of any card from the break!
________________________________________________________________________
Previous “WHAT IF…?” Articles
#1 What If The NHL Contracted To 24 Teams?
#2 What If Quebec Traded Lindros To The Rangers Instead Of The Flyers?
#3 What If Calgary Drafted Martin Brodeur Instead Of Trevor Kidd?
#3a What If Calgary Drafted Martin Brodeur Instead Of Trevor Kidd?: A RESPONSE
#4 What If The WHA Never Existed?
#5 What If The Position Of Rover Had Not Been Eliminated?
#6 What If Pittsburgh Had Not Been Awarded A Team In 1967?
#7 What If Steve Smith Had Not Scored In His Own Net In Game 7?
Join the Discussion:
»