Jump to content
Hockey Wilderness Zone Coverage Property
  • The Wild (And The Rest of the NHL) Would Benefit From A Different Playoff Format


    Image courtesy of Matt Blewett-Imagn Images
    Chris Schad

    The Minnesota Wild finally made the playoffs. Once they earned the loser's points in the Anaheim Ducks game, they ensured they would chase the Stanley Cup for the 10th time in the past 13 seasons, drawing an opening round matchup with the Vegas Golden Knights.

    When the Wild take the ice for the first game of the series, there’s no guarantee the team that surged out to become the best team in the NHL in November will begin an unexpected march to a championship. However, one thing is certain.

    The Wild (and the rest of the NHL) may have benefited from a different playoff format.

    The NHL changed its playoff format for the 2013-14 season, with divisions taking priority over conference record. The change was intended to create more important divisional matchups during the regular season and lasting rivalries when they met in the playoffs.

    If we look at the main objective, the playoffs have been a success. The Wild haven’t made it to the conference finals since before the format change. Still, they’ve built animosity with their Central Division rivals as they became a consistent playoff team.

    Many of those meetings took place with the Chicago Blackhawks. Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews became mortal enemies in Minnesota during the mid-2010s. They foiled Minnesota's most likely team to make a run, defeating the Wild on a bad bounce off the end boards in Game 6 of the Western Conference semifinals.

    The playoff format also intensified the Dallas Stars rivalry. This rivalry didn’t need much to get going because Norm Green relocated the North Stars in the early 1990s. But it also hasn’t seen Minnesota get its revenge, losing six-game playoff series to Dallas in 2016 and 2023.

    Then there’s the St. Louis Blues, who defeated the Wild in five games in the 2017 playoffs and in six games during the 2022 campaign. The Winnipeg Jets beat Minnesota in the Ope, let me sneak past ya there series. The Wild and Jets look like friendly neighbors on a combo drive from I-94 to I-29, but the Jets gained the upper hand with a 4-1 win in 2018.

    These rivalries feel like the ones Bettman was trying to recreate when the NHL had the Adams, Norris, Patrick, and Smythe Divisions until 1993. However, the Prince of Wales and Clarence Campbell Conferences gave way to the Eastern and Western Conferences -- or so they thought.

    When the Wild arrived as part of the NHL’s expansion wave to begin the 2000s, they immediately had a playoff series with the Colorado Avalanche. As Northwest Division rivals, there was already a Can you please be mean to each other? element to the matchup. However, things became heated when Andrew Brunette sent Patrick Roy into retirement with an overtime goal in Game 7 of the Western Quarterfinals.

    Eleven years later, the Wild earned another playoff series win over the Avalanche when Nino Niederreiter buried a Game 7 overtime winner at the Pepsi Center. These two teams can’t stand each other, and it was a manufactured rivalry when the league launched its current playoff format.

    But then an organic rivalry formed. The Wild took on the higher-seeded Vancouver Canucks which may have been the most heated playoff series in franchise history. After jumping out to a 3-1 lead, the Wild stole Game 5, Vancouver blasted them in Game 6, then blew a 2-0 lead in Game 7 to create a new rivalry.

    It didn’t matter that half the games began at 9:30 pm. Wild fans hated the Canucks. Even though they would remain in the Northwest Division for a decade, the rivalry eventually dissipated after Minnesota formed Central Division rivalries.

    This illustrates the problem with the current format. It creates regionalized rivalries that inspire fans to make the short trips to see their teams play. However, it also removes the possibility of creating new ones with teams they may not see otherwise.

    How much fun would it be to see the Wild go up against Connor McDavid for seven games? Or even rekindling a rivalry with Vegas that seemed to be born in a seven-game playoff series in 2021? The Wild will have the chance to do the latter, but only because they benefited from the NHL’s wonky wild card rules, which allow each team to play in a different “divisional” bracket.

    This is good news for this team, which avoids the Presidents Trophy-winning Jets in the process. However, it also deprives fans of exposure to new teams and new rivals during the NHL’s showcase moments.

    Another flaw is that the best teams get knocked out early in the playoffs, such as the 2021-22 Wild team that the Blues knocked out in the first round. But a novelty in the playoffs would be nice in a format that allows the Edmonton Oilers and Los Angeles Kings to meet for the fourth straight year.

    Then again, this is a league that is reluctant to change. After a year away, the Wild will have to figure out how to beat Vegas as a wild card to reach the Stanley Cup Playoffs. 

    Think you could write a story like this? Hockey Wilderness wants you to develop your voice, find an audience, and we'll pay you to do it. Just fill out this form.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Featured Comments

    I have never really liked the new playoff format.  As much as I dislike Colorado and Dallas and am happy that one of them will be eliminated in round one, I wish it was based on points for seeding.  Teams would have more games to play for at the end of the year.  

    • Like 4
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Top 2 seeds from each division play the bottom 2 wild cards.  That makes sense. 

    But the middle 4 teams should also be seeded allowing them to cross divisions.  In theory this would allow the 4 best conference seeds to all advance.

    • Like 5
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I like the old format of taking the top 8 teams with seeding based off that. I don't think it's happened recently but with this current format we will see a team miss the playoffs that should have made it.

    Imagine a team from the Pacific getting the 3rd playoff spot in their division with 88 points and a team from the Central finishing 6th in the division with 90 points...

    • Like 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This is a prime example of how the NHL is mismanaged. I don't know a single hockey fan who likes the current formant and yet its still here.  Similarly, the 2 point game makes zero sense and yet its still here.  Bettman needs to go. He too arrogant for the position.

    • Like 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Can we talk about the playoff game start times? The second game is 10 PM on a weeknight...really?! Does the NHL want to grow the fanbase at all? It sure doesn't seem like it. Screw you kids, too bad your favorite team starts playing hours after your bedtime.

    And those are the road games. The home games are no better. It may say 8 PM, but it depends on what time the East game finishes. Everyone knows it's actually around 8:50. Screw you again kids. Not only can't you stay up to watch them on the road, you can't even attend (or watch) a playoff game at home.

    It's plainly obvious that the NHL/Bettman could care less about the Minnesota Wild and it's fans. This is flyover country and the big market coast teams are all that matters.

    I'm not surprised at all that my son is rapidly losing interest in the Wild and gaining interest in the Timberwolves. I'm a hockey guy and could never stand basketball, but between the Jekyll and Hyde performances, the star player always being hurt, and the ridiculous playoff start times, I don't blame my son for losing interest.

    Oh yeah, back on topic, the playoff format is pure stupidity. It's completely illogical and unbalanced. One should play eight and so on, and then reset every round, highest to lowest.

    • Like 4
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    The Canucks were the Wild’s first rival even before that playoff series. Even before Todd Bertuzzi talked mad shit.

    That being said, over the last decade and a half, the central division has been one of, if not, the most competitive divisions in the entire league. The Wild ran into some really great teams over that time, while also having great teams of their own that completely shat the bed. 

    The hill to climb through this kind of playoff format does seem unbalanced based on year to year strength of the two divisions. And if you've been in the Central, it's been hard since they've re-aligned. 

    I don't find this playoff format confusing (like some) or inherently bad. Frankly, even the arguments laid out in this article aren't enough to sway me in either direction. It's just that the way it's set up now makes for a less than balanced approach to playoff bracketing rather than a 1-8, or even a 1-16 seeding based on standings points can provide.

    But frankly, to shut any of this kind of talk up is for the Wild to actually do something in the postseason for once in a decade. Win, and we won't have to bitch.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This rant is like picking low hanging fruit.  Seed one plays seed eight, just like every other sport.  Seed two plays seed seven, once again like every other sport.  The middle four play each other just like every other sport.  

    Changing the format would have Edmonton playing Dallas and LA playing Colorado.  If that is a monumental change to the playoff system I am not seeing it.  This attitude that it would be better for the league is very weak when you realize you have to win 16 games against 4 playoff teams.  It doesn't matter if you get a weaker or stronger team in the first round you still have to play the games. 

    The only flaw in this format is that a division could have six teams better than the third place team in the other division which would mean a better team was left out of the playoffs.  That came close to happening only once.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Heres my 1 year trial plan  ,  every team plays a 4 game series against every playoff team in their own conference , who ever has the best records from each conference faces off in a 7 game series . 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    18 hours ago, Patrick said:

    This is a prime example of how the NHL is mismanaged. I don't know a single hockey fan who likes the current formant and yet its still here.  Similarly, the 2 point game makes zero sense and yet its still here.  Bettman needs to go. He too arrogant for the position.

    The 2 points for a win exists because they used to have ties, 1 point for each. They could have, and maybe should have, changed it to 1 point, but instead decided to award 1 point to the OT loser. So a game only worth 2 points now awards 3. I would rather see ties again personally, but that was deemed too boring. I also preferred the 5 on 5 OT. 3 on 3 is a gimmick and teams quickly adapted to it and made it boring anyway.

    NHL, you want excitement? 5 on 5 with no goalies, most goals in 5 minutes wins. 

    • Like 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    13 hours ago, 1Brotherbill said:

    This rant is like picking low hanging fruit.  Seed one plays seed eight, just like every other sport.  Seed two plays seed seven, once again like every other sport.  The middle four play each other just like every other sport.  

    Changing the format would have Edmonton playing Dallas and LA playing Colorado.  If that is a monumental change to the playoff system I am not seeing it.  This attitude that it would be better for the league is very weak when you realize you have to win 16 games against 4 playoff teams.  It doesn't matter if you get a weaker or stronger team in the first round you still have to play the games. 

    The only flaw in this format is that a division could have six teams better than the third place team in the other division which would mean a better team was left out of the playoffs.  That came close to happening only once.  

    You are missing the point. Its nonsensical and makes for the same first round match ups year after year.  Gets pretty boring. I skip most of the first round now a days for that reason. And just because it hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean its a good idea. You can cross the road without looking and not get hit by a car, but its still a stupid thing to do!

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    47 minutes ago, Patrick said:

    Its nonsensical and makes for the same first round match ups year after year.  Gets pretty boring.

    Yup! Might as well do away with half the playoff teams. 👍

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 hours ago, Scalptrash said:

    The 2 points for a win exists because they used to have ties, 1 point for each. They could have, and maybe should have, changed it to 1 point, but instead decided to award 1 point to the OT loser. So a game only worth 2 points now awards 3. I would rather see ties again personally, but that was deemed too boring. I also preferred the 5 on 5 OT. 3 on 3 is a gimmick and teams quickly adapted to it and made it boring anyway.

    NHL, you want excitement? 5 on 5 with no goalies, most goals in 5 minutes wins. 

    I hate the 3 on 3 too.  If you don’t want to play 20 minutes, make it a ten minute 5x5 ot.   Go back to the ties, 2 points for the win.  Awarding a team two points because they win on 3x3 sucks.  To me, 3x3 isn't real hockey.

    Edited by SkolWild73
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 hours ago, Scalptrash said:

    NHL, you want excitement? 5 on 5 with no goalies, most goals in 5 minutes wins. 

    While this would undoubtedly be entertaining, I think we'd see injuries spike as D-men stand in the net to block shots.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 hours ago, Patrick said:

    You are missing the point. Its nonsensical and makes for the same first round match ups year after year.  Gets pretty boring. I skip most of the first round now a days for that reason. And just because it hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean its a good idea. You can cross the road without looking and not get hit by a car, but its still a stupid thing to do!

    What exactly is the point?  I'm not for or against the current playoff selection process.  But this garbage about the same teams playing each other every year isn't really a thing.  It happens sometimes but in the more traditional format it would happen just as much.

    Who is going to be in the playoffs next year?  Let's dust of the crystal ball.  Colorado, Vegas, Winnipeg, Dallas, Edmonton, L A, Minnesota, and some random team or maybe St. Louis again.  There really isn't a lot of parody in the NHL.  The same teams make the playoffs every year with a few acceptations.  It is a mathematical certainty that they will play against each other often.  

    This article in general is just a filler article that pops up every year at this time.  Someone writes this article and basically copies and pastes one of the seven hundred thousand versions and calls it unique. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...