Why the NHL’s five-year-old playoff format is still causing controversy
In 1917, the NHL’s first season, the Montreal Wanderers’ arena burned to the ground, two players were arrested by the Toronto police for a stick-swinging duel, and the championship was decided by a two-game series between the team that won the first half of the season and the team that won the second. The league has changed the playoff format 26 times in the century since, and some players and managers are clamoring for a 27th tweak to the Stanley Cup competition.
The 2018 playoffs follows a structure that’s been described as “unfair,” a “disaster,” and “the stupidest thing ever.”
But it’s a structure that appears to be here to stay. The league’s deputy commissioner, Bill Daly, said the format isn’t a burning issue for owners and has “worked I think for the most part as we anticipated it would work.”
Here’s why the format is so controversial, and why it’s in place to begin with:
How it works
The top three teams in each of the four divisions make the playoffs. The next two teams in the conference, regardless of division, earn wild-card berths. The division leader with the most points plays the wild-card team with the fewest points, the second place team in each division takes on the third place team, and the bracket looks like this:
Eastern Conference
Atlantic No. 1 vs. Wild Card No. 1
Atlantic No. 2 vs. Atlantic No. 3
Metropolitan No. 1 vs Wild Card No. 2
Metropolitan No. 2 vs. Metropolitan No. 3
Western Conference
Central No. 1 vs. Wild Card No. 2
Central No. 2 vs. Central No. 3
Pacific No. 1 vs Wild Card No. 1
Pacific No. 2 vs. Pacific No. 3
Why did the NHL change the format in 2013?
From 1993 through 2013, there were three divisions in each conference and the top eight teams made the playoffs. Teams were seeded one through eight and re-seeded after each round to reward regular season success. That changed when the Board of Governors approved a realignment plan ahead of the 2013-14 season.
The adjustment reduced the number of divisions from six to four. For Detroit and Columbus, that meant a move to the Eastern Conference. Winnipeg switched into the Western Conference. Dallas stayed in the West, but swapped the Pacific division for the Central. These moves were intended to slot teams into divisions that lined up with their geography, reducing travel times and increasing television ratings.
At the time, Dallas Stars president Jim Lites said moving into a division comprised of teams from the same time zone would reverse a trend that began in 1998, when the club moved from the then-Central division to the Pacific and saw ratings drop by an average of 60 percent.
“When we play consistently in prime [time] our numbers go up by a factor of something like four or five times. It’s just natural,” he said. “Central time zone starts at 7 p.m. [are] typically in people’s television-watching habits, and trying to start games at 9 or 9:30 p.m. just limits the amount of people that are going to watch.”
Another result the NHL hoped to achieve was more intense divisional rivalries, which generate fan interest and attendance. The revamped Eastern division now included four Original Six teams: the Boston Bruins, Detroit Red Wings, Montreal Canadiens and Toronto Maple Leafs. And the new schedule meant every team visited every arena at least once per season.
The shift sounded good to commissioner Gary Bettman.
“This goes into the good news category,” he said.
Why do some players and managers want to change it again?
The problem with intensified rivalries within divisions occurs when those intensified rivalries play out in the early rounds of the playoffs and send a top team home before their time.
Last season, the Capitals won the President’s Trophy with 118 points in the regular season. The Penguins had the second-most points in the entire league, with 111, and the Blue Jackets had the fourth-highest total, 108. Because all three of those teams are in the Metropolitan Division, only one was left standing after two rounds of the playoffs. Pittsburgh beat Columbus in the first round, then knocked off Washington on their way to another Stanley Cup.
“It’s stupid. It’s the stupidest thing ever,” Capitals forward Daniel Winnik said of a format that locked the two top teams in the NHL into a second-round matchup. “It doesn’t work. It doesn’t make sense.”
Mike Harrington of the Buffalo News suggests that the league’s decision to shift the way its May showdown operates might have been inspired by a certain tournament in March.
“You can’t tell me there’s not a huge marketing element to this,” he writes. “The format allows for a March Madness-style bracket to be formed and the league loves to push its bracket challenge contest through the spring on NHL.com. You can’t have that under the 1-8/2-7 etc. format because teams are re-seeded after each round.”
In the upcoming postseason, the No. 1 team by record is facing the No. 4 team, the No. 3 team will meet No. 7, and No. 5 is taking on No. 6 in both conferences. New Jersey Devils defenseman Ben Lovejoy said he understands that the format may sometimes backfire, but pitting archenemies against each other is ultimately for the best.
“You can get two high seeds playing each other in the first round or the second round and perhaps that’s not fair,” he said. “But I think ultimately it’s good for the game to have heated playoff series against teams that don’t like each other and see each other a lot.”
Will the NHL go back to the way it was before?
“I would assume after his year there’d be a bigger appetite to do it,” Washington general manager Brian MacLellan said. “In the past it hasn’t affected as many teams as might be required to get that movement. It’s basically been us that’s been the team that’s not benefited from the one through eight. But we’ll see what happens this year with a couple more really good teams being beat out in the second round.”
