NHL and NBA standings system question

[Mac the Knife]

yeah, many thanks to fruitgirl...looks like the only way to find the true champion is the points leader when the season is over, like in Euro soccer LOL , but that sure would take much drama out, but still the correct way to crown a champion, or what do you guys say ?

That would be true if all sports played what are called 'balanced' schedules, in which a team plays all the other teams an equal number of times each season. In North American sports leagues, due to their size that's far more the exception than the rule.

In Baseball from its inception through 1968, league champions were determined simply: the team with the most wins is the champion, and if two teams win the same number of games, they play each other to determine a champion. But when its number of teams grew past 16, the sport split its leagues into geographically-based divisions and adopted an unbalanced schedule, rendering this concept impossible while creating extended rounds of postseason play that lined the pockets of team owners.

In American football a balanced schedule with 32 teams, playing a 31-week season, initially sounds like fun, but in practice it would kill the sport - and perhaps more than a few of its players.

Basketball and hockey would be well-suited to a balanced regular season schedule if they didn't have quite so many teams. But at 30 each, their schedules would have to be extensively modified (shrinking to 58 games, or bloating to 87) to make it work. Instead, these sports compensate for this somewhat by artificially inflating their playoff structures to a point where they represent as much as a third of the league's overall schedule calendar.

So, in essence, the system that works best varies from sport to sport.

[JasonFromMiami]

thanks for the info mac

[DaRadniz29]

I personally am partial to the 1-8 conference based system. I think it's a better set up. it ensures the team with the most points in the conference will face the team with the least amount of points in the conference in the opening round.

While this season (2014-2015) the Eastern Conference actually worked out that it is a 1-8, the Western Conference's matchups would change a bit:

- Calgary wouldn't be third in the Pacific, they'd be 8th overall and face the top seeded Ducks.

- Vancouver would not have home ice, as they'd be slotted 5th and visit the Mad House on Madison for at least Games 1 & 2.

- Winnipeg matchup with St. Louis

- Minnesota would square off with Nashville.

Here's both the current divisional system and the previous 1-8 system:

Divisional System:

(Points)

Pacific:

1. Ducks (109)

4b. Jets (99)

2. Canucks (101)

3. Flames (97)

Central:

1. Blues (109)

4a. Wild

2. Predators (104)

3. Blackhawks (102)

Theoretically, more spirited games due to divisional foes facing off. I get it, the NHL wants to create rivalries, but in reality, while some more than others, a divisional opponent is a rival. Sure, a playoff matchup magnifies that but take Minnesota and St. Louis, they've played five times against each other. Now they're going to play at least four more and maybe seven more against each other. That would be a total of 12 games and ten of those in 45 days. That's a lot of games against the same team.

Conference Based System:

1. Anaheim (109)

8. Calgary (97)

2. St. Louis (109)

7. Winnipeg (99)

3. Nashville (104)

6. Minnesota (100)

4. Chicago (102)

5. Vancouver (101)

This system also would reseed, so the highest remaining seed would face the lowest remaining seed. While both the Divisional and Conference based systems do keep the top two seeds in each conference from facing each other until the Conference Finals.