NHL Playoffs -- the true crapshoot

[MU82]

The No. 1 seed in each conference (Lightning, Flames), representing the two best records in the NHL, each lost its first round series. Tampa Bay, which had one of the best regular seasons ever, was dominated in being swept right out of the playoffs.

The defending champion (Caps) suffered a first-round loss, too.

And this is not all that rare. Teams that are considered among the best often lose early in the playoffs. The NCAA basketball tournament equivalent would be a 1-seed losing every couple years, with occasionally multiple 1- and 2-seeds losing. Doesn't happen.

The NHL teams that pulled off this season's monumental first-round upsets -- Colorado, Columbus and Carolina -- actually have a chance to make some noise the rest of the way, even win the whole shebang.

Even after beating Virginia in 2018, UMBC had zero chance of getting to the Final Four (or obviously of winning a title). The same is true of all the 15 and 14 and 13 seeds that win early.

If a tournament really is a crapshoot, the supposed "worst" teams would get to the finals every so often. It happens in the NHL. It doesn't happen in college hoops.

Luck is a far bigger factor in hockey. No basketball player ever has won an overtime game with a shot that ricocheted off a teammate's shoulder and an opponent's knee. Plus, one player -- the goalie -- has an outsized role in hockey. If he gets hot, he can carry a team for 2 months. Kind of like the way Kemba carried UConn ... except UConn was a 3-seed and a very good team with a great player; them winning was not a crapshoot.

When I was in Minnesota, the North Stars finished with the league's 16th best record ... but they got to the 1991 Stanley Cup Final by beating the team with the best record (Chicago), the team with the second-best record (St. Louis) and the defending champs (Edmonton). They had a hot goalie (Jon Casey). Total crapshoot. And similar runs have been repeated since.

Any of the 16 NHL playoff participants has a shot to win the championship or at least get to the Final. Any of the 68 NCAA basketball tournament participants has a shot to ... um ... be in the tournament and get lovely parting gifts.

NHL playoffs = True crapshoot. NCAA tournament = crapshoot wannabe.

[#UnleashSean]

OR... The teams are just much more equal in quality.

[JWags85]

The No. 1 seed in each conference (Lightning, Flames), representing the two best records in the NHL, each lost its first round series. Tampa Bay, which had one of the best regular seasons ever, was dominated in being swept right out of the playoffs.

The defending champion (Caps) suffered a first-round loss, too.

And this is not all that rare. Teams that are considered among the best often lose early in the playoffs. The NCAA basketball tournament equivalent would be a 1-seed losing every couple years, with occasionally multiple 1- and 2-seeds losing. Doesn't happen.

The NHL teams that pulled off this season's monumental first-round upsets -- Colorado, Columbus and Carolina -- actually have a chance to make some noise the rest of the way, even win the whole shebang.

Even after beating Virginia in 2018, UMBC had zero chance of getting to the Final Four (or obviously of winning a title). The same is true of all the 15 and 14 and 13 seeds that win early.

If a tournament really is a crapshoot, the supposed "worst" teams would get to the finals every so often. It happens in the NHL. It doesn't happen in college hoops.

Luck is a far bigger factor in hockey. No basketball player ever has won an overtime game with a shot that ricocheted off a teammate's shoulder and an opponent's knee. Plus, one player -- the goalie -- has an outsized role in hockey. If he gets hot, he can carry a team for 2 months. Kind of like the way Kemba carried UConn ... except UConn was a 3-seed and a very good team with a great player; them winning was not a crapshoot.

When I was in Minnesota, the North Stars finished with the league's 16th best record ... but they got to the 1991 Stanley Cup Final by beating the team with the best record (Chicago), the team with the second-best record (St. Louis) and the defending champs (Edmonton). They had a hot goalie (Jon Casey). Total crapshoot. And similar runs have been repeated since.

Any of the 16 NHL playoff participants has a shot to win the championship or at least get to the Final. Any of the 68 NCAA basketball tournament participants has a shot to ... um ... be in the tournament and get lovely parting gifts.

NHL playoffs = True crapshoot. NCAA tournament = crapshoot wannabe.

There is something unique about hockey like that.  Happens in the NCAA hockey tournament as well.  In a 16 team tourney, the 4 seed can very often make the Frozen Four if not win the whole thing.  All it takes are a few funky bounces.

[Cheeks]

Second most crapshootish

I gave you the article a few weeks ago that had the statistical analysis.  NCAA most unpredictable, followed by NHL, then MLB.  NBA most predictable.

And yes, all of these NHL teams and same for NBA, NFL and MLB were good teams by and large.  That is not the case for NCAA tournament necessarily where teams can win their conf tournament to get in, or are considered lower quality conf champions.

[MU82]

Second most crapshootish

I gave you the article a few weeks ago that had the statistical analysis.  NCAA most unpredictable, followed by NHL, then MLB.  NBA most predictable.

And yes, all of these NHL teams and same for NBA, NFL and MLB were good teams by and large.  That is not the case for NCAA tournament necessarily where teams can win their conf tournament to get in, or are considered lower quality conf champions.

The team I spoke specifically about in the OP, the 1990-91 Minnesota North Stars, was not a "good team by and large." They were 27-39-14 and had the 16th-best record in a 21-team league. They were still playing only because the NHL allowed a ridiculous 76% of teams into the playoffs back then.

As soon as a team with a .425 regular-season winning percentage makes it to the Final Four, let me know and I'll agree with you, your "statistical analysis" and your buddy Mark Few that the NCAA tournament is a crapshoot.

Again, the No. 1 seeds in each conference and the defending champion all failed to get out of the first round in this year's NHL playoffs. Nothing even remotely close to that has ever happened in college basketball.

NHL playoffs = true crapshoot. NCAA tournament = chicos' crapshoot wannabe.

[Lennys Tap]

OR... The teams are just much more equal in quality.

Uh, that's kinda what makes for a crapshoot.

[Lennys Tap]

The team I spoke specifically about in the OP, the 1990-91 Minnesota North Stars, was not a "good team by and large." They were 27-39-14 and had the 16th-best record in a 21-team league. They were still playing only because the NHL allowed a ridiculous 76% of teams into the playoffs back then.

As soon as a team with a .425 regular-season winning percentage makes it to the Final Four, let me know and I'll agree with you, your "statistical analysis" and your buddy Mark Few that the NCAA tournament is a crapshoot.

Again, the No. 1 seeds in each conference and the defending champion all failed to get out of the first round in this year's NHL playoffs. Nothing even remotely close to that has ever happened in college basketball.

NHL playoffs = true crapshoot. NCAA tournament = chicos' crapshoot wannabe.

You're right. Chico's wrong. Another day that ended in y.

[Cheeks]

https://www.foxsports.com/nba/story/nba-playoffs-best-golden-state-does-team-with-best-record-win-mlb-ncaa-super-bowl-041516

Great article.

Go to point number 6, number 7, number 8 in the article.  It isn't close that NCAA hoops is the most unpredictable.  And yes, NHL is second most unpredictable....not all that surprising by the nature of the game. 

[MU82]

https://www.foxsports.com/nba/story/nba-playoffs-best-golden-state-does-team-with-best-record-win-mlb-ncaa-super-bowl-041516

Great article.

Go to point number 6, number 7, number 8 in the article.  It isn't close that NCAA hoops is the most unpredictable.  And yes, NHL is second most unpredictable....not all that surprising by the nature of the game.

NHL playoffs = true crapshoot.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

NCAA tournaments format is the biggest crapshoot. That's simple statistics.

Professional playoffs are "crapshoots" because the teams are more equal.

[MU82]

NCAA tournaments format is the biggest crapshoot. That's simple statistics.

Professional playoffs are "crapshoots" because the teams are more equal.

I appreciate your attempt to broker peace, TAMU.

It's reasonable ... and therefore rejected - ha! I mean, this is Scoop after all!!

[Benny B]

I appreciate your attempt to broker peace, TAMU.

It's reasonable ... and therefore rejected - ha! I mean, this is Scoop after all!!

This is Scoop, where the B-Plot is discussed ad nauseum.

All y'all are overlooking the two main points 82 was making...

#1 - A hot goalie can carry an otherwise mediocre team to a championship, something to which I can attest, being a hot goalie myself with two beer league championships and a Zebra Cup under my belt, and

#2 - The '90-91 North Stars were the greatest team of all time... at least amongst the not-so-great teams who did great things, and then got robbed by some guy named Mario Luigi or something.  Fu*k you, Mario Luigi.

[Cheeks]

This is Scoop, where the B-Plot is discussed ad nauseum.

All y'all are overlooking the two main points 82 was making...

#1 - A hot goalie can carry an otherwise mediocre team to a championship, something to which I can attest, being a hot goalie myself with two beer league championships and a Zebra Cup under my belt, and

#2 - The '90-91 North Stars were the greatest team of all time... at least amongst the not-so-great teams who did great things, and then got robbed by some guy named Mario Luigi or something.  Fu*k you, Mario Luigi.

Not discounting it at all....hockey can be that way.  I used to work for the Ducks, we went to two Cups, lost one in 7 and won the other in 5 games.  A hot goalie can do wonders.  So can a stout defense and special team play by frustrating the hell out of teams.  The puck takes a lot of tricky bounces off those dasherboards sometimes.  Playoff hockey is wonderful. 

[MU82]

Not discounting it at all....hockey can be that way.  I used to work for the Ducks, we went to two Cups, lost one in 7 and won the other in 5 games.  A hot goalie can do wonders.  So can a stout defense and special team play by frustrating the hell out of teams.  The puck takes a lot of tricky bounces off those dasherboards sometimes.  Playoff hockey is wonderful.

True crapshoot.

[MU82]

And so it continues.

Carolina, which barely sneaked into the playoffs before beating the defending champs in the first round, is now up 2-0 on one of this season's best teams, the Islanders, winning both on the road.

Yesterday, the Hurricanes went in with 3 players hurt, and 3 more got hurt early in the game, including their starting goalie. The backup didn't allow any goals but he was beaten twice; luckily, both shots hit the crossbar and caromed away.

No sport has more luck involved than hockey, and the NHL playoffs remain the ultimate crapshoot.

[MU82]

The True Crapshoot strikes again!

Blues had the worst record in the NHL a couple months into the season, ended up with the league's 12th best record and were the 5-seed in their conference.

Nevertheless, they will drink from Lord Stanley's Cup.

And the freaky thing is that this isn't all that freaky.

It's roughly the equivalent of Wofford not only winning this year's NCAA basketball tournament but a similar team doing so again in a couple/few years and then another similar team doing it a couple/few years after that.

In the NHL, a Wofford wins amazingly often.

[forgetful]

The True Crapshoot strikes again!

Blues had the worst record in the NHL a couple months into the season, ended up with the league's 12th best record and were the 5-seed in their conference.

Nevertheless, they will drink from Lord Stanley's Cup.

And the freaky thing is that this isn't all that freaky.

It's roughly the equivalent of Wofford not only winning this year's NCAA basketball tournament but a similar team doing so again in a couple/few years and then another similar team doing it a couple/few years after that.

In the NHL, a Wofford wins amazingly often.

I wonder how much of this is home advantage. The NBA has by far the largest home court advantage of all sports. The NHL is just above MLB in terms of home advantage and way lower than other major sports.

3 road victories by this years Stanley Cup winner.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The True Crapshoot strikes again!

Blues had the worst record in the NHL a couple months into the season, ended up with the league's 12th best record and were the 5-seed in their conference.

Nevertheless, they will drink from Lord Stanley's Cup.

And the freaky thing is that this isn't all that freaky.

It's roughly the equivalent of Wofford not only winning this year's NCAA basketball tournament but a similar team doing so again in a couple/few years and then another similar team doing it a couple/few years after that.

In the NHL, a Wofford wins amazingly often.

C'mon Mike. The difference in talent between the Tampa Bay Lightning (#1 regular season team) and the Blues is a lot closer to the difference between Virginia and like Michigan State, then it is to Virginia and Wofford.

[GooooMarquette]

C'mon Mike. The difference in talent between the Tampa Bay Lightning (#1 regular season team) and the Blues is a lot closer to the difference between Virginia and like Michigan State, then it is to Virginia and Wofford.

Yep.

[MU82]

I wonder how much of this is home advantage. The NBA has by far the largest home court advantage of all sports. The NHL is just above MLB in terms of home advantage and way lower than other major sports.

3 road victories by this years Stanley Cup winner.

Hockey teams win often on the road in the playoffs. There have been many series with 3, 4, 5 road wins. So I don't think it's a huge advantage, in general.

C'mon Mike. The difference in talent between the Tampa Bay Lightning (#1 regular season team) and the Blues is a lot closer to the difference between Virginia and like Michigan State, then it is to Virginia and Wofford.

Maybe. But it's a crapshoot.

[tower912]

Some years, it is about nothing but a hot goalie.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Maybe. But it's a crapshoot.

Not really. Basic math will tell you a best of seven series is the least crapshooty format of any playoff scenario. The difference between the best professional playoff team and the worst professional playoff team is minuscule while the difference between the best at large bid in the NCAA tournament and the worst at large bid in the NCAA tournament is massive. Parity is what leads to the "crapshootiness" of the NHL playoffs, not the tournament itself.

[GooooMarquette]

My favorite part of this thread is the use of the word "crapshootiness."

[JWags85]

I wonder how much of this is home advantage. The NBA has by far the largest home court advantage of all sports. The NHL is just above MLB in terms of home advantage and way lower than other major sports.

3 road victories by this years Stanley Cup winner.

I think the dynamics of hockey diminish a lot of the home ice advantage.  Crowd noise cant disrupt the players.  There is very little a crowd can do to push their team, save for maybe a penalty kill, cause there isn't much "need you for the next play".  And as Tower said, a hot goalie can negate anything else.  You speak to the best goalies, and they get tunnel vision, they don't hear or see anything else.

[forgetful]

Hockey teams win often on the road in the playoffs. There have been many series with 3, 4, 5 road wins. So I don't think it's a huge advantage, in general.

That was my point. Playoffs where teams play at home, will give an advantage to the highest ranked team, proportionate to the league home advantage.

The NBA has a massive home advantage, by far the largest of any league. Both MLB and the NHL have almost no home advantage, so like you say it would not impact the playoff results.

I think the dynamics of hockey diminish a lot of the home ice advantage.  Crowd noise cant disrupt the players.  There is very little a crowd can do to push their team, save for maybe a penalty kill, cause there isn't much "need you for the next play".  And as Tower said, a hot goalie can negate anything else.  You speak to the best goalies, and they get tunnel vision, they don't hear or see anything else.

Agreed.

[Its DJOver]

Interesting topic.  As far as "crapshootiness" goes, I would still favor NCAA just because of the single elimination format, but I certainly see the case for hockey.  A lot of which just comes from "puck luck", getting advantages from weird bounces off the board/refs skate etc. just throwing it in a dangerous area and having it bounce in.  Throughout a season, it usually balances out, but in a 7 game series it often times doesn't.

As for riding a hot goalie, I'd agree to an extent.  Binnington was great in game 7, but very mediocre in 6 (not to mention 3).  Raask was a wall in game 6, but the first two goals last night were pretty soft IMO.  Other than a closer in baseball, I can't think of another position in all of sports where you need to have a shorter memory.   

[MU82]

That was my point. Playoffs where teams play at home, will give an advantage to the highest ranked team, proportionate to the league home advantage.

Oh ... further strengthens my argument that the NHL playoffs is the biggest crapshoot.

Some years, it is about nothing but a hot goalie.

This also supports my opinion. When one person on one team -- even an inferior team, sometimes a vastly inferior team -- can carry a team through an entire postseason ...

Crapshoot!

[MU82]

Interesting topic.  As far as "crapshootiness" goes, I would still favor NCAA just because of the single elimination format, but I certainly see the case for hockey.  A lot of which just comes from "puck luck", getting advantages from weird bounces off the board/refs skate etc. just throwing it in a dangerous area and having it bounce in.  Throughout a season, it usually balances out, but in a 7 game series it often times doesn't.

Not really. Basic math will tell you a best of seven series is the least crapshooty format of any playoff scenario. The difference between the best professional playoff team and the worst professional playoff team is minuscule while the difference between the best at large bid in the NCAA tournament and the worst at large bid in the NCAA tournament is massive. Parity is what leads to the "crapshootiness" of the NHL playoffs, not the tournament itself.

The worst team has a reasonable chance to win big in the NHL "tournament." That simply is not the case in the NCAA tournament.

If that's because the difference in talent is less in the NHL compared to the NCAA, I won't argue that ... but it makes it no less of a crapshoot IMHO.

Here's where I'm willing to go ...

The first round of the NCAA tournament is the biggest crapshoot in major pro/college sports. Maybe, just maybe, the second round is up there. But the NHL playoffs, as an overall tournament, is a bigger crapshoot IMHO.

The equivalent of the Blues -- as far as league standings, seed, etc -- simply cannot win the NCAA tournament and just about never even advances to the Final Four. In the NHL, it happens fairly often.

Merriam Webster's definition of crapshoot is "something that has an unpredictable outcome."

The NCAA tournament outcome is pretty darn predictable. A top seed wins just about every year. The NHL tournament is truly unpredictable historically. It's the true crapshoot.

[Coleman]

Some years, it is about nothing but a hot goalie.

Yup. The goalie can impact an NHL game in a way that pretty much no other position can in any other sport, except maybe an ace pitcher in baseball, but they only get to play once every 4 or 5 games.

An otherwise mediocre team (not saying that was the Blues, they are definitely talented) with a shutdown, brick wall goalie performance can and will win.

[Pakuni]

The worst team has a reasonable chance to win big in the NHL "tournament." That simply is not the case in the NCAA tournament.

If that's because the difference in talent is less in the NHL compared to the NCAA, I won't argue that ... but it makes it no less of a crapshoot IMHO.

Here's where I'm willing to go ...

The first round of the NCAA tournament is the biggest crapshoot in major pro/college sports. Maybe, just maybe, the second round is up there. But the NHL playoffs, as an overall tournament, is a bigger crapshoot IMHO.

The equivalent of the Blues -- as far as league standings, seed, etc -- simply cannot not win the NCAA tournament and just about never even advances to the Final Four. In the NHL, it happens fairly often.

Merriam Webster's definition of crapshoot is "something that has an unpredictable outcome."

The NCAA tournament outcome is pretty darn predictable. A top seed wins just about every year. The NHL tournament is truly unpredictable historically. It's the true crapshoot.

But it's really not an apples to apples comparison.
The talent gap between an 1 seed and 8 seed in the NHL is significantly narrower than that between a 1 seed and 8 seed in the NCAA tournament.

And the fact that lower-seeded teams succeed so often in the NHL playoffs proves you can't call it a crapshoot. By the definition you provide, a crapshoot is something with an "unpredictable outcome." Lower seeds winning in the Stanley Cup playoffs is hardly unpredictable.

[MU82]

But it's really not an apples to apples comparison.
The talent gap between an 1 seed and 8 seed in the NHL is significantly narrower than that between a 1 seed and 8 seed in the NCAA tournament.

And the fact that lower-seeded teams succeed so often in the NHL playoffs proves you can't call it a crapshoot. By the definition you provide, a crapshoot is something with an "unpredictable outcome." Lower seeds winning in the Stanley Cup playoffs is hardly unpredictable.

Well, I read the definition as ...

In the NCAA tournament, I can predict that Duke, Kentucky, UNC or another top seed is going to win ... and that almost surely will happen because it does year after year after year after year.

In the NHL tournament, I can predict that one of the top-2 seeds in each conference will win ... but if I do I will be wrong a whole lot of times because lower seeds win big very often.

I will concede that it is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison. However ...

Using the very definition of "crapshoot," I simply do not believe the NCAA tournament -- in its entirety, not just the first round or two -- is as big a crapshoot as some claim.

"Something that has an unpredictable outcome"? Nope. NCAA tournament has a pretty darn predictable outcome.

[Pakuni]

Well, I read the definition as ...

In the NCAA tournament, I can predict that Duke, Kentucky, UNC or another top seed is going to win ... and that almost surely will happen because it does year after year after year after year.

But it doesn't.
Since 1985, 22 #1 seeds have won the championship, so one of every three champs has been a non #1 seed.
In that same time frame. 57 #1 seeds have made the Final Four, so a #1 seed is less likely to make the Final Four than make it.

But again, if we know from history that lower seeds often succeed in the NHL playoffs, then we can't call it "unpredictable" when that happens. It's the very opposite of unpredictable.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Can’t stand the Blues, respect them the least of any Big 4 sports organization.

[Pakuni]

Can’t stand the Blues, respect them the least of any Big 4 sports organization.

As a non-hater of the Blues, can I ask why?
I can't think of many (or any) egregious sins by the franchise, i.e. regularly signing criminals, cheating, etc. And the only time I went to a Blues home game, as a fan of the visiting team, people were decent enough to me.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

As a non-hater of the Blues, can I ask why?
I can't think of many (or any) egregious sins by the franchise, i.e. regularly signing criminals, cheating, etc. And the only time I went to a Blues home game, as a fan of the visiting team, people were decent enough to me.

In my lifetime they’ve kinda had the reputation of being a dirty team. Especially under Hitchcock, they played on an edge that was borderline dangerous.

That and from my experience, Blues fans seemed pretty entitled for a franchise that hadn’t won anything.

Obviously not the case anymore.

[JWags85]

In my lifetime they’ve kinda had the reputation of being a dirty team. Especially under Hitchcock, they played on an edge that was borderline dangerous.

That and from my experience, Blues fans seemed pretty entitled for a franchise that hadn’t won anything.

Obviously not the case anymore.

Agreed. They were a team of douchebags and Hitchcock was the ringleader.   They also had an incessantly whiny fanbase during some of those great Blues-Blackhawk series.

 I think a combination of Hitchcock leaving, guys like Backes leaving (lol, still no cups for you), kind of softened it for me.  I was kind of absent the hatred I normally have for them, and I definitely was rooting for them against the Bruins which felt weird.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Yea, David Backes was the absolute worst.

[MU82]

But it doesn't.
Since 1985, 22 #1 seeds have won the championship, so one of every three champs has been a non #1 seed.
In that same time frame. 57 #1 seeds have made the Final Four, so a #1 seed is less likely to make the Final Four than make it.

But again, if we know from history that lower seeds often succeed in the NHL playoffs, then we can't call it "unpredictable" when that happens. It's the very opposite of unpredictable.

By "top seed" I was thinking top-2 or top-3 seed -- in other words, one of the best teams in the tournament. But I guess any of us can use any terms to make a definition work for his/her own theory.

Like the fact that the NHL playoffs are unpredictable every year actually means they are predictable. Nicely done, Pak.

[withoutbias]

cubs fans calling other organizations’ entitled for fans who have never won anything is...well, something.

[JWags85]

cubs fans calling other organizations’ entitled for fans who have never won anything is...well, something.

My god, do you ever stop?

[Pakuni]

Like the fact that the NHL playoffs are unpredictable every year actually means they are predictable. Nicely done, Pak.

I take a bow.

[jesmu84]

Can’t stand the Blues, respect them the least of any Big 4 sports organization.

They aren't even the worst organization in their own city

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The equivalent of the Blues -- as far as league standings, seed, etc -- simply cannot win the NCAA tournament and just about never even advances to the Final Four. In the NHL, it happens fairly often.

This is the thing though, the NCAA tournament equivalent of the Blues is like Texas Tech, or Michigan State, or Auburn. They absolutely can win the NCAA tournament and have. The difference between the two is that NHL playoffs are between 16 teams that are pretty close together in talent and the NCAA tournament is between 68 teams that are hugely different in talent.

[MU82]

This is the thing though, the NCAA tournament equivalent of the Blues is like Texas Tech, or Michigan State, or Auburn. They absolutely can win the NCAA tournament and have. The difference between the two is that NHL playoffs are between 16 teams that are pretty close together in talent and the NCAA tournament is between 68 teams that are hugely different in talent.

Within their own environments -- which is the only thing we can judge, because an NHL team is never going to play for the NCAA basketball title -- low seeds win in the NHL but simply do not in the NCAA tourney.

But I do like your argument. We just respectfully disagree.

[Its DJOver]

Yea, David Backes was the absolute worst.

Not to go full "Bias Cage Match" with you and the entire city of Chicago but do you not like Backes because you think he's dirty, or do you not like Backes because he captained the Blackhawks biggest rival for half a decade?

What are your thoughts on Andrew Shaw?