This is just getting embarrassing...

[ruxpin]

14 hours ago, brelic said:

They already do

How's that possible if the Leafs aren't there? 

Edited February 18, 2020 by ruxpin

[WordsOfWisdom]

5 hours ago, brelic said:

It would be interesting to see a 25 year sample.

 

Yes.   

 

5 hours ago, brelic said:

Disagree for many reasons, but primarily, because you are bringing a normative viewpoint to an empirical situation. 

 

Well somebody has to.....     

 

The only reason it works out the way that it does is due to the overwhelming amount of parity in the NHL (which I find boring by the way). In a league with 100% parity you have no winners because you have no losers. Everyone is 41-41-0. That means there is no best or worst team. The league continues to strive for this "equality of outcome" scenario where (ideally) they want every team to finish with the same number of points. Then it truly would be a coin toss in terms of who won.

 

However, that's not how things work in a normal competitive environment (in any sport). No matter how much a "guiding hand" (Bettman) tries to interfere, you will always have different "tiers"/levels of teams. In a marathon, you can give all the runners the same shoes, the same diet, and select people who are all the same size and weight, but someone is still going to finish way ahead of the last place runner. The only reason it doesn't happen more in the NHL is because of puck bounces (luck playing a role), the salary cap, injuries, etc.

 

 

 

[WordsOfWisdom]

3 hours ago, ruxpin said:

How's that possible if they Leafs aren't there? 

 

[hobie]

Ya, it's not looking great for TO right now but really does it matter. In a perfect world TO should be well established as a top contender and as a Cup favourite but the world isn't unfolding as we Leaf fans want/need.

 

You think we have it bad, how about if TO finished 62-16-4 and then lost in the first round of the playoffs to a team that didn't make it to the finals, a team that barely made the playoffs.

 

Their core was Kucherov 25, Hedman 28, McDonagh 29, Point 22, Stamkos 28 so really there shouldn't have been any excuses.During the playoffs only Kucherov missed a game from the core, TB has a good/great d, toughness, incredible scoring capability, a top quality core piece at every position and they easily defied parity but they only lasted 4 games in the playoffs.

 

So what can be learned from TB, I think it's if your team is in the right place(the zone)when entering the playoffs anything is possible.

 

TO is in the east and there are many good regular season teams in the east, TO is currently tied for 4th overall in the west, but how many of those good regular season eastern teams are actually good, actual Cup contenders and are they actually better than a healthy TO. Come playoff time TO might actually be healthy and in the playoffs.

 

My only concern is TO making the playoffs right now and health will be a major determining factor. TO lost in the 1st round of the last 3 playoff years, terrible yes, but TO lost to a Cup winner, a Cup favourite and a finalist and thru all three years TO lost to far more mature/experienced teams than what TO was.

 

I think we've seen tremendous progress from Matthews and Nylander this year, I don't know how much better Marner can get but I know the size of his heart expands when needed and this is making me feel far more comfortable about TO's future both immediate and in the distance.  

 

 

 

[brelic]

12 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

The only reason it works out the way that it does is due to the overwhelming amount of parity in the NHL (which I find boring by the way).

 

I like real parity, but the current NHL points system is tilted towards artificial parity by having some games worth 2 points and others worth 3. To me, that makes no sense, and you should never ever ever get a point for losing. You lost. Period. Lasting an extra 5 minutes in said loss is not worthy of a participation point, IMO. 

 

But that's never going away, so... 

 

12 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

The only reason it doesn't happen more in the NHL is because of puck bounces (luck playing a role), the salary cap, injuries, etc.

 

So, you mean they don't play the games on paper?  

 

I think I understand what you're getting at, but the truth for me is that the best team is the one that lasts 4 rounds and wins 16 games. Period. 

 

To me, the regular season is just one long entertainment and revenue-driven machine to determine seeding in the playoffs. I don't care if Tampa can win 65 games in the regular season playing LA, Detroit, SJ, NJ on a random Tuesday night in December. 

 

If they can't win 16 games when it truly counts, then they aren't the best team. Period. 

 

(With the caveat that the SC champs are the best team in that 8 week period - nothing more, nothing less. If you had another playoff start right after the SC was awarded, you'd end up with a different result almost guaranteed.)

 

 

[ruxpin]

2 hours ago, brelic said:

To me, the regular season is just one long entertainment and revenue-driven machine to determine seeding in the playoffs. I don't care if Tampa can win 65 games in the regular season playing LA, Detroit, SJ, NJ on a random Tuesday night in December. 

 

I agree (with your entire post).  But the above is why I'm spending less and less time actually watching games and find myself channel-surfing when I do.

[brelic]

34 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

I agree (with your entire post).  But the above is why I'm spending less and less time actually watching games and find myself channel-surfing when I do.

 

I'm the same, really. I love the Flyers and watch them to be entertained. In past years, I'd watch no matter what the score was or how boring the game was.

 

But ever since Hex/Hak took over, I found myself tuning out for large parts of games and seasons, honestly. I'd rather write music or go to the gym or go out with friends. 

 

If we can make the playoffs this year, and show some real competitiveness, that will go a long way to rekindling my interest!!

 

Man, ain't nothing like playoff hockey.

[pilldoc]

40 minutes ago, brelic said:

I'm the same, really. I love the Flyers and watch them to be entertained. In past years, I'd watch no matter what the score was or how boring the game was.

 

But ever since Hex/Hak took over, I found myself tuning out for large parts of games and seasons, honestly. I'd rather write music or go to the gym or go out with friends. 

 

@ruxpin

@brelic

 

Put me in the same category .......   I'm glued to the TV when playoffs hi, but regular season I find myself getting disinterested.  If it wasn't for FHL I wonder how much I would "really" watch or care?  I miss the old game chats we used to have years ago .......  it was hoot back then.  Now it seems everyone is so busy ...... 

 

just my 10 cents (cost of inflation)

 

Edited February 18, 2020 by pilldoc

[ruxpin]

4 hours ago, pilldoc said:

I miss the old game chats we used to have years ago .......  it was hoot back then.  Now it seems everyone is so busy ...... 

 

Yeah, I miss that too. Not sure whether busy or disenfranchised by the Flyers or both.

I miss the banter in chat with people like gazoo, EDI, etc.

 

8 hours ago, brelic said:

 

To me, the regular season is just one long entertainment and revenue-driven machine to determine seeding in the playoffs.

 

This is why we can't have nice things.

 

If the regular season has become the equivalent of NFL or MLB pre-season games and only the playoff games are actually entertaining and you cheer for a team that doesn't make or rarely makes the playoffs...well, you begin to look for something more interesting--Like an earwax remover infomercial. 

Edited February 18, 2020 by pilldoc

[brelic]

2 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

If the regular season has become the equivalent of NFL or MLB pre-season games and only the playoff games are actually entertaining and you cheer for a team that doesn't make or rarely makes the playoffs...well, you begin to look for something more interesting--Like an earwax remover infomercial. 

 

Haha, well, to be fair, I just think I'm no longer the target demographic of the NHL. I'm also not a fan of televised sports in general. And with hockey as I've mentioned before, I'm a Flyers fan, not a hockey fan. I rarely if ever watch any other games. I can only name one NFL player (Brady) and one NBA player (Embiid but only because you Philly guys mention him lol). And zero people from the other sports lol. 

 

Maybe we're just getting old, rux!

 

 

 

Here are some interesting stats about demographics across sports.

 

The NHL targets approximately 20% of the American population, who have attained the age of 18 years and over and who are fans of the game. Moreover, most targeted fans are under the age of 45 years. In addition, the majority of the targeted NHL fans are well educated and are paid well compared to the non-hockey fans.

 

 

• The NBA has the youngest audience, with 45 percent of its viewers under 35. It also has the highest share of black viewers, at 45 percent—three times higher than the NFL or NCAA basketball. 
   
• Major League Baseball shares the most male-heavy audience, at 70 percent, with the NBA.
   
• The NHL audience is the richest of all professional sports. One-third of its viewers make more than $100k, compared to about 19 percent of the general population.
   
• Nascar's audience has the highest share of women (37 percent) and highest share of white people (94 percent).
   
• The Professional Golfers Association has the oldest audience by multiple measures: smallest share of teenagers; smallest share of 20- and early 30-somethings; and highest share of 55+ (twice as high, in the oldest demo, as the NBA or Major League Soccer).
   
• Major League Soccer has the highest share of Hispanics by far (34 percent; second is the NBA at 12 percent) and the lowest income of any major sports audience. Nearly 40 percent of its fans make less than $40k.

[pilldoc]

1 hour ago, brelic said:

Here are some interesting stats about demographics across sports.

 

The NHL targets approximately 20% of the American population, who have attained the age of 18 years and over and who are fans of the game. Moreover, most targeted fans are under the age of 45 years. In addition, the majority of the targeted NHL fans are well educated and are paid well compared to the non-hockey fans.

 

 

• The NBA has the youngest audience, with 45 percent of its viewers under 35. It also has the highest share of black viewers, at 45 percent—three times higher than the NFL or NCAA basketball. 
   
• Major League Baseball shares the most male-heavy audience, at 70 percent, with the NBA.
   
• The NHL audience is the richest of all professional sports. One-third of its viewers make more than $100k, compared to about 19 percent of the general population.
   
• Nascar's audience has the highest share of women (37 percent) and highest share of white people (94 percent).
   
• The Professional Golfers Association has the oldest audience by multiple measures: smallest share of teenagers; smallest share of 20- and early 30-somethings; and highest share of 55+ (twice as high, in the oldest demo, as the NBA or Major League Soccer).
   
• Major League Soccer has the highest share of Hispanics by far (34 percent; second is the NBA at 12 percent) and the lowest income of any major sports audience. Nearly 40 percent of its fans make less than $40k.

 

very interesting ..... would love to dig down more and explore each one but I'm too tired right now ..... (the joys of being up at 4 am :P )

[hobie]

I watch Leaf games, if the Leafs don't make the playoffs I don't watch.

 

I don't watch, the Junior championships at Xmas, Olympic games even if Leaf players are involved, WHO, Spengler Cup matches, I only watch Leaf games. 

 

I hate defensive games, I want excitement, scoring and ultimately for TO to win.

 

This is proving to be one of TO's most entertaining years, wins like 8-6 are fun, exciting, thank God Babs is gone.

 

I think the NHL needs to inject more excitement into the games and I think icing should be icing whether the team is Pking or not and like during regular play the team that ices the puck shouldn't be able replace the players. 

[WordsOfWisdom]

17 hours ago, hobie said:

My only concern is TO making the playoffs right now and health will be a major determining factor. TO lost in the 1st round of the last 3 playoff years, terrible yes, but TO lost to a Cup winner, a Cup favourite and a finalist and thru all three years TO lost to far more mature/experienced teams than what TO was.

 

No issue with them losing in the first round a few years ago. However, I want to see them take the next step and make a prolonged playoff run.   

[WordsOfWisdom]

13 minutes ago, hobie said:

I watch Leaf games, if the Leafs don't make the playoffs I don't watch.

 

I used to keep watching when I was younger, but I figure the best way to improve the Leafs is to stop watching when they miss the playoffs, because TSN and SportsNet are co-owners of the Leafs. So if fans watch any team, they make money regardless of whether the Leafs win or lose. If fans tune out, then they suffer when the Leafs suffer.   

 

15 minutes ago, hobie said:

I don't watch, the Junior championships at Xmas, Olympic games even if Leaf players are involved, WHO, Spengler Cup matches, I only watch Leaf games. 

 

Ditto.  (I do watch Olympics/World Cup hockey though.)

 

16 minutes ago, hobie said:

I hate defensive games, I want excitement, scoring and ultimately for TO to win.

 

And hitting.   

 

16 minutes ago, hobie said:

This is proving to be one of TO's most entertaining years, wins like 8-6 are fun, exciting, thank God Babs is gone.

 

Agreed.

 

16 minutes ago, hobie said:

I think the NHL needs to inject more excitement into the games and I think icing should be icing whether the team is Pking or not and like during regular play the team that ices the puck shouldn't be able replace the players.

 

Agreed!  

[hobie]

19 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

No issue with them losing in the first round a few years ago. However, I want to see them take the next step and make a prolonged playoff run.   

 

After losing to Boston what is the next step, becoming a Cup finalist or Cup winner, I'd say.

 

 TO extended Boston to 7 games last year, they met the physical challenge so they are taking huge steps but the quality teams are in the east. 

[WordsOfWisdom]

8 minutes ago, hobie said:

 

After losing to Boston what is the next step, becoming a Cup finalist or Cup winner, I'd say.

 

 TO extended Boston to 7 games last year, they met the physical challenge so they are taking huge steps but the quality teams are in the east. 

 

My thoughts are this:

 

A first round playoff exit would be disappointing, regardless of who they lose to, because it shows that they're not "finding a way" to win.

 

A second round playoff exit would show some progress being made. 

 

A third round playoff exit would energize the entire city because they haven't been there since 2002 or whenever it was.

 

If they make the Cup final, they have to win it all. Getting to the final and not winning would be unthinkable given the length of the drought. That would be like the New York Rangers NOT winning in 1994.  

 

So to summarize, if they're going to lose, do it in round two or three but not in round one or four.   

[ruxpin]

4 hours ago, brelic said:

Maybe we're just getting old, rux

I think that's very true, for me anyway.  I'm really only hockey and football at this point but struggle to watch a full game of either. 

 

Over time, the seasons are simply variation on a theme and i fight the thought of "this again? seen it." 

 

Thanks for the target audience info. Very interesting. I can't say I'm surprised by much of it, but a very interesting read. 

[WordsOfWisdom]

18 hours ago, pilldoc said:

The NHL audience is the richest of all professional sports. One-third of its viewers make more than $100k, compared to about 19 percent of the general population.

 

We should take that as a compliment I guess.  It means we're distinguished.  

[WordsOfWisdom]

23 hours ago, brelic said:

To me, the regular season is just one long entertainment and revenue-driven machine to determine seeding in the playoffs. I don't care if Tampa can win 65 games in the regular season playing LA, Detroit, SJ, NJ on a random Tuesday night in December. 

 

If they can't win 16 games when it truly counts, then they aren't the best team. Period. 

 

I liked your post, but one minor point:    

 

That's what the regular season (in the NHL and NBA) are yes.... but it's my belief that the regular season should be the "first playoff" so to speak. You give meaning to the regular season games by using the regular season as a means to eliminate most of the teams from the playoffs. For me, most should be 3/4 of the teams gone, not 1/2. That way it becomes a badge of honor to make the playoffs, and then winning is like the icing on the cake. 

 

MLB has always done this so well. I remember when only FOUR teams made the playoffs in baseball. Four divisions. Four teams in the playoffs. It was the absolute best going up against the absolute best. Every match was a marquee match. There were no weak teams. No pushovers. You got the fans dream match up every time. Regular season games in September felt like playoff games because they meant that much. 

 

Being great for 82 games is technically a greater accomplishment than being great for 16 games. We should reward teams for their excellence in the regular season (somehow) by either getting rid of the .500 teams from the playoffs or by allowing top teams to skip a round altogether. 

[brelic]

3 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

For me, most should be 3/4 of the teams gone, not 1/2. That way it becomes a badge of honor to make the playoffs, and then winning is like the icing on the cake.

 

That's a fundamental change to the playoff format that I'm not sure would be well received by fans, players, and owners. 

 

Fans lose out because there's less chance their team makes it.

Players lose out because fewer will make the playoffs.

Owners lose out on revenue.

 

3 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

MLB has always done this so well. I remember when only FOUR teams made the playoffs in baseball. Four divisions. Four teams in the playoffs. It was the absolute best going up against the absolute best. Every match was a marquee match. There were no weak teams. No pushovers. You got the fans dream match up every time. Regular season games in September felt like playoff games because they meant that much. 

 

3 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

Being great for 82 games is technically a greater accomplishment than being great for 16 games. We should reward teams for their excellence in the regular season (somehow) by either getting rid of the .500 teams from the playoffs or by allowing top teams to skip a round altogether. 

 

I'd say they are different accomplishments. Being great for 82 shows you can be consistent on a daily basis for 7 months. But being great and coming out on top in four best-of-7 matchups is a different kind of accomplishment - one that I personally place much more value on.

 

Team are rewarded for their excellence in the regular season - they draw supposedly easier matchups. But the beauty of hockey is that it has the highest level of randomness and chance of any of the major sports, which I would argue builds much more excitement across the board. 

 

How awesome was it to watch Columbus beat the Lightning last year? That, as a storyline, was way better than if the Bolts had steamrolled them in 4 games. But they didn't. They couldn't even win one game. Columbus absolutely deserved to win last year, and the Bolts didn't. 

 

I guess I don't truly understand why you want to remove teams from the playoffs. For me, no other sport comes close to NHL playoff hockey, but of course, I find other sports boring, so I'm biased  

 

It's an interesting thought experiment, but my guess is that would be a non-starter for the owners and players' association, let alone fans.

 

[WordsOfWisdom]

1 hour ago, brelic said:

That's a fundamental change to the playoff format that I'm not sure would be well received by fans, players, and owners. 

 

Fans lose out because there's less chance their team makes it.

Players lose out because fewer will make the playoffs.

Owners lose out on revenue.

 

I'll post a new thread on this because I have an idea!  

 

1 hour ago, brelic said:

I guess I don't truly understand why you want to remove teams from the playoffs. For me, no other sport comes close to NHL playoff hockey, but of course, I find other sports boring, so I'm biased  

 

Check my new thread....   

[Holymakinaw]

On 2/16/2020 at 3:22 PM, ruxpin said:

 

Jesus,.   Seriously though, the Leafs have not been injured worse -- and arguably less -- than teams they're looking up at.     They're not where they are because of injuries.  They're where they're at because, frankly, they're simply not that good.

 

Or that young.

 

Here's a fun fact  for you, Chief.......

 

Only two teams in the league have more man-games lost to injury than the Leafs:  Pittsburgh and Columbus.

 

And the Leafs will make the playoffs in spite of it all, with their "kids" leading the way.  

 

You are clueless.

 

[hobie]

I think Rux was trolling us, don't you.

 

Ya think that might be because the Flyers are rapidly approaching rebuild, they're having what might be their last kick at the can, this year.

 

Couturier-27

Vorachek-30

JVR-30

Giroux-32

Hayes-27

Niskanen-33

 

That is the ages of the Flyers top 6 of 7 in scoring, JVR and Hayes have 3 and 6 years left on their $7 mil. per contracts. 

 

If Rux doesn't think TO is young, what must he think of Philly's age?

 

 

[flyercanuck]

On 2/18/2020 at 5:18 PM, hobie said:

I watch Leaf games, if the Leafs don't make the playoffs I don't watch.

 

I don't watch, the Junior championships at Xmas, Olympic games even if Leaf players are involved, WHO, Spengler Cup matches, I only watch Leaf games. 

 

I hate defensive games, I want excitement, scoring and ultimately for TO to win.

 

This is proving to be one of TO's most entertaining years, wins like 8-6 are fun, exciting, thank God Babs is gone.

 

I think the NHL needs to inject more excitement into the games and I think icing should be icing whether the team is Pking or not and like during regular play the team that ices the puck shouldn't be able replace the players. 

 

I'm amazed by how many Leaf fans don't watch other hockey, only the Leafs. I know lots of them.

 

 I mean for the last 50 years they don't even know what good hockey is for the most part. That's not a shot, it's the truth. 

 

Pretty well everyone else I know who cheers for other teams watches all kinds of hockey. 

[flyercanuck]

On 2/19/2020 at 10:14 AM, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

I liked your post, but one minor point:    

 

That's what the regular season (in the NHL and NBA) are yes.... but it's my belief that the regular season should be the "first playoff" so to speak. You give meaning to the regular season games by using the regular season as a means to eliminate most of the teams from the playoffs. For me, most should be 3/4 of the teams gone, not 1/2. That way it becomes a badge of honor to make the playoffs, and then winning is like the icing on the cake. 

 

MLB has always done this so well. I remember when only FOUR teams made the playoffs in baseball. Four divisions. Four teams in the playoffs. It was the absolute best going up against the absolute best. Every match was a marquee match. There were no weak teams. No pushovers. You got the fans dream match up every time. Regular season games in September felt like playoff games because they meant that much. 

 

Being great for 82 games is technically a greater accomplishment than being great for 16 games. We should reward teams for their excellence in the regular season (somehow) by either getting rid of the .500 teams from the playoffs or by allowing top teams to skip a round altogether. 

 

The NHL playoffs are the greatest sporting event going. Beating 4 teams in best of 7s is a grueling marathon. Heck the 1st round is usually a treat to watch. I know one thing...it's far more exciting than any MLB top 4 borefest.

 

 I think you may find that exciting because after 162 games of watching 9 guys standing around grabbing their crotches and spitting chew and doing not much else, you're excited that thank God, at long last this never ending paint has almost dried.

 

 I'd be ok in hockey if they went back to top 8 seeds in each conference. The current format could possibly have the top 4 teams eliminate all but 1 in the first 2 rounds.