Metropolitan Division Final: (1) Washington Capitals vs (2) Pittsburgh Penguins

[rataylor22]

Seems weird to complain about the playoff format. It is what it is. Meh.

If they don't do 1-16, every playoff format is wrong. I don't much care which wrong format they choose.

[agentzero]

Seems weird to complain about the playoff format. It is what it is. Meh.

If they don't do 1-16, every playoff format is wrong. I don't much care which wrong format they choose.

I'm kind of with you.. except that it should be logical that the highest seeded remaining teams play the lowest seeded remaining ones, retaining home ice advantage. Otherwise, why would team jockey for positioning in the standings in the regular season after they qualify for the playoffs? May as well ice your AHL squad after you qualify and then take your chances.. I can see the reason the NHL did the whole "come out of your division" thing like it was before... except that with the wildcard crossing over, that's lost... I dunno, I just don't get it.

The part I'm with you is, well, they'd have to play the Penguins eventually, so why not play them now..

[StuntMan12]

i picked pens in 7 but who knows how this series will go.

[Godin]

Seems weird to complain about the playoff format. It is what it is. Meh.

If they don't do 1-16, every playoff format is wrong. I don't much care which wrong format they choose.

You're right. We shouldn't complain about anything.

[hockeyrobot]

Malkin is such a beast. How the heck was he not in the NHL's Top 100 players!?

[blayze]

Malkin is such a beast. How the heck was he not in the NHL's Top 100 players!?

He's Russian... and besides, how can he stack up against such Top 100 monsters as Duncan Keith?!?

[Canucks_fan18]

He's Russian... and besides, how can he stack up against such Top 100 monsters as Duncan Keith?!?

Well Ovi was on that list... I agree Malkin's exclusion was brutal. I think the biggest outlier was Toews being on that list. If Toews makes that list then why not Patrice Bergeron? 3 time could be 4 time after this year Selke winner. Stanley Cup winner as well and I would argue if you switched him and Toews out he would have just as many cups.

[Godin]

Malkin is such a beast. How the heck was he not in the NHL's Top 100 players!?

Very true. I don't have the stats in front of me but you are a special player when you've won 2 Stanley Cups, a Conn Smyth, a scoring title and contribute consistently year in, year out.

[hockeyrobot]

Very true. I don't have the stats in front of me but you are a special player when you've won 2 Stanley Cups, a Conn Smyth, a scoring title and contribute consistently year in, year out.

I believe he's almost in the top 10 in playoff points per game as well....who knows maybe he is now with 11 in only 5 gp.

[agentzero]

2 Stanley Cups, a Conn Smyth, a scoring title

I would love to see how many of those top 100 players can match a resume like that..... His exclusion was ridiculous. I know you have to draw the line somewhere, but gimme a break...

[Jouko-Pouko]

I would love to see how many of those top 100 players can match a resume like that..... His exclusion was ridiculous. I know you have to draw the line somewhere, but gimme a break...

Back in the day when they had just a few teams in the league, it wasn't all that difficult to get 2 Stanley Cups, a Conn Smythe (although not sure this existed) and a scoring title. Winning Stanley Cups and scoring titles is so much more difficult now than what it used to be because of the amount of teams in the league and the salary cap creating parity. Current players with multiple awards should be ranked really high because of this. But of course I wasn't around back in the day, so maybe I'm biased like that.

[agentzero]

Back in the day when they had just a few teams in the league, it wasn't all that difficult to get 2 Stanley Cups, a Conn Smythe (although not sure this existed) and a scoring title. Winning Stanley Cups and scoring titles is so much more difficult now than what it used to be because of the amount of teams in the league and the salary cap creating parity. Current players with multiple awards should be ranked really high because of this. But of course I wasn't around back in the day, so maybe I'm biased like that.

Yeah I know.. There are a lot of players in the Hall of Fame who got in much more easily than the players playing today will... History is like that.. I'd like to argue you can still measure impact, regardless of the time a player played, by comparing him to his peers. I think Malkin should be in over Keon... Looking at the list, I can understand how it was so hard to pick..

[rataylor22]

I'm kind of with you.. except that it should be logical that the highest seeded remaining teams play the lowest seeded remaining ones, retaining home ice advantage. Otherwise, why would team jockey for positioning in the standings in the regular season after they qualify for the playoffs? May as well ice your AHL squad after you qualify and then take your chances.. I can see the reason the NHL did the whole "come out of your division" thing like it was before... except that with the wildcard crossing over, that's lost... I dunno, I just don't get it.

The part I'm with you is, well, they'd have to play the Penguins eventually, so why not play them now..

In the current "divisional format", Washington was (1) in their division while Pittsburgh was (2). Ottawa is the highest seeded team in their division (2) with the Rangers being (4). What you're referring to would be a 1-8 system, and if you're going to that it should be a 1-16. The entire system is complete stupid, but doing anything other than 1-16 is completely stupid, so.

Really, the "Eastern Conference" and "Western Conference" standings method is the visual representation that causes the issues, when really those conferences are used for schedule matchups and traditionalist representation. The NHL shouldn't offer that standings view anymore, because it's really quite irrelevant to the playoffs, except for wildcard determination.

You're right. We shouldn't complain about anything.

Always goes to this I guess, since you like that extremist approach.

I would love to see how many of those top 100 players can match a resume like that..... His exclusion was ridiculous. I know you have to draw the line somewhere, but gimme a break...

Back in the day when they had just a few teams in the league, it wasn't all that difficult to get 2 Stanley Cups, a Conn Smythe (although not sure this existed) and a scoring title. Winning Stanley Cups and scoring titles is so much more difficult now than what it used to be because of the amount of teams in the league and the salary cap creating parity. Current players with multiple awards should be ranked really high because of this. But of course I wasn't around back in the day, so maybe I'm biased like that.

Malkin has 2 Stanley Cups, 2 Art Ross, 1 Hart, 1 Ted Lindsay, and 1 Conn Smythe. He certainly has more individual awards than a certain group of 3 Blackhawks have, but hey, the league sure loves their Blackhawks.

[Jouko-Pouko]

Yeah I know.. There are a lot of players in the Hall of Fame who got in much more easily than the players playing today will... History is like that.. I'd like to argue you can still measure impact, regardless of the time a player played, by comparing him to his peers. I think Malkin should be in over Keon... Looking at the list, I can understand how it was so hard to pick..

I don't really know the old guys from the list but I find it difficult to believe that there have been 100 players who were better than Malkin.

Was Karlsson on the list? When I was watching the final game from the OTT-BOS series, I started wondering... If we just look at his individual results and not his team's results, he should be a first ballot Hall of Famer, right? 456 points in 556 games, and his defensive game has improved greatly. Two-time Norris winner as well (maybe a 3rd one coming this summer). Of course he'll need a few more years at similar level he's been these past few years but I see no reason he wouldn't do that. If they'd do the list again in 5 years, I think Karlsson would be there. When talking about great offensive D-men in the history of the game, I think we should start adding Karlsson's name to that discussion. Again, difficult to believe there have been too many players who have been better than him in that game. Of course some players have better numbers but that's just because of the era they played in, not necessarily because they're better players. Purely offensive D-men don't even crack the NHL roster anymore, they need to be solid defensively as well. That wasn't really demanded back in the day...

[EdmontonCrunch]

Pens in 6 but I think it will be better contested then most people think. Have a feeling Washington's players will have a bit more room to operate then last series but this one comes down to goaltender play. Washington needs Holtby to be on his game to have a shot