What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

Anahem is the Pacific #1 seed out west. The Wild had the second most points in the West (one more than Anaheim) and were the Central #2 seed out west. Had Anaheim and Minnesota met in the Western Conference finals, Anaheim would have had home ice advantage.

Wrong. The Wild would have had home ice advantage. Home ice is by points not seed.
 
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

Wrong. The Wild would have had home ice advantage. Home ice is by points not seed.

My mistake. You're partially right. Home ice for the Conference Finals and the Stanley Cup is based on points. Home Ice for the first two rounds are based by seed. So yes, the Wild could have had home ice for the Conference Finals had they not choked against the Blues (and presumably not choked against Nashville).
 
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

Wrong. The Wild would have had home ice advantage. Home ice is by points not seed.

Usually. But if a UND fan said it, he's right, even if he has to invoke the alternate facts rule. It's like a Trump card.
 
Last edited:
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

The whole thing is stupid. The NHL needs to get a clue and go back to 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, etc. Write your congressman.
 
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

My mistake. You're partially right. Home ice for the Conference Finals and the Stanley Cup is based on points. Home Ice for the first two rounds are based by seed. So yes, the Wild could have had home ice for the Conference Finals had they not choked against the Blues (and presumably not choked against Nashville).

Sure, but that's because of this stupid divisional system they put in that punishes good divisions and rewards bad ones.
 
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

Ottawa may have won the series, but Boston did manage to take another delay of game penalty while going through the handshake line.
 
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

The whole thing is stupid. The NHL needs to get a clue and go back to 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, etc. Write your congressman.

1/16, 2/15. Kill the conferences and divisions and just have one table.
 
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

Won't work. Play everyone 2x (like they did after the WHA "merger")

It works because we contract to 26 teams. Goodbye FL, TB, ANA, NSH.

Carolina is permitted to stay after being relocated to Hartford.
 
Last edited:
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

So before the playoffs began my pick was Chicago to win the Cup by beating Boston.


People, people, people...listen to me. I know these things. :D
 
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

So before the playoffs began my pick was Chicago to win the Cup by beating Boston.


People, people, people...listen to me. I know these things. :D

I can beat that. Back in 2015 I told my wife the GOP nomination would come down to Walker or Jeb.
 
Re: NHL 2016.2: An All-Canada Final (Playoffs and Off-season)

I thought the Vikings were going to win the super bowl.
 
Back
Top