INTRODUCTION

This year marks the tenth* postseason under the divisional playoff format. Since its institution, it has been heavily debated amongst hockey fans. But have matchups been that different? And have the matchups been better, or worse? With the first round of the playoffs starting, I'd thought it'd be interesting to look back at the matchups we have had and the matchups we could have had.

^{*technically 8 since 2020 and 2021 used unique formats due to COVID}

POST FORMAT

• Some clarifying remarks

• Year-by-year tables of playoff matchups

• Brief summary of some things I found interesting

CLARIFICATIONS

DISCLAIMER: I don't dive into which matchups are "better" (a lot of that depends on context that would take a lot more analysis). Instead, the purpose of this is to simply list out each season's playoff matchups under both formats and where they may differ.

Just a refresher: the 1-8 format–used until 2013–consisted of the top 8 teams in each conference. Division winners occupied the top seeds, and the remaining playoff teams were seeded by points.

First: The new playoff format has produced the same playoff teams that would be present under the conference format, with one exception. In other words, no one has been “robbed” of a playoff spot by the new format. The only exception is in 2021.

NOTE: ROW (regulation overtime wins) are used as the first tiebreaker until 2019-20, when the league switched to RW (regulation wins) as the first tiebreaker. Additional tiebreakers will be listed if needed.

YEAR-BY-YEAR TABLES

TABLE FORMATTING

When matchups differ, the divisional and conference matchup will be listed in bold.

The matchups will be listed in conference order (1 vs 8, 2 vs 7, 3 vs 6, 4 vs 5), unless otherwise noted.

Under the conference column, the total points (and ROW/RW, if applicable) are listed in parenthesis (example: ANA (116; 51)).

2014

Here, the division winner/wild card matchups would have remained the same–something that we will see happen fairly often. It’s the “middle matchups” that would’ve changed. The divisional format gave us STL/CHI and SJS/LA in round one; the conference matchup swaps LA and CHI. In the east, we get TBL facing PHI instead of MTL, and MTL hosting NYR instead of playing TBL.

2015

2015 is interesting. All four Western matchups would have been different under the 1-8 conference format, while all four Eastern matchups would have been the same. A truly odd year.

NOTE: WSH finished higher than NYI due to having a higher goal differential (39 vs. 22)

2016

Six of the eight matchups would have been different this year. What is especially significant here is the variations in home ice advantage: under the conference format, NYR and CHI would have had home ice advantage, while TBL and LA would not.

Oddly enough, PIT (104 points) actually finished with more points than FLA (103 points), and STL (107 points) and CHI (103) finished with more points/ROW than ANA (103 points); however, since FLA and ANA both won their division, they still would’ve finished as the second seed in the 1-8 format.

2017

ANA and MTL both won their divisions; as such, they each secured the 2 seed in their conferences despite finishing with less points than other teams.

In the West, we still have CHI/NSH and ANA/CGY, and MIN would host SJS instead of STL while EDM would host STL instead of SJS. Overall, not too many major differences.

The East, however, would look very different. WSH would still host TOR, but after that there are no overlapping matchups. In fact, CBJ would have home ice against NYR, while OTT would face PIT instead of having home ice against BOS. We also would have had a MTL/BOS matchup!

NOTE: STL finishes higher than SJS due to head-to-head record as STL was 3-0-0 against SJS.

2018

VGK and WSH both won their divisions; as such, they each secured the 2 seed in their conferences despite finishing with less points than other teams.

Similar to 2014, the division winner/wild card matchups would stay the same. The other matchups, however, would change quite a bit. Instead of playing on the road to WPG, MIN would actually host a series against ANA. Similarly, TOR would get home ice against PIT, instead of having to play BOS.

2019

NSH and WSH both won their divisions; as such, they each secured the 2 seed in their conferences despite finishing with less points than other teams.

Here, SJS would have hosted DAL instead of VGK, who would instead visit NSH. TOR again would have avoided a matchup with BOS, instead going on the road against NYI.

2020

NOTE: Match-ups that would’ve stayed the same for Divisional and Conference formats are listed in italics

2020 is strange due to the bubble. Here, I just went by the seeding created for the bubble, with the round robin teams being ranked by their point percentage and the 5-8 teams keeping their seed from the play-in round. As expected, almost all of the matchups were completely different from what would’ve happened in either the divisional or conference format. However, WSH/NYI, which happened in the bubble, would’ve happened under the conference format, which is fun.

2021

NOTE: You can find a deeper analysis of the 2021 playoff match-ups and potential divisional match-ups here

This table is going to be odd, mainly due to the CAR / NSH matchup. CAR / NSH is listed under the Western Conference.

Obviously another weird year. I do think it’s interesting that TOR/TBL would’ve matched up under the Divisional format, as this would’ve given us 4 straight TOR/TBL first round series if 2020 were under the normal format (2020, 2021, 2022, 2023). This also would’ve been the first (and only) occurrence of a team making the playoffs under one format and not the other: CGY would have clinched the third Pacific spot despite finishing below DAL in the conference standings (55 points for CGY; 60 for DAL). MTL would not have made the playoffs in either format; no team would replace them here, since the regional format lead to 9 Eastern teams in the playoffs.

NOTE: PIT holds the tiebreaker over TOR, as they have more total wins (37 vs 35); TOR holds the tiebreaker over WSH, as they have more ROW (34 vs 33).

2022

CGY won their division; as such, they secured the 2 seed in the West despite finishing with less points than MIN.

A lot of changes here. STL would host a series against EDM instead of having to face MIN on the road. TOR would avoid TBL to instead face…BOS.

2023

EDM technically holds the tiebreaker over COL (45 RW to 36); however, since COL won the Central, they get the 2 seed.

This year’s matchups. Here, the division winner/wild card matchups would stay the same. The other matchups, however, would simply swap the lower seeds. EDM would host MIN instead of LA, and DAL would host LA instead of MIN. NJ would host TBL, while TOR would host NYR.

SOME INTERESTING FINDINGS

Overall, 48 of the 80 matchups–or 60%–would have been different under the 1-8 conference format compared to the current divisional format.

Had the divisional format been used in 2020 and 2021, TOR and TBL would have played each other FOUR years in a row (including this season). Under the conference format, there would have been 0 TOR / TBL matchups.

8 teams would have had home ice under the conference format that did not have it under the divisional format:

• MTL in 2014 (NYR)

• CHI in 2015 (VAN)

• NYR and CHI in 2016 (TBL, LA)

• CBJ in 2017 (OTT)

• TOR in 2018 (PIT)

• DAL in 2020* (EDM)

• STL in 2022 (EDM)

Only one team would have made the playoffs under the conference format and not under the divisional format: DAL in 2021, as CGY would have made it as the third seed in the Pacific instead.

EDIT: Mistakenly stated that ARI would have made the playoffs in 2021. This is not true: CGY would have clinched the spot instead.