Talk:2007 Stanley Cup playoffs

Final

Don Cherry is apparently going to do a segment on NBC during the finals

Predictions

Would it be appropriate to list series' predictions made by various sources (i.e., ESPN already made some) prior to each round's start? If so, how should it be done? -- megarockman 13:19 CDT, 9 April 2007

Predictions shouldn't be on the article page. People can make their own here if they like. Eric B ( T • C • W ) 00:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Officials

I think this should be incorporated into an article somewhere, but, I'm not sure where. According to this article, the following officials will participate in the Playoffs:

Referees:

• Paul Devorski
• Eric Furlatt
• Mike Hasenfratz
• Dave Jackson
• Marc Joannette
• Don Koharski
• Dennis LaRue
• Mike Leggo
• Dan Marouelli
• Wes McCauley
• Bill McCreary
• Mick McGeough
• Dan O'Halloran
• Dan O'Rourke
• Tim Peel
• Kevin Pollock
• Rob Shick
• Kelly Sutherland
• Don Van Massenhoven
• Brad Watson

Linesemen:

• Derek Amell
• Steve Barton
• Lonnie Cameron
• Pierre Champoux
• Mike Cvik
• Greg Devorski
• Scott Driscoll
• Shane Heyer
• Brad Kovachik
• Brad Lazarowich
• Steve Miller
• Jean Morin
• Brian Murphy
• Derek Nanson
• Thor Nelson
• Tim Nowak
• Pierre Racicot
• Dan Schachte
• Jay Sharrers
• Mark Wheler

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by NorthernThunder (talk • contribs).

Considering only 4 of the officials even have Wikipedia articles, I somehow don't feel that which officials are working for the playoffs is really a notable fact. Geoffrey Spear 16:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps in the individual game tables, list the officials working each game? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 136.244.13.116 (talk) 16:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC).

Brackets

The NHL doesn't actually use brackets for the playoffs as they reseed everything each round. As such the brackets are inherentally wrong and should probably be removed --T-rex 21:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

They don't use brackets for the first and second round, following rounds they do. It is seeded by points for the first and second which the bracket shown therein is appropriate. -- Eric B ( T • C • W ) 00:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

See my talk page for continued disscussion, apperentlly this is mathamatically set at the conclution of the second round, but not before then --T-rex 20:37, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I put together the bracket that we're currently using, and I'm starting to work on something to replace it right now. Give me a day or so, and we should have something that is a better representation of how the playoffs actually work. z4ns4tsu\^talk 22:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, the redesign is pretty much done. Take a look at it in my sandbox and let me know if you think it looks any better. z4ns4tsu\^talk 21:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Spacing?

What's with the spacing? When I first looked at the page and saw the Pens/Sens lines, I was confused, and realized there were lines going on to the next score, it makes it difficult to read what was going on. Shouldn't there be clearer spacing between the scores (3 - 0, 3 - 1) and who scored, so things aren't carrying over to the next line? --Snojoe 01:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

• I'm not seeing any problems. What parts appear incorrect or confusing to you? --Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 02:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Penguins/Senators Game One, just looking at it, there's a bit at the Third Period. Heatley scored to make it 4-1, but that whole detail line carries over to the next table line, and as a result, the next score's detail line appears at 6-1, not 5-1, which (when first glanced at) could appear to give some incorrect information. I had edited the lines in the table before to make the scoring equal to the team's player's, but it was reverted back to what it's at now. --Snojoe 02:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I see what you're talking about. It should not be a problem as most people view it at a minimum 1280 pixel width screen. I am editing the actual template for another solution though, so it looks fine for all users, and any editor can be satisfied with his edits without having to see how many breaks they need to add in between. Thanks for pointing this out. --Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 03:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Ah, that was it then, yeah. I'm on 1024x768, so that does explain it. But, if you're working on a new template, then I'll drop the conflict and just deal with it for the time being. Good luck with that, and thanks for the clarification. --Snojoe 03:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
        • I have fixed this problem, and now unless a user has a really small screen size (for example less than 800 pixels wide, the goals should appear for all users on one line, and in line with the score column as well. --Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 07:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

triva is wrong this is the 2nd year that all 4 wha teams have missed the playoffs the first was the 1993-1994 season Ranul 16:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Poll: Final Score in Series Table

Check out the newer design at the bottom of the page!

I just wanted to conduct a quick poll to see which format users seem to like better.

Cast your vote below the format you choose in the manner shown below.

# Explanation for choosing. --~~~~

Choice 1

1

April 11

7:00 p.m. (CDT)

San Jose Sharks 5

Nashville Predators 4

Final 2OT

Nashville Arena

TSN

Votes in Support of Choice 1

1. On my monitor, the other choice takes up two lines, and since I run at a pretty high resolution, I'm pretty sure it will for most users. If possible, I always prefer single lines in tables. z4ns4tsu\^talk 19:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
2. I prefer to see the score next to the team's name, such as in this. Yes, the "Final" is redundant, which is why the option proposed by Psyklek at the bottom is better. David7581\^talk 03:32, 18 April 2007

Choice 2

1

April 11

7:00 p.m. (CDT)

San Jose Sharks

Nashville Predators

5 – 4 (2OT)

Nashville Arena

TSN

Votes in Support of Choice 2

1. I would prefer this one because the other method leaves the "Final" column redundant for non-OT games (which most will be). It may take up two lines when OT comes around, but visually isn't it still one line? -- megarockman 13:55 CDT April 17, 2007
2. I also prefer option 2 for the exact same reason as above. It just looks a lot cleaner than the former option. --Snojoe 02:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
3. I like this one as well. So much cleaner. Nurmsook 02:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your cooperation! --Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 18:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

• Might I venture a third option? This is the method I've used in the World Championships pages. What do you think? Lord Tau 11:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

April 11, 2007 19:00 CDT

San Jose Sharks

5–4 (2OT)

Nashville Predators

Nashville Arena

	(Scorers Go Here) Goals (Scorers Go Here)

This is not good at all. The page becomes too long and would take a while to load on slower connections.

I propose:

1

April 11

7:00 p.m. (CDT)

San Jose Sharks 5 (2OT)

Nashville Predators 4

Nashville Arena

TSN

The redundant "Final" column is elimated, and since we're not in regulation, OT doesn't matter to the loser. (Psyklek 02:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC))

My proposal is just re-use what we had from the 2006 Stanley Cup Playoffs article. An example using this year's repeat series...

Game-by-Game			Score	NSH goals	SJ goals
1	April 11	2OT	Sharks 5, at Predators 4	Radulov 2, Dumont 2	Carle, Grier, Rivet, Michalek, Rissmiller
2	April 13		at Predators 5, Sharks 2	Forsberg 2, Dumont 2, Radulov	Clowe, Rivet
3	April 16		at Sharks 3, Predators 1	Suter	Clowe, Michalek, Marleau
Sharks lead series 2-1				Dumont 4, Radulov 3	Rivet 2, Michalek 2, Clowe 2

Simple, informative and takes up the least amount of space (usually). NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 19:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• See, what my opinion on this is that in the case that this does not include as much information as the table at the bottom. If you fix the names such that you have the first initial in each case, then it becomes very long, and in addition, there is no information included here about goalies. If goalie stats were included, it would most likely result in having to adopt a two line format for each game, as some games, as has already occurred in these playoffs, have had two goalies play for a team in one game. Additionally, the format below is much easier in the fact that you can maintain that template throughout the series, as both a table for before the series begins, and also as a summary table at the conclusion of the series. --Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 19:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Yeah, this one I don't like all that much. I'm seconding Sukh on this one, I would like to see the Goalie information listed, and this one doesn't have that information there. Also, I'm one to look at +/- information, so I'd rather see who also got assists, and if their goals were shorthanded/power play goals, and the like. Of all the proposals, I like this one the absolute least, and am still leaning towards Option 2, if anything, or the newer one(s) Sukh or Lord Tau has proposed, one of those styles. --Snojoe 20:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

New Solution

After recieving some more specific complaints and concerns, I am currently constructing a new template that features collapsible game summaries, so it will not take up too much space, and additionally, it will feature as much information as possible. Look forward to this new template in the near future.

Overtimes

Minor suggestion for any games into Overtime; since all games are of the sudden-death OT variety, wouldn't it (in theory) be a better fit, for multiple OT games (a la Canucks/Stars Game One) to just put:

First - xxx Overtimes
No Scoring
nth Overtime
Scoring line

Instead of listing each Overtime individually? Just a thought... --Snojoe 21:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

updates

nobody is updating this page consistently —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.98.228.98 (talk) 02:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

New Series Box: Example

Following is a new template I have designed for playoff series. This is how it would look like for the current Sharks-Predators Series

San Jose Sharks Lead Series 2-1

How it would look before the series began.

Please leave any comments or suggestions. If nobody has any problems with it in the near future, then I'll consider that it is safe to go ahead and switch this out with the old series boxes currently in the article.

Thanks! --Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 03:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Comments

• I do have to say, it's somewhat similar to the third proposal above, with some key differences. However, I prefer the one above over this one, because this one looks a bit cluttered and hard on the eyes, whereas the one above is a bit easier to read. I do like the idea though, if it were spaced out a wee bit. Given all the suggestions though, I still the the option 2 (see above) is still the better of the few proposed. --Snojoe 07:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Going to second SnoJoe on this one. Having a listing like this for each and every game in these playoffs will make the page a complete clutter. I do not know why we aren't reusing the series box from 2006 Stanley Cup Playoffs; they perfectly summarize the important information about each series (when it happened, who hosted, the result, and the goal scorers) without taking up too much space. NeoChaosX (talk, walk) 19:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I am not understanding the problem of too much information. The only additional information that appears on the main part of this is just the goalies' performances. Otherwise, the TV and venue information is just on the side. Each and every game in the last year's playoffs had a listing with Goal scores. The goal of this is to create a neater and fixed format throughout, so the table has uniform dimensions and all the information sections include that information on one line as well.--Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 19:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Additionally, the goalies section is not required and it can be completely omitted, as with virtually any part of the template except for the team, the score/time section and the date.--Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 20:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

New New Series Box: Example

San Jose Sharks Lead Series 2-1

Here is a new and improved series box that has the actually game summaries within the series summary table. Any comments and suggestions are welcome. --Sukh17 ^{T • C • E} 02:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

• Alright, now this I like very much. Very simple, very clean, and easy to read, I like it a lot. This one gets my vote for sure. --Snojoe 03:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)