Historic Playoff Hypotheticals

There have been countless arguments over the MLS playoff system and I'm not going to revisit that today. Rather, I thought I would take a look at MLS history and see just how things would've changed if the league's playoffs were a bit more exclusive. How much change would there actually be if the number of playoff teams was reduced by half? Here's what I did. I reduced the number of teams in the playoffs to 4 instead of 8 for every season. I used the rules for each year (so top 2 in each conference except 2000-02), and I assumed that the team which advanced the furthest in the playoffs in real life would win each series. If two teams both exited in the same round, then I assumed the one with a better regular season record would advance. I also did this for the NBA and NHL, which can be seen below for comparison. Here's how the MLS Cups look in real life, and hypothetically with half the playoff teams (champions are listed first). Only changed years are listed under hypothetical: Real Life Hypothetical 1996 DC vs LA 1997 DC vs COL DC vs KC 1998 CHI vs DC 1999 DC vs LA 2000 KC vs CHI 2001 SJ vs LA LA vs MIA 2002 LA vs NE 2003 SJ vs CHI 2004 DC vs KC 2005 LA vs NE NE vs SJ 2006 HOU vs NE 2007 HOU vs NE 2008 CLB vs NY CLB vs HOU 2009 RSL vs LA LA vs CHI 5/14 years would be different, and 3/14 champions: 1997 - Runner up Colorado wouldn't have qualified, so Kansas City replaces them. KC/LA were the top two West seeds, and both lost their first round series. 2001 - Champion San Jose finished 5th overall, losing a tiebreaker with Columbus. As the furthest advancing team, Los Angeles are picked over Miami. 2005 - Champion LA would've missed the playoffs. San Jose vs Dallas would've been a playoff matchup, so SJ replaces LA in the title game with NE picked to win. 2008 - Runner up New York out of the playoffs. Houston over Chivas (both first round losers) for an MLS Cup spot. 2009 - Champion Real Salt Lake misses the playoffs. Chicago over CLB to advance and lose in the final. Ultimately, LA/NE end up with an extra championship, while RSL/SJ lose one. What about playoff berths? Amazingly, with the number of spots halved, the Rapids would still be looking for their first ever playoff appearance. Meanwhile, NY would only have one (2000): Real Hyp CHI 11 6 CHV 4 2 CLB 9 6 COL 9 0 DAL 10 5 DC 9 8 HOU 4 4 KC 9 4 LA 11 8 MIA 3 1 NE 10 5 NY 10 1 PHI 0 0 RSL 2 0 SEA 1 0 SJ 6 3 TB 4 3 TOR 0 0 How does this compare with other leagues? I originally investigated this subject because of the divisional realignment in MLB. There was talk before the season about the AL East and how three of the league's strongest teams (Rays, Red Sox, Yankees) were only competing for two playoff spots due to playing in the same division. A few weeks ago, Jeff Passan of Yahoo Sports had a great article where he pushed for something I've long thought to be a better system: Just get rid of divisions altogether and take the top four teams by record. That means geography would have nothing to do with a team's playoff chances. By the way, that's a great reason for MLS to go to a single table besides the tradition argument. Anyway, I was curious how different the World Series would look each year if the strange divisions of the pre-wild card era (Atlanta/Cincinnati in the West, really?) were still in existence. I started looking into it, but it gets a bit messy since you have to deal with the 1998 expansion and assume some things. I decided to leave it out of this post as a result, and also the NFL because I don't know how you could halve the teams there (division winners only?). Also, both of those leagues don't have a lot of complaints about too many teams involved, unlike the NBA/NHL. Those two are much more comparable to MLS, so let's get to that. How would their champions/runners up look with only half the playoffs? I started with the first years both went to the current 16 team fields. First, the NHL: Real Life Hypothetical 1980 NYI vs PHI 1981 NYI vs MIN NYI vs BUF 1982 NYI vs VAN 1983 NYI vs EDM 1984 EDM vs NYI 1985 EDM vs PHI 1986 MON vs CAL 1987 EDM vs PHI 1988 EDM vs BOS 1989 CAL vs MON 1990 EDM vs BOS 1991 PIT vs MIN PIT vs LA 1992 PIT vs CHI CHI vs BOS 1993 MON vs LA PIT vs VAN 1994 NYR vs VAN NYR vs TOR 1995 NJ vs DET DET vs PHI 1996 COL vs FLO 1997 DET vs PHI 1998 DET vs WAS 1999 DAL vs BUF DAL vs TOR 2000 NJ vs DAL 2001 COL vs NJ 2002 DET vs CAR 2003 NJ vs ANA NJ vs DAL 2004 TB vs CAL TB vs SJ 2006 CAR vs EDM CAR vs DET 2007 ANA vs OTT 2008 DET vs PIT 2009 PIT vs DET 10/29 years with a different game, 3/29 with a different champion (1992, 1993, 1995). Chicago/Detroit get an extra title, while Montreal/New Jersey each lose one. The NBA: Real Life Hypothetical 1984 BOS vs LAL 1985 LAL vs BOS 1986 BOS vs HOU 1987 LAL vs BOS 1988 LAL vs DET 1989 DET vs LAL 1990 DET vs POR 1991 CHI vs LAL 1992 CHI vs POR 1993 CHI vs PHO 1994 HOU vs NY 1995 HOU vs ORL ORL vs SA 1996 CHI vs SEA 1997 CHI vs UTA 1998 CHI vs UTA 1999 SA vs NY SA vs IND 2000 LAL vs IND 2001 LAL vs PHI 2002 LAL vs NJ 2003 SA vs NJ 2004 DET vs LAL 2005 SA vs DET 2006 MIA vs DAL 2007 SA vs CLE 2008 BOS vs LAL 2009 LAL vs ORL 2/26 years were changed, that's it. Only one champion is different. It makes you wonder why they insist on keeping the playoffs so large. Orlando takes the 1995 title away from Houston (the only non-top 4 seed to win in these years). At first, I thought that MLS didn't have much change. But it turns out that compared to the NHL and especially the NBA, it is quite a bit. Diff Champs MLS 36% 21% NHL 34% 10% NBA 8% 4% First column = number of years with a difference in the title game if the league had half the playoff teams. Second column = number of years with a different champion. I don't think this post covers new ground, because we all know that the MLS playoff system doesn't do enough to reward strong regular seasons. We also know that best of 7 series lead to better teams winning more often. My main goal here was just to see what exactly would've changed.