Template talk:NHLBracket
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This non-article page is within the scope of the WikiProject Ice Hockey, an attempt at building a useful ice hockey resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ for more information). |
| NA | This page is not an article and does not require a rating. |
Template description: This template generates an NHL-specific playoff bracket.
Infobox code
{{NHLBracket | RD1=
| RD2=
| RD3=
| RD4=
| group1=
| group2=
| RD1-seed01=
| RD1-team01=
| RD1-score01=
| RD1-seed02=
| RD1-team02=
| RD1-score02=
| RD1-seed03=
| RD1-team03=
| RD1-score03=
| RD1-seed04=
| RD1-team04=
| RD1-score04=
| RD1-seed05=
| RD1-team05=
| RD1-score05=
| RD1-seed06=
| RD1-team06=
| RD1-score06=
| RD1-seed07=
| RD1-team07=
| RD1-score07=
| RD1-seed08=
| RD1-team08=
| RD1-score08=
| RD1-seed09=
| RD1-team09=
| RD1-score09=
| RD1-seed10=
| RD1-team10=
| RD1-score10=
| RD1-seed11=
| RD1-team11=
| RD1-score11=
| RD1-seed12=
| RD1-team12=
| RD1-score12=
| RD1-seed13=
| RD1-team13=
| RD1-score13=
| RD1-seed14=
| RD1-team14=
| RD1-score14=
| RD1-seed15=
| RD1-team15=
| RD1-score15=
| RD1-seed16=
| RD1-team16=
| RD1-score16=
| RD2-seed01=
| RD2-team01=
| RD2-score01=
| RD2-seed02=
| RD2-team02=
| RD2-score02=
| RD2-seed03=
| RD2-team03=
| RD2-score03=
| RD2-seed04=
| RD2-team04=
| RD2-score04=
| RD2-seed05=
| RD2-team05=
| RD2-score05=
| RD2-seed06=
| RD2-team06=
| RD2-score06=
| RD2-seed07=
| RD2-team07=
| RD2-score07=
| RD2-seed08=
| RD2-team08=
| RD2-score08=
| RD3-seed01=
| RD3-team01=
| RD3-score01=
| RD3-seed02=
| RD3-team02=
| RD3-score02=
| RD3-seed03=
| RD3-team03=
| RD3-score03=
| RD3-seed04=
| RD3-team04=
| RD3-score04=
| RD4-seed01=
| RD4-team01=
| RD4-score01=
| RD4-seed01-bgcolor1=
| RD4-seed01-bgcolor2=
| RD4-seed01-border-color=
| RD4-seed02=
| RD4-team02=
| RD4-score02=
| RD4-seed02-bgcolor1=
| RD4-seed02-bgcolor2=
| RD4-seed02-border-color=
}}
Template parameters
- RD1, RD2, RD3, RD4 — [OPTIONAL] The names of each respective round. Defaults to "Conference Quarterfinals", "Conference Semifinals", "Conference Finals", and "Stanley Cup Final", respectively.
- group1, group2 — [OPTIONAL] The name of the first group of eight team, and the name of the last group of eight. Defaults to "Eastern Conference" and "Western Conference" respectively.
- The rest of the parameters fill in the bracket and consists of the form X-YZ where
- X is the specific round
- Y is either the team's seed, name, or score
- Z is the specific placement on the bracket, counting from top to bottom.
- Please note that this is not technically a bracket as the teams are re-seeded after the first round so that the highest ranking team always plays the lowest. For this reason, and to conform to the standard format on the NHL's web site, the teams are not laid out the way they would be for a basketball or football bracket. The first pairing is always 1 and 8, second is always 2 and 7, and so on.
Credits
- This template is based on the 16 Team Bracket template. I did not write it, just modified to suit the needs of the Ice Hockey WikiProject.
Z4ns4tsu 18:16, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Additions Added optional colors for the final round. This will allow for proper seeding if the West is first seed over the East. 
Eric B ( T • C • W ) 17:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] New bracket proposal
How about this?
| Conference Quarterfinals | Conference Semifinals (Reseeded) |
Conference Finals | Stanley Cup Final | |||||||||||||||
| 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Eastern Conference | ||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 6 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 5 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Western Conference | ||||||||||||||||||
| 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 6 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 5 | ||||||||||||||||||
--Howard the Duck 06:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- I support this bracket. I think by extending the Semifinals like this, it visually emphasizes that the QFs are a pool of teams that the SFs draw upon. Moving away from the "stairstep" design will deflect editor pressures to advance teams too quickly into the SF round, and will also hopefully deflect pressures to re-order the QF pairings to match the post hoc results of which teams end up playing each other in the SF round. Although it needs some debugging that I am not qualified to perform, I strongly support this redesign as more accurately displaying, in a visual way, how the NHL playoffs work. MrArticleOne (talk) 06:52, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah I wouldn't have a problem with this. -Djsasso (talk) 15:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- I like it. Is there any way to include the standard verbiage explanation with it? Also, should the template have a specific name, so that you can create another one the next time they re-invent their playoff scheme, and not lose this one? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think the standard verbiage would be part of the article, not the template. I can't think of a template I've seen that's had text attached like that. You raise a good point about the naming though. On an unrelated note, does anybody know how to reduce the space between the QFs? I think that would also help emphasize that the QFs are a pool of teams that the SFs draw upon. Full disclosure: I approached Howard about this design and he and I have been chatting back and forth about it, so I've put some thought already into what I'd like the redesign to look like. MrArticleOne (talk) 16:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- I like it. Is there any way to include the standard verbiage explanation with it? Also, should the template have a specific name, so that you can create another one the next time they re-invent their playoff scheme, and not lose this one? Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 16:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah I wouldn't have a problem with this. -Djsasso (talk) 15:28, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
- I made changes to the proposal: the Conf. QF orders can't be changed, and I added a small "reseeded" beneath the Conference Semifinals label. --Howard the Duck 04:55, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
- I guess I thought more people would chime in on this proposal, seeing all the interest the bracket has gotten in the past. I think these are good changes, Howard. I sorta wish there was a way we could keep the "reseeded" from going on to a 2nd line, and I find it somewhat frustrating that the text description and the improved bracket design won't be enough, but I can't argue with you that it's probably needed. At the risk of sounding like a broken record, and this is not directed at Howard specifically (since I've spoken with him about it before), but does anybody know how to fix the "fat" line for the 8th place team in the Eastern Conference and/or pinch the spacing down between the QF boxes? The current spacing is the spacing needed for a traditional bracket design and that's what we're trying to move away from with this change. Perhaps if I repeat my request someone with the know-how (and spare time!) will do it. MrArticleOne (talk) 20:36, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
How about ditching the colors too? --Howard the Duck 13:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Personally, I like the colors; I think it makes it much easier to see it as two sets of 8 teams, instead of 1 set of 16 teams (which is really what it is). If anything, I was going to ask whether there would be a sensible way to color-code the NBA playoff bracket. MrArticleOne (talk) 13:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, and in addition, I think the re-seeding process and the lack of connecting lines to the SFs makes the color-coding particularly important in this context. MrArticleOne (talk) 13:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Now that you've said about the reseeding process it did make sense. Dunno if it'll apply for the NBA since there is no reseeding involved. --Howard the Duck 13:55, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- I absolutely agree that it is a peripheral concern in the NBA. However, personally I would color-code the NBA. The tournament is not so much a 16-team tournament as two 8-team tournaments (unlike, say, one of the Regionals in the NCAA Tournament), and I think there would be some value in color-coding the NBA bracket. But, that isn't this discussion (obviously!). I do think it's important to keep it here, though. I downloaded the Firefox web developer extension to try and edit this bracket to make some of the changes I'd like to see, but I don't have the skill yet. MrArticleOne (talk) 13:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think the #8 now had a liposuction. --Howard the Duck 01:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I remain convinced that there is a way to narrow the gap between the QF boxes (it involves reducing the "rowspan" value from 2 to 1 in some circumstances; it's just a matter of figuring out which ones). However, I think that this version of the bracket is ready to go; if we decide to fiddle with the rowspan business and narrow it, that's not the sort of change I think that we need to spend a lot of time and effort building consensus on. Since there have been no negative comments I say we move forward with this and implement it. MrArticleOne (talk) 02:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- If you'd remove the rowspans, the cells won't line up properly. --Howard the Duck 04:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I played around with it in a Sandbox. You're right, but that isn't the point, in a way. I mean, you're right that reducing the rowspans from 2 to 1 throws off the rest of the table, but my point all along has been do make those rowspans=1 and have the rest of the table line up properly. I just don't know how to fix the cascading errors that are caused by shrinking the gaps between the QFs. MrArticleOne (talk) 04:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- Beyond that, though, my overall point with my last post was, do we think this is ready to go? These are just minor stylistic issues that can be fixed up after the template is "live." I was also going to suggest that we toss around making the colors a little less bold (i.e., saturating the blue and red with a little more white to make it more pale). MrArticleOne (talk) 04:16, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think this is good to go. I'd also agree on making the colors paler. --Howard the Duck 09:53, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- So, if it's ready, how/when do we take it live? MrArticleOne (talk) 17:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I suggest to take it after the playoffs are over. Most still aren't aware of this discussion. --Howard the Duck 03:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- OK. I just don't want it to sputter and die with a whimper like it apparently did last year. MrArticleOne (talk) 13:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- Now that the playoffs are over, how do we want to handle moving forward with this redesign? MrArticleOne (talk) 00:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
- How about a broken but heavy line separating the Conf. QF and Conf. SF? I'll implement it if anyone wants to see it. --Howard the Duck 06:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- I would oppose any and all lines from the QFs to SFs. I think it only encourages the sort of mistakes/confusion that this redesign is trying to combat. MrArticleOne (talk) 12:09, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- How about a broken but heavy line separating the Conf. QF and Conf. SF? I'll implement it if anyone wants to see it. --Howard the Duck 06:20, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
- Now that the playoffs are over, how do we want to handle moving forward with this redesign? MrArticleOne (talk) 00:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
- OK. I just don't want it to sputter and die with a whimper like it apparently did last year. MrArticleOne (talk) 13:58, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- I suggest to take it after the playoffs are over. Most still aren't aware of this discussion. --Howard the Duck 03:40, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
- So, if it's ready, how/when do we take it live? MrArticleOne (talk) 17:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think this is good to go. I'd also agree on making the colors paler. --Howard the Duck 09:53, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- If you'd remove the rowspans, the cells won't line up properly. --Howard the Duck 04:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I remain convinced that there is a way to narrow the gap between the QF boxes (it involves reducing the "rowspan" value from 2 to 1 in some circumstances; it's just a matter of figuring out which ones). However, I think that this version of the bracket is ready to go; if we decide to fiddle with the rowspan business and narrow it, that's not the sort of change I think that we need to spend a lot of time and effort building consensus on. Since there have been no negative comments I say we move forward with this and implement it. MrArticleOne (talk) 02:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I think the #8 now had a liposuction. --Howard the Duck 01:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
- I absolutely agree that it is a peripheral concern in the NBA. However, personally I would color-code the NBA. The tournament is not so much a 16-team tournament as two 8-team tournaments (unlike, say, one of the Regionals in the NCAA Tournament), and I think there would be some value in color-coding the NBA bracket. But, that isn't this discussion (obviously!). I do think it's important to keep it here, though. I downloaded the Firefox web developer extension to try and edit this bracket to make some of the changes I'd like to see, but I don't have the skill yet. MrArticleOne (talk) 13:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Now that you've said about the reseeding process it did make sense. Dunno if it'll apply for the NBA since there is no reseeding involved. --Howard the Duck 13:55, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
