Expansion

[jstewismybastardson]

with the Phoenix ownership deal apparently on the rocks, (and no new owner to be found) the NHL should fold that franchise and announce expansion the same day

 

[pixburgher66]

with the Phoenix ownership deal apparently on the rocks, (and no new owner to be found) the NHL should fold that franchise and announce expansion the same day

"You promised you wouldn't move the team!"
*aghast* "Wha...what? I did no such thing!"

 

[forty_three]

And in regards to the 90's expansion, yeah it was tough but it was right on the cusp of the Russian and European invasion. So there was big influx of talent to fill in rosters, albeit not completely. But the game was different then as well. Interference (for better or worse) was not being called like it is now. Hitting was much more "wild west" and the game was noticeably slower. So the game itself was in a better position to survive mediocre talent.

Now the game is a little more open, and a lot less restrictive. The plodding goon is going away. You need more talent to fill in each roster. And with the KHL competing, there is less actual talent to fill in those spots where you'd ideally have much higher skill players. A 90's third line is a fourth line at best now. A 90's fourth line would not survive today's NHL.

Yes, the KHL is essentially a joke, but the top 10% of players there could easily find themselves in the NHL if the K didn't exist. Is that 10% enough to field two fully new teams over here? It would be close. But we don't have them. So we are not close.

Instead of doing a season ticket drive to see if they can make enough cash, the NHL should offer a hockey equipment bank to the kids of Vegas. Free hockey for a year and if more than 5,000 kids sign up to play they can proceed with the season ticket drive. Because casinos buying up tickets to give to appease gamblers who are complain about the buffet is not going to be a measure of success. Kids playing hockey is. Those kids will be the working class in 10-12 years buying tickets on their own to take their kids to games.

That is where Phoenix and Miami have failed. And where Minnesota, Columbus, San Jose, Ottawa and Colorado (I know, not expansion but the point stands) have succeeded. Look at the first round of expansion - Philly, Pitt, Buffalo, Washington... HUGE youth hockey success there. Generations of it.

 

[jstewismybastardson]

"You promised you wouldn't move the team!"
Bettman: *aghast* "Well...technically ... we're not moving the team"

fify

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

And in regards to the 90's expansion, yeah it was tough but it was right on the cusp of the Russian and European invasion. So there was big influx of talent to fill in rosters, albeit not completely. But the game was different then as well. Interference (for better or worse) was not being called like it is now. Hitting was much more "wild west" and the game was noticeably slower. So the game itself was in a better position to survive mediocre talent.

Now the game is a little more open, and a lot less restrictive. The plodding goon is going away. You need more talent to fill in each roster. And with the KHL competing, there is less actual talent to fill in those spots where you'd ideally have much higher skill players. A 90's third line is a fourth line at best now. A 90's fourth line would not survive today's NHL.

Yes, the KHL is essentially a joke, but the top 10% of players there could easily find themselves in the NHL if the K didn't exist. Is that 10% enough to field two fully new teams over here? It would be close. But we don't have them. So we are not close.

Instead of doing a season ticket drive to see if they can make enough cash, the NHL should offer a hockey equipment bank to the kids of Vegas. Free hockey for a year and if more than 5,000 kids sign up to play they can proceed with the season ticket drive. Because casinos buying up tickets to give to appease gamblers who are complain about the buffet is not going to be a measure of success. Kids playing hockey is. Those kids will be the working class in 10-12 years buying tickets on their own to take their kids to games.

That is where Phoenix and Miami have failed. And where Minnesota, Columbus, San Jose, Ottawa and Colorado (I know, not expansion but the point stands) have succeeded. Look at the first round of expansion - Philly, Pitt, Buffalo, Washington... HUGE youth hockey success there. Generations of it.

Well said.

 

[Center Ice]

The talent pool is diluted as it is and nobody gives a damn. The league added 9 damn teams in the 90s and the supply of NHL-calibre talent simply hasn't kept pace with the growth of hockey overall. In fact, given how restrictive the sport is to play at a young age due to cost, it wouldn't shock me if we start seeing an even steeper decline in the talent pool eventually.

Agreed, while I do believe there are some cities out there whose fans deserve and would support a team, the talent pool is already diminishing. There are players in the NHL now who should still be in AAA hockey and the instigator rule has left the superstars unprotected which could shorten their careers.

 

[tducey]

Expansion is more a when and not an if now. Got to think the NHL goes to Seattle and Quebec City and moves Florida to Las Vegas or Houston.

 

[Harry Crack]

A picture says a thousand turds

 

[Tomas Tatar]

Move Phoenix to Seattle, Florida to Milwaukee...there, expansion complete, and the conferences are balanced again.

We know Phoenix isn't moving. At least not for awhile. Florida is awful. They have some great specs though, maybe they can eventually grow like Nashville. Nashville everyone wanted to move in 09 and look damn good now.

^^^^^ OH HELLS YES

Jared Boll, Scott Gomez, Shawn Thornton, and Dominic Roussell all have regular jobs in the NHL. I am not convinced the "talent pool" will support expansion.

Boll actually isn't bad. Gomez is technically like a 15yh forward. In Detroit alone, I'd say youve got 4 NHL ready in the AHL.

The talent pool is diluted as it is and nobody gives a damn. The league added 9 damn teams in the 90s and the supply of NHL-calibre talent simply hasn't kept pace with the growth of hockey overall. In fact, given how restrictive the sport is to play at a young age due to cost, it wouldn't shock me if we start seeing an even steeper decline in the talent pool eventually.

Seriously? Talent hasn't grown. Look at the players that play in the NHL from each draft. Go ahead and take a look at US's development ... Their US Development squads are legit and NCAA has grown in a. Big way. I'm Canadian BTW. Countries like Germany, Slovakia, etc are producing more NHL talent.

KHL has hit a patch.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting the same result. Hockey didn't work in the desert of Arizona, why do they think it will work in the desert of Nevada?

Not sure you can really compare the two.

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

Seriously? Talent hasn't grown. Look at the players that play in the NHL from each draft. Go ahead and take a look at US's development ... Their US Development squads are legit and NCAA has grown in a. Big way. I'm Canadian BTW. Countries like Germany, Slovakia, etc are producing more NHL talent.

Just because the quantity of players has grown doesn't mean the quality has. There are a lot of guys with 7 figure contracts who would've been career AHLers 20 years ago.

And for the record, in the past five drafts only 9 more American players have been drafted than between 2000 and 2004, 290 to 281 respectively. Number of American players jumped from 170 to 223 from the 2003-04 to 2008-09 seasons, but have essentially plateaued since only growing to 238 for 2013-14. It's also tough to make an argument for the players getting better over that span - The tenth-best American-born player in 2003-04 scored 53 points (Drury), in 2008-09 it was 59 points (Pavelski), and last season it was Oshie with 60 points. These numbers obviously don't paint the entire picture, but they can definitely be used to temper the notion that hockey is experiencing some sort of boom in the United States that is at all comparable to the growth it saw in the early and mid parts of last decade.

 

[oaknightshockey1]

Instead of doing a season ticket drive to see if they can make enough cash, the NHL should offer a hockey equipment bank to the kids of Vegas. Free hockey for a year and if more than 5,000 kids sign up to play they can proceed with the season ticket drive. Because casinos buying up tickets to give to appease gamblers who are complain about the buffet is not going to be a measure of success. Kids playing hockey is. Those kids will be the working class in 10-12 years buying tickets on their own to take their kids to games.

That is where Phoenix and Miami have failed. And where Minnesota, Columbus, San Jose, Ottawa and Colorado (I know, not expansion but the point stands) have succeeded. Look at the first round of expansion - Philly, Pitt, Buffalo, Washington... HUGE youth hockey success there. Generations of it.

This is spot on. Another one to mention (again, not expansion) is Dallas. Youth hockey in Texas has grown ridiculously since the Stars moved.

 

[ratenstein]

No expansion. Move PHX to KC, Panthers to Quebec and as far as I'm concerned, Seattle can have the Ducks anytime they want. I'll even call the movers if you want.

 

[DaBoltsNIsles]

Whoever moves their team to Vegas will likely fail. They'll do okay early on as a novelty, but there are to many things to do in Vegas.

 

[davnlaguna]

Vegas needs to market to eastern teams. Teams that play once a year in Vegas. Make it aam event for the fans. See a game, with cheap tickets, catch a show, grab a meal, grab a stripper, and gamble your bank account dry. It works with the Kings in Preseason. It should work with 14 of the Eastern teams. Fans would make it an annual event.

 

[juliansteed]

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting the same result.

That's actually not the definition of insanity at all. That sounds more like the definition of common sense.

 

[juliansteed]

I can't say I'm too concerned about the dilution of talent for a number of reasons.

The NHL all-star game is the least diluted game of the season. Does that make it the most exciting? Meanwhile the World Juniors seem to be far more popular, and features very few players capable of playing in the NHL at that time, (The last place team in the NHL would destroy the gold medal winning team.) but most hockey fans seem to find that tournament way more exciting than an NHL All-Star Game.

There are tons of talented players in the minors/overseas that aren't in the NHL because teams will only sign them to play a top 6 forward role or nothing, so if they don't make the top 6 they are sent to the minors. The so-called untalented dirty players that tend to take up bottom 6 spots aren't in the NHL for lack of talent but because they fill a role that GMs/coaches have in mind (rightly or wrongly) that their team must have. They'd be there no matter how many teams you had.

It really doesn't matter how many teams you have in the league, there will always be bottom feeders "who wouldn't be there if there were fewer teams". So where is the line drawn and why? Again, no matter how many teams you have in the league, the difference between the bottom guys in the NHL and the top guys in the AHL (or elsewhere who couldn't quite make the NHL) is pretty much negligible. As long as the NHL more or less has the best X number of players playing, that works for me, no matter what X happens to be.

I will tell you what was watered down when I first started watching hockey in the late 80s. The first round of the Stanley Cup Playoffs in a league where 76% of the teams made the playoffs (would have been an even 80% if not for that whacky 6-team Patrick Division). I like that you basically have to be at least .500 (or better depending on how you define winning percentage with these extra points) to get into the playoffs now, and anyone can beat anyone. With that in mind I think a 32-team league makes sense but not so much Las Vegas. Not only would that balance out the conferences but I like the idea of exactly 50% of teams making the playoffs.

 

[Oldtom]

Ha, ha, ha. MT seat syndrome is spreading all ova duh South. Sandy-eggo anyone, Hootch-town Tax-ass, not to mention Can-suss Shitty, See-8-hole? Bring on them expansion fees. Quebec and Saskatoon will just have to wait. Butt hey, three more in the East would make it an even 40. Then 32 could make the playoffs and stretch them to five rounds, and the season could start in mid to early September.

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

I can't say I'm too concerned about the dilution of talent for a number of reasons.

The NHL all-star game is the least diluted game of the season. Does that make it the most exciting? Meanwhile the World Juniors seem to be far more popular, and features very few players capable of playing in the NHL at that time, (The last place team in the NHL would destroy the gold medal winning team.) but most hockey fans seem to find that tournament way more exciting than an NHL All-Star Game.

You realize we're talking about the Oilers right now, right?

 

[Comeds]

I'm not going to be happy until there are 40 NHL teams.

4 conferences of ten teams each (The North, The South, The East, The West - 'The' is an official part of the conference name). Top 4 teams in each conference make the playoffs.

If there is a tie between 4th and 5th in any division, only 4th and 5th, then those teams combine rosters for the playoffs. That team would wear the uniform and use the name of the more established team.

In the third round of the playoffs The North team remaining would play The South team Remaining and The East would play The West.

Its all pretty simple.

 

[forty_three]

I'm not going to be happy until there are 40 NHL teams.

4 conferences of ten teams each (The North, The South, The East, The West - 'The' is an official part of the conference name). Top 4 teams in each conference make the playoffs.

If there is a tie between 4th and 5th in any division, only 4th and 5th, then those teams combine rosters for the playoffs. That team would wear the uniform and use the name of the more established team.

In the third round of the playoffs The North team remaining would play The South team Remaining and The East would play The West.

Its all pretty simple.

If the teams combine, do they still only get one win in the bank, or would they get two?