How does league expansion work?

[Adidarw 35]

I just read an article about the NHL expanding to 32 teams in 4 or 5 years. Possibly to Las Vegas and somewhere else.

How does expansion work? Where do the new teams get their players from? Is there an 'equaling draft' where teams have to give up a player or two for the new team or do they start from scratch? If they start from scratch, what is scratch?? They sign guys off the street?

[HomeNugget 2]

I just read an article about the NHL expanding to 32 teams in 4 or 5 years. Possibly to Las Vegas and somewhere else.

How does expansion work? Where do the new teams get their players from? Is there an 'equaling draft' where teams have to give up a player or two for the new team or do they start from scratch? If they start from scratch, what is scratch?? They sign guys off the street?

they hold an expansion draft. all thirty teams get to protect a certain number of players and the new teams select from the unprotected list. they also get the first picks in the draft.

[russianswede919293 95]

It doesn't

[LIDDYGIBBY5 1]

It doesn't

You took the words right out of my mouth

[eva unit zero 271]

If the league expands, it should be two teams. Kansas City and Houston.

Both are large cities that have modern arenas ready for NHL use. Each has two professional sports franchises that only have moderate success. Both have had major pro hockey teams in the past and would have a natural rival (St. Louis and Dallas, respectively)

Each team should be able to protect maybe twelve skaters and one goalie, with exemptions (as always) for those under a certain age (23?) or experience level (80 games?). Teams would be required to expose at least one forward, defenseman, and goalie, and could lose a maximum of one goalie OR defenseman, and two total players. Each expansion team would draft two players from each team, for 30 players each.

That would leave the following likely lists using the current Wings roster:

Protected: Zetterberg, Holmstrom, Draper, Franzen, Cleary, Osgood, Lidstrom, Kronwall, Lebda. Three spots remain open to protect players.

Exempt: Hudler, Filppula, Kopecky

Available: Lilja, Lang (UFA), Maltby (UFA), Hasek (UFA), Schneider (UFA), Markov (UFA), Datsyuk (UFA), Calder (UFA), Bertuzzi (UFA), Chelios (UFA).

Assume Detroit resigns Dats, Bert, and Calder and uses their final three protection slots on them. Lilja, as he is under contract, is the most attractive pick on the 'available' list-meaning UFA Maltby, as the only forward left, would also be claimed.

At that point, Detroit would need to sign two forwards (Grigorenko and Ellis?), four defensemen (Chelios, Schneider, Kindl, and Markov?), and a goalie (Howard/Liv)

The roster for next season--if the draft happened this June under those rules, would not look significantly different than it will next year anyway. This would likely be the case regardless of when it happened. And it would definitely mean schedule changes and realignment.

[TheLegend19 1]

It doesn't

Post of the day

Here is another thread in which expansion is being discussed, albeit to Las Vegas and Seattle, not Houston and Kansas City.

[HenrikRules40 14]

It doesn't

That's what I was going to say!!! I honestly hope they don't expand. It's like having a fantastic cup of coffee, and then pouring water in it.

PLEASE DON'T PUT MORE WATER IN MY COFFEE BETTMAN!!!

[Flip-check 6]

Houston honestly would be just bizarre. There's already Dallas.. would Texas support two NHL teams?

If they did, Seattle somehow seems like a better choice for that market.. northern WA already is close enough to British Columbia, and I think that actually could be a valid choice. It's so retarded though, so many of the games are sleepers already with thirty teams as is.

That's what I was going to say!!! I honestly hope they don't expand. It's like having a fantastic cup of coffee, and then pouring water in it.

PLEASE DON'T PUT MORE WATER IN MY COFFEE BETTMAN!!!

Bettman: But if it helps me sell more coffee... you know I gotta, Rabia! GOOOOOO AVS VS. WINGS!! KEEP THE RIVALRY ALIVE!

[eva unit zero 271]

It's so retarded though, so many of the games are sleepers already with thirty teams as is.

And the talent level across the league top to bottom is the highest it has been in almost 40 years.

Prior to the early 90s expansion, there were 21 teams. There were about 450 Canadian players in a league with about 475 players, or 20 teams worth.

Now, there are about 16.5 teams worth of Canadian players. If you add two more teams, and of the additional 23 players per team in the league, if all of those players are Canadian, you would still only have 18.5 teams worth of Canadians. Since the 1971-72 season, there have been at least 21 major pro teams in North America, and the percentage of Canadian players on those teams has been steadily declining. The last time there were fewer than the approximately 385 Canadians playing major pro hockey now was 1970-71, due to the 14-team NHL having approximately 350 players, and the WHA yet to start play. Meaning that the average fourth liner in a 32-team league would be better than the average fourth liner at any point since 1971.

[swedishseven 9]

while the seattle thunderbirds have a decent turnout to games,i dont think it's a hockey town,at least not enough to support an nhl franchise imo.

[arnoldbuck 0]

And the talent level across the league top to bottom is the highest it has been in almost 40 years.

Prior to the early 90s expansion, there were 21 teams. There were about 450 Canadian players in a league with about 475 players, or 20 teams worth.

Now, there are about 16.5 teams worth of Canadian players. If you add two more teams, and of the additional 23 players per team in the league, if all of those players are Canadian, you would still only have 18.5 teams worth of Canadians. Since the 1971-72 season, there have been at least 21 major pro teams in North America, and the percentage of Canadian players on those teams has been steadily declining. The last time there were fewer than the approximately 385 Canadians playing major pro hockey now was 1970-71, due to the 14-team NHL having approximately 350 players, and the WHA yet to start play. Meaning that the average fourth liner in a 32-team league would be better than the average fourth liner at any point since 1971.

Totally agree. The players in the league ar emore talented than ever, and if they expanded there could esily be players to fill those voids. Sure there are only so many Ovechkins and Crosby's but the quality of games for the most part has to do with the style of hockey and not the players on the ice. I have seen many games this year featuring teams with star players, but the games were boring as hell. Not the fault of the stars, but because the game itself jsut had no spark or flair to it.

[bogeygolfer 4]

KC is a stupid place for hockey

las vegas is where it's at

[arnoldbuck 0]

KC is a stupid place for hockey

las vegas is where it's at

I just dont see it happening successfully in Vegas. Too many distractions and too much else for ppl to do than go to 41 hockey games.

[YoungGuns1340 1]

Las Vegas would be the best choice for one. Its growing faster than any other relatively large city in the entire country and its filled with northern transplants. Not to mention, its another pro sport to bet on.

The problem with Seattle is its proximity to Vancouver.

[Kp-Wings 3]

The problem with Seattle is its proximity to Vancouver.

Agreed. I'm sure most people in Seattle will pick up Sportsnet Vancouver, so they can easily follow the Canucks. The city is somewhat close enough for some fans to drive to Vancouver on a weekend game and go watch too.

[Majsheppard 203]

If the league expands, it should be two teams. Kansas City and Houston.

NO NO NO.

I hate states getting more then one team, none more then Texas. Screw that.

I would like to see Seattle and KC get the teams. Winnipeg is more likely then Seattle though, as is Las Vegas.

I do think that 32 is the magic number, I cannot see any more then 32 working for hockey and I do think they should follow the NFL model.

Best thing about two new teams in the west would be trying to move Chicago and Detroit East and having two divisions holding the six.

[Zetter is Better 0]

It doesn't

Thank You!

[Kp-Wings 3]

NO NO NO.

I hate states getting more then one team, none more then Texas. Screw that.

I would like to see Seattle and KC get the teams. Winnipeg is more likely then Seattle though, as is Las Vegas.

I do think that 32 is the magic number, I cannot see any more then 32 working for hockey and I do think they should follow the NFL model.

Best thing about two new teams in the west would be trying to move Chicago and Detroit East and having two divisions holding the six.

How is Winnipeg MORE likely to get an NHL franchise? They already showed they couldn't support one before. And besides that, the NHL has already expressed it's desire to expand to more southern markets rather than another canadian team.

And what's wrong with another team in Texas? The state is certainly big enough. And they have a good arena to put them in. Seattle doesn't. Key Arena, which is where the NBA's Sonics play, is in awful condition and is only getting older and older. Houston, meanwhile, has the Toyota Center, which was built fairly recently (2002). And it has considerable seating arrangements, which makes it easier than expanding the seating room in a smaller arena. So what is it that makes Houston unfavorable for a team? Because their from the south? Please clarify.

[theman19 47]

so has Kansas city, Colorado had one lost it, got it back, ditto for minnesota,...is it monumental to think that Winnipeg couldn't have one?

[eva unit zero 271]

so has Kansas city, Colorado had one lost it, got it back, ditto for minnesota,...is it monumental to think that Winnipeg couldn't have one?

Denver and Minneapolis are MUCH bigger metro areas than Winnipeg.

Winnipeg lost its team because it had horrible attendance for 20 years, and even when the fans knew the team was in danger of folding or moving, they still didn't show up.

Also, the original ownership of the Scouts and Rockies was not willing to spend money to ice a winning product...the fans saw this and stopped showing up.

[BlueMonk 102]

And the talent level across the league top to bottom is the highest it has been in almost 40 years.

Prior to the early 90s expansion, there were 21 teams. There were about 450 Canadian players in a league with about 475 players, or 20 teams worth.

Now, there are about 16.5 teams worth of Canadian players. If you add two more teams, and of the additional 23 players per team in the league, if all of those players are Canadian, you would still only have 18.5 teams worth of Canadians. Since the 1971-72 season, there have been at least 21 major pro teams in North America, and the percentage of Canadian players on those teams has been steadily declining. The last time there were fewer than the approximately 385 Canadians playing major pro hockey now was 1970-71, due to the 14-team NHL having approximately 350 players, and the WHA yet to start play. Meaning that the average fourth liner in a 32-team league would be better than the average fourth liner at any point since 1971.

I guess I'm missing something. How does a decline in Canadian hockey players across the league equate with a higher talent level?

[BlakChamber 8]

I guess I'm missing something. How does a decline in Canadian hockey players across the league equate with a higher talent level?

I think because there are more American and European players. If there were 20 teams worth of Canadian players in a 21 team league, and now there's 16.5 teams worth of a Canadian players in a 30 team league, clearly someone has stepped up to fill the void.

At least that's how I read it.

[sibiriak 84]

I guess I'm missing something. How does a decline in Canadian hockey players across the league equate with a higher talent level?

Assuming that Canada produces at least the same number of NHL-level players as it did in 1971, (an easy asumption, given the increased population and improved nutrition and training methods) that means that instead of about 450 of these Cnadians making the NHL then, only about 380 of the 450 can make the NHL now. The rest are playing in the minors. This suggests that the talent level has improved tremendously over 1971, and that with the influx of Europeans and an increse in the number of the US-born players, there are enough players to fill 33-35 teams and they all would have the level of talent at least as good as the 1971 average.

In short, expansion didn't water down the talent level.

[Kp-Wings 3]

so has Kansas city, Colorado had one lost it, got it back, ditto for minnesota,...is it monumental to think that Winnipeg couldn't have one?

At the current time it is, as Eva just stated pretty much all the reasons.

Here's another: The MTS Centre, which is the biggest arena in Winnipeg, has a seating capacity of about 11,000. Most NHL arenas average around 17,000. Unless they want to expand the seating, which is a major pain the ass, they also don't have an arena to put the team. What's the point of expanding a team to a city that doesn't have a big enough arena to put them in, where as places like Kansas City and Houston do?

[DRAPES RULES 7]

The Legue needs to get smaller not larger !