NHL to discuss expansion

[Hank 0]

Given that there are third and fourth liners who could have played on a lot of second lines in the 80s? Given that most current starters in the NHL would have been All-Star goaltenders in the 80s? Yes, there is an overabundance of talent in that respect.

Of course a 4th liner today is better than a 2nd liner in the 80's. Everyone knows that. But you're not speaking in relative terms.

4th liners are still 4th liners today.

By your reasoning, since ECHL players are much better than 1st line stars in the 1910's then I guess we should have 200 NHL teams today.

The fact is, the league is already watered down. We need less teams not more.

That, in a nutshell, is why the NHL has lost popularity. There used to be a time when it wasn't uncommon to have a 30 goal scorer on your 3rd line. Now a 30 goal scorer is an allstar.

Expansion is the sole reason why we have neutral zone traps, bigger goalie equipment, less scoring and an overall push for defensive hockey instead of offensive minded-coaches.

Edited September 18, 2007 by Hank

[Hank 0]

The game is a different game now. While I see where you are headed with that argument it works both ways.

More 3rd and 4th liners statistically are better than the 80's because they are playing against lesser talent.

Also while guys like Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman and Messier could have scored in any era, comparing 80's netminders to today's goaltenders is a bad comparison. Just look at the pads that Patty Roy wore for his career. I think it was SI or THN that did an article showing the pads he wore throughout his career and the difference from year to year is more than noticable.

Goalie equipment is bigger and lighter.

Players, like Cheli, have learned to work out specifically for hockey.

The talent pool is thin, I would say very thin, and yes some teams have four solid lines. Then you have a team like the Bruins whose fourth line would be better if you and I played on it. (exaggeration)

Expansion is like fighters on the wings roster, it is an opinion not a fact, and we will probably never agree but I think the league should work more on supporting the teams out there before expanding. How much fan support is Nashville going to get if all of the sudden there is a new team in KC. Is it going to help them any. NO.

But that is my opinion we welcome yours (sorry Maine joke, Fred Nutter Reference that none of you probably get)!

Excellent post Opie.

I know this is a pipe-dream and something for fairy-tales but I wish the owners would look at the league as more of a partnership between them and BUY struggling teams instead of having them stay in the league.

Again, I'm aware of how naive this thought is, but what if all the owners pooled their money and bought the Preds (just for an example).

They then sell off the property and put all the players into a 'contraction draft'.

If the Preds sold for $200M, it would cost each owner under $7M to buy it (not including the share they would all receive from selling the arena or other property that came with the sale).

But after that, they would then get the Preds share of TV revenue, among other things as well.

The CBC contract alone is worth close to $5M per team, per year. Splitting up $5M among 29 other owners is a pitance, I know, but throw in the TV contracts with VS, NBC and Centre Ice over the course of a few years, and you start to see a profit.

Not only that, but the product becomes better and the league is stronger for cutting off a dying limb.

I know it's unrealistic but I think it's plausable.

Last night on XM they were talking about how Phoenix could be facing trouble in the future. If the league would buy back just 4 teams over the next 5-10 years I think it would help not only the league but also the owners bottom line.

[Opie 308]

Great idea Hank but as you said Pipe dream.

The owners are so busy thinking myopically that they don't see spending a little money in the short term may look bad but in the long run will be much better for the league and their pockets.

[Hank 0]

Not a bad idea - contraction that is...However most of the current owners cannot see beyond their own noses, & right now many of them are more concerned about the amounts of $$$ Bettman has promised them if 2 more teams are allowed into the league

DING! DING! DING! We have a winner for the REAL reason for expansion.

Short term thinking is what's kept the NHL in the dark ages for years.

The ONLY good thing that could come from expansion is the Wings moving to the East. But even Holland has said the league will never let that happen. So to expansion.

[wingsfan40 0]

I say no to expansion as well....

[T-Ruff 47]

to expansion, I think it will work if done in 5-7 years or so..... any diluted talent pool argument no longer flies.....

[Opie 308]

thumbup.gif to expansion, I think it will work if done in 5-7 years or so..... any diluted talent pool argument no longer flies.....

How so, care to elaborate?

[TheBadOne 0]

Great posts by everyone thus far. Here's my two cents:

- If the NHL is going to expand into two cities, they should expand to Winnipeg and Portland.

- If the NHL wants a team in KC, they should move the Devils there. They were already there before and they currently play in a market that's served by 3 teams (Rangers and Islanders being the others.) 4,615 NJ fans came out to support their team last night. By comparison, 8,392 came out for the Coyotes yesterday. Considering, however, that the Devils are moving into a new building, the Islanders may be a better option.

- A team in Vegas would be a waste of money and time.

- Florida's team should be moved before any of the others, if relocation is an option. Granted, the Preds and Tampa Bay are for sale, but Nashville's fans seem legit, and Tampa's team has been moderately successful.

- Keep a team in Phoenix. In addition to the locals starting to get into hockey out here, there's a lot of transplants from Detroit, Denver, Minnesota, and Canada that live around here now. That way when I see someone from Denver at a Phoenix game, it's like "Hey, go Coyotes." and not "REMEMBER WHEN MCCARTY DID THAT CHEAP SHOT ON LEMIEUX?!" (and then I have to smack a person.)

- I hope Bastille doesn't get a team. The league needs a team in Hamilton like Detroit needs to go sign Tim Cheveldae out of retirement as their starting goaltender.

[BlakChamber 8]

There isn't going to be any contraction, you can bank on it. And can someone explain how a league that is already hurting for ratings/publicity going to benefit by having less teams and less places to develop new fans?

I don't think expansion is really needed, but I'm surprised Houston hasn't been mentioned. They've got an NHL ready arena and the owner of the Rockets has been trying to get a team for a while now.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Yeah, because if the NHL expanded by two teams there would be such a loss of talent for the existing teams. Figure teams get to protect nine forwards, four defensemen, and a goaltender, and players with equal to or less than 120 games (75 games for goaltenders) and three seasons are exempt...that means if it happened this season the Wings could protect Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Holmstrom, Franzen, Draper, Cleary, Maltby, Samuelsson, Drake, Lidstrom, Rafalski, Chelios, Lebda, Hasek. Hudler, Filppula, Grigorenko, Kronwall, Kopecky would be exempt. Meaning the only available players on the roster would be Osgood and Lilja, plus possibly one more defenseman- likely Sopel or Lebda if Sopel makes the team. Ultimately, if every team lost a fourth line forward, a third-pairing defenseman, or a backup goaltender...how does that hurt the overall product? There are many players currently not in the league who are capable of filling those roles without the team missing a beat. The talent difference between 30 and 32 teams is virtually negligible, and the league currently has a higher average talent level than it did in the 80s.

I totally agree Eva. How many players are in the AHL that are strong offensive players but for whatever reason can't crack an NHL lineup? First of all NHL lineups have to balance talent with checkers, role players, fighters, etc.... It'd be crazy to assume we couldn't fill two NHL rosters with players that can't get good minutes in the NHL or with AHL guys who can't crack their team due to a logjam at their position.

I don't know how I feel about expansion though. I don't think i'm totally against it. If you agree with the concept that the players are available then what reason do you have not to expand other than making the argument that some markets are crap already, which is a valid concern.

I just want the contractionists to stop picking on Columbus when they don't know a buckeye from a grapefruit. People give Ohio a bad rap when it comes to sports, especially hockey and football. Ohio has had a history of minor league hockey, they have great Division 1 programs and Miami, Bowling Green, Ohio State. Ohio I think has the 4th most players in the NFL of any state and like the 2nd or 3rd most HOF NFLers coming from the state. I think people outside of here think we all drive friggin tractors and are located about 10 minutes North of Mississippi or something.

[Guest Yzer19]

I totally agree Eva. How many players are in the AHL that are strong offensive players but for whatever reason can't crack an NHL lineup? First of all NHL lineups have to balance talent with checkers, role players, fighters, etc.... It'd be crazy to assume we couldn't fill two NHL rosters with players that can't get good minutes in the NHL or with AHL guys who can't crack their team due to a logjam at their position.

I don't know how I feel about expansion though. I don't think i'm totally against it. If you agree with the concept that the players are available then what reason do you have not to expand other than making the argument that some markets are crap already, which is a valid concern.

I just want the contractionists to stop picking on Columbus when they don't know a buckeye from a grapefruit. People give Ohio a bad rap when it comes to sports, especially hockey and football. Ohio has had a history of minor league hockey, they have great Division 1 programs and Miami, Bowling Green, Ohio State. Ohio I think has the 4th most players in the NFL of any state and like the 2nd or 3rd most HOF NFLers coming from the state. I think people outside of here think we all drive friggin tractors and are located about 10 minutes North of Mississippi or something.

Columbus fans gave themselves a bad name when they decided to boo Yzerman at the NHL draft. It was unclassy and very uncalled for. They have nobody to blame but themselves.

[eva unit zero 271]

Expansion is the sole reason why we have neutral zone traps, bigger goalie equipment, less scoring and an overall push for defensive hockey instead of offensive minded-coaches.

Neutral zone traps were used by Montreal to win Cups in the 70s. The greatest team ever used in the 70s something that is a result of 90s expansion and talent dilution? Don't think so. Have you noticed that Jacques Lemaire is the leading trap coach, and he happened to be a defensively minded center on those Habs teams?

Bigger goalie equipment has nothing to do with a diluted talent pool; if it was, the top goalies wouldn't use it.

Teams nowadays are much more defense-first than teams were in the 80s, but teams in the 50s and 60s were as low scoring as games today. The 80s are the aberration as far as goal production; this is mainly because of the fact that there were significantly fewer quality players to go around, so when one team got a few quality players together they could wreak havoc on their opposition much moreso than today because the style was more wide open, and the disconnect between the stars and the rest was far greater.

Also, someone said it was once not uncommon to have a 30 goal scorer on your third line. The NHL record for number of 30-goal scoring forwards on a team is 6, achieved by the 74-75 Sabres and the 84-85 Jets. The Islanders had 6 30-goal scorers in 77-78, but that included Denis Potvin. The Red Wings have had five 30-goal scorers three times, with Jimmy Carson being the only third liner to score 30, and he played on the second PP unit and led the team in PP goals with 11. Luc Robitaille was able to score 30 from the third line in 2002, but 2002 was hardly a COMMON team. It's obviously not something that has happened very many times, and usually only as a result of teams choosing to spread their offensive talent to three lines rather than having two concentrated offensive lines. The 2002 Wings had a third liner finish fourth on the team with 30 goals, but fifth place was Kris Draper's 15 goals, and the team only scored 251. The 92 Wings had a third liner score 34, but they also had a second liner score 19 and a first liner score 20. And they finished second overall.

Edited September 18, 2007 by eva unit zero

[Hank 0]

Neutral zone traps were used by Montreal to win Cups in the 70s. The greatest team ever used in the 70s something that is a result of 90s expansion and talent dilution? Don't think so. Have you noticed that Jacques Lemaire is the leading trap coach, and he happened to be a defensively minded center on those Habs teams?

Bigger goalie equipment has nothing to do with a diluted talent pool; if it was, the top goalies wouldn't use it.

Teams nowadays are much more defense-first than teams were in the 80s, but teams in the 50s and 60s were as low scoring as games today. The 80s are the aberration as far as goal production; this is mainly because of the fact that there were significantly fewer quality players to go around, so when one team got a few quality players together they could wreak havoc on their opposition much moreso than today because the style was more wide open, and the disconnect between the stars and the rest was far greater.

Also, someone said it was once not uncommon to have a 30 goal scorer on your third line. The NHL record for number of 30-goal scoring forwards on a team is 6, achieved by the 74-75 Sabres and the 84-85 Jets. The Islanders had 6 30-goal scorers in 77-78, but that included Denis Potvin. The Red Wings have had five 30-goal scorers three times, with Jimmy Carson being the only third liner to score 30, and he played on the second PP unit and led the team in PP goals with 11. Luc Robitaille was able to score 30 from the third line in 2002, but 2002 was hardly a COMMON team. It's obviously not something that has happened very many times, and usually only as a result of teams choosing to spread their offensive talent to three lines rather than having two concentrated offensive lines. The 2002 Wings had a third liner finish fourth on the team with 30 goals, but fifth place was Kris Draper's 15 goals, and the team only scored 251. The 92 Wings had a third liner score 34, but they also had a second liner score 19 and a first liner score 20. And they finished second overall.

Sorry Eva, you're absolutely right. Bring on more expansion!!! Lets add 20 more teams!

[eva unit zero 271]

There are some parts of your post in which I agree 100%, & then there are parts in which I think WTF!!??

I do agree with the fact that the NHL should stay away from Lost Wages; NFL, MLB, & the NBA don't have franchises there so why should the NHL? I also agree that franchises should relocate rather than add more teams thru expansion which as most of us agree is a horrible idea.

Now what I don't agree is the fact that the Devils should move; they've won the Cup on multiple occasions, & they do get "respectable" (just under 15,000 ) crowds for home games...You go on by saying that a fellow transplant team the Coyotes should stay in Phoenix - sans Stanley Cup, & fan attendance not much better than the Devils. Kinda hypocritical don't ya think?

Now - anyone who says that a team that doesn't belong in Hamilton is either misinformed about the Hamilton area (pop 700,000 plus), about hockey, or both...FYI when Balsillie made arrangements to prove to the BOG (Board of Govenors - aka owners of franchises) that he has a building to play in (Copps Coliseum in which Balsillie was going to spend millions of his own $$$ to renovate to a higher standard), sold out for the entire season (season tickets sold-out in less than 2 business days), and is in an area far enough away from T.O. (about 90 miles) for MLSE not to have any significant complaints concerning the loss of revenue ...Okay the Leafs sell out every game for the past 50 years, & they will do so for another 50 years. IMHO for Bettman to pressure Leopold on not selling to Balsillie (and in many ways he's defending MLSE's monopoly/stranglehold in Ontario - now is this good for the fan base?) is nothing short of criminal, & should be fired on the spot by the BOG!

Balsillie is the one who never signed a binding agreement. The BoG CAN'T rule on the sale or the relocation until a binding agreement is in place..Balsillie wanted the league to approve the move BEFORE he agreed to buy the team, and when the league told him they wouldn't vote on it until he agreed to purchase, he took his ball and went home. The NHL does NOT need a spolied rich crybaby owner who thinks he should get things his way because that's what he wants.

[Hank 0]

Balsillie is the one who never signed a binding agreement. The BoG CAN'T rule on the sale or the relocation until a binding agreement is in place..Balsillie wanted the league to approve the move BEFORE he agreed to buy the team, and when the league told him they wouldn't vote on it until he agreed to purchase, he took his ball and went home. The NHL does NOT need a spolied rich crybaby owner who thinks he should get things his way because that's what he wants.

Facts have been leaked that Bettman 'asked' Leopold not to sign the agreement and eventually cut of ties with Ballsillie.

If the league can ask an owner like Jeremy Jacobs to be it's Chair, I don't see why a person of Ballsillies wealth and passion should be blackballed.

[eva unit zero 271]

Facts have been leaked that Bettman 'asked' Leopold not to sign the agreement and eventually cut of ties with Ballsillie.

If the league can ask an owner like Jeremy Jacobs to be it's Chair, I don't see why a person of Ballsillies wealth and passion should be blackballed.

The only 'leaked facts' were a statement by Balsillie's camp that Bettman had told Leipold not to sell to him. Hardly worthy of being considered evidence.

As for Balsillie as an owner; he has already demonstrated his unwillingness to operate by BoG rules and bylaws. The BoG is an exclusive club; the existing members have to approve you for you to become a member. Balsillie has put himself at odds with the current members; this means he's likely to never get in. Like how a store is likely to not hire someone with an embezzlement conviction on his record to oversee employee loss prevention. He's demonstrated that he won't obey the rules, so why would the BoG feel he should be included?

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Columbus fans gave themselves a bad name when they decided to boo Yzerman at the NHL draft. It was unclassy and very uncalled for. They have nobody to blame but themselves.

You're joking right? I remember this hullabaloo and it was so blown out of proportion. Anyway, what are you like 5 years old? Did you get your feelings hurt over this or something?

How does booing the division rival captain make you a small market team? How does booing Yzerman mean you aren't a viable hockey city or that the team should be contracted?

Should the Wings have been contracted for booing arguably the greatest American born defenseman in Chris Chelios everytime he stepped on Joe Louis ice?

I don't sugarcoat things for people and I ain't gonna do it for you. Your response to my questioning you about contracting Columbus is that Columbus fans have no class??? That is the most absurd response imaginable. If you want to discuss that situation then we can. But this is about contraction and why you name columbus as a city to contract. You don't have a good reason for it other than a personal bias because they booed Stevie. You failed to address anything I said. Like I pointed out, people who want to contract Columbus don't know a puck from their butthole. When the best argument for contraction you can come up with is that they booed Yzerman at the draft, I think you need to spend less time on here and more time studying for your Geography test on Friday.

Edited September 18, 2007 by GordieSid&Ted

[HenryMalredo 2]

Exactly!

Just as Balsillie was about to purchase the Pens (of course with the intentions of moving) new stipulations were added to the contract that would keep them in Pittsburgh for many years...This of course isn't what Balsillie wanted, & any smart businessman would walk away from it.

Leiplod was ready to sell; Balsillie proved once again that he had everything lined-up for a team for the 2008/2009 season...Then Bettman notified Leipold via email to stop negotiations with Balsillie; once negotiations ceased then Balsillie realised that Bettman was running the show, & more or less made Leipold sell the team for $50 million less to a group of businessmen which just happened to include an individual by the name of William "Boots'' Del Biaggio III - ya know - the guy who wants to bring a team to KC...I'm certain Bettman has a back-up plan in which he'll allow William "Boots'' Del Biaggio III to purchase the other owners shares of the team within a few years, & then move them to KC.

If I were an owner I'd be seriously pi$$ed off; since when can he dictate how a franchise is run, & to whom an owner may sell/not sell to?...Me thinks Gary B is meddling way too much into the owners affairs, & should get axed!

See my above post concerning the approved sale by the BOG of the Pens to Balsillie...Any owner with any common sense would approve of him in a second!

Bettman doesn't have the power to circumvent the BOG. There is no way that the Balsillie deal was axed without consent from the BOG.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

The only 'leaked facts' were a statement by Balsillie's camp that Bettman had told Leipold not to sell to him. Hardly worthy of being considered evidence.

As for Balsillie as an owner; he has already demonstrated his unwillingness to operate by BoG rules and bylaws. The BoG is an exclusive club; the existing members have to approve you for you to become a member. Balsillie has put himself at odds with the current members; this means he's likely to never get in. Like how a store is likely to not hire someone with an embezzlement conviction on his record to oversee employee loss prevention. He's demonstrated that he won't obey the rules, so why would the BoG feel he should be included?

Why is this a bad thing that Basillie doesn't want to play ball the way it is now? I for one think owners like the dolt in Boston and that asshat in Chicago are ruining hockey. They're tied into Bettman like they need each other to breathe. The league needs owners that want to shake things up. The league needs an owner like a Mark Cuban to say," hey this is horses***."

So Basillie didn't get his team. What does that leave us with? The same old Nashville team (albeit a shell of its former self having rid itself of most of its top end talent) being kept on life support only after Nashville folks had to drop everything and focus all their energy on saving a dying franchise. The market blows and we wouldn't be talking about this if it didn't. They can't make money, the are a drain on the other teams like Detroit and I for one would've welcomed the change.

PS: Didn't Basillie not want to sign it because there was no guarantee he'd be able to move the team? s***, I don't blame the guy. Would you buy something if the guy selling it told you he's losing like 15 mil a year on it and you weren't given any guarantee you could move the team to where you wanted to? F that is what i'd say. Basillie was smart not to get out of this. For all he knows, he signs the thing, the board approves and they don't let him move the team or some other stipulation forces him to stay in Nashville. I'd be going postal on somebody.

Edited September 18, 2007 by GordieSid&Ted

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

That's what any level-headed individual would think...But why in the world would Leipold/Balsillie lie about this intrusion by Bettman - what would they gain? What would the league as a whole gain for having a franchise losing $$$ on a yearly basis? A team in Hamilton owned by Balsillie makes all the economic sense in the world. Both Leipold/Balsillie had $$$ figures being ironed out when the emails from Bettman to Leipold started to arrive...That's when negotiations broke off, & Leipold more or less had no choice but to sell the team to the locals for far less $$$...Doesn't seem to make any sense to me - other than the fact that Bettman intervened, & more or less axed the sale.

IMHO the team is ripe for being bought out by partial owner William "Boots'' Del Biaggio III, & moved to his new arena in KC within a few years ...I'm certain Bettman wants it this way.

You are probably right. I don't know the motivation but selling for 50 mil less would piss me the hell off if i was a part owner or whatever. This all boiled down to Gary and the old boys club weren't gonna give him a 100% guarantee he could move this crap franchise so Basillie said to hell with that, we do it my way or no way. I'd do the same thing. You'd be fool to go through with that purchase. Which makes your hypothesis sound even more convincing. Selling to Boots for 50 mil less, to cover some of the losses he's bound to incur while he has to stick around that s***ty market. Sounds plausible to me.

[drwscc 212]

So, if you're the seller in that situation, and someone e-mails you and says "Hey, don't sell the team to this guy. Instead, sell it for a bunch less to someone else who may or may not materialize," you'd cancel the sale? Bettman doesn't have that much power.

Ballsack's camp is lying to make him look better for walking away. Does he really look good for saying "Well, I couldn't litigate my way to what I wanted, so I gave up." I think not.

[drwscc 212]

I don't think Bettman had anything to do with Balsille pulling out. I think that Balsille figured out that he wasn't going to just be able to throw money at any hurdles and make them go away like he's used to, so he didn't want to play anymore.

The BoG is an exclusive club that has to approve you as a member, as others have said on here. The best way to get them to accept you is to *demand* that they treat you as an exception to the rules, and get pissy when they won't. The BoG told him, "We need to approve you as the owner of the team. THEN we can vote on whether or not you can relocate the team." Balsille didn't like that (and I can't say I blame him) so he pulled out. End of story.

Back on topic:

As for expansion, we don't need it. It won't help anything to expand, and the Wings will *never* move to the Eastern Conference (thank God) so there's not really a point. KC would be a terrible market, Los Vegas should be avoided at all costs (head coach Janet Gretzky anyone?) The 'Peg has already demonstrated they won't support a team, so I don't see the point of expanding there either.

[Curban915 0]

Hell give every major city that wants a hockey team a team and be done with it so the league can be done with in a year or 2.

[Bluedevils_13 0]

Do people ever put any actual thought into the idea of contraction? I swear, did you even look at any figures to decide on who to contract or did you just decide based on win-loss record or which teams/cities you don't like?

WTF, contract Columbus? That doesn't even make no sense, it makes negative sense if you look at any useful statistics like payroll, attendance, etc...

What is your definition of a small market team exactly? I'd love to know what figures you are using to establish this criteria of "small market".

If you did some research you would change some of those teams you have listed their, starting with Columbus.

Thank you! I totally agree, I have been to many Jackets games and it really is a good hockey market, and the numbers do show that. Ecspecially for having such a lousy team for so long.......

[Hank 0]

Thank you! I totally agree, I have been to many Jackets games and it really is a good hockey market, and the numbers do show that. Ecspecially for having such a lousy team for so long.......

I can 2nd this. My wife and I have been to two Cbus games and both were sold out by loud, passionate fans.

It's a good hockey market.

If there were to be contraction it should be for teams that have proven to lose money and struggle due to poor attendance and an apathetic fanbase.

The minute situations arrive like the Preds fiasco, the thought of contraction should cross the owners mind. But that will never happen. The league will continue to grow as more and more teams are placed into non-traditional markets hoping to slam the sport down the US's throat.

You could put an NHL team in every city in the States and it's not going to make Juan Valdez in New Mexico watch the game anymore than he is now.