NHL to discuss expansion

[MacK_Attack 108]

Meanwhile, the owners will also hear from the league on possible expansion Tuesday, with Las Vegas, Kansas City, Seattle and Winnipeg among the cities on the radar.

LaForge said he isn't aware an expansion plan being in the works, but didn't hide his support for one of the cities.

"As it relates to Winnipeg, it's one of the great hockey markets in North America," said LaForge. "The next proposal - if there ever is one - for expansion, it has to be a great hockey market. And Winnipeg passes the great hockey market test."

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/2007/...4504041-cp.html

[Sting 11 0]

No. No, no, no, no, no. Especially not Vegas.

Maybe Winnipeg...but I'd prefer to see an existing team move there, as awful as that sounds. No more teams!

[timothy1997 0]

to expansion. Need to make the NHL better first to the casual fan before talk of expansion. Better tv coverage would definately help.

[GMRwings1983 8,794]

I live in one of these cities, and even I don't want to see NHL expansion. Contraction is another story, and even though it isn't something that I wanted at first, I'm beginning to warm up to the idea that the league would be better off if at least 4 teams were dissolved.

[hockeytown9321 0]

Good news. They will have to add 2 teams to keep things even. All of these possible expansion cities would have to be in the Western Conference, which means 2 current Western teams move East.

[tipetz22 0]

No to expansion!!! Yes to moving another team (to Winnipeg, KC, or maybe Portland). NO TO VEGAS!!!!!!

[Mickeyisms Rule! 0]

Good news. They will have to add 2 teams to keep things even. All of these possible expansion cities would have to be in the Western Conference, which means 2 current Western teams move East.

More like one team moving to the East from the West. Would most likely be Columbus as the league wants to keep us in the West as we are the only perennial powerhouse team.

[auxlepli 17]

I'm more excited aboot the schedule changing next year. Illitch has been telling journalists it will happen without a doubt. So that's good. Anyway I'm all for the idea of expansion, but then I think aboot how bad those teams will be, and how it will dilute talent .... AGAIN .... those facts don't excite me.

[Wings_Dynasty 267]

Here's the deal. There are 3 options.

1. No expansion. Leave the league as it is and work with 30 teams.

2. Cut 6 teams and make the NHL 24 teams in 6 divisions with 4 teams per or 4 divisions with 6 teams per. 8 teams from each conference make the playoffs. My list of the unlucky six: PHX, FLA, NAS, ATL, CBJ, CAR

3. Expand to 32. 8 teams from each conference make the finals (top 2 from each of the 4 divisions or each conference). My picks for expansion: Winnepeg and KC. Both go to West. Wings and Jackets go East.

Edited September 18, 2007 by Wings_Dynasty

[vangvace 12]

of the four... KC and Vegas have the most hype so far. As for the two teams going east... Nashville and Columbus/Dallas.

[Dabura 12,207]

I'm for expansion if it's done practically and intelligently.

But it won't be. Because the world is run by idiots.

[Cicada 4]

i don;t have a problem with adding 2 teams...

move detroit to the east and have 2 x 8 team divisions in each conference..

add say Seattle and Winnipeg...

[timothy1997 0]

2. Cut 6 teams and make the NHL 24 teams in 6 divisions with 4 teams per or 4 divisions with 6 teams per. 8 teams from each conference make the playoffs. My list of the unlucky six: PHX, FLA, NAS, ATL, CBJ, CAR

If we go to 4 divisons, can we bring back the old divison names?? Dying to see the Norris, Smythe, Patrick, and Adams divison names again.

[Guest Yzer19]

You have got to be kidding me. The last thing the NHL needs is expansion. If anything they should move some of the teams that are struggling to these cities, but they shouldn't just add more teams. I would have no problem with the league moving teams like Florida, Tampa Bay, Atlanta, Columbus, Pittsburgh, etc. to one of those other cities.

Edited September 18, 2007 by Yzer19

[Guest LivingtheDream]

This would be awful, but just in case, lets come up with some names. I'll give it a shot

The Las Vegas Show Girls

Kansas City Evolution (joke about how Kansas never accepts evolution, but KC is of course in Missouri so this is completely stupid...).

The Winnipeg Props (Prop, Jet, Prop, Jet, get it?)

The Seattle who the hell cares about that pompous city

[eva unit zero 271]

Seattle and Kansas City should bet the cities selected from that group. Vegas is an iffy decision, and Winnipeg, despite popular misconception, is the only city on that list that does NOT have an arena suitable for the NHL, nor did they ever support the Jets when they were there.

Change the format to eight four-team divisions as follows:

WESTERN CONFERENCE

-Anaheim, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Jose

-Calgary, Edmonton, Seattle, Vancouver

-Chicago, Columbus, Minnesota, Nashville

-Colorado, Dallas, Kansas City, St. Louis

EASTERN CONFERENCE

-Atlanta, Carolina, Florida, Tampa Bay

-Boston, Montreal, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh

-Buffalo, Detroit, Ottawa, Toronto

-New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Washington

Each team could play six per team within the division (18), four per team within the conference (48) and one outside of the conference (16) for a total of 82 games.

[Guest Yzer19]

Didn't Bettman already say that Detroit isn't moving to the Eastern Conference? For some reason I remember reading an article where Bettman said Detroit would stay in the Western Conference because they are such a big draw for other teams in the West or something like that.

[Hank 0]

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/2007/...4504041-cp.html

Awesome! I was just saying to my buddies "you know the NHL is in such good shape, with an overabundance of talent on each team, they should expand!".

[eva unit zero 271]

Awesome! I was just saying to my buddies "you know the NHL is in such good shape, with an overabundance of talent on each team, they should expand!".

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.

[jerm8352 3]

Awesome! I was just saying to my buddies "you know the NHL is in such good shape, with an overabundance of talent on each team, they should expand!".

You hit it on the head there. If anything, they should contract two teams. In fact, I wouldn't be crushed if we went back to 21 teams like in the late 80's early 90's.

[Guest Yzer19]

You hit it on the head there. If anything, they should contract two teams. In fact, I wouldn't be crushed if we went back to 21 teams like in the late 80's early 90's.

Exactly. I'd have no problem with contraction. I wouldn't be crushed if the NHL got rid of small market teams like Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Florida, Tampa Bay, Nashville, Columbus, Atlanta, etc.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Here's the deal. There are 3 options.

1. No expansion. Leave the league as it is and work with 30 teams.

2. Cut 6 teams and make the NHL 24 teams in 6 divisions with 4 teams per or 4 divisions with 6 teams per. 8 teams from each conference make the playoffs. My list of the unlucky six: PHX, FLA, NAS, ATL, CBJ, CAR

3. Expand to 32. 8 teams from each conference make the finals (top 2 from each of the 4 divisions or each conference). My picks for expansion: Winnepeg and KC. Both go to West. Wings and Jackets go East.

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...

Exactly. I'd have no problem with contraction. I wouldn't be crushed if the NHL got rid of small market teams like Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Florida, Tampa Bay, Nashville, Columbus, Atlanta, 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.

[eva unit zero 271]

You hit it on the head there. If anything, they should contract two teams. In fact, I wouldn't be crushed if we went back to 21 teams like in the late 80's early 90's.

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.

[Opie 308]

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.

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)!

[Guest Yzer19]

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.

Those were the teams that NHL referred to as small markets during the lockout.