73 replies to this topic

[blgillett]

No we have to many teams that can't pull their own weight aka.Coyotes.

[MulesWillFly93]

Just throwing things out here, but it seems to me like if the salary cap wasn't such a hindrance, more of the free agent talent out there wouldn't have such a problem getting signed, and then we wouldn't need more teams.

That said, I think Winnipeg should definitely have a team, whether they get their Jets back from Phoenix or have to start another team.

I'm on the fence about Seattle...it seems like a great environment for hockey, but I have no idea how many people there are actually hockey fans, and their population is kind of small. If they can do a study that shows they have a high proportion of hockey fans in the population, then heck yeah, go for it. Thrashers, anyone?

I think Las Vegas is a big no way. It'll be just like the Coyotes problem. And unlike L.A., Anaheim, and Phoenix, where you have people driving from out of the area to go to games (like me), nobody is going to drive 5 hours to Vegas just to see a hockey game when the majority of people who go there already have a team that's way closer to them. Sure, I suppose they might show up to a game if they're already visiting the city, but that doesn't do much to build a loyal fanbase. I just don't see it. Plus, I could be totally wrong about this, but my impression is that Las Vegas doesn't get as many snowbirds as Phoenix does. So while you have a bunch of Northern hockey fans in Phoenix looking for a fix who might break down and go to Yotes games, I don't think the same would happen on such a widespread basis in Vegas.

[jollymania]

no way

[NomadFromKazoo]

No we have to many teams that can't pull their own weight aka.Coyotes.

That's the problem, not the availability of talent, the availability of viable sites. They can't compete and they're driving the Cap down because they don't generate the revenue to compete.

[HankthaTank]

That's the problem, not the availability of talent, the availability of viable sites. They can't compete and they're driving the Cap down because they don't generate the revenue to compete.

^ This times 3 billion. The competition has been great recently but its the cities that couldn't tell a puck from a hostess king dong that need to go. More Canadian teams please.

[Shady Ultima]

I'm on the fence about Seattle...it seems like a great environment for hockey, but I have no idea how many people there are actually hockey fans, and their population is kind of small. If they can do a study that shows they have a high proportion of hockey fans in the population, then heck yeah, go for it. Thrashers, anyone?

They're HUGE hockey fans. I lived in Vancouver for some time, and it was insane to see the number of Washington and Oregon license plates there, and a lot of them were at the Canucks stadium. I realize that Washington is more than just Seattle, but one team in that state, probably closer to the border of Washington/Oregon would do very, very well.

Not to mention, a friend of my wife's lives in L.A, and a lot of people from Washington/Oregon also come to see the Kings play... most of the time, more people from Washington/Oregon are there then people from California. Which makes the decision harder. If you put a team in Seattle or Portland... the Kings will lose a LOT of fans.

Edited by Shady Ultima, 13 August 2010 - 01:57 PM.

[MulesWillFly93]

They're HUGE hockey fans. I lived in Vancouver for some time, and it was insane to see the number of Washington and Oregon license plates there, and a lot of them were at the Canucks stadium. I realize that Washington is more than just Seattle, but one team in that state, probably closer to the border of Washington/Oregon would do very, very well.

Not to mention, a friend of my wife's lives in L.A, and a lot of people from Washington/Oregon also come to see the Kings play... most of the time, more people from Washington/Oregon are there then people from California. Which makes the decision harder. If you put a team in Seattle or Portland... the Kings will lose a LOT of fans.

Sweet! Then I'm all for it. It seemed to me like there ought to be lots of hockey fans in WA/OR, but I'd never met anyone from there, so I wasn't sure.

Do you mean people drive down JUST for a game? Or is it more snowbirds who are already in the area for the winter (and there are definitely a lot of those)? If it's just for the game, those are some dedicated hockey fans! If it's the snowbird effect, I hope maybe they'll keep going to Kings games just because they're there, but you never know...give WA a hockey team, and maybe people won't be so hot to be Kings fans anymore. Hmm, interesting side effect, either way.

[luvmnger]

my personal fix for the league....

franchise bred players cost 50% of cap hit to salary...1 mil. player hits cap 500K

#1 draft pick goes to first team NOT in playoffs. (this will drive the win every game theme and no one gets the "we suck" award of a prime time player.

more across conference games... less inter division.

shrink season to 70 games, spread out season ( non-hockey fans need time to digest the game before the next one)

move Atlanta...Florida...Phoenix...

open up shops in Vegas..Quebec/Toronto...Seattle....Winnipeg...Hartford

divide the league north/south

use the Bud Light advertising team to help market hockey faces in humorous commercials.

latch on to Hollywood types that love hockey to help promote the sports passion.

same for music, lots of musicians love the NHL but are quiet about it.


lynch Bettman! Shanahan for commissioner!

please get someone in the NHLPA that can keep the peace.

fire mccrimmon and assign chelios to defensive coach.

1 mandatory mullet per team! (just checking if your still reading)

that's my take on the world of hockey!

[henrik40]

I'd be okay with expansion if they expand to the right markets. They need to move struggling teams from crap markets that they keep trying to force down people's throats. People in the south couldn't care less if they lost their team. I mean I'm sure there would be some who would be upset but the majority aren't going to care and the proof that people don't care is there.

[betterREDthandead]

They're HUGE hockey fans. I lived in Vancouver for some time, and it was insane to see the number of Washington and Oregon license plates there, and a lot of them were at the Canucks stadium. I realize that Washington is more than just Seattle, but one team in that state, probably closer to the border of Washington/Oregon would do very, very well.

Not to mention, a friend of my wife's lives in L.A, and a lot of people from Washington/Oregon also come to see the Kings play... most of the time, more people from Washington/Oregon are there then people from California. Which makes the decision harder. If you put a team in Seattle or Portland... the Kings will lose a LOT of fans.

I lived in Washington for a little while.....I don't think it's quite the hockey market you describe. I didn't see the fanaticism. It probably wouldn't be too bad, certainly an improvement over a few existing markets, but "insane" wouldn't describe it.

[Nhurdi]

I think we have enough teams currently in the league. After reading your post twice I have a few thoughts of my own to add.

I think alot of GM's have inadvertently priced themselves out of competition. Meaning they signed people and before they knew it they were to close to the cap to sign anyone but bargain basement. Hopefully after some time they will get used to it and things will balance out but i'm not holding my breath. Wishful though.

I think alot of players perhaps over value themselves. They see one player with a similar skill set, point totals and just cause that one player was given perhaps too much by a GM some place they assume they are worth that as well. This may be great for that player, but not for the team as it leaves the team short to sign other quality players.

Then you got the rookies, awesome if you can get some on your team that are NHL ready. In the cap crunch perhaps some teams are more willing to let younger guys play to save on the cap.

Right now there are two types of players that seem to be benefiting from the salary cap in my eyes. Those are the star players that command 6 million plus to play in the league. Then there is the under million club, basically any player that is willing to take 1 mill or less to play. The players in the middle are perhaps not deemed important enough for GM's to budget around or simply casualties of bad cap planning. For the player, they sometimes often think they are worth more than they are. Thus pricing themselves out of a job for most teams in a cap world. It's not that teams don't want players like Afinogenov it's just they simply can't pay him what he wants due to a cap. Thus limiting his options.

As for extra teams, I already mentioned I wouldn't want more. I simply think they should solve the issue with some of the teams in the current locations they are at. Over time we will loose some players, gain some but once gm's learn from their mistakes, players sit from over pricing themselves or leave to the KHL then I think it should hopefully improve.

[McAwesome]

I think the league could support as many as 32 franchises, but they have to explore moving teams out of struggling markets BEFORE they consider expansion. As many on here have said, and I agree 100%, teams should be moved from Phoenix, Atlanta, Florida, Nashville, and put them in Winnipeg, Quebec, etc. where the fanbase will support them until corporate sponsors can be found.

I also think that the NHL should be trying markets such as Kansas City, Seattle, SLC, where junior and youth hockey are strong and the league can draw upon the existing grassroots efforts and generate real interest in a potential franchise (besides, if you moved a team from the east to any of these cities, then Detroit could be moved to the Eastern Conference where they would dominate )

Bottom line, I agree with the OP that there is enough of a talent pool to support expansion, but I also think that the league has to cut their losses and get teams out of struggling markets and improve the financial position of the league as a whole before they should think about taking on any more franchises.

[Shady Ultima]

I lived in Washington for a little while.....I don't think it's quite the hockey market you describe. I didn't see the fanaticism. It probably wouldn't be too bad, certainly an improvement over a few existing markets, but "insane" wouldn't describe it.

Well, I've never lived in Washington, my post was simply referring to the number of Washington license plates at Canucks games.

[CaliWingsNut]

We have teams now that can barely afford to pay their players, and you guys are talking expansion?!?!?! WTF?

This is a professional sport. Only the best of the best play, and if they get kicked off a team, tough s***.

I'm sorry some player you like can't find a spot.

[zata40]

I think there should be another expansion, but lets wait 15 years. At the most 2 teams should be added at once to keep competitive.

[redwings1914]

Take for example Hossa. It took him several tries in Pittsburgh and Detroit before he found a team that would give him a long-term contract with a nice salary.

Hossa had multiple long term offers from Pittsburgh and a huge offer from Edmonton in the range of 90 million and instead signed with the Wings just to get a cup

[Datsyerberger]

The league is due for an expansion of two more teams. Aside from 32 teams being a much more desirable number for a number of scheduling and divisional reasons, the talent pool of developing youth, both in Europe and North America, has greatly expanded. There's investment opportunity out there (see: number of investors that were at one point in line for a hockey team even in a crappy location, aka Phoenix), and there's certainly talent. In fact, I'd imagine you'd see less skilled players, Russians included, going to the KHL and other leagues; the addition of two extra teams would allow them to get paid more.

On top of that, if both teams were in the West (Pick 2 of: Seattle, Winnipeg, Vegas, Kansas City, Houston), then the Wings could finally be moved to the East where they belong

Edit: I know some people are going to ask "Why did you mention 'x' city?" Here's why:

Kansas City: Preexisting arena; rivalry potential with Blues; close to relocation there before

Vegas: Feed off tourism

Seattle: Northwest seems a logical destination for expanding the game both business-wise and in popularity/player development. It gets, you know, cold there.

Winnipeg: No explanation needed, I hope

Houston: Largest hockey market (AHL) without an NHL team. Old and longstanding tradition of having an AHL team there and a hockey following.. oddly enough. I look at Houston's AHL success as an example of what can happen in the south if given both enough time AND competent management (something many of the southern expansion teams have not had).

Edited by Datsyerberger, 13 August 2010 - 07:16 PM.

[pvilleguru]

absolutely. there should be one in alabama.

yes, i'm being very selfish.

[GMRwings1983]

The league needs to contract some teams, and not expand.

Everyone is jumping to the KHL post lockout because the salaries players were getting before aren't as widely available now. Now it's only 2 or 3 players on every team taking up about 50% of the salary for the team. The rest of the role players (the ones jumping to the KHL), don't get paid as much.

That's why all these jobbers jump to the KHL, and not because there's not enough team. Blame the salary cap.

[IceMunkee]

Out of work players just means they were not good enough anymore. I think the league could use two teams less. The cap has really leveled out the league as far as distribution of skill and it will continue to do so. No more teams!!!