ddaryl Posted February 19, 2013 Report Posted February 19, 2013 "Better" if you never want the Sabres to make the playoffs again. Also pretty sure the NY/NJ teams won't like losing their traditional rivals so that they can play with four non-hockey markets. if you can't win in the best division then you are not a champion.
apuszczalowski Posted February 19, 2013 Report Posted February 19, 2013 Problem with the lottery conference/division alignment (which they more or less went with when the Caps and Scouts came into the league) is they'd be significantly increasing their overall (travel) costs and would probably be reducing revenues as well as there is no particular reason for a fan in Baaah-ston to care about seeing the Yotes or Blues in Bean-town 3 or 4 times / year and a lot of televised games are now shown outside of primetime when the 6-8 games between a PST and an EST based team are played. True, my reasoning for the lottery is that atleast this way, any additional travel is randomly done. With the proposed re-alignment, theres alot more travel for Montreal and Ottawa to have to go down to Florida, compared tot eh teams in the other group that only have to go down to Carolina. That group get way less travel then the other.Unless of course they are expecting Florida and Tampa to relocate soon to Quebec and Hartford/Markham which would let them keep the same realignment after the move (Phoenix goes to Seattle leaving that group the same too)
Taro T Posted February 20, 2013 Report Posted February 20, 2013 True, my reasoning for the lottery is that atleast this way, any additional travel is randomly done. With the proposed re-alignment, theres alot more travel for Montreal and Ottawa to have to go down to Florida, compared tot eh teams in the other group that only have to go down to Carolina. That group get way less travel then the other. Unless of course they are expecting Florida and Tampa to relocate soon to Quebec and Hartford/Markham which would let them keep the same realignment after the move (Phoenix goes to Seattle leaving that group the same too) :lol: Eh, that would mean they're thinking ahead. Not sure if I can recall the last time they did that.
Doohicksie Posted February 20, 2013 Report Posted February 20, 2013 Q: So how does a Seattle expansion team fit into any of these scenarios? A: Worse than Winnipeg currently does in the Eastern Conference.
Eleven Posted February 20, 2013 Report Posted February 20, 2013 I think the Sabres could do really well in a division with Abbotsford, Lake Erie, Rochester, and Hamilton. The Marlies might prove to be a bit much, though.
IKnowPhysics Posted February 20, 2013 Report Posted February 20, 2013 Q: So how does a Seattle expansion team fit into any of these scenarios? In the NHL's proposed alignment, I would expect: 1) If Phoenix moves to Seattle, nothing changes. 2) If the league expands into Seattle (or Las Vegas, ugh), Colorado gets kicked to the Central Division and Detroit or Columbus moves eastward, unless Phoenix moves first out of the Pacific first. 3) Any team in Markham/Hamilton/QC team goes into the NE division. 4) Any team in KC team adds to Central and kicks Detroit or Columbus eastward.
Samson's Flow Posted February 20, 2013 Report Posted February 20, 2013 I think the Sabres could do really well in a division with Abbotsford, Lake Erie, Rochester, and Hamilton. The Marlies might prove to be a bit much, though. Doesn't Lake Erie have that phenom kid Connor McDavid? I don't know if we can handle him even at 16... edit: Quick google search indicates that there are two "Erie" teams and the kid is in the OHL's Erie Otters http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschool-prep-rally/reebok-signs-15-old-hockey-phenom-huge-endorsement-195109711.html
nobody Posted February 24, 2013 Report Posted February 24, 2013 Latest plan may have Detroit in the division with the Sabres. http://m.si.com/1889432/is-this-what-nhl-realignment-will-look-like/cfaef6da/
darksabre Posted February 24, 2013 Report Posted February 24, 2013 That could get ugly since the girlfriend is a Wings fan. :unsure:
IKnowPhysics Posted February 25, 2013 Report Posted February 25, 2013 The obvious big plus for me is every team seeing every market. In the three years I've lived out here, the Sabres have only been out here in SoCal once (the game against Anaheim last year when Myers fought for the first time, Cody Hodgon played his first game as a Sabre, and Miller made upwards of 43 saves to shut out the Ducks).
apuszczalowski Posted February 25, 2013 Report Posted February 25, 2013 Q: So how does a Seattle expansion team fit into any of these scenarios? A: Worse than Winnipeg currently does in the Eastern Conference. It all depends which team. With all likelyhood being that its Phoenix to move next and Seattle or KC having the best odds right now (do to being further along or already having an arena to play in) they fit right into whats being proposed easily. What makes it really hard is that there are some teams (with big influential owners *Cough* NY, Philly, Boston, etc. *Cough*) that may fight something that really makes sense Geographically because it might remove a current rival from their division so they wouldn't have the same amount of games against each other, or they may have to take one of the lesser draw teams (Florida, TB, etc) in with a few extra games while losing a couple games against a better drawing crowd
zow2 Posted February 25, 2013 Report Posted February 25, 2013 As we sit here today, the Sabres look so unlikely to compete in an 8 team "conference" with Boston, Ottawa, Montreal and now Detroit. Ugh! Florida is pesky and Toronto and Tampa look like they have bright futures. Things just seem to bleak right now.
sabres4life19 Posted February 25, 2013 Report Posted February 25, 2013 http://deadspin.com/5986770/?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
IKnowPhysics Posted February 25, 2013 Report Posted February 25, 2013 4th-5th seed play-in game in the bigger eastern conferences? Interesting.
sabres4life19 Posted February 25, 2013 Report Posted February 25, 2013 4th-5th seed play-in game in the bigger eastern conferences? Interesting. yeah that was an interesting addition i hadnt heard yet
apuszczalowski Posted February 25, 2013 Report Posted February 25, 2013 I think that this will be the precursor to another NHL expansion in a few years to balance the divisions since the league won't contract teams. I think Phoenix goes to Seattle as the only team relocating, with KC and another team in the Central/West of the US given expansion teams to blance the league out geographically and divisionally. Having the unbalacned conferences isn't really fair to all the teams and would most likely make it easier to get in for western teams (since theres less)
Taro T Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 4th-5th seed play-in game in the bigger eastern conferences? Interesting. Me no likey. It's a precursor to having 20 teams in the playoffs. 16 is plenty. Back in the days of the 21 team league, the Snorris suffered with 2 entire teams (out of 6) missing the playoffs when everybody else only had 1 team miss out of 5; considering the entire division usually stunk back then people dealt. I like the idea of going 8 & 8 in the east and feel bad for the Preds as they're getting rooked. As Apus mentioned, this sets up well for expanding the league out towards the west which (theoretically) would increase TV revenues in the next NBC contract.
Trettioåtta Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 Me no likey. It's a precursor to having 20 teams in the playoffs. 16 is plenty. Back in the days of the 21 team league, the Snorris suffered with 2 entire teams (out of 6) missing the playoffs when everybody else only had 1 team miss out of 5; considering the entire division usually stunk back then people dealt. I like the idea of going 8 & 8 in the east and feel bad for the Preds as they're getting rooked. As Apus mentioned, this sets up well for expanding the league out towards the west which (theoretically) would increase TV revenues in the next NBC contract. No I don't think they are moving towards 5 teams per conference in the finals. I think they are just trying to find a way to make it fair until they can expand
Taro T Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 No I don't think they are moving towards 5 teams per conference in the finals. I think they are just trying to find a way to make it fair until they can expand There have been a few teams (the Eulers come to mind immediately) that have been pushing for a 20 team playoff since at least the lost season lockout. Considering additional playoff games mean additional TV revenue, I don't see them dumping 'wildcard' playoff games / series after they've added them for a year or 2; I'd more likely expect them to add them to the other conference once it expands to 16 teams as well.
IKnowPhysics Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 I ... feel bad for the Preds as they're getting rooked. I was curious to know if this was a real screwing or speculation by the writer, because I hadn't heard any issues with it before. I started reading what Preds fans thought about this and so far, I haven't found a many fans that give a ###### if any. Possibly related: Nashville is in the Central Time Zone.
Realist Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 LeBrun's latest:http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/8991414/nhl-realignment-proposal-adds-playoff-wild-cards-drops-league-4-divisions
Doohicksie Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 I think Phoenix goes to Seattle as the only team relocating, with KC and another team in the Central/West of the US given expansion teams to blance the league out geographically and divisionally. Having the unbalacned conferences isn't really fair to all the teams and would most likely make it easier to get in for western teams (since theres less) I wonder if Oklahoma City could swing a team? The OKC Thunder is a good rivalry for the Mavericks. An OKC NHL team would go good with the Stars, and would be a closer trip for the Avs. What to name them, though? Sticking with the weather names, maybe the OKC Sleet. Or OKC Hail.
apuszczalowski Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 I wonder if Oklahoma City could swing a team? The OKC Thunder is a good rivalry for the Mavericks. An OKC NHL team would go good with the Stars, and would be a closer trip for the Avs. What to name them, though? Sticking with the weather names, maybe the OKC Sleet. Or OKC Hail. If their arena could be used for Hockey, and theres someone with the money to buy a team, I'm sure the NHL would love having a team thereThe NHL needs expansion all over the country (especially the south) to get one of those lucrative TV Deals in the US
thewookie1 Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 I just downright despise the new playoff system; its strange and downright confusing.
Doohicksie Posted February 26, 2013 Report Posted February 26, 2013 OKC has the advantage of bringing a new TV market to the league. People from OKC don't have any other hockey team that the natives would naturally root for. Getting them on-board would bring more US TV revenue to the table. That was one of the things that made it attractive to the NBA. (Fort Worth, by way of comparison, has a larger population than OKC but there is no incentive for a major league sport to move/expand there, since the market is already served by other teams- Rangers, Cowboys, Mavericks & Stars.) I just downright despise the new playoff system; its strange and downright confusing. I like it fine. It's actually more fair than a lot of other systems, and is a decent balance between excelling in the division and within the larger conference. I think they should bring back the old conference and division names.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.