EHM The Blue Line

No I don't complain for me, I only watch western games when I'm off from work. I think it can sucks for some people though. The wild card is weird too, that looks too much like baseball to me.

@Danny, I was just kidding you and by the way, since when you stopped kidding me about being an Habs fan?

Nah he is sarcastically ranting at you there Philou. He knows you are a Habs fan.

And yes I understand Danny....you are old like me. No seriously...change to balance things is not necessarily the right motivation in some cases...but in this case I actually believe it is correct. Winnipeg needs to be in the west. Detoilet needs to be in the east.....and then you have to leave room in the west as that is where expansion should be (Although they will likely let Q City in as expansion) IF THEY FOOLISHLY EXPAND.

I actually just looking at the 4 conferences like the changes. They are more natural to hockey for me. With the exception of Chicago not having and Original 6 team in their conference...the rivalry situation is good and strong in these conferences. I DO NOT GET THE WILD CARD THING EITHER. Weird money grab to me.

philou21 wrote:No I don't complain for me, I only watch western games when I'm off from work. I think it can sucks for some people though. The wild card is weird too, that looks too much like baseball to me.

@Danny, I was just kidding you and by the way, since when you stopped kidding me about being an Habs fan?

I know philou, I just don't get the complaints about a 10 pm start in general even if you have to work in the morning. Maybe it's a cultural thing. Most people here don't go to bed before 12-1 anyway even if they have to get up early in the morning. A lot of sporting events don't start before 9-10

Winnipeg needs to be in the west. Detoilet needs to be in the east.....and then you have to leave room in the west as that is where expansion should be (Although they will likely let Q City in as expansion) IF THEY FOOLISHLY EXPAND.

Don't disagree with that. Oh, and it's not "IF", it's "WHEN". I'd bet a considerable amount of money there will be 32 teams by 2017-18 at the latest. And oh boy am I ever gonna rant about that here.

Some people told that Qc City is a goner with that new divisions things because they want to make 16-16 on each side. I still don't know about that. What if Columbus goes to Qc City or even the Panthers?

Don't know, isn't expansion fee higher than relocation fee ? So ideally they would not like to relocate anyone to the GTA or QC. Or was it the other way round ?

I don't know either, I'm just guessing. Anything can happen, for better or worse. SPOILER: It will probably be for worst.

I'm not such a fan of this proposal at all. I'm a Blackhawk supporter and I think we get particularly scr........... As someone pointed out, no Original 6 team in the conference, no particularly great rivalry (with the departure of Detroit). The only positive that I can see is an essentially guaranteed playoff spot every season as the other teams in the Div won't offer that much competition! (that may be a ridiculously biased opinion! haha).

I don't quite get the need for the Wild Card entries into the playoffs either. I really like the structure of it now.

As for expansion, well, there really is only 1 team that is going to move - Phoenix. Florida and Columbus, I feel, are safe for a little while. And, based on the restructure, the only place PHX could move to and keep the Divisions even is Seattle. That ensures the smae amount of teams in each divison in that Conf. Sorry GTA and QC!

Blackhawks will have tons of fun in their division. NYR--the team everyone says is favored by the league, does not have Original 6 team either. 4 in one conference. That is super cool in my opinion. Great for TV ratings in both countries. And that guaranteed spot may only be short term. Teams can only suck for so long.......right?????

Wild card thing is just extra revenue. To appease those who realize that 4/8 is harder to make it than 4/7.

But this is likely much ado about nothing. There is a split in the fan base about it....and that means there is a split in ownership and players about it....so chances are it will not happen. I would say 60-40 it does not happen.

batdad wrote:Teams can only suck for so long.......right?????

How long have the Leafs sucked for now?

Exception that proves the rule?? And they only suck after the season starts...and not so much this year. Off season you would think they were the best team ever.

batdad wrote:IF LA can win the cup so can any Western team.

This really isn't an issue. The West has been the far better conference now for some time. The West hasn't had the NYI, Leafs, ThrasherJets, Panthers, etc dragging down the curve, for one. But I see evidence that the west's travel plays a role in helping them often come playoff time.

I say it every year around playoff times and it's still true: Since 2000 when NJ won it in 6 games no Eastern Conference team has won the Cup in less than 7 games. Since 2000, Western teams have won the Cup in less than 7 games 5 times and counting, including twice in 5 games. IMO when Eastern teams win the Cup they have to wear down the Western team, which is tough because of how battle-tested they already are from the previous 3 rounds. There's also the fact that the East has the superstars, but the West traditionally has more depth.

As for the "But East Coast games start at 4:30p on the West Coast" argument.... please. I'll respond with what I've responded for years: Yes, but the end of the game (what really matters) is then at 7p, 7:30p. For a easterner watching a west coast game, then end of the game is at 1a, 1:30a. Really think about that westerners: would you stay up regularly until 1am to watch the end of a game in regulation (later if you go OT)?

I think moving DET and CBS really are about the fanbases (though for different reasons). CBS may be being primed to moved to Toronto/Quebec City in the near future. Or possibly another stab at Atlanta even.

And BTW BatDad, Calgary does not make money hand over fist. Just ask them. They sell out every game, sell a lot of merch, and somehow their ownership claims financial losses (CGY was one of the Hawks during the lockout, alongside BOS/Jacobs). IMO they, along with Edmonton, need to both be reevaluated. Just because they are Canadian markets doesn't mean they are good ones if owners are going to constantly complain about losing money.


As for the playoff setup.... meh. At some point more teams are going to make it, so owners can get 1 or 2 more home games without having to pay the players and make some money. It's inevitable. More than anything I'd like to see the Division winners being guaranteed a top 3 seed thing go away, and this would kinda' do that.

The KHL has an interesting idea with a sort of consolation tourney. I believe the "winner" of the bracket of teams that miss the playoffs gets the first overall pick in the junior draft. The NHL would be well-served to have something like this IMHO: have the consolation bracket winner get the best odds in the draft lottery. You wouldn't even need to include all the non-playoff teams, maybe just the first 4 overall (regardless of conference) that miss the playoffs could do round-robin, and then a Best of 3 short bracket. It gets those teams some extra games (and that "free" home gate revenue for not having to pay the players) and rewards them for at least TRYING to make the playoffs or playing well enough to come close.

I say it every year around playoff times and it's still true: Since 2000 when NJ won it in 6 games no Eastern Conference team has won the Cup in less than 7 games. Since 2000, Western teams have won the Cup in less than 7 games 5 times and counting, including twice in 5 games. IMO when Eastern teams win the Cup they have to wear down the Western team, which is tough because of how battle-tested they already are from the previous 3 rounds. There's also the fact that the East has the superstars, but the West traditionally has more depth.

1. West has traditionally more depth? What has this to do with anything giving an advantage or disadvantage? I would say not so much the case of having anything to do with the argument. That is just management decision making, and any team can do so.

2. Battle tested an advantage? Right....not. Beating the living daylights out of each other to get there does not help, it hurts. .Backwards logic you have there. The more banging and crashing...the more pain, injury, weariness...etc.

3. Even if true it is a testament to the management of the Western clubs that you speak of outdoing the management of the Eastern clubs.

4. It in the last few years has been way more difficult a road for the western teams than the east just to get to the finals. With the exception of 1 or 2 clubs in the east (Pit, Phi) the style the eastern teams play allows them to have rested/uninjured and unhurt players more often than the West.

If the west smokes the east it is because of management....not anything to do with anything else. More travel is an advantage? No. Not. Get on a plane and fly like the Canucks do for even just one week....and you will see how you feel.

Again...not something the west should use an excuse, but it is an element in their planning more so than in the east. Which explains the depth they acquire and supposedly have more of (Although I do not necessarily agree they do).

Calgary makes money hand over fist. They do. 2008 44.8 million in gate. That is 4th among Canadian teams (above Edmonton, below the bigger cities). They just don't spend the $ they make well, and that causes them their issues if there are any. 12th highest ranked in terms of value franchise. And they are a small city in comparison to many. They are hawks in lockout not because of money, but because their owners have been known to be that type of owner. However...they are not like Jeremy Jacobs and the like. Harley Hotchkiss has been one of THE MOST RESPECTED B0G types by the players and has been (in the past) the guy who was most likely of the hard core owner people to compromise. Players like him and what he says and does.
Plus that hard core stuff has nothing to do with how much money the team makes. All Canadian teams make money hand over fist. They have expenses that hurt them in some cases. But they just do make $ hand over fist. Even when they suck like the Flemmes. If they had half a decent team....raking it in.

Consolation tournament---Pure money grab and pure rubbish. Stupid and silly...losers go out, winners stay in. Forget about this garbage sounds like minor kids sports where the losers should always have the same opportunity as the winner. Blech.

Well speaking of the Flamers and spending money well, O'Reilly offer sheeted by Calgary

Yeah I saw that too! 10 millions for two years. I can't believe and arrogant and self-centered that dumbass is, he can go to hell if you ask me.

batdad wrote:1. West has traditionally more depth? What has this to do with anything giving an advantage or disadvantage? I would say not so much the case of having anything to do with the argument. That is just management decision making, and any team can do so.

Again...not something the west should use an excuse, but it is an element in their planning more so than in the east. Which explains the depth they acquire and supposedly have more of (Although I do not necessarily agree they do).

What?

The Western teams generally don't spend the huge bucks on a single player or two. It's called capgeek, look it up. 7 of the top 10 salaries are in the East... and that's only after the NAS-MIN debacle with Weber's new deal (prompted by an eastern team, Philly) and Minny then losing their mind to sign Parise and Suter (which has worked out, shall we say, poorly). So 7 of the top 10, and 10 of the top 15 are in the East.

Sorry, but in a cap league, having the cap room to sign more depth is a difference. As for your argument that it's "management"... how does that make it any less true? West teams have more depth because they can under the cap, period. And in a grind of a playoff, that depth is an advantage.

And you can't argue with the numbers: the West does better than the East overall in the Cup Finals, despite having to have much more travel.

batdad wrote:Consolation tournament---Pure money grab and pure rubbish. Stupid and silly...losers go out, winners stay in. Forget about this garbage sounds like minor kids sports where the losers should always have the same opportunity as the winner. Blech.

Then you can't complain about the Wild Card concept, because one or the other is going to happen in this modern pro sports climate. It's just the reality. I would personally like limited playoffs to keep them special, but too much money is at stake.

I also loathe the worst of the worst teams getting rewarded with top picks (CHI didn't even try to ice a reasonable team for a few years and got Kane & Toews for their troubles.... PIT did the same and got MA Fleury, Malkin, and Crosby, and then EDM's terrible drafting over the last 20 years has now been rewarded similarly). It's bull. Teams actually trying should be rewarded for doing so. You should not be rewarded for being the absolute worst.

Wow...just wow. Could write a ton to explain where you are so so wrong but ...

Choosing depth vs star player is Strategy. Both work under same cap, and all are free to do whatever they want. Montreal does depth, Buffalo does depth, even Toronto does depth....one could say Philadelphia as well....and Carolina....and Tampa....and BOSTON. And only one of those teams wins. Depth is not necessarily better...just more of a necessity in the west.

Depth is only an advantage when the GM does depth right. Stars in the west getting paid a ton? Chicago...oh yeah...wins. Vancouver....Stanley Cup finalist....nothing to do with Depth vs Star Power theory you have going on. Nothing. just good decision making.

I can complain about the wild card as much as I want. If you finish less than 4th place....you don't deserve to be in. Why? you did not win enough.

COMPETITIVE BALANCE--reason for the draft, and draft lottery being the way it is. It makes sense teams that suck for whatever reason should get a chance to improve themselves. There would be no league if the freaking top teams got all the rights to the new young players. You would have Rangers, Flyers...Leafs...and that is it.

Not sure if you are just arguing for the sake of argument or if you ACTUALLY believe what you say. But it makes zero sense to me. Well almost zero. And your theory is not supported by reality. The teams with stars only and scrubs can choose to lose those players and build a different way....but that is management/owner call. It has ZERO to do with chances of winning a Stanley Cup. A GM ability to get the best players and coaches is what does that...and yeah...all under the same cap for all 30 teams...with the same opportunity to sign or not sign guys

Kadri has his first career NHL hat trick last night as the Leafs beat the Isles 5-4 in OT.

Primis wrote:7 of the top 10 salaries are in the East...

If Ovy, Crosby and Malkin would've been draft by teams from the west it would be the opposite. This has nothing to do with what you're saying IMO.

Primis wrote:I also loathe the worst of the worst teams getting rewarded with top picks (CHI didn't even try to ice a reasonable team for a few years and got Kane & Toews for their troubles.... PIT did the same and got MA Fleury, Malkin, and Crosby, and then EDM's terrible drafting over the last 20 years has now been rewarded similarly). It's bull. Teams actually trying should be rewarded for doing so. You should not be rewarded for being the absolute worst.

What? Every sports is like this since forever, why do you argue about this now? I got difficulty following you right now.

No ... not every sport. Soccer. Oops I mean football.

Some people just want free market everything...and I get that. But the league in this case is the entire market..and I do get what he is saying...but in this case I think the draft system works better. You could do away with an NFL draft because the league is always going to be financially healthy due to TV revenues making small markets big $$. Maybe even in Baseball which has 350000000 rounds in their draft....but not in a FRINGE sport like hockey, where bandwagonners come and go all the time in many many cities. And you need them....without the draft....many many markets (not just the rubbish ones) would suffer and die off.

LOL.Vancouver Canucks claim a player from waivers. The greatest player to play in England this year? Well second best maybe. TOM SESTITO.


LOL for a week on this one.

batdad wrote:LOL.Vancouver Canucks claim a player from waivers. The greatest player to play in England this year? Well second best maybe. TOM SESTITO.


LOL for a week on this one.

Hey, he had 2 goals for the Flyers this year which it more than half the forwards on the Canucks have at this point.
Besides they needed a 4th liner to replace Volpatti

He is the second line centre. By proclamation.

Sedin-Sedin-Burrows
Raymond-Sestito-Hansen
Higgins-Schroeder-Booth
Wiese-Lapierred-Kassian
Pinozotto (LOL)

Stanley Cup here come the Canucks. After they trade Roberto and get the first overall pick a few times. Oh wait....Calgary, Toronto, Columbus might wreck that theory.

Vancouver Canucks...accept your mediocrity.

batdad wrote:LOL.Vancouver Canucks claim a player from waivers. The greatest player to play in England this year? Well second best maybe. TOM SESTITO.


LOL for a week on this one.

darn it if I wasn't working I could've beat you to it! I had a smile too reading the news.

So need Biznasty now.