Are current expansion rules too beneficial?

[RickyLafleur]

So the league having made mistakes in the past obligates them to continue making them in the future? That’s a ludicrous position.

Yeah, that's exactly what I said. You sure got me.

 

[Curufinwe]

Watching how we (ducks)managed the Vegas draft, it’s hard to blame the rules, we made a mistake that helped Vegas succeed

So did Minnesota and Florida.

 

[KingsFan7824]

The cap changed everything about expansion drafts. Established teams wanted Vegas and Sea to have to take a certain %, so that established teams could get out of their own contract messes. Then teams that had really backed themselves into a cap corner got taken advantage of. Cry me a river on that one though.

Sorry Clb, Min, SJ, and Ott, but you guys came in with no cap. Should've waited a little longer for your teams I guess.

Or, come around back in 1967, when a Bettman-less led NHL literally guaranteed 1 of 6 expansion teams, regardless of how crappy it was, a spot in the Final. To "grow the game" in non-traditional markets. Again, Uncle Gary was 15 years old when the NHL did that.

 

[ichbinkanadier]

100% agree. I think early success leads to better long term growth for the team and the league. Now they just need to move Arizona to Houston and all 32 teams should be financially sound.

Not Houston, Austin.

 

[ichbinkanadier]

That's great but when the odds are stacked against you, it isn't simply on ownership and management. Personally, I'm all for ditching the hard cap and eliminate revenue sharing. Sink or swim time/

How are the odds stacked against them?

 

[ichbinkanadier]

It's kind of remarkable, when you think about it, but the Leafs have actually managed to *twice* surrender a 40-goal scorer for absolutely nothing during Expansion.

In 1992, the Tampa Bay Lightning claimed Brian Bradley from the Toronto Maple Leafs. Bradley led the Bolts in scoring with 42-goals and 86 points during their inaugural season.

Then the Leafs of course gave up Jared McCann and he just scored 40-goals for the Kraken this year. McCann's 70 points this year saw him lead the team in scoring.

Bradley was a one hit wonder, total fluke. So they didn't lose much there.

McCann: time will tell.

The cap changed everything about expansion drafts. Established teams wanted Vegas and Sea to have to take a certain %, so that established teams could get out of their own contract messes. Then teams that had really backed themselves into a cap corner got taken advantage of. Cry me a river on that one though.

Sorry Clb, Min, SJ, and Ott, but you guys came in with no cap. Should've waited a little longer for your teams I guess.

Or, come around back in 1967, when a Bettman-less led NHL literally guaranteed 1 of 6 expansion teams, regardless of how crappy it was, a spot in the Final. To "grow the game" in non-traditional markets. Again, Uncle Gary was 15 years old when the NHL did that.

Ottawa became competitive fairly quickly. By '97 they were becoming a competitive team and went on a ten year run of competitive hockey. Goaltending was their Achilles heel as well as Jacques Martin who was a great regular season recod coach but a shitty playoff coach

 

[Gnashville]

No tax rules are more beneficial.

A no tax team will be in the final every year since 2019….
It could be a no tax final for the 2nd time in 4 years.

There are what 6 no tax markets?

Vegas final 4 twice cup final
Tampa 2 cups and a final
Florida presidents trophy and final 4
Nashville. Presidents trophy and final
Dallas. Final and final 4
Seattle game 7 second round.

The last 7 cups will have at least 1 no tax teams

Elect better government instead of demanding the NHL fix things for you

 

[ChaosAgent]

The middle class of NHLers is filled with high potential types who haven't gotten the right opportunities on top lines and especially powerplays to juice their stats. The player pool is more equal than ever. Throw in full cap space and a high initial pick. Good combo.

 

[ponder719]

Yeah, that's exactly what I said. You sure got me.

If you can see another reason why "because previous expansion teams got hosed" is a reason why it's bad for expansion teams to be reasonably competitive on day one, I'd be willing to hear it, but absent that, this just sounds like "my team got it in the shorts, so the league shouldn't improve on that bad process in the future."

 

[VivaLasVegas]

If you can see another reason why "because previous expansion teams got hosed" is a reason why it's bad for expansion teams to be reasonably competitive on day one, I'd be willing to hear it, but absent that, this just sounds like "my team got it in the shorts, so the league shouldn't improve on that bad process in the future."

Exactly. Success by expansion teams shines the light on fundamentally flawed organizations that are stuck in perpetual "rebuild".

 

[Legion34]

Elect better government instead of demanding the NHL fix things for you

Like…. Instituting a cap?

You do get the irony of that right?
Get better fans instead of demanding the NHL fix things for you

Small market teams demanded the NHL fix things and then refuse to recognize the unfair advantage they were given

 

[FerrisRox]

Bradley was a one hit wonder, total fluke. So they didn't lose much there.

McCann: time will tell.

What are you talking about? Brian Bradley led the Lightning in scoring their first four seasons.

 

[ichbinkanadier]

What are you talking about? Brian Bradley led the Lightning in scoring their first four seasons.

But he wasn't hitting even the 30 goal mark nevermind the 40 goal mark.

 

[Help]

it is unfair that [my team] must bear the cap burden of [poor decision X, Y, Z] while [expansion franchise, composed of every team's 11th best skater] gets off Scot-free. i think we need to pool the caphits of all Bad Deals (selected entirely arbitrarily), and issue a share of that bad cap to the new expansion franchises!

Ha ha, nah, I'm just playing

 

[FerrisRox]

But he wasn't hitting even the 30 goal mark nevermind the 40 goal mark.

So because he wasn't scoring 40-goals, the Leafs don't care that they gave away, for nothing, a high scoring forward?

Bradley had 79 points for the Lightning in 95-96. That would have slotted him ahead of Doug Gilmour on the Leafs that year. I'm pretty sure he would have been a useful piece for the team I don't see how they "didn't lose much there" nor do I understand how he's a "fluke" or a "one hit wonder."

 

[MessierII]

I just think cap space is so valuable. More so than any other asset in the nhl.

 

[Soundgarden]

Nashville took Richter & co. intentionally because they would receive entry draft picks for the following year in compensation if they didn't sign. They then drafted Alex Auld, Adam Hall, Andrew Hutchinson, Ján Lašák, and Alexander Krevsun with those picks. Unfortunately the 1999 draft was very weak, but overall the strategy was sensible.

Yes, this is also how Nashville got the Weber pick, by trading for Ed Belfour at the end of the '02 season.

 

[JeffreyLFC]

Absolutely not. People were laughing at the team Seattle built

I like your avatar

 

[Three On Zero]

I like your avatar

Imposter!

 

[Kevinsane]

One could get alcohol poisoning from all the sour grapes in this thread.
Both Vegas and Seattle were preseason laughingstocks their inaugural seasons. We all know what the Golden Knights did. The Kraken, though, retained that derisive tag going into this year.
The only thing this thread “proves” is that many posting are no better at assessing talent than the GMs who let it get away.
NOBODY thought the expansion rules were too beneficial until they saw their teams beaten.

 

[ichbinkanadier]

So because he wasn't scoring 40-goals, the Leafs don't care that they gave away, for nothing, a high scoring forward?

Bradley had 79 points for the Lightning in 95-96. That would have slotted him ahead of Doug Gilmour on the Leafs that year. I'm pretty sure he would have been a useful piece for the team I don't see how they "didn't lose much there" nor do I understand how he's a "fluke" or a "one hit wonder."

He could have been useful sure, but the initial point made about him was he scored 42 goals, as if he became a high scoring centre from that point on.

Even his point totals make him a second line centre on a good team. If Brian Bradley was your number one centre, you knew you weren't going anywhere

 

[CashMash]

One could get alcohol poisoning from all the sour grapes in this thread.
Both Vegas and Seattle were preseason laughingstocks their inaugural seasons. We all know what the Golden Knights did. The Kraken, though, retained that derisive tag going into this year.
The only thing this thread “proves” is that many posting are no better at assessing talent than the GMs who let it get away.
NOBODY thought the expansion rules were too beneficial until they saw their teams beaten.

People keep coming up with this take but I don't see what faulty predictions have to do with the actual results.

Also, I don't recall making a derisive comment about either, so there you go. If it were a question of being a sore loser (you are using sour grapes wrong), I would have posted this thread after Seattle beat Dallas, not before they happened to lose a game 7.

My only point is that it feels odd to have expansion teams come in and be a threat even for well-built, non-rebuilding teams right away. Entrance fee should not guarantee that, because that would be "pay to win."

 

[CashMash]

Also, if bettman has admitted he wanted them to be competitive, as someone suggested, he certainly was aware that the rules were favorable.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Also, if bettman has admitted he wanted them to be competitive, as someone suggested, he certainly was aware that the rules were favorable.

No it was because he was aware the previous expansion rules were not favourable.

 

[ijuka]

Columbus early on was told that it's expected that expansion teams suck really bad for a while. And boy did they. Now, 20 years later, they're still paying the price of that when players and media pundits label them as a team with no history and that has always been bad.

So yeah, I'm a bit salty the league decided starting with Vegas that expansion teams should start out on 2nd base. I'm still of the view that expansion rosters should be made up mostly of AHL players and that the team needs to start at 0 and build from there.

To those pointing at the expansion fees - those fees actually are just in line with franchise valuation. Teams have always paid around the median franchise value cost to enter. It's no different now than it was during previous expansion rounds.

Columbus are paying the price for Kekäläinen being a terrible GM who constantly makes signing such as Gudbranson for 4mil while trading away Bjorkstrand almost for free. Also, on a player like Tolvanen, Kraken were NOT the team who had the first pick. Other GMs just decided to pass up on an essentially free asset.

The issue isn't the expansion draft, the issue is that the other GMs are not good at their jobs.