I don't believe in the "expansion will dilute the talent pool" argument

sawchuk1971

Registered User
Jun 16, 2011
1,491
629
Maybe back in 1967-1968 when the talent pool had all Canadians.

Back then, you had no Russians, no Swedes, no Finns, and no Americans in the talent pool.

I don't think expansion will dilute the talent pool this time around.

The talent pool is getting deeper. You have more talented Americans dominating the rosters.

You have the European talent base getting stronger. Canadians talent pool is dwindling because lack of interest.

So when the NHL expands in a couple of years, the talent pool, already discussed, will get stronger, not weaker.
 
06860515.jpg
 
See, I think it will. If you add two teams, you add roughly 40-50 players to the league.

The majority of that, say 35-40, will merely be your higher-end AHL talent that couldn't stick with an NHL roster. And the others will be the over-the-hill vets that no ones wants but will get signed to plug a hole. You might get a few randos from European leagues but I imagine no more or less than usual.

Just a basic normalized distribution tells you that if you increase the population size, you will be diluting of the mean because we are not adding top talent on the other end. If they were there to add, they would already be in the league. Not like there are 20 1Cs over in Europe or the KHL that can't get an NHL deal. Instead, you're adding several AHL/AAAA players. So yeah, overall weaker. I do not agree with your premise.
 
Technically, it will. No way going around it. On the bigger picture, the overall product is more watered down due to teams being restricted by the hard cap and stuff. Hopefully that will start to fix itself in the upcoming years.

The problem isn't that every team is going to have two players that are worse than what they currently have. The problem is that there isn't enough separation between the good, the mediocre and bad teams in this league. That's what makes it boring.
 
See, I think it will. If you add two teams, you add roughly 40-50 players to the league.

The majority of that, say 35-40, will merely be your higher-end AHL talent that couldn't stick with an NHL roster. And the others will be the over-the-hill vets that no ones wants but will get signed to plug a hole. You might get a few randos from European leagues but I imagine no more or less than usual.

Just a basic normalized distribution tells you that if you increase the population size, you will be diluting of the mean because we are not adding top talent on the other end. If they were there to add, they would already be in the league. Not like there are 20 1Cs over in Europe or the KHL that can't get an NHL deal. Instead, you're adding several AHL/AAAA players. So yeah, overall weaker. I do not agree with your premise.
I think the difference between the last 46 guys in the NHL and the next 46 out is not as big as you think it is. Obviously you are adding all at the bottom end, but going from 32 teams to 34 is only increasing the number of jobs by 6.25%. I think there's a lot of guys too that could be very successful at the NHL level or have been successful earlier if they're given the chance, and they could now get it.

Overall weaker but won't significantly impact the quality of the league at all just like Vegas and Seattle haven't
 
There's some high level hockey players coming up the ranks.

I don't think expansion would dilute the speed in the game. The core 5 players will still be at a high level with free agency. Houston will cater to same tax advantages as Dallas so it wouldn't surprise me if they could be competitive as a market quickly with a competent management team.

I think you could mitigate a lot of talent shortage by plucking 19 year olds out of the CHL, as you can for the NCAA and European leagues.
 
In the short-term it absolutely will. If 20+ new NHL positions open up it'll mean 20 guys who wouldn't otherwise be playing in the league will be.

In the long-term you can make the argument that expanding the league's reach and creating new fanbases will promote the game and lead to more kids playing hockey, which will then improve the talent pool, but that's a seperate argument.

Talent dillution isn't the best anti-expansion argument anyway - it's the fact that if the NHL has it's way and there's 36 teams in the league in the not-too-distant future, only 50% of teams will make the playoffs under the current format, and with that many teams it increases the chances that fans may never see their team win a cup.
 
There's some high level hockey players coming up the ranks.
Of course - but there's also some high level hockey players that are leaving the ranks: Ovi, Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Letang, Kopitar, Zuccarello, Giroux, Marchand, Kane, Bobrovsky

That's how it always goes. New guys come in the league and young players hit their primes. And then older players leave their prime and retire.

The difference with expansion is that it skips the natural flow of ins/outs in the league, and immediately shoves players into the league regardless of the aging curve.
 
What people forget is that there are many players in different leagues/situations that could be good nhlers with the right opportunity. In theory the bottom lines would get worse with expansion but teams would just need to be more creative in terms of how they find and develop talent.
 
When a league expands there is always a talent dilution, and I would find it foolish to deny that. At the same time, when the league is already at 32 teams, expanding to 36 isn't some giant talent dilution, so I feel like it's overstated. The issue of talent dilution then tends to correct itself over time, but that takes longer to manifest itself.
 
It will be diluted in some sense but I don’t think it will be nearly as drastic as the doomsayers think.

Expansion has always caused there to be more roster spots. It has happened before. It will happen again. The NHL isn’t going to suddenly become a dying league based on expansion alone.

I’d wager nearly every poster here who has blown a gasket about how unwatchable the NHL will be with 34 or 36 teams…will continue to watch the NHL and be invested in the expansion process when it happens.

If I had a nickel for every sports fan who complains ad nauseum on some message board about how they are no longer going to watch the product because of expansion or rule change or some issue they don’t agree with because they are used to things a certain way - and then continue to watch said product…I’d be able to quit my day job.
 
Maybe back in 1967-1968 when the talent pool had all Canadians.

Back then, you had no Russians, no Swedes, no Finns, and no Americans in the talent pool.

I don't think expansion will dilute the talent pool this time around.

The talent pool is getting deeper. You have more talented Americans dominating the rosters.

You have the European talent base getting stronger. Canadians talent pool is dwindling because lack of interest.

So when the NHL expands in a couple of years, the talent pool, already discussed, will get stronger, not weaker.
If you add half a cup of water to half a cup of coffee, will you dilute the coffee?
 
In the short-term it absolutely will. If 20+ new NHL positions open up it'll mean 20 guys who wouldn't otherwise be playing in the league will be.

In the long-term you can make the argument that expanding the league's reach and creating new fanbases will promote the game and lead to more kids playing hockey, which will then improve the talent pool, but that's a seperate argument.

Talent dillution isn't the best anti-expansion argument anyway - it's the fact that if the NHL has it's way and there's 36 teams in the league in the not-too-distant future, only 50% of teams will make the playoffs under the current format, and with that many teams it increases the chances that fans may never see their team win a cup.

There's definitely some talent coming out of USA hockey. Germany and Switzerland are increasing their output of hockey talent.

It's not hard to imagine more Russian players joining the ranks if the war ends.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VivaLasVegas
What people forget is that there are many players in different leagues/situations that could be good nhlers with the right opportunity. In theory the bottom lines would get worse with expansion but teams would just need to be more creative in terms of how they find and develop talent.
And existing teams get worse each time, they give up a third line forward or a 4D, and replace them with an AHLer.
 
Don't really see how it could possibly make the pool stronger but I agree the concerns over it are overblown. The amount of quality promising young talent that enters this league every year is better than its ever been. More opportunity for guys who can play at the NHL level but struggle a bit to distinguish themselves riding buses in the AHL is good thing.
 

Ad

Ad