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

[SEALBound]

Yea I mean once again it definitely is diluted -- the main thing is it's adding 6% more of everything to the league which is really not a big number in the grand scheme of things.

Vegas and Seattle had a bigger impact on talent dilution numbers wise, and the league is better than ever since they joined. Not something to be worried about

The salary cap helps maintain parity. And I think what we would be seeing is merely "middle class growth". It doesn't seem like there's any impact because we see more of the 68% which re-establishes expectations and perspectives.

To put it another way, I believe that if you cut the number of teams in half, you would see a sharp increase in the overall quality of play but because the level of play would have risen for all 16 of the teams, it wouldn't be as noticeable. Like 4 Nations is a good example - 4 powerhouse teams and the games were certainly high quality, but because every team was more or less an all-star caliber team, the differences in abilities were not THAT apparent because it didn't exist.

A Porsche vs a Ferrari in a race would look different than a Porsche vs a Camry.

 

[AlwaysSunnyInDetroit]

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.

hey... i know that everyone has strong opinions on expansion, but there's no reason to take shots at toronto fans

 

[Three On Zero]

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.

The current pool of talent can sustain a 34 team league. They will need a few years to jump to anything beyond that.

 

[Voight]

There are 4th liners in the AHL that have the talent level as the average NHLer in the mid-1980's. The talent pool has never been better.

 

[psycat]

I don't know if it'll dilute the talent pool (a lot of people play ice hockey these days), but it will certainly make it harder for current teams to won the Stanley Cup, and as a fan of a team that hasn't won the Cup in over 55 years, I can't say I like that.

Do more people play now than in say the 80s, 90s? I would bet on no, just too much other stuff to do. Like sitting and scrolling on your phone I suppose. Not to mention other sports might be more popular comparatively, especially applies to Canada I suppose.

Just going by my empirical evidence is obviously not enough but if I go to the local rink(in Sweden mind you) it's certainly less crowded now than when I grew up.

Not saying it's a fact so would be interested in statistics, then again those could be misleading since even if there are more registered players that means just that, anyone with insight on if more kids actually play hockey or not compared to 30(or even 50) years ago?

I would certainly believe that there are more who play organized hockey from a young age but to me that's slightly different and even then that's just a hunch.

 

[Bizz]

View attachment 1003420

Nobody can come up with a valid response so they just post memes from 15 years ago.

 

[Boss Man Hughes]

The current pool of talent can sustain a 34 team league. They will need a few years to jump to anything beyond that.

It's shyte now. Probably can support a 28 team league.

 

[EdJovanovski]

The more the game grows the larger of a talent pool there is to draw from

 

[bleedthenorth]

only thing diluting the talent pool is cost of living in Ontario

 

[wingerdinger]

I'm sure there would be enough talent, the real problem is you're going to have franchises that are going to irrelevant for decades at a time.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I'm sure there would be enough talent, the real problem is you're going to have franchises that are going to irrelevant for decades at a time.

Yeah like 20 year conference finals draughts will be super common.

 

[BB79]

Yeah like 20 year conference finals draughts will be super common.

They already are for a lot of teams

 

[Three On Zero]

It's shyte now. Probably can support a 28 team league.

It really isn’t.

 

[The Panther]

Expansion sucks. The NHL should have stopped at about 26 clubs in the mid-/late 1990s, and there has never been a compelling reason to have franchises in Arizona, Georgia, etc.

The smaller the League, the better the hockey. That's a simple fact.

 

[T REX]

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.

your comment about an unwatchable product is true...so is ppl still watching...both can be true.

THAT is taking advantage of your fanbase IMHO. I already gave up my center ice after all games weren't included.

Now add in these new ESPN+ games and other BS...I think it is a horrible idea overall. Less visibility IMHO

 

[TruePowerSlave]

Ideally there would be less teams than now. Say you take out 10 teams, the hockey would be straight up better and most teams would be stacked.

Not really a realistic scenario, but expansion only makes the viewing experience worse.

 

[WarriorofTime]

They already are for a lot of teams

Longest active droughts:
Columbus (since inception)
Toronto (2002)
Minnesota (2003)
Calgary (2004)
Buffalo (2007)
Detroit (2009)
Philadelphia (2010)

I expect a lot more to get a lot longer as teams continue to be added.

 

[SannywithoutCompy]

If people want the high scoring games to continue you gotta keep adding teams.

Or just call the game with the actual rulebook. Enough of the interference on zone entries and clutch and grab, it's nauseating to watch

 

[The Panther]

The expansion from 21 to 30 basically opened up jobs for Americans and Europeans. Before teens had none yo

This is very incorrect.

 

[cupface52]

It's pretty clear when there's expansion there's talent dilution. Any time there's expansion, goal scoring always goes up, it's not a coincidence. It takes a few years for it to normalize and drop back down a bit.

NHL became international in 1924.

How many non Canadians played in the league in the following 60 years? 10, 15?

Players like Charlie Gardiner, Billy Burch and Stan Mikita don't count as they came to Canada at a young age and went through the Canadian hockey system.

 

[Oilslick941611]

View attachment 1003293

Holy shit. It’s Dolan duck

 

[Ghost of Murph]

Obviously there are plenty of bottom 6 players that could move up to the NHL, but the diluting of talent comes in to play with the upper tier players. How many teams as of now have a great and complete top-six and/or a great top-two D pairings?

Expansion hurts in those areas since there are a limited number of top-notch players already spread among 32 teams. Filling the league with 92 more AHL-level players while spreading out the better talent is for sure dilution. How much it will hurt the overall product is anyone's guess.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

I thought this was a Mulletman thread lol.

This literally isn’t even a question that can be debated. Dilution of talent based on number of teams in a league is just logical and factual.

 

[majormajor]

The talent level of young players is better than ever.

There are 4th liners today that would have made the 2nd line in the 80s.

Expansion does dilute the talent per team - and I oppose any further expansion because I would like the talent per team to keep increasing.

 

[tarheelhockey]

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.

Economics is shrinking the NHL talent pool a lot faster than internationalization could ever hope to grow it.