Miscellaneous NHL Discussion CX: That's A Lot.





Kind of amusing. I really cant think of a team that was faster/more agile in terms of best 10 skaters or so than the 06-07 team... the worst Flyers team ever. I would bet on it probably being the team with the best aggregate of the top 10 skaters in team history... yet they were awful.

Think they were also a top 10 PK team but gave up the most goals overall that year. That season was a fever dream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BernieParent
Buffalo let us down today too :facepalm:

Buffalo fans after being let down every day for 14 years:

200w.gif
 




Kind of amusing. I really cant think of a team that was faster/more agile in terms of best 10 skaters or so than the 06-07 team... the worst Flyers team ever. I would bet on it probably being the team with the best aggregate of the top 10 skaters in team history... yet they were awful.

I distinctly remember seeing Nedved play for the Phantoms that year :laugh:
 
Houston is the next expansion spot Friedman says the NHL would like to get close to $2 billion for the new team
 
No, better is right. More teams means more fans, and that's a good thing for a niche sport, presuming they aren't handing out franchises to any random jackass who claims to totally have a few bucks in his back pocket, trust me bro, like they did in the 90s. If the owners are legit, the league will benefit.
Where are they going to get an additional 80+ players to be able to field these teams without watering down the league?
 
Where are they going to get an additional 80+ players to be able to field these teams without watering down the league?
Where are they getting an additional 80+ players? Same place they get everyone else. AHL, Euro leagues, college, juniors, the standard mix.

As to watering down the league, I don't think much of that as an argument. Oh no, the median 4th liner is going to be slightly more along the lines of Anthony Richard than Garnet Hathaway, however will the NHL survive. On average, assuming the league expands by 4 teams, each of the existing 32 will have 1-2 players who would have been on their AHL 1st line/pairing instead of their NHL 4th line/3rd pairing. In the meantime, you may find a handful of players who turn out to be better players than you previously knew, like Marchessault and Karlsson in Vegas, because of the added opportunity that comes with the extra ice time. Then, over the next few years, the talent level resettles, as more players filter through the system, and it becomes a negligible issue again.

There'll be a few more teams at the top of the pyramid drawing talent up to that top level, and the rosters further down the chain will bring in people from that next tier, and so on until you open up more opportunity at the bottom for people who might not have gotten a break before. Ultimately, it just doesn't change things all that much IMO.
 
Where are they getting an additional 80+ players? Same place they get everyone else. AHL, Euro leagues, college, juniors, the standard mix.

As to watering down the league, I don't think much of that as an argument. Oh no, the median 4th liner is going to be slightly more along the lines of Anthony Richard than Garnet Hathaway, however will the NHL survive. On average, assuming the league expands by 4 teams, each of the existing 32 will have 1-2 players who would have been on their AHL 1st line/pairing instead of their NHL 4th line/3rd pairing. In the meantime, you may find a handful of players who turn out to be better players than you previously knew, like Marchessault and Karlsson in Vegas, because of the added opportunity that comes with the extra ice time. Then, over the next few years, the talent level resettles, as more players filter through the system, and it becomes a negligible issue again.

There'll be a few more teams at the top of the pyramid drawing talent up to that top level, and the rosters further down the chain will bring in people from that next tier, and so on until you open up more opportunity at the bottom for people who might not have gotten a break before. Ultimately, it just doesn't change things all that much IMO.
I tend to agree about the non-elite players. There's probably 20-40+ guys in most professional leagues (including the AHL) that could be positive contributors to teams bottom of the lineup, maybe more. Now that assumes that teams begin to accept that bottom of the lineup players don't have to fit into a specific roles. Look no further than the Phantoms. You mention Richard, totally agree. You also have guys like Lycksell and Andrae who are now in the NHL, but have shown they have NHL potential during previous callups.
 
adding hide avatars option

Ad

Ad