News From Around the League - Part XXXIX

[NJDevs26]

Not sure if it was posted earlier, but Buffalo sent Mikhail Grigorenko back to juniors. Reading through the main board thread and apparently he burns a year off his ELC but this season doesn't start his free agency clock since he played fewer than 23 games. Lou/Pete said that Matteau's play would be the primary reason he's kept up and not his contract, but it'll be interesting to see if Matteau reaches that barrier.

So that's the barrier for a year of FA, 23 games? Matteau's at 16 now, and presumably a healthy scratch again tonight since we're going with the same lineup again. They don't seem to want him to play juniors but he probably won't get to that total if Zubrus comes back soon and there aren't too many other injuries up front.

 

[Mory Schneideur*]

Last year the Sounders averaged nearly 44k per game and set an MLS record with something like 68k or 69k in a game.

Seattle would be cool! But what about Toronto2 and Quebec?

I'm guessing two expansions and maybe a relocation. IMO I want to keep all the teams where they are, coyotes, panthers and all.

 

[apice3*]

Toronto getting a second team has been talked about for a while and I think it is such a stupid idea. The Leafs have been around forever. You're not going to convert those fan for at least 20-30 years.

Expansion teams usually suck, and rely on a new, loyal fan base to sustain profit. That's how Columbus has survived. They have a good fan base. No one is going to leave the Leafs to watch an even worse team for a long time.

Seattle, Las Vegas, Quebec, are all better options.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Toronto getting a second team has been talked about for a while and I think it is such a stupid idea. The Leafs have been around forever. You're not going to convert those fan for at least 20-30 years.

Expansion teams usually suck, and rely on a new, loyal fan base to sustain profit. That's how Columbus has survived. They have a good fan base. No one is going to leave the Leafs to watch an even worse team for a long time.

Seattle, Las Vegas, Quebec, are all better options.

They should just wait and expand with Seattle and Quebec. Two places that want hockey and will support it. Or if the Yotes have to move, add KC to the mix.

 

[Devilsfan92]

It's the amount of people in the area that's appealing.

I would rather see Quebec comeback though.

Quebec & Seattle and bump Columbus back to the Western conference.

 

[Bleedred]

Why would they wanna do expansion in Toronto? I guess it's like MLB with two teams each in New York and Chicago.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Why would they wanna do expansion in Toronto? I guess it's like MLB with two teams each in New York and Chicago.

They figure that Toronto is big enough and likes hockey enough to support a 2nd team. In theory that might be true, but in practice it would be a nightmare because you have to assume there is a sizable hockey population that is not Leafs fans there.

It worked in NYC and Chicago because both teams have been around since the stone age (well with the Mets they just picked up the old Giants and Dodgers fans so sort of the same deal).

It works in this area with hockey because the teams are spread out enough to be able to find new hockey fans. Islanders in LI, and Devils in Jersey.

 

[Hockey Sports Fan]

Toronto almost need's another NHL team to more satisfy the market. You could fill up two arenas there, no problem. Tickets could be half the price of Leafs tickets and they'd fill the place every night and still make bank.

I say just move Phoenix to any of Seattle, OKC, or QC and add two more teams in whichever two cities are left over, then call it a league. And hopefully leave it that way for a looong long time.

 

[Bleedred]

I guess it isn't so weird considering us and the Rangers are like 10 miles apart.

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

AKA "I'll do just about everything to keep that team in Phoenix, so I won't look like a idiot for moving to a city where hockey is probably the 10th most important sport right after PBA bowling and mini put".

Yotes had good run at start ,, MOve to Glendale killed the diehard fanbase they had at start (+ Constant failed playoffs)

1996 Pho >>>>>>>>>>> 1996 Winnipeg

and in end Winnipeg had no owners step up and at time there was no plans to build new arena. NHL cant be blamed for approving sale/move to Pho when there was absolutely zero hope of keep Jets in place

Also at time Cnd dollar was a disaster and if you recall it was Bettman and NHL that saved Oilers/Sens/Flames

Problem with KC and Portland is ownership and there being a lack of an interested party to put teams in the building. Seattle and QBC don't seem to have that problem. Of course moving Phoenix to Seattle means that you still need 1 more city for expansion.

I wish the NHL would approach Les Alexander about getting back into NHL mix

Remember Alexander tried hard (And almost had success) getting the Oilers in late 90's to move to Houston

He also had bid in last round of expansion ,, Unfortunately for him at time the arena in Houston was ? and there were 2 rival bids which watered down Houston's chances

After that failed attempt he focused on his other teams/moved on

Yotes at discount could be very appealing to him

Houston vs Dallas could be very good for hockey going forward if it happened

 

[manilaNJ]

You could say that it was a terrible idea in retrospect to move a team here.

A team that hadn't had much success on or off the ice in two previous cities coming right smack in the middle of the lure of the Broad Street Bullies, the success of Islanders dynasty, the Rangers and their Original Six checkbook history.

It happened to work out, not just because of the success, but the timing was pretty perfect.
The Devils were growing a fan base as hockey was trying to gain an American audience.

The size of the hockey viewing public in the country was (and still is) bound to increase.

Can you really grow the game in Canada anymore? You'll have a few disgruntled fans switch allegiances, a few people pick up the team that had never invested into Toronto/Ottawa/Detroit/Montreal/Buffalo/whoever.
No one group that will come out in droves to support that team. I mean they'll get their money out of it as the arena will definitely fill up.

It'll take a while to grow a fan base deep in the heart of leafs country, though.

 

[Rhodes 81]

With unbalanced conferences, I doubt any expansion happens in the east without another in the west and a team moving from east to west

 

[aboriginal]

I want Seattle. Give me a new team to root for in my sparish time.

 

[MartysBetterThanYou]

Toronto getting a second team has been talked about for a while and I think it is such a stupid idea. The Leafs have been around forever. You're not going to convert those fan for at least 20-30 years.

Expansion teams usually suck, and rely on a new, loyal fan base to sustain profit. That's how Columbus has survived. They have a good fan base. No one is going to leave the Leafs to watch an even worse team for a long time.

If the Internet was around in 1982: Greater New York getting a third team has been talked about for a while and I think it is such a stupid idea. The Rangers fans have been around forever. You're not going to convert those fan for at least 20-30 years.

Expansion (still valid since the Scouts/Rockies were only 6 years old) teams usually suck, and rely on a new, loyal fan base to sustain profit. That's how Pittsburgh has survived. They have a good fan base. No one is going to leave the Rangers to watch an even worse team for a long time.

Remember where we came from guys...If NY and environs, one of the most saturated sports markets in the US, can support three hockey teams and build up loyal fanbases for all of them, Hockey-crazed Toronto can do it with two.

 

[lboogie42*]

i have some news. its old tho. flyers are gay and dirty

 

[NJDevs26]

If the Internet was around in 1982: Greater New York getting a third team has been talked about for a while and I think it is such a stupid idea. The Rangers fans have been around forever. You're not going to convert those fan for at least 20-30 years.

Expansion (still valid since the Scouts/Rockies were only 6 years old) teams usually suck, and rely on a new, loyal fan base to sustain profit. That's how Pittsburgh has survived. They have a good fan base. No one is going to leave the Rangers to watch an even worse team for a long time.

Remember where we came from guys...If NY and environs, one of the most saturated sports markets in the US, can support three hockey teams and build up loyal fanbases for all of them, Hockey-crazed Toronto can do it with two.

'New York' didn't get a third team, NEW JERSEY got a team of its own. Yes, most of the fanbase were either converted Rangers fans or fans the team had to get interested in hockey, but there is a 'large' portion of the local fanbase that was pretty much neutral to hockey before the Devils arrived, and were willing to back a team of their own. There aren't a large number of Canadian fans neutral to hockey, and no inherent reason to back another Toronto team. They aren't going to be more local than the Leafs.

It would be stupid for Toronto to get a second team, because unlike say the Yankees/Mets or Cubs/White Sox, you don't have a hundred years of those teams never playing each other. The Toronto teams would have to play every year. Why would you root for a 'second' Toronto team if you're already a big hockey fan? Presumably you're hooked into the Leafs.

 

[The Wumpus]

I actually think a second Toronto team makes sense. People move to Toronto from all over Canada, and many of them probably hate the Leafs. If the second Toronto team is in the western conference, that means that all the teams in the league get equal exposure in Canada's biggest market.

My first choice would be Seattle, though. I'd love to see a team there.

 

[NJDevs26]

That's the other part, there's 'several' untapped markets you could go to before Toronto (the aformentioned Seattle/Portland maybe), or markets starving for a team like Quebec. If there's an expansion Quebec needs to be next up.

 

[apice3*]

Why would they wanna do expansion in Toronto? I guess it's like MLB with two teams each in New York and Chicago.

The difference is the MLB formed both those Chicago teams when the league was still fairly new and times were different. Both franchises are 100 years old.

New York at one point had 4 teams and 2 moved out to California.

I can't even tell you the last time an expansion team joined an area with a team already. It's not a good business decision. You have to cater to a new audience rather than steal from an established one. That's why Quebec and Seattle make sense.

 

[apice3*]

If the Internet was around in 1982: Greater New York getting a third team has been talked about for a while and I think it is such a stupid idea. The Rangers fans have been around forever. You're not going to convert those fan for at least 20-30 years.

Expansion (still valid since the Scouts/Rockies were only 6 years old) teams usually suck, and rely on a new, loyal fan base to sustain profit. That's how Pittsburgh has survived. They have a good fan base. No one is going to leave the Rangers to watch an even worse team for a long time.

Remember where we came from guys...If NY and environs, one of the most saturated sports markets in the US, can support three hockey teams and build up loyal fanbases for all of them, Hockey-crazed Toronto can do it with two.

And we came awfully close to relocating, and had it not been for an extremely successful team, we'd probably be in Nashville. We lucked out.

And we weren't an expansion team, as you noted. We were a relocated team. Imagine those 6 Scouts/Rockies years being in NJ. That's a long time of suckage. We would have packed our bags, no doubt.

 

[Lshap]

Some good reading on an interesting subject.

Y'know, after reading the opinions here, I think a second Toronto team is a BAD idea. As others have mentioned, us Canadians are pretty well team-branded by the age of six. We develop loyalty to a team and stick with it. My brother moved from Montreal to Toronto 20 years ago but still cheers for the Habs and hates the Leafs, as all thinking humans should do. The Canadians who don't like hockey aren't likely to develop an interest because a new team arrives on the scene. I just don't see existing markets being sub-divided in this hockey-saturated country.

Canadians would look at a new Toronto team as the estranged fourth cousin who shows up to the wedding to drink the free booze. We'd tolerate him as a relative, but have no interest in hanging out with him or lending him money.

Quebec has a ready-made market, the same might be said for Hartford (don't really know the demographics there). New teams need new markets. In Canada, there are plenty of hockey-crazed markets without teams, but with tiny populations that couldn't fill the arena. I like the Seattle idea, just so somebody could suggest calling the team the Seattle Ice-Puckaccinos.

By the way, good luck in our game tonight!

 

[jkrdevil]

With unbalanced conferences, I doubt any expansion happens in the east without another in the west and a team moving from east to west

They can just realign again. Alignment won't impact expansion if they think there is miney to be made.

Let's say Phoenix moves to Seattle (keeping this alingment in tact). Then in the next few years they expand to Qubec and a second Toronto team. You just move the Red Wings back to the Central Division where they now and put the second Toronto team with them. Quebec then takes the Red Wings place in the northeast. Colorado move back to the pacific (where they should be timezone wise anyways)

The format would be similar to the one prososed past year. Four conferences (probably split into two four-team divisions each). You play teams in your division 6 times, the other division in your conference 4 times and everyone else in the league twice. Top 4 teams in each conference make it, with division winner preference. There is no crossover as all the conferences are even, so you don't have to worry about an east/central timezone team playing a pacific timezone team in round one (which is why the moved the Jackets and Wings east this time around). Reseed for the round 3 following conference playoffs.

I think this is temporary.

 

[jkrdevil]

And we came awfully close to relocating, and had it not been for an extremely successful team, we'd probably be in Nashville. We lucked out.

And we weren't an expansion team, as you noted. We were a relocated team. Imagine those 6 Scouts/Rockies years being in NJ. That's a long time of suckage. We would have packed our bags, no doubt.

Um you need to look at the first couple of years of the team in NJ. They did suck that bad for about as long as that.

The difference was in NJ we had a better funded owner who was willing to absorb the growing pains. KC and especially in Colorado that didn't exist.

 

[Devils Dominion]

The difference is the MLB formed both those Chicago teams when the league was still fairly new and times were different. Both franchises are 100 years old.

New York at one point had 4 teams and 2 moved out to California.

I can't even tell you the last time an e. xpansion team joined an area with a team already. It's not a good business decision. You have to cater to a new audience rather than steal from an established one. That's why Quebec and Seattle make sense.

NY had 3 teams. Yanks,Giants and Dodgers. Mets came later I think,though I am far from a baseball fan.
I think Quebec City should have a team,no doubt. Seattle is a good sports area and growing city.

Forget Hartford and KC.

 

[NJDevs26]

Obviously he meant add those six years on top of the six years of sucking we 'already' had. His point was having a Columbus/Atlanta length dark days stretch probably would have signaled doom for us in NJ before we ever had a 1995. We were kind of fortunate we had a good playoff run in '88 after only a few years in the state, and then were a perennial playoff team after that though the next big run wasn't till '94.