LOL. You are trying to compare two of the WORST teams in the NHL to one of the best and a division leader? If Boston and Chicago were top teams, they'd be pulling in TONS of fans (as history has proven). The fact that teams who are excelling are having trouble drawing is why people clamor for contraction/relocation.
You're sure about that, huh?
You mean like 2003-04, when Boston went 41-19-15-7, for 104 points and 1st in their division, and drew an average of 15,133 (a little under what Nashville is doing this year, even though Boston has a bigger arena)?
Or maybe 2001-02, when Boston won their division with 101 points and drew 15,404?
Maybe 1992-93, first place again, but still not a universal sellout (14.233 average)even in the tiny Garden.
I am just quoting first place finishes, since you want to compare top notch teams (otherwise screaming "no fair").
Perhaps the Blackhawks, then?
2001-02, 41-27-13-1 for 96 pts, 3rd in division (hard to find more recent first place finishes, so bear with me) - drew 15,569 in a 20,500 seat arena, only 76% capacity.
Going back further, I will grant that Chicago was a very strong draw, averaging 20,000 fans for good teams (and 17,000 before the United Centre), but that was a long time ago.
The point is that Chicago does not have a spotless record draw-wise, and Boston has never been a good draw, even when they played in a miniscule arena. So "history" has not proven anything like what you suggest. People just assume that all "traditional markets" have exhibited strong support. Not the case. Yet among some, the de facto standard of strong support is the universal sellout of every game.
The numbers are out there, folks. I do not know why people do not avail themselves of them before posting.
NOTE to Boston and Chicago fans - I am not picking on you. The poster cited those examples, so I was responding.