Another Division Realignment

TequilaBay

Registered User
May 30, 2019
108
153
Hey y'all. I'm hoping this thread turns out to be decent, this is my first thread on this site, thought I've give it a shot, so if it doesn't turn out decent, cut me some slack. :)

Anyways, today I wanted to discuss the NHL's plans to redistribute the divisions following Seattle's incorporation into the league. Since Seattle is being incorporated into the Pacific Division, which already has eight teams while the Central Division only has seven, meaning one other Pacific Division needs to switch over in order to solve the issue of imbalance, and that team has already been confirmed to be the Arizona Coyotes. News of this confirmation immediately brought about rumors that this absolutely meant the Arizona Coyotes were relocating to Houston, given the financial struggles the team has already been, and still is, going through, and since moving the team over to Houston would put the team closer to its other Central Division rivals. However, these rumors have possibly been shot down by the Coyotes CEO Ahron Cohen, whom has stated, as I quote, "Any investment in our team must be laser-focused on helping the Coyotes achieve a long-term sustainable arena solution here in Arizona."
With a statement like that coming from the owner of the team, I wouldn't put my money on the Coyotes relocating anytime soon. Sure, it's possible the CEO could eat his own words and the team would relocate to Houston anyways if the team financially has no other choice, but don't hold your breath on it.

So this brings me to the main point of the thread. If the Arizona Coyotes are going to be realigned into the Central Division, and if they're staying in Arizona, travel costs can become an absolute nightmare, not only that, but all of its division rivals, with the exceptions being the Colorado Avalanche and Dallas Stars, would be unnatural rivals well over 1500 miles away. Teams such as Winnipeg, Minnesota, Chicago, and Nashville would be in the same division as Arizona, while teams in Arizona's backyard such as San Jose, Anaheim, LA, and Vegas won't be. The desert rivalry between the Yotes and Knights? Gone. A shame too, I truly believe an own-the-desert rivalry between Arizona and Vegas would be great for both teams, and I think it could give the Yotes a boost in attendance as well.
But this division issue goes beyond just Arizona though. The two teams in Florida are arbitrarily grouped within the Atlantic Division, with teams way up north such as Boston and Montreal, instead of the Metro Division with teams far closer such as Carolina and Washington. The division alignment in the NHL is pretty sloppy, although to it's credit, it's nowhere near as bad as the NFL, but that's no excuse.

Now, I don't expect the NHL to at all take my advice on the following material, which I'm mostly just doing for fun. I do have my concerns with how the divisions are aligned, but I don't expect this thread to change anything at the higher level, this thread is mainly for a fun, but still intellectual, discussion topic. I would like to know how you personally would realign the divisions if you would like to let me know in the comments down below, but for now, I'll give how I'd do it.

Now, the way I'd do it.
Instead of having 4 divisions with 8 teams each, there'd be 8 divisions with 4 teams each. The conferences would stay the same, all the teams in either the Western or Eastern Conference would stay put.
In the regular season, any specific team would meet its three division rival 6 times, which adds up to 18 games. They would meet the twelve teams in the same conference but not the same division 3 times, which adds up to 36 games, 18 + 36 gives you 54 games. They would meet the sixteen teams in the opposite conference 2 times, which adds up to 32 games. 54 + 32 gives you 86, so it would be an 86 game schedule.
The playoff format format would revert back to a 1-8, 2-7, 3-6, 4-5 system, the way it was before the current division realignment.

Here's what the divisions would look like;

West

Northwest
Vancouver Canucks
Calgary Flames
Edmonton Oilers
Winnipeg Jets

Pacific
Seattle
San Jose Sharks
Los Angeles Kings
Anaheim Ducks

Southwest
Vegas Golden Knights
Arizona Coyotes
Colorado Avalanche
Dallas Stars

Central
Minnesota Wild
St. Louis Blues
Chicago Blackhawks
Nashville Predators

East

Northeast
Toronto Maple Leafs
Ottawa Senators
Montreal Canadiens
Boston Bruins

Atlantic
Buffalo Sabres
New York Rangers
New York Islanders
New Jersey Devils

Metropolitan
Detroit Red Wings
Columbus Blue Jackets
Pittsburgh Penguins
Philadelphia Flyers

Southeast
Washington Capitals
Carolina Hurricanes
Tampa Bay Lightning
Florida Panthers


 

Bee Holder

Registered User
Jul 3, 2017
855
1,118
Montreal
In a 1-8,2-7, 3-6, 4-5 format, it REALLY is atrocious for Canadian hockey, since the 7 teams are cramped into 2 divisions. With the amount of games same-division teams play with each other. I don’t see how at the end of the year, more than 2 maybe 3 or 4 canadian teams might reach the playoffs
 

TequilaBay

Registered User
May 30, 2019
108
153
You're concerned about Arizona's travel in the Central but then you place the Jets in a division with 3 different time zones. :huh:

:jets

Good point. The problem is, if I were to replace Winnipeg with Seattle in the Northwest, and have Vegas take Seattle's place in the Pacific, that would require Arizona sharing a division with St. Louis or Nashville. Phoenix is further apart from both St. Louis and Nashville than Vancouver and Winnipeg are, plus Arizona in the same division as St. Louis or Nashville would be an unnatural rivalry. At least with a Canucks-Flames-Oilers-Jets division, you'd have all the Western Canadian teams all in one division.

Now that I think about it, both the NHL's current 8-in-4 and my 4-in-8 models would be improved if the Yotes moved to Houston. In fact, with that scenario, my model would have no teams over 1200 miles apart in the same division, and only a small handful of teams over 1000 miles apart in the same division. Here's what the Western Conference would look like; (the Eastern Conference would stay the same as in my original post);

West

North Pacific
Seattle
Vancouver Canucks
Calgary Flames
Edmonton Oilers

South Pacific
San Jose Sharks
LA Kings
Anaheim Ducks
Vegas Golden Knights

South Central
Colorado Avalanche
Dallas Stars
Houston Coyotes
Nashville Predators

North Central
Winnipeg Jets
Minnesota Wild
St. Louis Blues
Chicago Blackhawks

Again though, I know that neither model of mine would be adopted by the NHL, this is purely for fun, albeit still with intellectual conversation.
 
Last edited:

bh53

Registered User
Sep 18, 2017
484
781
Victoria
West
1.
Canucks
Flames
Oilers
Seattle
2.
Ducks
Kings
Sharks
Knights
3.
Coyotes
Avs
Stars
Preds
4.
Jets
Hawks
Blues
Wild

East
1.
Leafs
Habs
Sens
Sabres
2.
Panthers
Lightning
Canes
Caps
3.
Wings
Jackets
Pens
Flyers
4.
Rangers
Islanders
Devils
Bruins
 

Boxer Courage

Registered User
May 26, 2018
62
66
“Now, I don't expect the NHL to at all take my advice on the following material”
I’m sure they will. Count Bettman and all of his upper level NHL cohorts scour HF Boards searching for new ideas, input about rules and where to relocate teams, and just the next big thing in general.
 

Keeptdos

Registered User
May 1, 2011
1,812
104
Finland
I honestly like those divisions, at least for the Wild. Sadly though I hope us being in the dumpster for the next years to get top picks to be somewhat competitive in future.
 

DowntownBooster

Registered User
Jun 21, 2011
3,202
2,414
Winnipeg
Good point. The problem is, if I were to replace Winnipeg with Seattle in the Northwest, and have Vegas take Seattle's place in the Pacific, that would require Arizona sharing a division with St. Louis or Nashville. Phoenix is further apart from both St. Louis and Nashville than Vancouver and Winnipeg are, plus Arizona in the same division as St. Louis or Nashville would be an unnatural rivalry. At least with a Canucks-Flames-Oilers-Jets division, you'd have all the Western Canadian teams all in one division.

Now that I think about it, both the NHL's current 8-in-4 and my 4-in-8 models would be improved if the Yotes moved to Houston. In fact, with that scenario, my model would have no teams over 1200 miles apart in the same division, and only a small handful of teams over 1000 miles apart in the same division. Here's what the Western Conference would look like; (the Eastern Conference would stay the same as in my original post);

West

North Pacific
Seattle
Vancouver Canucks
Calgary Flames
Edmonton Oilers

South Pacific
San Jose Sharks
LA Kings
Anaheim Ducks
Vegas Golden Knights

South Central
Colorado Avalanche
Dallas Stars
Houston Coyotes
Nashville Predators

North Central
Winnipeg Jets
Minnesota Wild
St. Louis Blues
Chicago Blackhawks

Again though, I know that neither model of mine would be adopted by the NHL, this is purely for fun, albeit still with intellectual conversation.

I have to say I like your second realignment option much better than the first. I also like that presented by bh53 in post #6.

:jets
 
  • Like
Reactions: bh53

RaleighBlues

Registered User
Feb 18, 2019
617
1,771
Raleigh, NC
Unfortunately, the Jets or Wild are probably getting the shaft in most of these scenarios. I expect the Hawks, Blues, and Preds to stay in a division. The rivalries are too strong. I think either the Wild or Jets will get stuck pairing with Arizona, Colorado, and Dallas.

For the West:

SEA/VAN/CGY/EDM

SJ/ANA/VGK/LA

WPG/COL/ARI/DAL

MIN/CHI/STL/NSH
 

kvladimir

Registered User
Dec 1, 2010
640
288
There is no way to do a 4x8 or 8x4 alignment with the current teams + Seattle without making at least one team very unhappy, and having multiple teams feel out of place in how they are aligned. For that reason, even though it seems illogical when you have 32 teams, I would realign into 3 conferences, with a 10/11/11 split, like this:

West: Anaheim, Arizona, Calgary, Colorado, Edmonton, Los Angeles, San Jose, Seattle, Vancouver, Vegas
Central: Chicago, Carolina, Columbus, Dallas, Detroit, Florida, Minnesota, Nashville, St. Louis, Tampa Bay, Winnipeg
East: Boston, Buffalo, Montreal, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Ottawa, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Toronto, Washington

This way, all 10 teams in the Pacific/Mountain time zones are together, Detroit and Columbus regain their Central alignment without being attached to the West, the southeastern teams trade 2 original 6 teams for far, far better travel, but still get DET/CHI and a couple snowbird rivals (WPG/MIN), and every Eastern team loves this because of the travel advantage they get. Schedule would be 4 games vs. Conference rivals, 2 games vs. all other teams. This works as-is for the Central and East (4x10 + 2x21 = 82), and for the West, you just need each team to play a 5th game vs. 2 Conference rivals to make up for the difference.

In the playoffs, to keep the odds of making the playoffs even despite the uneven split, you just need to make the number of teams that make it in each Conference average to half the number of its' members: 3-7 teams in the West (avg. 5/10), 4-7 teams in the Central and East (avg. 5.5/11). So, each year, 11 teams clinch automatic spots (top 3 West, top 4 Central + East), and the remaining 5 teams would be the next 5 best by record, so long as no Conference exceeds 7 teams.

There would be frequent crossovers between Conferences, because there would ofen be an odd number of teams. Any time this is the case, it will be 2 Conferences that have an odd number. If it's West/Central or Central/East, you just have to do one crossover between 1 team from each of those Conferences, whichever matchup is most fair when you pool the Conferences together. If the West and East are the ones with an odd number, you instead do 2 crossovers: 1 West/Central, and 1 Central/East, same idea as above. To stop the teams in the Central that are in the Eastern time zone from meeting West teams, make it so that those teams can't cross over to the West unless there are no Central teams to do so, and vice versa so the Central time zone teams don't go to the East. This maintains the traditional East/West flavour to the matchups, other than for ones within the Central conference.
 

Khelandros

Registered User
Feb 12, 2019
3,928
4,410
You do realize that Winnipeg to Nashiville is 1300 miles right? Seattle to LA is 1200 miles. Vegas to Dallas is 1200 miles.
 

txpd

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
69,649
14,131
New Bern, NC
The Capitals for certain would never agree to that kind of crap. Their rivals are the old Patrick Division. You want them to sign up to 6 games a year against Carolina, Fla and Tampa? No.

Washington is closer to Philly and Pittsburgh than Raleigh. They are closer to Philly, Pittsburgh, NYR, NYI and NJD than Florida and Tampa. So....hell, no
 

Grudy0

Registered User
Mar 16, 2011
1,878
122
Maryland
Time to be the thread-killer.

Even though there is a caveat that this is purely an intellectual conversation and the NHL likely wouldn't approve, there has to be some basis that the NHL would approve.

I believe it takes a three-fourths majority to change the alignment, schedule matrix and playoff format, and then it also would require the NHLPA's blessing.

It was just over five years ago that all of the above were approved by the NHL and NHLPA, moving away from a six-division, five-team per division alignment in favor of having larger divisions and having every team visit an arena at least once a year. Therefore, it would have to be a non-starter to discuss realignment to smaller groups of more divisions.

Just search HFBoards for the amount of threads how the alignment sucks, the playoff format sucks and the schedule matrix sucks. Yet the NHL and the NHLPA continue to approve.
 

txpd

Registered User
Jan 25, 2003
69,649
14,131
New Bern, NC
always amazes me how little NHL fans actually like the NHL. Bad refs, Bad rules, Bad schedule, Bad alignment, Bad playoff format
 

Gunnersaurus Rex

Registered User
Jan 14, 2008
3,245
2,180
Good point. The problem is, if I were to replace Winnipeg with Seattle in the Northwest, and have Vegas take Seattle's place in the Pacific, that would require Arizona sharing a division with St. Louis or Nashville. Phoenix is further apart from both St. Louis and Nashville than Vancouver and Winnipeg are, plus Arizona in the same division as St. Louis or Nashville would be an unnatural rivalry. At least with a Canucks-Flames-Oilers-Jets division, you'd have all the Western Canadian teams all in one division.

Now that I think about it, both the NHL's current 8-in-4 and my 4-in-8 models would be improved if the Yotes moved to Houston. In fact, with that scenario, my model would have no teams over 1200 miles apart in the same division, and only a small handful of teams over 1000 miles apart in the same division. Here's what the Western Conference would look like; (the Eastern Conference would stay the same as in my original post);

West

North Pacific
Seattle
Vancouver Canucks
Calgary Flames
Edmonton Oilers

South Pacific
San Jose Sharks
LA Kings
Anaheim Ducks
Vegas Golden Knights

South Central
Colorado Avalanche
Dallas Stars
Houston Coyotes
Nashville Predators

North Central
Winnipeg Jets
Minnesota Wild
St. Louis Blues
Chicago Blackhawks

Again though, I know that neither model of mine would be adopted by the NHL, this is purely for fun, albeit still with intellectual conversation.
Pretty sure Seattle wouldn't want to have all Canadian teams in their division
 

Pantokrator

Who's the clown?
Jan 27, 2004
6,147
1,311
Semmes, Alabama
From a Flyers perspective, I agree with the Caps fan that the old Patrick division has the most relevance for their rivalry. Probably the one that makes the most sense geographically is the Flyers with the NYR, NYI, and NJ. The rivalry with Pittsburgh is relatively new, and geographically, they are closer to Columbus, Pittsburgh, and Buffalo.

I would prefer to keep Pitt in the division because of the current rivalry (past 12 years) but if it needed to be looked at geographically, they make more sense to be moved.
 

JianYang

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
17,753
16,119
I'm not gonna read the entire OP, but I noticed you had 4 team divisions.

I've heard elliott Friedman talk about this several months ago, and he believes Bettman is a proponent of this NFL style setup.

You might get your wish.
 

Mickey Marner

Registered User
Jul 9, 2014
19,225
20,758
Dystopia
What's the advantage of 4-team divisions? It doesn't solve anything. The west divisions are easy to make, it's the east where everyone wants a compromise between geography and rivalry that buggers it all up.
 

JianYang

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
17,753
16,119
What's the advantage of 4-team divisions? It doesn't solve anything. The west divisions are easy to make, it's the east where everyone wants a compromise between geography and rivalry that buggers it all up.

In the the OP, my biggest issue in the format actually came out of the west. I have a hard time believing vancouver and seattle wouldn't be in the same division. Its easily the closest opponent for either city.

The next closest ends up in another time zone in Calgary,
 

Mickey Marner

Registered User
Jul 9, 2014
19,225
20,758
Dystopia
In the the OP, my biggest issue in the format actually came out of the west. I have a hard time believing vancouver and seattle wouldn't be in the same division. Its easily the closest opponent for either city.

The next closest ends up in another time zone in Calgary,

I was speaking in general terms, not specifically the OP's setup. Geographically, Pittsburgh & Columbus and Florida & Tampa are in the wrong divisions.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->