If expanding the NHL should look to reduce roster size/ amount of players that dress

[joshjull]

If they expand I really wish they would take that as an opportunity to change the rosters size and how many players can dress.

Drop the number of players on a roster to 22. That would mean a total loss of 30 jobs (1 player x 30 teams). The NHLPA would get 44 jobs with 2 expansion teams. So it would net gain of 14 jobs instead of 44.

I would prefer dropping the roster to 21 players which would lead to a net loss, after expansion, of 18 jobs (60 roster spots cut minus the 42 added with expansion). But I doubt the NHLPA would be on board with that. Although less players per roster means more per player in a cap world, so that could be a selling point to the NHLPA.


The roster cut should be followed by the amount of skaters allowed to dress getting dropped from 18 to 16. Teams would likely dress; 2 goalies, 6 dmen and 10 forwards (3 lines with 1 extra forward). With a 21 or 22 man roster they would still have plenty of depth to cycle in to account for fatigue. It would 3 or 4 extra skaters depending on roster size.


To me that would be the easiest way to increase the level of skill throughout the league without drastic rule changes, etc. It would also give more ice time by default to the more talented players in the league. It would also accommodate an expansion of the league by adding two more teams without adding the full amount of roster spots. So there would be no dilution of the talent.

Thoughts.

Click to read more...

 

[Jim Bob]

To me that would be the easiest way to increase the level of skill throughout the league without drastic rule changes, etc. It would also give more ice time by default to the more talented players in the league. It would also accommodate an expansion of the league by adding two more teams without adding the full amount of roster spots. So there would be no dilution of the talent.

Thoughts.

I don't believe the skill level across the league would be altered with your suggestion because it won't reduce the number of top 6 F and top 4 D slots that need to be filled and those are your "skill level" slots.

It just affects the bottom line and the skill level in the AHL.

There are only so many top line talents to go around. So, adding more teams dilutes that top line talent a little more. I don't see a way around it outside of the KHL folding so guys like Kovy & Radulov have to come back to the NHL to get paid.

 

[joshjull]

I don't believe the skill level across the league would be altered with your suggestion because it won't reduce the number of top 6 F and top 4 D slots that need to be filled and those are your "skill level" slots.

It just affects the bottom line and the skill level in the AHL.

There are only so many top line talents to go around. So, adding more teams dilutes that top line talent a little more. I don't see a way around it outside of the KHL folding so guys like Kovy & Radulov have to come back to the NHL to get paid.

If you eliminate the worst players that dress on a roster you increase the talent level that plays nightly.

You're arguing about top 6 spots and I'm talking about the overall product. I'm talking about reshaping the way teams look on a nightly basis. Not having goons and plugs dressing and giving more ice time to the better players increases the talent thats on display nightly.

 

[Jim Bob]

If you eliminate the worst players that dress on a roster you increase the talent level that plays nightly.

You're arguing about top 6 spots and I'm talking about the overall product. I'm talking about reshaping the way teams look on a nightly basis. Not having goons and plugs dressing and giving more ice time to the better players increases the talent thats on display nightly.

Dropping the active roster from 20 to 18 (18 skaters to 16) may improve the product not by increasing the talent density within the forwards, but creating more mistakes due to the forwards getting tired and thus increasing the types of mistakes that create goals.

Or, it makes it worse because the D don't get more work and the forwards are too tired to create and finish chances later in the game.

I think the better approach to get plugs out of the game is to simply go with the NC$$ rules where a fighting major gets a game misconduct and a suspension. That will make players like John Scott extinct and increase the talent level on fourth lines throughout the league.

If they are going to open up the CBA to make the changes you suggest, I think the length of the regular season gets stretched out as they would have to create more recovery days so that the forwards can deal with the added ice time.

 

[Sabretooth]

I don't understand the "talent dilution" argument and why you think its a problem. In order to give fair thoughts on your suggestion I need to first understand the problem the solution is trying to solve. Could you give a little explanation of what the problem is?

 

[joshjull]

Dropping the active roster from 20 to 18 (18 skaters to 16) may improve the product not by increasing the talent density within the forwards, but creating more mistakes due to the forwards getting tired and thus increasing the types of mistakes that create goals.

Or, it makes it worse because the D don't get more work and the forwards are too tired to create and finish chances later in the game.

Thats a tad melodramatic.

I think the better approach to get plugs out of the game is to simply go with the NC$$ rules where a fighting major gets a game misconduct and a suspension. That will make players like John Scott extinct and increase the talent level on fourth lines throughout the league.

I'm not sure what NC$$ means. But I completely disagree with the idea of a game misconduct and suspension for fightng to address things. I enjoy fighting as part of the game but not staged fights. I like it when things boil over naturally and a fight ensues. If you implement your idea guys like Lucic, Backes, Ott, Hartnell, Simmonds, Clarkson, Foligno among man many other actual hockey players will lose a big part of their game and also alter the makeup of rosters as these guys lose some of their value. No team is going to want guys fightng at all if they will get suspended for it.

If they are going to open up the CBA to make the changes you suggest, I think the length of the regular season gets stretched out as they would have to create more recovery days so that the forwards can deal with the added ice time.

My thinking was not quite opening the CBA so much as a side agreement made to accommodate expansion. As for extending the season, how long are you looking at? Personally I think you're making way too much of how tired the forwards are going to be. The last two seasons have been ridiculous with the condensed schedules due to the lockout and now the Olympics. I think maybe add a week or two.

 

[CriminallyVu1gar]

In relation to teams being able to spend more per player: that might also reduce the number of quality NHL players that get bumped to the AHL because of contracts that are prohibitive.

 

[joshjull]

I don't understand the "talent dilution" argument and why you think its a problem. In order to give fair thoughts on your suggestion I need to first understand the problem the solution is trying to solve. Could you give a little explanation of what the problem is?

Ask the people worried about it because of expansion. That wasn't the point of my OP. I'm talking about changing the makeup of teams and who they dress nightly and how that would IMO positively impact the game. I suggested using any expansion as an opportunity to address it since the NHLPA isn't going to be on board with eliminating jobs. This way the expansion rosters make up for the lost roster spots per team. It also could elevate the fears of those worried about talent dilution caused by expansion since minimal or no jobs would be created.

 

[Paxon]

Ask the people worried about it because of expansion. That wasn't the point of my OP. I'm talking about changing the makeup of teams and who they dress nightly and how that would IMO positively impact the game. I suggested using any expansion as an opportunity to address it since the NHLPA isn't going to be on board with eliminating jobs. THis way the expansion rosters make up for the lost roster spots per team.

The problem is the NHLPA imo would never buy that thinking. They wouldn't see it as losing some jobs and replacing those jobs via expansion. They'd quite reasonably see expansion and the jobs it brings as inevitable.

 

[joshjull]

The problem is the NHLPA imo would never buy that thinking. They wouldn't see it as losing some jobs and replacing those jobs via expansion. They'd quite reasonably see expansion and the jobs it brings as inevitable.

Very true but a boy can dream

Although financial inducements could be brought to bear to try and sway them. Like some expansion money getting put into the pension benefits and the fact that they would make more per player with less players per roster. Just a couple of examples.

 

[1point21Gigawatts]

My question is, and maybe this isn't a huge factor, what do teams do for that extra depth? Injuries decimate team rosters and even losing one spot for a skater can hurt. Would this proposal include redefining minor league contracts, the waiver process, or emergency call-ups?

 

[joshjull]

My question is, and maybe this isn't a huge factor, what do teams do for that extra depth? Injuries decimate team rosters and even losing one spot for a skater can hurt. Would this proposal include redefining minor league contracts, the waiver process, or emergency call-ups?

The depth doesn't really change. You have 3 or 4 extra skaters depending on roster size. If you need more players than that you simply do what teams have always done.

 

[Jim Bob]

Thats a tad melodramatic.

I was pointing out the law of unintended consequences.

I could see your proposed change working as you intended or having unintended consequences that are counter to what you were trying to accomplish with the change.

I'm not sure what NC$$ means. But I completely disagree with the idea of a game misconduct and suspension for fightng to address things. I enjoy fighting as part of the game but not staged fights. I like it when things boil over naturally and a fight ensues. If you implement your idea guys like Lucic, Backes, Ott, Hartnell, Simmonds, Clarkson, Foligno among man many other actual hockey players will lose a big part of their game and also alter the makeup of rosters as these guys lose some of their value. No team is going to want guys fightng at all if they will get suspended for it.

NC$$=NCAA

I was referring to the NCAA Men's Ice Hockey rules around fighting majors.

Personally, I think it's only a matter of time before the NHL goes that way. Especially if there are more lawsuits around concussions and enforcers are at the forefront of it due to brain injuries caused by legalized bare knuckles fighting.

Only time will tell.

My thinking was not quite opening the CBA so much as a side agreement made to accommodate expansion. As for extending the season, how long are you looking at? Personally I think you're making way too much of how tired the forwards are going to be. The last two seasons have been ridiculous with the condensed schedules due to the lockout and now the Olympics. I think maybe add a week or two.

I doubt the NHLPA goes along with that as the owners are highly motivated to get expansion done as it will give each owner over $15M in expansion fees.

The NHL isn't going to try and bluff the NHLPA and say they will only expand if the NHLPA goes along with smaller rosters.