NHL maps out major changes (Realignment to 4 divisions?)

[IceAce]

Uneven divisions? For the love of God Bettman, don't wade into MLB territory

MLB has to do it that way otherwise you'd have interleague play every day of the season.

 

[rabi]

Just a thought..

Maybe the unevenness of the divisions leaves the door open to expansion, something the NHL was seriously considering pre-recession.

Ding-ding-ding!!! We have a winner!!!

 

[Crayton]

There is no flipping way that the Leafs would ever agree to go to the west again.

Most likely the conferences will only mean something after the divisional portion of the playoffs. So unless the Leafs win a playoff series, they won't have to worry about playing San Jose more often than Washington.

To eliminate all this gripe with uneven divisions they could simply make it top 3 in each division make the palyoffs then the next 2 most points regardless of the division.

This is what I say, for sure. Maybe even pull 4 league-wide wild cards (max 2 per division)

Just a thought..

Maybe the unevenness of the divisions leaves the door open to expansion, something the NHL was seriously considering pre-recession.

Expansion and... Relocation. It happens, as much as Gary would hope it doesn't. If Phoenix hangs around a few years after this realignment before moving to Hamilton, you may not have to worry about realignment because you could still have 2 divisions of 7 and 2 of 8 after the move.

Here are the changes I'd make to Gary's plan:
1) Each division sends 3-5 teams (no more or less considering the division-heavy schedule)
2) Each round, participants from 2 divisions are grouped and reseeded together (not always an East+South pairing)
3) Seeds can be fudged up to 1-spot to keep division matchups in playoffs

 

[Alex The Loyal]

MLB has to do it that way otherwise you'd have interleague play every day of the season.

I suppose. But maybe if they sorted out the DH/No DH crap that wouldn't be a big problem wouldn't it?

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

The idea sounds great.

 

[Gobo]

They could add/take away two teams to make the divisions even...

 

[Alex The Loyal]

Yeah, the unevenness of the divisions definitely hints at expansion. So Quebec City and Houston/KC/Seattle, get ready!

 

[Crayton]

Pacific, Midwest, South, and the East are the 4 divisions.

I am going to map out what teams will most likely fit into each conference geographically, but I will leave out teams that could be in multiple conferences.

South:
Carolina
Florida
Tampa
Nashville

Pacific:
Vancouver
Calgary
Edmonton
San Jose
Anaheim
Pheonix
LA

Midwest:
Detroit
Columbus
Minnesota
Chicago

East:
NYR
NYI
NJD
Boston
Montreal

Any objections so far? So that leaves 10 teams that could be bouncing around.
Dallas: MW or S
St. Louis: MW or S
Washington: E or S
Winnepeg: MW or P
Colorado: MW or P or S
Pittsburgh: MW or E
Philly: MW or E
Buffalo: MW or E
Ottawa: MW or E
Toronto: MW or E

So obviously, the Mid West is the most versatile. The Pacific is the most set in stone.

I think the deciding factor will be who/where are the prospective cities for relocations/explansions. Divisions that are likely to gain a team would only have 7 teams to start out, and Divisions most likely to lose a team would have 8. If the NHL feels Phx is going to move, I suspect they start out with 8 teams in the Pacific.

I am guessing that because we are using "Midwest" and "South" instead of the more traditional "Central" and "Northeast," that the "South" will include Central teams like Dallas and Nashville, while the "Midwest" will include Northeast teams like Toronto and Buffalo.

We must remember that one of the biggest concerns is having too many traditional markets in one conference (the East). So bringing in Eastern Canadian teams into the West is probably the way they are going.

Although I have my own guesses, I'd expand the definites like this:

South: Carolina, Florida, Tampa, Nashville, Dallas

Pacific: Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, San Jose, Anaheim, Phoenix, LA

Midwest: Detroit, Columbus, Minnesota, Chicago, Toronto, Ottawa, Buffalo

East: NYR, NYI, NJD, Boston, Montreal, Philadelphia

The Final Pieces:

The two "western" divisions (still don't like the West/East monikers) each have 7 teams, so Winnipeg goes into one, likely the Midwest.

Colorado is so far away from the South and the Eastern Conference in general, so I'd switch them with Columbus, sending Colorado to the Western Conference (Pacific) and Columbus to the Eastern Conference.

St. Louis would then be forced out of the Western Conference and into the South with Central teams Nashville and Dallas.

Columbus, Washington, and Pittsburgh can't all fit in the East Division. One or two must be in the South. While I'd like to see the old Patrick Rivals all together in the East, I will take a guess that ONLY because the "East" is not called the "Atlantic," that Washington will stick with their Southeast Division bretheren in the South, and Columbus and Pittsburgh will stick together in the East. Alternatively Columbus could stick with STL and NAS going into the South, but that seems a somewhat odd division name for a team from Central Ohio.

 

[edog37]

I don't mind the 4 divisions idea, but I don't like the playoff format. There will be a lot of undeserving teams making the playoffs such as last season's St. Louis Rams, and a lot of deserving teams missing out. The divisional round sounds like fun, but it will be flawed. I think the current playoff format is best.

divisional playoff makes the regular season much more relevant...

 

[SoCalShark]

Yeah, the unevenness of the divisions definitely hints at expansion. So Quebec City and Houston/KC/Seattle, get ready!

Throw So. Ontario/Hamilton and Portland, OR into the mix. Of those who don't get Phoenix (assuming CoG doesn't continue to payout), 2 of them will get a team in 5 seasons.

Maybe even going away from the east / west monikers and really have four divisions with no true conferences. Pacific winner vs South winner (Campbell) and East vs Midwest (Wales) in the Stanley Cup semi-finals after 2 rounds of Divisional playoffs. Every few years flip the south and mid-west playing for the Wales and Campbell trophies. Also, the division banner is given to the winner of the division playoff rounds instead of the regular season. Makes a team build for the playoffs instead of regular season success

 

[Grudy0]

Let's do this...

The impetus for this appears three-fold:
1) Creating home-and-home for teams outside the division, so every team plays twice, and
2) Forcing the first round of playoffs to be divisional play
3) keeping most game in-division means less travel.

Pacific:
Vancouver
Calgary
Edmonton
Los Angeles
Anaheim
San Jose
Winnipeg
Phoenix

Midwest:
Detroit
Chicago
Minnesota
St. Louis
Dallas
Nashville
Colorado

Northeast:
Boston
Montreal
Ottawa
Toronto
Buffalo
Rangers
Islanders
Devils

South:
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington
Carolina
Florida
Tampa Bay
Columbus

Keep in mind under this scenario, although Detroit remains in the West, Detroit's travel is greatly reduced, as they would play a majority of their games in the Eastern Time Zone (all home games (41) and every one of the Eastern Conference away games (15), total 56), while keeping most of their rivalries intact.

This also allows for any movement of the Phoenix franchise in case Glendale doesn't foot the bill next year.

Phoenix to Houston? Moved to Midwest.
Phoenix to Seattle? Stays in Pacific, could move Winnipeg to Midwest.
Phoenix to Quebec or Hamilton? Back to drawing board. I'd be amenable to move the Devils into the South to keep a rivalry with Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and Washington and leave the "New York" teams in the Northeast.

It also allows for possible expansion.

 

[ThirdManIn]

Something is always going to be "unfair". It's life. The way I see it, with seven or eight teams in a single division you have less chance that a division will have one dominant team, some mediocre teams, and a terrible team or two. It would probably actually promote parity rather than destroy it. I'm just glad the league doesn't look to HF Boards for ideas. They would never get anything done.

 

[IU Hawks fan]

Are you serious? Have you ever heard of the AL East? The A's haven't been good in 5 years, the Mariners have lost 100 2 of the past 3 years. So basically it comes down to the Angels and Rangers in the division.

Every team has won the AL West at some point in the past 10 years. AL East is a 2 sometimes 3 team division but 2 teams (O's, Jays) haven't been competitors for ages.

 

[Kitsune]

I like this... but scrap the conferences. Then, when we get down to 8 teams, have it be ranked on points 1 to 8, where 1st meets 8th, 2nd vs 7th etc.

 

[garnetpalmetto]

Throw So. Ontario/Hamilton and Portland, OR into the mix. Of those who don't get Phoenix, 2 of them will get a team in 5 seasons.

Maybe even going away from the east / west monikers and really have four divisions with no true conferences. Pacific winner vs South winner (Campbell) and East vs Midwest (Wales) in the Stanley Cup semi-finals after 2 rounds of Divisional playoffs. Every few years flip the south and mid-west playing for the Wales and Campbell trophies.

Just no. Why overcomplicate things for no good reason?

Not a fan of this proposal at all. I think the current League format is fine and has worked well. Until such time that the League expands I don't think it should move away from it. Not a fan of divisional playoffs either, nor a fan of unbalanced divisions (which are one of my bigger gripes regarding MLB). I do like the balanced schedule with regards to playing teams in the other conference home-and-home though.

 

[Bucky Katt]

If the 16 ETZ teams end up in two divisions of 8, I think the disadvantage of having an additional team in the division more than makes up for the disadvantage that all non-ETZ teams face in terms of their travel schedules.

I'm not really in favour of the playoff format - I would rather they go to two rounds of divisional playoffs and then semi-finals and finals of divisional playoff champions. My second choice would be one round of divisional playoffs and then a complete reseeding of the remaining eight - this would enable any two teams to meet in the SCF which I think would be kinda cool and unique in North American sports.

 

[LadyStanley]

http://www.twincities.com/ci_18334600?source=most_viewed&nclick_check=1

Minnesota really wants out of NW division (and into Central) due to time zone and travel (Van, Cal, Edm, etc.).

From a geographical standpoint, we are the Central Division," Leipold said. "The natural rivalries are not against western Canadian teams but Chicago and Detroit, St. Louis and maybe Columbus, maybe Nashville. Those are the kind of rivalries we'd like to see come back."

There seems to be some "power struggles" between the Detroits and other teams with some clout that may have a bearing on how the new alignments are done.

 

[Ogopogo*]

That's completely false!

The AL West is often the toughest division the game. People like to look at it as in the AL West you have a 1/4th shot to win the division and in the NL Central you have a 1/6th, and that's a really bad way to look at it. More teams in a division means MORE GAMES AGAINST BAD TEAMS in your division. The NL Central is usually the easiest division to win because the Pirates and at least 1 of the Cubs, Reds, Brewers, and Astros are always terrible. The Angels, A's, Mariners, and Rangers would all KILL to be swapped with an NL Central team.

????

1/4 is always better than 1/6 odds at winning a division. There is no guarantee as to who will always be bad.

 

[Canuckommunist]

Fantastic idea, would applaud the NHL if they did it. I would honestly prefer if they just scrapped Conferences all together, either retiring the Campbell/Prince of Wales or awarding them in some different way. Especially if the idea is one home/away series with each team + others. Not sure how I feel about divisional playoffs, unless the amount of teams in the playoffs is changing. They were a great way of encouraging rivalries before but it does also lead to some er.. teams that shouldn't make the playoffs who inevitably do.

Glad it's being considered though. Lots of the current alignment just doesn't make geographical sense.

 

[MoreOrr]

Any objections so far? So that leaves 10 teams that could be bouncing around.
Dallas: MW or S
St. Louis: MW or S
Washington: E or S
Winnepeg: MW or P
Colorado: MW or P or S
Pittsburgh: MW or E
Philly: MW or E
Buffalo: MW or E
Ottawa: MW or E
Toronto: MW or E

Winnipeg > Pacific > No
Colorado > South > No
Philadelphia > Midwest > No

The rest is possible, though in some cases still stretching it.

 

[MoreOrr]

Yeah, the unevenness of the divisions definitely hints at expansion. So Quebec City and Houston/KC/Seattle, get ready!

But I thought that people have been saying that the League/Bettman has made suggestions that there is no Expansion expected on the horizon.

My stomach is churning that this 4-Division idea has even been brought up. Regardless if there is Expansion sometime in the future or not. Could the League actually have forgotten why it went away from large Divisions in the first place? This is just not a very good marketing idea.

I also cannot see how the Top-4 spots can be guaranteed a Playoff spot. That idea will surely not be used (hopefully none of this). As to whether they'd go with the Top-3 spots plus the next 2 best records, or the Top-2 spots plus the next 4 best records, I suppose either is fine... but one of those options would have to be chosen.

So then imagine, by mid-Season, fans of teams buried at or near the bottom of an 8-team Division will just say, 'forget it', my team has no chance of leap-frogging all those teams above them in the Division.

To the League: Please stay with 6 Divisions, and work within that to find a solution to the alignment problems!

 

[r0bert8841]

Winnipeg > Pacific > No
Colorado > South > No
Philadelphia > Midwest > No

The rest is possible, though in some cases still stretching it.

I agree with Colorado and Philly, but I was thinking Winnipeg might want to be with the 3 Western Canadian teams. But I agree geographically Winnepeg wouldn't be likely for the Pacific.

 

[MoreOrr]

????

1/4 is always better than 1/6 odds at winning a division. There is no guarantee as to who will always be bad.

And 1/5 is better than 1/8 odds.

And being 3rd or 4th in a 5-team Division gives you better odds to finish 1st or 2nd, than being 5th or 6th in an 8-team Division.

 

[Crayton]

I like this... but scrap the conferences. Then, when we get down to 8 teams, have it be ranked on points 1 to 8, where 1st meets 8th, 2nd vs 7th etc.

Definitely, if you MUST put 4 teams from each division in the playoffs, then mixing the 8 first round winners is the best way to go.

I would also allow for some leeway (2 spots) in allowing teams to continue to be matched against their division opponents.

If, for example, Vancouver and Anaheim advance to the Second Round from the Pacific Division, then allow them to be matched up if Anaheim is #8, #7, or #6 (Vancouver would obviously be ranked #1).

 

[MoreOrr]

Let's do this...

The impetus for this appears three-fold:
1) Creating home-and-home for teams outside the division, so every team plays twice, and
2) Forcing the first round of playoffs to be divisional play
3) keeping most game in-division means less travel.

Pacific:
Vancouver
Calgary
Edmonton
Los Angeles
Anaheim
San Jose
Winnipeg
Phoenix

Midwest:
Detroit
Chicago
Minnesota
St. Louis
Dallas
Nashville
Colorado

Northeast:
Boston
Montreal
Ottawa
Toronto
Buffalo
Rangers
Islanders
Devils

South:
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Washington
Carolina
Florida
Tampa Bay
Columbus

You missed one "impetus"... getting both Detroit and Columbus out of the West.

Of course, not having an East-West (nor North-South) is another solution to that problem.