NHL Realignment 2012-13 – Part III

[danishh]

tht depends if they allow Dallas to change, it seems to be the concensus tht if VAN is the team tht replaces the Stars in that division, I'll bet 2/3 will vote for DET to the East if at minimum WPG goes West, why deny DET wht they were promised when we went to the 3 division format and when TML went East? You wouldn't change the NE/Atlantic, all we want/are asking for is 2 equal conferences of 15, not 14/16, or 16/14. DAL can replace DET in the Central, can't it? It solves what the Stars are asking for, and DET gets wht they are asking for, you might ignite a rivalry between the Stars & Wild....

detroit is one of the premier franchises in the west, and additionally, the only two divisions that they would make sense in in the east want to stay as they are.

Detroit moving to the east fails automatically, even if they join the south east, because the 14 remaining west teams dont want to lose the best road draw in the league.

Propose a plan that has 2/3 of the league approving detroit moving to the east. I fail to see a way to make that happen.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

detroit is one of the premier franchises in the west, and additionally, the only two divisions that they would make sense in in the east want to stay as they are.

Detroit moving to the east fails automatically, even if they join the south east, because the 14 remaining west teams dont want to lose the best road draw in the league.

Propose a plan that has 2/3 of the league approving detroit moving to the east. I fail to see a way to make that happen.

you have to place DET in the East, otherwise you'll even have a worse imbalance than 16/14, nor does a 4 team SE even look right under any proposal bc at minimum you're definitely not going to get 2/3 approval for either Columbus or Nashville to join tht division as others have proposed.... Minimum, WPG goes to the NW, AND YOU DON'T HAVE to disturb either the NE or the Atlantic, bc all DET wants is wht it was promised.... if one of those teams leaves either division, then DET can switch into those divisions if it wants to, if you want balanced conferences, this is an easy choice, it also solves the timezone issues, even w/ Glendale splitting timezones depending on the months, you'd solve Dallas' complaint if you move them to the Central as DET'S replacement, and VAN replaces the Stars in the Pacific.... why does DET have to be in either the NE or the Atlantic if those franchises aren't to be disturbed?

 

[danishh]

once again, show me an alignment with detroit in the east that 2/3 agree with.

detroit leaving the west upsets 14 teams, and therefore is impossible.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

once again, show me an alignment with detroit in the east that 2/3 agree with.

detroit leaving the west upsets 14 teams, and therefore is impossible.

this is the proposal:

Eastern Conference:

Atlantic:

unchanged

Northeast:

unchanged

Southeast:

DET in WPG OUT


West:

NW:

Add WPG, DEL VAN;

CEN:

DEL DET Add DAL;

Pacific:

DEL DAL ADD VAN:

# OF Games is the same for all you don't have to change much, if anything all this is a an alignment thread, it solves wht DET wants, (I don't think they care what division they're in, as long as they are in the East, nor do I buy said argument that 14 west franchises lose them as a road draw)..... Aren't the divisions rotated every 2 or 3 years so eventually you'll see them in their traditional rotation.....

 

[optimus2861]

this is the proposal:

Southeast:

DET in WPG OUT

You're missing the point. 2/3 of the teams in the league need to vote in favour of a realignment. Moving Detroit to the eastern conference is opposed by a lot of teams in the west. Most if not all of the Central & Pacific teams would be near-certain "No" votes (Dallas could be 'bought off' by giving them the open spot in the Central), which gives you 8 or 9 "No" votes right away. It only takes 1 or 2 more to defeat the proposal, and we don't know how many teams in the east actually want Detroit to join them.

 

[barneyg]

So the same would go for Quebec City. I personally think that if Quebec gets a team then the 4 Eastern Canadian teams should be separated into different Divisions rather than leaving, let's say, Buffalo as the 5th wheel.
I'd put Quebec City and Montreal in one Division, and Toronto and Ottawa in another.
Besides, if in the West Vancouver gets separated from the Alberta teams then it seems only fair that the East has a similar alignment.

This. Quite frankly I see the "they don't want to lose their rivalries" argument to be rather unsubstantiated. The Leafs didn't seem to mind the Adams/Norris alignment in a 21-team NHL (BOS/BUF/MTL/QC/HAR and TOR/DET/CHI/STL/MIN). Personally I would love to see that Adams division alignment back, whoever replaces the Whalers in there.

 

[Kebekoi]

This. Quite frankly I see the "they don't want to lose their rivalries" argument to be rather unsubstantiated. The Leafs didn't seem to mind the Adams/Norris alignment in a 21-team NHL (BOS/BUF/MTL/QC/HAR and TOR/DET/CHI/STL/MIN). Personally I would love to see that Adams division alignment back, whoever replaces the Whalers in there.

Ottawa?

 

[Grudy0]

Editing for brevity:

this is the proposal:

Eastern Conference:
Atlantic: unchanged
Northeast: unchanged
Southeast: DET in WPG OUT
Western Conference:
NW: Add WPG, DEL VAN;
CEN: DEL DET Add DAL;
Pacific: DEL DAL ADD VAN:

# OF Games is the same for all you don't have to change much, if anything all this is a an alignment thread, it solves wht DET wants, (I don't think they care what division they're in, as long as they are in the East, nor do I buy said argument that 14 west franchises lose them as a road draw)..... Aren't the divisions rotated every 2 or 3 years so eventually you'll see them in their traditional rotation.....

And now you've found out the reason why this isn't only an alignment problem, but a scheduling one...

The current scheduling matrix is a 6-4-18 matrix, with:
6 games against four opponents within your division (three home, three away, total 24)
4 games against ten opponents within your conference (two home, two away, total 40)
18 games against 15 opponents within the opposite conference

Move Detroit from East to West, and Phoenix, Colorado, Los Angeles and Minnesota go from playing Detroit four times a year (two home, two away) to only seeing them once a year, and it mightn't be a home game. Move Detroit from East to West, and Chicago, Nashville, Columbus and St. Louis go from playing them six times a year (three home, three away) to playing them once a year, and it mightn't be a home game.

You're missing the point. 2/3 of the teams in the league need to vote in favour of a realignment. Moving Detroit to the eastern conference is opposed by a lot of teams in the west. Most if not all of the Central & Pacific teams would be near-certain "No" votes (Dallas could be 'bought off' by giving them the open spot in the Central), which gives you 8 or 9 "No" votes right away. It only takes 1 or 2 more to defeat the proposal, and we don't know how many teams in the east actually want Detroit to join them.

I agree, to a point. Here's my concern:

Detroit's basically thrown the olive branch on the table. Their main complaint has been about the amount of road trips to the Mountain and Pacific Time Zones (MTZ and PTZ). So instead of moving to the Eastern Conference, Detroit says they can stomach a Western alignment if they only have to play once in each MTZ and PTZ arena. That makes Detroit's olive branch look conspicuously like the original Bettman proposal, having four divisions and home-and-home play outside of your division.

The rumor is that twelve of 15 teams in the Eastern Conference in a straw vote defeated the Bettman plan, as the East doesn't want to change their divisions. The West has some serious issues in order to accept the current six-division, 6-4-18 matrix and make it fit with a slightly different alignment. I also am afraid the West will blow up an alignment plan that moves Detroit to the East when it doesn't fix anything else. I specifically have to wonder about a plan to put Vancouver in the Pacific, as I think that the three current Canadian-based Northwest Division teams may actually vote against moving Vancouver.

 

[nyrmetros]

Why is it so hard to put Nashville in the southeast and cbus in the east?

 

[optimus2861]

I specifically have to wonder about a plan to put Vancouver in the Pacific, as I think that the three current Canadian-based Northwest Division teams may actually vote against moving Vancouver.

I honestly don't know how VAN/EDM/CAL would vote on a proposal to move VAN from NW -> P and have WPG take their place. No team actually loses all-Canadian dates in such an alignment. VAN's simply get shifted around, while EDM & CAL actually gain. It would even be beneficial for VAN from a timezone perspective, to gain 3 division opponents in their own timezone. There shouldn't be a reason to vote against that!

If I had to guess, though, I suspect you're right, and that all three will dig their heels in, whine about breaking up, and hold out for a 4-Canadian team NW division.

 

[Grudy0]

Why is it so hard to put Nashville in the southeast and cbus in the east?

Assuming the Jets are moved West:

Eastern Conference:
Northeast (5): Boston, Buffalo, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto
Atlantic (5): New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Phildelphia, Pittsburgh
Southeast (4): Carolina, Florida, Tampa Bay, Washington

Put Nashville and Columbus in the East, and now you have 16 teams in the East with only 14 in the West. Something would have to be done to change the Eastern's divisions, and we see they don't like that already. Detroit screams murder because they were promised to move, and if neither Minnesota nor Dallas have their alignment fixed, most of the league will vote against it.

 

[KingsFan7824]

NYR, NYI, NJ, Phi, Pit
Bos, Mtl, Ott, Buf, Clb
Was, Car, TB, Fla, Nas
Tor, Det, Chi, StL, Min
Dal, Col, Phx, SJ, Ana
Van, Edm, Cal, Wpg, LA

 

[webonics]

This is my ideal alignment for the 2012-2013 season. Detroit-West is West, Rest is East. There are no divisions. It is based on the idea that contraction is a possibility.

 

[Grudy0]

This is my ideal alignment for the 2012-2013 season. Detroit-West is West, Rest is East. There are no divisions. It is based on the idea that contraction is a possibility.

A possibility that eight teams are folded by next year? Next.

 

[garry1221]

The 'Balance of power' argument that I've seen lately doesn't sit too well with me. I get that if Detroit goes east that the West would lose a big draw. It would also create a huge hole that teams would love to step forward to fill. The last statement is related to standings, not presence. Last season, #4 - #11 ended the season within 12 points. Replace some losses with some wins for one or more of those teams and you have possibly a more exciting race down the stretch for various playoff positions. That alone gives me reason to think that not all 14 GM's would be against the move. At least a handful currently outside the playoffs looking in, would think long and hard about the opportunity to grab a handful of the playoff revenues for themselves. At the same time those teams currently sitting 7, 8, 9 in the east may not like Detroit coming as it would almost certainly keep 2 of the 3 out of playoff contention completely. However those teams would have to weigh those options with the almost certain sellout that Detroit often brings.

Bottom line is, it's a whole lot more complex than just "these teams don't want to lose Detroit, so they'll vote not to lose Detroit".

 

[webonics]

A possibility that eight teams are folded by next year? Next.

Yeah, I guess you're right. If we're operating under the assumption that only two teams can move and two teams can fold for next season, then I would say get rid of Columbus, Florida, NY Islanders and Phoenix and then go from there. But that's just me.

 

[Grudy0]

Yeah, I guess you're right. If we're operating under the assumption that only two teams can move and two teams can fold for next season, then I would say get rid of Columbus, Florida, NY Islanders and Phoenix and then go from there. But that's just me.

I recall that the rumor was with the new CBA, the prediction was that two teams would fold and two would relocate during the course of that CBA. I don't believe that a new CBA would impact and enforce all changes by next season.

The only two teams with "real" issues are Phoenix and the Islanders, as Phoenix is owned by the League and the Islanders lease runs out by 2015. However, the Isles have a fairly major local TV contract and that may preclude them from either moving or folding.

With escalation of the cap midpoint, Florida and Columbus would have to generate enough revenues to cover that extra expense. Heck, any team that doesn't generate much in revenues would have to start to cover and increase those revenues to attempt to offset that expense.

I would be surprised with solid revenues finally coming from Carolina and Tampa Bay that those two would even be considered at this point. Dallas shouldn't have a problem as part of their bankruptcy sale is half of the operation and asset of the arena. St. Louis and Anaheim don't particularly look bad.

I can understand the issues with certain franchises, but I don't understand the dire straits that are forecast.

 

[Mad Dog Tannen]

here's mine (again):

 

[MoreOrr]

tht depends if they allow Dallas to change, it seems to be the concensus tht if VAN is the team tht replaces the Stars in that division, I'll bet 2/3 will vote for DET to the East if at minimum WPG goes West, why deny DET wht they were promised when we went to the 3 division format and when TML went East? You wouldn't change the NE/Atlantic, all we want/are asking for is 2 equal conferences of 15, not 14/16, or 16/14. DAL can replace DET in the Central, can't it? It solves what the Stars are asking for, and DET gets wht they are asking for, you might ignite a rivalry between the Stars & Wild....

Whichever team gets put in the East, I don't think it effects at all the decision about which team would take that Central Division vacancy.

- As some are saying, it could be as simple as Winnipeg being left in the Central.
- It could be the next simplest thing, putting Minnesota in the Central.
- Or it could be with Dallas ending up in the Central.

Whichever is the case, it has zero to do with which team ends up going East.

to address some of that:

- detroit to the east = 14 western teams pissed off. With the current requirement of 2/3 approval, detroit to the east is just impossible.

- vancouver to the pacific can be approved as long as enough other teams get what they want, mainly detroit staying in the west and the NE+ATL staying the same. As moreorr pointed out above, calgary and edmonton actually gain canadian matchups with winnipeg coming west.

- dallas, colorado, winnipeg, calgary ,and edmonton as a scrub division: have you seen the southeast for the past 15 years? This "scrub division" would probably pull out just as many stanley cups as the southeast has.

This all relates in one form or another, so continuing from above...

First off, with respect to Vancouver, I don't think any of us really know what the vote will be. I think it's a real toss up regarding whether the League will be more likely to put Vancouver in the Pacific, thus reducing the Northwest to only 2 Time Zones and not having Minnesota as the lone Canadian team; or putting Colorado in the Pacific and thus keeping Vancouver with the Alberta teams.

The vote could go either way. Personally. I believe Vancouver to the Pacific is the better option because I think it slightly solves more problems than it creates.

As you see though, the option of Minnesota leaving that Northwest Division I believe is the least likely, because it creates a lone US scenario for Colorado and does nothing to aid Dallas. Minnesota is the only winner in that situation.

Now, regarding Dallas... If there is any team in the League that could challenge Detroit and Columbus for having the worst alignment situation, it has to be Dallas. The League must recognize that, and I'd be surprised if they don't use this realignment opportunity to try to address Dallas' situation. That is also why I don't think Minnesota will get the Central Division spot. Just having Winnipeg in that Northwest Division automatically improves Minnesota's situation in that Division... and even more so if Vancouver is taken out of the Division.

Now onto Detroit...
This to me is a similar scenario to Vancouver in that who knows how the vote will go.

You're missing the point. 2/3 of the teams in the league need to vote in favour of a realignment. Moving Detroit to the eastern conference is opposed by a lot of teams in the west. Most if not all of the Central & Pacific teams would be near-certain "No" votes (Dallas could be 'bought off' by giving them the open spot in the Central), which gives you 8 or 9 "No" votes right away. It only takes 1 or 2 more to defeat the proposal, and we don't know how many teams in the east actually want Detroit to join them.

There's going to be those in the League who feel that Detroit is deserving of getting put in the East, and especially since there was that promise made at one time that it would happen. While on the other hand there are all the practical business reasons for why it shouldn't happen. It's all been stated before... Detroit is a key player in the West, and a fan-draw that simply the East doesn't need in comparison to the West because there are numerous such teams in the East. And putting Detroit in the East forces a convoluted alignment with Detroit in the Southeast, because neither of the other two Divisions want their groupings changed.

One possible deciding point here might be: What is stronger? The feeling that Detroit deserves the East, or the unwillingness for those two northeastern Divisions to allow any changes to their Divisions? And will most of those Western teams feel the same sympathy to Detroit?

On the other hand, putting Columbus in the East could perhaps be the more controversial move. Why Columbus over Detroit?

Putting Nashville in the Southeast, might ultimately be the least controversial because Nashville is the most logical fit in that Division.

But again, it all depends on which sentiment is stronger regarding where Detroit should be.

OH, and then there's this... Detroit offering a compromise solution regarding scheduling, which essentially gives the League an out. As I said back in Post #18, certainly it's possible to have a scheduling matrix that could lesson Detroit's and Columbus' alignment woes in the West.

 

[MoreOrr]

I honestly don't know how VAN/EDM/CAL would vote on a proposal to move VAN from NW -> P and have WPG take their place. No team actually loses all-Canadian dates in such an alignment. VAN's simply get shifted around, while EDM & CAL actually gain. It would even be beneficial for VAN from a timezone perspective, to gain 3 division opponents in their own timezone. There shouldn't be a reason to vote against that!

If I had to guess, though, I suspect you're right, and that all three will dig their heels in, whine about breaking up, and hold out for a 4-Canadian team NW division.

I honestly know that Vancouver will be 100% against it. Edmonton and Calgary are marginal question marks though. Certainly the Alberta teams will be in favor of Vancouver staying in the Northwest, but with the introduction of Winnipeg and the understanding that alignment issues do exist... It might just be possible to convince the Alberta teams that a vote to put Vancouver in the Pacific is the better option. Or even if they vote against it, those 3 votes against might not get any support from the rest of the League. Winnipeg might not even support keeping Vancouver in the Northwest because there's the significant Time Zone difference. But again, I just don't know which teams in the whole League might think that keeping Vancouver in the Northwest is a significantly important thing.

 

[MoreOrr]

3. Timezones and their relationship with population, the NHL.

- In canada, based on population alone, mountain has one too many teams and est has one too little.
- In the USA, est has 2 extra teams at the expense of cst.

6. teams/tz on distro map. FYI.

I think those two maps do have a place here in the alignment thread, if it may be permitted for me to copy them here.

 

[Mad Dog Tannen]

I honestly know that Vancouver will be 100% against it. Edmonton and Calgary a marginal question marks though. Certainly the Alberta teams will be in favor of Vancouver staying in the Northwest, but with the introduction of Winnipeg and the understanding that alignment issues do exist... It might just be possible to convince the Alberta teams that a vote to put Vancouver in the Pacific is the better option. Or even if they vote against it, those 3 votes against might not get any support from the rest of the League. Winnipeg might not even support keeping Vancouver in the Northwest because there's the significant Time Zone difference. But again, I just don't know which teams in the whole League might think that keeping Vancouver in the Northwest is a significantly important thing.

I think you're too focused on options that keep 6 divisions because that is your preferance. Everything that I have heard indicates that the NHL management (Bettman etc) is pushing for a 4 division solution for several reasons. I'm not going to go into too much detail, cause I'll be torn to shreds for no proof. I'll be shocked if Bettman doesn't get what he wants though, and he's been pounding the pavement with the GMs and owners to get alignment on 4 divs.

All of the western teams prefer the 4 division alignment, where they are split is how to handle playoffs. Furthermore, the only unwavering opposition (ignoring playoff structure for the moment) to the 4 div set up I posted is from Pits, Phi, NYR and NJ. Even with the NYI still in the East (and not moved to Seattle).

 

[MoreOrr]

I think you're too focused on options that keep 6 divisions because that is your preferance. Everything that I have heard indicates that the NHL management (Bettman etc) is pushing for a 4 division solution for several reasons. I'm not going to go into too much detail, cause I'll be torn to shreds for no proof. I'll be shocked if Bettman doesn't get what he wants though, and he's been pounding the pavement with the GMs and owners to get alignment on 4 divs.

All of the western teams prefer the 4 division alignment, where they are split is how to handle playoffs. Furthermore, the only unwavering opposition (ignoring playoff structure for the moment) to the 4 div set up I posted is from Pits, Phi, NYR and NJ. Even with the NYI still in the East (and not moved to Seattle).

I also recognize your preference for 4 Divisions, but there's this, if you haven't been following the reports:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=594302

Coming out of the Sept. 20 board meeting in New York, the League's governors -- for the most part -- expressed a level of comfort with the current two-conference, six-division set-up. The general sentiment was: We're doing pretty well in our present format.

So, while there are some high-level execs who feel a change to a "four conference" approach would better address some problem areas, there just doesn't seem to be enough of an appetite for dramatic change. Remember, any plan will need a two-thirds vote for approval.

I wouldn't say it's dead, but as the quote says, there's not much "appetite" for it.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

I think you're too focused on options that keep 6 divisions because that is your preferance. Everything that I have heard indicates that the NHL management (Bettman etc) is pushing for a 4 division solution for several reasons. I'm not going to go into too much detail, cause I'll be torn to shreds for no proof. I'll be shocked if Bettman doesn't get what he wants though, and he's been pounding the pavement with the GMs and owners to get alignment on 4 divs.

All of the western teams prefer the 4 division alignment, where they are split is how to handle playoffs. Furthermore, the only unwavering opposition (ignoring playoff structure for the moment) to the 4 div set up I posted is from Pits, Phi, NYR and NJ. Even with the NYI still in the East (and not moved to Seattle).

THE 4 DIVISION proposal has been basically been eliminated from consideration, Doc, the current alignment of 2 conferences, 3 divisions w/ 15 teams in each conference.....is the model we're working with currently, they just have to tweak the alignment.....bc we know the following:

WPG is in the West after this season, FACT, if that's all they decide as to per the league/Bettman's statement in October prior to the season starting.....

as More said, regardless of where the Jets are placed, one team goes East, likely Detroit, not a perfect alignment, but as placing Dallas in the Pacific to begin with under the previous/current alignment , it's no wonder they're objecting and wanting out.... it doesn't even look right w/ the Jets in the SE, BUT, the timing of the sale of the Jets, forced the schedule to keep WPG in the SE this season, w/o modifying all of the other 29 schedules and the master schedule, and no league, likes to be placed in the position of adjusting a schedule once it's released....

 

[Mad Dog Tannen]

I also recognize your preference for 4 Divisions, but there's this, if you haven't been following the reports:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=594302

For sure I have a preference for 4 divs, buts its slight. I'm just happy Phx has a team, anything else is gravy.

I'm fairly open to almost anything.

The problem I've heard is the current set up is incredibly inflexible for 2 things, team movement and future growth.

Additionally, I'm fully aware of that quote from Sept, what you quoted stated that "a few upper level NHL management execs" want a 4 division league.

All I'm saying is expect those execs to fight tooth and nail to get what they want, they are after all, tasked with looking after the well being of the league.

I'm not saying 4 divs will happen, I'm saying make sure you are keeping both options on the table, despite that development from Sept.