NHL to Seattle Volume XVI - It's Official. Seattle to join the league for 21-22 season.

[AdmiralsFan24]

If you don't mind, who's your team?

Nashville but I also live in an AHL city that has a schedule where you play maybe 10 teams and play some teams as many as 12 times a year, which is ridiculous.

 

[KevFu]

I agree the AHL schedule is ridiculous for travel cost reasons.

What's interesting to me is that you like it, but you also live in the THE BEST time zone to watch sports in. I loved living in the CTZ, Half the games starting at 6 pm, I could watch the Mets/Islanders and THEN go out. Or the late games ended by midnight (I'm a night owl, though).

Now I live in the San Jose TV market (moving to PHX though) and because of blackout rules I had to watch the Sharks at Islanders game this season on cable at 9:30 a.m. I woke up and fired up my DVR to watch the beginning over coffee.

If you ask Sharks fans, they'd be on board with less 4 p.m. games starting when they're at work.
Or anyone in the East going from 10 games starting at 9 pm or 10 pm to only five.

 

[tony d]

Here in Newfoundland we have our own time zone which is a hour and a half ahead of EST. So by the time the early games are over it's time for bed for anyone working. Being a Sharks fan now I expect a few late nights as most Sharks games begin at 12 AM down here.

 

[gstommylee]

Seattle expansion vote by NHL on track for next month

Looks like things are on track for a December vote on Seattle. Although daly again pushed the idea of a 21-22 start time if arena construction doesn't finish in time for 20-21 season. Before people start saying 21-22 21-22 21-22, no one knows for sure how things will take until demo/construction starts and they get the demolition done. Nov 2020 is imo a worst case scenario completion date.

And comment from NHLSeattle

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

I think they should worry about the stuff that needs to be done first before the stuff they WANT done. That, or hire more employees and spend the extra money. In this case it's entirely worth it.

 

[gstommylee]

I feel Daly's comments were being made about the possibilities that the team won't start until 2021-22 season is being blown out of proportion. Nov 2020 is when the noise variation ends. It doesn't necessary imply construction won't be finish by then. This wasn't the first time daly and the NHL brought up 2021 start time and won't be last.

Always better to have an extra month or two on the noise permit in case if needed. Frankly again no one knows for sure how soon will the arena will get done and open until the demo and digging part is done. I think there is some leeway built it given OVG isn't touching the roof line helps. We'll find out by next spring may maybe Juneish when we get a full idea of when the arena will be done and if its in time or not.

Remember NHL folks are lawyers they'll leave themselves open for the possibility that the team start will be delayed a year. I trust OVG that they'll do their best to get the arena done and open in time for the 20-21 season.

 

[BattleBorn]

I feel Daly's comments were being made about the possibilities that the team won't start until 2021-22 season is being blown out of proportion. Nov 2020 is when the noise variation ends. It doesn't necessary imply construction won't be finish by then. This wasn't the first time daly and the NHL brought up 2021 start time and won't be last.

Always better to have an extra month or two on the noise permit in case if needed. Frankly again no one knows for sure how soon will the arena will get done and open until the demo and digging part is done. I think there is some leeway built it given OVG isn't touching the roof line helps. We'll find out by next spring may maybe Juneish when we get a full idea of when the arena will be done and if its in time or not.

Remember NHL folks are lawyers they'll leave themselves open for the possibility that the team start will be delayed a year. I trust OVG that they'll do their best to get the arena done and open in time for the 20-21 season.

The construction schedule is tight as it is, and as the reasons I've given previously (and used as a reason to delay announcement, which doesn't appear to be coming to pass) also apply to a delay of the opening day.

They're trying to smash a year and a half's worth of construction into a year and a half's worth of time, and that rarely works out in the construction world.

 

[gstommylee]

The construction schedule is tight as it is, and as the reasons I've given previously (and used as a reason to delay announcement, which doesn't appear to be coming to pass) also apply to a delay of the opening day.

They're trying to smash a year and a half's worth of construction into a year and a half's worth of time, and that rarely works out in the construction world.

It really depends on how soon they get the demo/digging done and that's an estimate 6 months. It could be less. No one knows until its starts and finishes.

The whole nov 2020 date is just mostly for noise variation ending. it may or may not have anything to do with the completed date. It could be done september 2020 as far as we know.

 

[voyageur]

I agree, and that's why Pit and Philly need to be in the same division. Both fanbases want that, and therefore, both front offices want that.

And, that brings the question of what to do with COL/ARZ vs EDM/CGY? I think it's a sure thing that CGY and EDM will prefer to be with Vancouver as opposed to Winnipeg. But I also think that Arizona will want to be with the California teams and Vegas. So, how do you do it? Big question. I keep thinking about what you've written often, Kev....

Do a total re-work, some thing like this:
WALES:
Pacific: SJS, SEA, VAN, COL
Central: EDM, CGY, WPG, MIN
Eastern: DET, TOR, OTT, BUF
Atlantic: CBJ, PIT, PHI, WAS
CAMPBELL:
Pacific: LAK, ANA, ARZ, VEG
Central: STL, CHI, DAL, NAS
Eastern: MTL, BOS, TBL, FLO
Atlantic: NYR, NYI, NJD, CAR

You play YOUR HALF OF THE CONTINENT IN YOUR CONFERENCE: 7 teams x 4 = 28
THE OTHER HALF OF THE CONTINENT IN YOUR CONFERENCE: 8 teams x 3 = 24
THE OTHER DIVISION WITH YOUR SAME NAME IN THE OTHER CONFERENCE: 4 teams x 4 = 16
THE OTHER 12 TEAMS: 12 teams x 1 = 12
PLUS 2 more games vs designated rival: MIN v WPG for example.

Playoffs would be division winners + the next 4 teams in each conference. Seed one through 8.
Division winners get home ice in Round 1. After that, it's the team with the most points.
In this way, everybody's happy. The west coast teams still have only 16 games in the ETZ. All games except 12 are against teams you compete for a playoff berth with OR historical/area rival.


Currently, by PPG, this would leave as playoffs:
Wales: Min, Tor, Van, Cmb + Wpg, Cgy, Pit, Was
Campbell: Nas, TBL, Isles, Arz + Bos, Mtl, Dal, StL with Arz dropping seed if they win the first round. And, by chance, the only first round series across 2 time zones would be ARZ/BOS.

But, that will never happen.

There will never be an 8 division alignment that works. Too many teams get left out in bad situations. Minny profits from Chicago, St. Louis in their division, as does NBC. Couldn't separate Montreal-Toronto, etc. Travel equity is an issue too. You'd never get the votes.

Simple solution, Arizona has no owner, no lease, no equity. Houston is interested. Jacobs wants Houston. Arizona goes to Houston. NHL keeps media happy. Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton stay together, with a new team in proximity.
Vegas has a rivalry with California, and geographical proximity so you combine the two poles into a division. Houston is the central market missing, increases value of the next TV contract. And it is poetic justice that Gordie Howe's WHA team, that folded one year too soon, comes back from Bobby Hull's WHA team, that came full circle.

 

[LeafalCrusader]

I like 4 8 team divisions myself, top 2 teams in each division make the playoffs. Your schedule would be 6 games vs. divisional rivals for 18 games, 4 games vs. conference rivals for 48 games and a game vs. a team in the other conference for 16 games. There's your 82 game schedule right there.

I like it. Only change I'd make is top 4 in each conference of 8 make the playoffs instead of top 2 in each division in the event that one division is drastically better than the other.

We're not going to find a matrix that pleases everyone but 4 conferences each with 2 divisions of 4 is my favourite.

 

[gstommylee]

I like it. Only change I'd make is top 4 in each conference of 8 make the playoffs instead of top 2 in each division in the event that one division is drastically better than the other.

We're not going to find a matrix that pleases everyone but 4 conferences each with 2 divisions of 4 is my favourite.

Its going to remaining 4 division 2 conference 8 teams each. NHL is not going to split things up like that. It makes zero sense and it'll mess with the schedule.

 

[KevFu]

I genuinely think that people who like discussing this stuff tend to have brain physiology that predisposes them to craving order, or structure, or (in my case) closure. I'm not saying that in a derogatory way.

There's a college sports realignment board (yeah, a whole board devoted to just THAT) and some of the posters there were like "Well, if that happens, the Pac-10 will add four teams." And their two extra candidates just didn't seem right... eventually I put two and two together and realized that they're not thinking about what would REALISTICALLY HAPPEN. They're thinking "8 FBS conferences of 16, 22 Division I conferences of 16. That's Symmetrical. That's Order. That's PERFECT." Even though it's never going to happen because they just don't have easy groups like that.

I don't say that to mock. (My brain craves closure. I'm gung ho on expansion talk because "30/31 isn't complete." Seattle for 32? Not complete yet because Quebec and Houston don't have teams. If the NHL adds those guys and Kansas City* and Hamilton (4 divisions of 9; 4 vs D, 2 vs C, 1 vs OC = 84 games!) my brain gets the closure it craves.

But that's the thing: Kansas City? There's like four cities BETTER for the NHL than Kansas City. KC just FITS as the 9th Central team for symmetry and geography. The NHL isn't going to pick KC for symmetry. They're taking the better market for MONEY.

So my point is: don't let a brain craving order/symmetry/geography fool you into thinking something is a good business decision. It's all going to come down to money and they'll fit a grid around what they have.

The grid is a TOOL to use to manage the business you run. You don't operate the business to fit the grid.

 

[MNNumbers]

There will never be an 8 division alignment that works. Too many teams get left out in bad situations. Minny profits from Chicago, St. Louis in their division, as does NBC. Couldn't separate Montreal-Toronto, etc. Travel equity is an issue too. You'd never get the votes.

Simple solution, Arizona has no owner, no lease, no equity. Houston is interested. Jacobs wants Houston. Arizona goes to Houston. NHL keeps media happy. Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton stay together, with a new team in proximity.
Vegas has a rivalry with California, and geographical proximity so you combine the two poles into a division. Houston is the central market missing, increases value of the next TV contract. And it is poetic justice that Gordie Howe's WHA team, that folded one year too soon, comes back from Bobby Hull's WHA team, that came full circle.

I actually believe you are both right and wrong. The proper alignment for $$ is probably something like what KevFu has been pushing, which is similar to what I posted, above. However, it's far enough out of the box that I can't see the owners ever going for it.

As to what actually happens when Seattle joins? I've said several times that I want to see if Arizona is still here when they drop the first puck at Seattle Arena.

Houston is geographically perfect, and Jacobs wants to be there, which are 2 powerful indicators. However, if Fertitta won't pay the going rate, it won't happen. I think that, in one small sense, what we have seen is Fertitta and the NHL negotiating in the media. I've written it often, but I think that, just to get everyone's money back, Fertitta would have to pay more than 400M right now. I don't think he wants to do that, when he says "Hockey struggles south of the Mason/Dixon. It's just a fact....."

This is why the matter is so fascinating. The NHL may have painted themselves into a corner. For example, IF it happens (and, in one way I hope it does to see what Gary does.......In another I don't because of the fans who do exist in Phoenix)......
Arizona can't get a new arena.
Houston won't pay.
Now what????

Quebec would love the team, but NHL doesn't really want that... so,
what happens???

 

[cbcwpg]

Concerns raised over KeyArena being ready to host NHL by 2020

**

This might not be an issue since Seattle might get a free year on the calendar when the next lockout starts.

 

[gstommylee]

Concerns raised over KeyArena being ready to host NHL by 2020

**

This might not be an issue since Seattle might get a free year on the calendar when the next lockout starts.

Its also taking what daly said out of proportion (imo). Noise variation ends nov 2020. Komonews has always tend to take negative spins on the arena articles. I already shared my thoughts on it. But i don't see it being an issue. Daly is not going to guarantee anything.

We'll see where things are at by next summer once OVG is done with demo and the digging. The plan is still to get the arena done and open by October 2020. Always good to have an extra month for the noise variation if needed.

 

[OG6ix]

Are there any temporary venues that the team can play in? Could they do a Safeco field/Centurylink field temporary setup like the Lightnight had with Trop or the Raptors did with the Skydome?

 

[gstommylee]

Are there any temporary venues that the team can play in? Could they do a Safeco field/Centurylink field temporary setup like the Lightnight had with Trop or the Raptors did with the Skydome?

No there isn't any temporary facilities that will work on a temp base.

 

[voyageur]

I actually believe you are both right and wrong. The proper alignment for $$ is probably something like what KevFu has been pushing, which is similar to what I posted, above. However, it's far enough out of the box that I can't see the owners ever going for it.

As to what actually happens when Seattle joins? I've said several times that I want to see if Arizona is still here when they drop the first puck at Seattle Arena.

Houston is geographically perfect, and Jacobs wants to be there, which are 2 powerful indicators. However, if Fertitta won't pay the going rate, it won't happen. I think that, in one small sense, what we have seen is Fertitta and the NHL negotiating in the media. I've written it often, but I think that, just to get everyone's money back, Fertitta would have to pay more than 400M right now. I don't think he wants to do that, when he says "Hockey struggles south of the Mason/Dixon. It's just a fact....."

This is why the matter is so fascinating. The NHL may have painted themselves into a corner. For example, IF it happens (and, in one way I hope it does to see what Gary does.......In another I don't because of the fans who do exist in Phoenix)......
Arizona can't get a new arena.
Houston won't pay.
Now what????

Quebec would love the team, but NHL doesn't really want that... so,
what happens???

I'm of the opinion that it is a done deal. Just a matter of time. I see a lot of similarities to the Atlanta situation. When the Thrashers traded for Buff, and signed Buff to a long term deal, i was of the opinion that Buff had insight that he was going to Winnipeg. Same with Ekman Larsson. The Thrashers went up for sale early in the 2010 season. Yotes up for sale now, with no arena other than one that is unsustainable, and a heaping debt, to operate with. After a buyout of minority owners, like the Thrashers. The NHL is trying get value for their franchise. $400 million seems like the right price. You think that is what a Houston franchise would be valued as in the NHL. It's slightly more than the Jets, who bought in at $110 million, plus $60 million for the owners. I think the NHL might get $360 million for the Yotes, +$90 million for the owners. How the NHL's $100 million loan factors in is a mystery. But with $250 million in debt, there's not a lot of value in the franchise. I don't know if the NHL has to pay indemnity to Glendale, without a lease, seems like it is just hand washing. I think Barroway gets a return on his investment. Fertitta gets an NHL ready franchise, with some good players. I can't believe that Jacobs sounds off about Houston, getting in before Quebec, without there being some basis. The NHL wanted Vegas and Seattle. Now they have them. Houston is a bigger market than Phoenix, with better demographics. I think Fertitta is just stating the obvious. Waddell in the Thrashers final year, final stab at traction, went out of his way to put a black presence on the ice. That was precipitated by the fact that as Waddell stated, in a city of 4.5 million people, 2/3 don't know who the Thrashers are. I think the oil boom brings enough money in to ensure Houston has a fan base. Even with the Aeros of the 70's Houston was one of the better drawing teams. Gordie Howe helped, but I don't think it will be that difficult of a transition. I can't see the NHL moving Colorado into the Pacific, to pry Calgary and Edmonton out. You're adding extra travel cost to all the teams in the northwest and the Central, going to make it contentious to vote on. Houston fits. And their time is now. Might be some posturing but I see it as destiny.

 

[PCSPounder]

I like how every argument about who realigns to where is based on TV start times, because they're the most important thing to TV ratings and revenues... but reducing the number of out-of-time zone non-conference games from 16 to 8 is bad for business and TV ratings?

I've shown time and time again with attendance data that while MARQUEE East vs West games bring in more fans per game; there's WAY MORE non-marquee matchups, and those all bring in far fewer fans per game, resulting in a ticket loss.

So 32 non-conference games sells less tickets and have more out-of-time zone start times for the entire league as a whole.
And 16 non-conference games sells more tickets and has fewer out-of-time zone start times for the entire league as a whole.

And we'd chose more non-conference games why? The only valid argument I've seen is "It's more equitable for travel, and that effect is apparent in free agency: The East rarely leaving the tightly clustered group of 13 teams from DET to MON to DC makes more free agents want to sign with those 13 teams which hurts competitive balance.

To which I'd say 16 non-conference games and pairing the Smythe and Patrick in a conference would be a better solution.

Kev, I've seen you argue this a few times by now, and I understand what you're saying. I get the math.

The math assumes that people are linear. Maybe people are. Fans aren't.

MLS Cascadia... MLS practically tried to reduce other games and have us play 4 times each. We pushed back. It's more interesting to see the whole league. (If anything, it's more exhausting to plan more massive away trips)

If you want to argue that NHL is different than MLS... maybe. However, I doubt the league gets more credibility this way. In fact, I can show the evidence that because of soccer in general, more people overall are aware of league structures and would question a move like this. Your idea might lose more credibility than the math suggests it is worth.

 

[PCSPounder]

No there isn't any temporary facilities that will work on a temp base.

There are facilities that, with further additions of ownership money, can be used on a temporary basis. Several of them, frankly. With money comes Tacoma. If San Jose could use the Cow Palace, Seattle could use Everett.

Of course, as per usual, message board posters can always find ways to spend the owners' money, which doesn't necessarily get the owners to do that.

 

[gstommylee]

There are facilities that, with further additions of ownership money, can be used on a temporary basis. Several of them, frankly. With money comes Tacoma. If San Jose could use the Cow Palace, Seattle could use Everett.

Of course, as per usual, message board posters can always find ways to spend the owners' money, which doesn't necessarily get the owners to do that.

Tacoma lacks an ice planet and i don't think the NHL group wants to spend that money just for a month. Problem Everett arena is only 8k Kent is only 6. NHL already said they aren't going to do that given its not ideal enough for a temporary facility.

 

[PCSPounder]

Tacoma lacks an ice planet and i don't think the NHL group wants to spend that money just for a month. Problem Everett arena is only 8k Kent is only 6. NHL already said they aren't going to do that given its not ideal enough for a temporary facility.

The private money flying around could take care of the ice plant (and I'd think proactively in terms of A YEAR rather than a month given the potential that the NHL resolves its labor issue- consider me a hopeless romantic that way- but again, there I am spending the owner's money).

As I thought about it on the AHL board, though, the argument you really should be using is that Tacoma treats the Dome more like a convention space than a sports arena.

I'm one who thinks you can add temporary seats in Everett. Again, spending the owner's money. And nobody's talking about Kent.

 

[tony d]

Yeah, I think that until Seattle's arena is 100% ready they won't start play. It'll be either in Seattle or not for the new team.

 

[LeafalCrusader]

Its going to remaining 4 division 2 conference 8 teams each. NHL is not going to split things up like that. It makes zero sense and it'll mess with the schedule.

It makes a lot of sense and the schedule works great. See I can make grand statements too.

 

[snovalleyhockeyfan]

The private money flying around could take care of the ice plant (and I'd think proactively in terms of A YEAR rather than a month given the potential that the NHL resolves its labor issue- consider me a hopeless romantic that way- but again, there I am spending the owner's money).

As I thought about it on the AHL board, though, the argument you really should be using is that Tacoma treats the Dome more like a convention space than a sports arena.

I'm one who thinks you can add temporary seats in Everett. Again, spending the owner's money. And nobody's talking about Kent.

And they do. The only sports events of note they have in there are the state high school football, basketball and wrestling championships. With respect to Everett there is room at the one end of the arena for some temporary seating but I don't think it's very much. Maybe 1,000 seats tops and that's being generous. Kent could work but I think Tommy's right. For purposes of this exercise, there really isn't a temporary facility of any consequence that could be used for a year if they wanted to go that route. Tacoma could be doable IF they want to put the AHL team there and have to spend on the ice plant. Other than that, no.