Realignment II: Well, why not, we've got another year to kill

[FakeKidPoker*]

Here is my new central or whatever.

Chicago
Winnipeg
Toronto
Detroit
Minnesota
St. Louis

That's good.. it's perfect.. don't split up Chicago-Detroit.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Here is my new central or whatever.

Chicago
Winnipeg
Toronto
Detroit
Minnesota
St. Louis

That's good.. it's perfect.. don't split up Chicago-Detroit.

that doesn't solve anything, Fake..... Daly has already said bc of the late transition from Atlanta to Winnipeg is why the Jets remain in their divisional alignment had they not been bought and isn't Dallas in the same time zone as the all of those except DET

 

[KingsFan7824]

The NHL Division:
NYR, NYI, NJ, Phi, Was, Pit, Bos, Mtl, Ott, Tor, Buf, Det, Chi

The Unrequited Love Division:
Fla, TB, Car, Clb, Nas, Stl, Dal, Min

The Nocturnal Division:
Wpg, Col, Van, Edm, Cal, SJ, LA, Ana, Phx

The NHL division competes for the Cup. 8 teams make the playoffs, seeded 1-8. Those 13 teams just play each other all year.

The unrequited love division competes for a chance to play in the NHL division if they prove they're good enough, but not right away, it'll take some time.

The nocturnal division...it doesn't really matter what they compete for, since most people are asleep by the end of the 1st period during games out west. So they'll compete for one of those little plastic souvenir Stanley Cups.

 

[Melrose Munch]

Bring Detroit into the east. Forget those guys out west whining. They Have Chicago LA and San Jose or Dallas.

 

[Nashvols]

The nocturnal division...it doesn't really matter what they compete for, since most people are asleep by the end of the 1st period during games out west. So they'll compete for one of those little plastic souvenir Stanley Cups.

And Vancouver still won't win one.

 

[FakeKidPoker*]

Predators or Blue Jackets move East

Detroit stays where they are.

 

[RandR]

What I don't get is why Nashville supposedly looks so great in the Southeast. Just because we're a Southeastern US city?

Well that would be the reason.

Anyways, there was a story in the Tennessean yesterday on this topic...

Nashville Predators split on realignment -- Realignment talk divides David Poile, Barry Trotz

Neither of these guys get to vote at the BoG but I thought the key quote was this one from Poile:

“If Detroit goes east, then that supports what I’m saying about needing a more balanced schedule,” Poile said. “If they go east, I don’t want to never play them. I’d still want to play them and maybe there would be a compromise that makes it work for more teams.”

To me, this point of view gives more credence to the gathering evidence that Detroit will indeed be moving to the East as previously promised. Having every team play every other team at least twice a year is being done at least in part as a compromise aimed at mollifying the concerns of Central Division and Western conference teams who won't like losing Detroit as a divisional or conference rival. Instead of seeing their ex-divisional or conference rival only every other year at home, they will see them home and away every year. And their season ticket holders will also get to see the East conference stars like Crosby and Ovechkin at home every season. That other benefit of course applies also to Eastern teams since they will get to see Western conference stars at home every year.

 

[Retail1LO*]

If push comes to shove, I'd just assume both Detroit and Columbus go east, and have 16 teams in the east, and 14 in the west. 2 teams hardly represents a HUGE imbalance. Two divisions of 8 in the east, two divisions of 7 in the west. I think it represents a fair compromise. The teams out west have far more travel than the teams out east.

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

If push comes to shove, I'd just assume both Detroit and Columbus go east, and have 16 teams in the east, and 14 in the west. 2 teams hardly represents a HUGE imbalance. Two divisions of 8 in the east, two divisions of 7 in the west. I think it represents a fair compromise. The teams out west have far more travel than the teams out east.

Retail:

WOULD IT HAVE BEEN EQUITABLE though if Daly had said Winnipeg goes West instead of staying in the SE this season

 

[RandR]

If push comes to shove, I'd just assume both Detroit and Columbus go east, and have 16 teams in the east, and 14 in the west. 2 teams hardly represents a HUGE imbalance. Two divisions of 8 in the east, two divisions of 7 in the west. I think it represents a fair compromise. The teams out west have far more travel than the teams out east.

I agree with you... I don't see an uneven number of teams as a huge imbalance. When trying to beat out other teams to make it into the playoffs, the number of teams in a conference varying by 14% at most (depending how you calculate it) makes less of a difference than how tough your divisional or conference rivals are.

Having Detroit goes East anyway along with either Columbus or a relocated Phoenix as the 16th East team seems reasonable to me.

 

[Bucky Katt]

If push comes to shove, I'd just assume both Detroit and Columbus go east, and have 16 teams in the east, and 14 in the west. 2 teams hardly represents a HUGE imbalance. Two divisions of 8 in the east, two divisions of 7 in the west. I think it represents a fair compromise. The teams out west have far more travel than the teams out east.

The Western teams gets an advantage in making the playoffs as there are only 7 teams in a division. The Eastern team that make the SCF gets an advantage in that they would have had far less travel and wear by the time they reach the finals.

 

[Nashvols]

And getting back to Nashville...while I respect Nashville considers the teams currently within its division rivals (and understandably so), I wonder how many other teams consider Nashville a rival. I don't know too many fanbases that get all geeked up when the Predlies are in town. Just sayin'.

I've heard many reasons (excuses) on that matter. It could be the type of game the Preds play (tight and defensive), which isn't as wide open and exciting as some like, and it could be the fact that we're just so damn lovable that no one can bear to call us a rival.

In any case, yes, we know that we are (relatively speaking) the new guys in town. We don't have the long standing history. But as each season passes, I guarantee that will change. I know Detroit doesn't consider us a rival, but if you consider how close the series has been in the past several seasons (it's about even), and how close we have come to winning the division on a couple of occasions, there has to be some sense of a rivalry brewing there. I think actually winning the Central would go a long ways into establishing the Predators' place in the Central.

It's kind of hard for the new team to become rivals with teams that have been around 40+ seasons. From our perspective, every Central team is a rival. It may not seem like much on your end, but hitting the reset button after 13 seasons would be a major disappointment to us.

Well that would be the reason.

Anyways, there was a story in the Tennessean yesterday on this topic...

Nashville Predators split on realignment -- Realignment talk divides David Poile, Barry Trotz

Neither of these guys get to vote at the BoG but I thought the key quote was this one from Poile:



To me, this point of view gives more credence to the gathering evidence that Detroit will indeed be moving to the East as previously promised. Having every team play every other team at least twice a year is being done at least in part as a compromise aimed at mollifying the concerns of Central Division and Western conference teams who won't like losing Detroit as a divisional or conference rival. Instead of seeing their ex-divisional or conference rival only every other year at home, they will see them home and away every year. And their season ticket holders will also get to see the East conference stars like Crosby and Ovechkin at home every season. That other benefit of course applies also to Eastern teams since they will get to see Western conference stars at home every year.

Yes, I was at the Skate of the Union...Poile and Trotz do seem to be split on it. One thing might be that Poile came from an Eastern Conference program (Washington), and Trotz is a Western Canadian. Trotz pretty much said he doesn't mind the Western road trips, while Poile would like to see us play the East more often. I don't think Trotz really cares about the balanced schedule...but Poile definitely wants to play Detroit at home every year (almost a guaranteed sell out, no matter what day of the week, and there are a lot of Michiganders here, so there is a little bit of an effort to "flush them out" of the stadium...because in the early years, there was always a lot of red at those games.

 

[KevFu]

Hate to say it, but the easiest solution divides PIT/PHI from NY teams.

Clean, simple divisions. Line has to be drawn somewhere, it's better to just split NY from Pennsylvania than try to divide the Canadian teams or NY teams. You can always try to rectify the divisional split by having more inter-division games.

Divisions are Pacific, Central. Northeast, and Southeast.
Any of Detroit, Nashville, or Columbus could be included in the SE. Colorado could go in either the Pacific or Central divisions.

I don't understand what makes that "easiest" and why "easiest" is a goal.

And I don't agree that lines need to be drawn somewhere. We're not carving up fiefdoms. We're grouping teams.

The goal is to make the best possible situation, a balance of time zones for start times, and rivalries. Travel is a secondary factor at best (as time zones accommodate most that goal; and the SCHEDULE ORDER is what makes travel bad or good, and not schedule allotment).


I'm still saying:
Adams - DET, BUF, TOR, OTT, MON, BOS, CAR
Patrick - NYR, NYI, NJ, PHI, PIT, WASH, FLA, TB
Norris - CHI, NAS, STL, DAL, MIN, WIN, CBJ
Smythe - VAN, EDM, CAL, SJ, LA, ANA, PHX, COL

And you add a flex schedule component to give CBJ some more ETZ games.

 

[Retail1LO*]

Retail:

WOULD IT HAVE BEEN EQUITABLE though if Daly had said Winnipeg goes West instead of staying in the SE this season

Would what have been equitable? I don't understand your question. Knowing that full fledged realignment is in the cards next season, I don't suppose it would have mattered whether they put Winnipeg in the western conference this season or not. Things are going to change.

I agree with you... I don't see an uneven number of teams as a huge imbalance. When trying to beat out other teams to make it into the playoffs, the number of teams in a conference varying by 14% at most (depending how you calculate it) makes less of a difference than how tough your divisional or conference rivals are.

Having Detroit goes East anyway along with either Columbus or a relocated Phoenix as the 16th East team seems reasonable to me.

Right. The ONLY problem is that a team moving from Phoenix to Quebec, would make it 17-13 instead of 16-14. Then you're shuffling around again. I think they move Detroit by itself first. If Phoenix moves to QC, Columbus gets hosed. If Phoenix stays in the desert or goes to KC, or somewhere else in the "west" then Columbus moves too. Just my opinion

The Western teams gets an advantage in making the playoffs as there are only 7 teams in a division. The Eastern team that make the SCF gets an advantage in that they would have had far less travel and wear by the time they reach the finals.

Right. Seems like a pretty equitable compromise, all things considered. And seeing as how there'd be a divisional format for the opening of the playoffs, it would simply mean that 3 teams in each division in the West would miss the playoffs, and 4 teams in each division in the East would miss the playoffs. Again...big deal. Sounds fair enough to me.

 

[Space Herpe]

Uneven just bugs me.

There's something inherently unnerving about it. (To me at least.)

30 teams just doesn't split up easily....

 

[CHRDANHUTCH]

Would what have been equitable? I don't understand your question. Knowing that full fledged realignment is in the cards next season, I don't suppose it would have mattered whether they put Winnipeg in the western conference this season or not. Things are going to change.


Right. The ONLY problem is that a team moving from Phoenix to Quebec, would make it 17-13 instead of 16-14. Then you're shuffling around again. I think they move Detroit by itself first. If Phoenix moves to QC, Columbus gets hosed. If Phoenix stays in the desert or goes to KC, or somewhere else in the "west" then Columbus moves too. Just my opinion


Right. Seems like a pretty equitable compromise, all things considered. And seeing as how there'd be a divisional format for the opening of the playoffs, it would simply mean that 3 teams in each division in the West would miss the playoffs, and 4 teams in each division in the East would miss the playoffs. Again...big deal. Sounds fair enough to me.

yeah it does, Retail which Western team had the League said WPG goes into its geographical divisional alignment this year instead of agreeing to remain in the SE.... IT MAKES NO sense to debate PHX at this time bc DM has stated that the ownership is not a concern and if they stay in Glendale, eliminates all those proposals of QUE, MEANS CBJ goes nowhere in any realigned scenario

 

[RandR]

Right. The ONLY problem is that a team moving from Phoenix to Quebec, would make it 17-13 instead of 16-14. Then you're shuffling around again. I think they move Detroit by itself first. If Phoenix moves to QC, Columbus gets hosed. If Phoenix stays in the desert or goes to KC, or somewhere else in the "west" then Columbus moves too. Just my opinion

Yeah, a 16-14 split makes sense, but 17-13 wouldn't.

The planned December vote on the realignment may very well take place in advance of any resolution to the Phoenix situation. I find it a little hard to imagine that Columbus would be moved to the East in a December vote if there was any potential that they might have to be moved right back to the West months later because Phoenix finally got resolved by relocating to, for example, Quebec City. For that reason, I can imagine Columbus only getting to move East in a December vote if there has already been a resolution to the Phoenix situation (that does not involve a move to the Eastern time zone).

It is one thing for Winnipeg to wait a year to be put into a proper division where they will stay for many years, it is another to move somebody back and forth except in completely unforeseen circumstances.

 

[Nashvols]

Uneven just bugs me.

There's something inherently unnerving about it. (To me at least.)

30 teams just doesn't split up easily....

Me too. If you keep the same playoff format of 16 teams getting in, then you have 50% of one conference making the playoffs, and 57% of the other conference making it. It may not seem like much, but [assuming this is under the 4 division alignment, with the top 4 in each division making the playoffs] each team in the West would have one less team to worry about in the standings.

I don't mind the 8-7-8-7 division numbers, just as long as conference seeding is done by overall standings, rather than standings within the division, or some sort of hybrid, like the top 3 in each division being guaranteed a spot, with 2 wildcard slots for the next highest in the standings. I just think if you go 16-14 in the conference alignment, it gives one side an advantage over the other.

 

[RandR]

If you keep the same playoff format of 16 teams getting in, then you have 50% of one conference making the playoffs, and 57% of the other conference making it.
...
I just think if you go 16-14 in the conference alignment, it gives one side an advantage over the other.

But isn't that smaller than any advantage gained by which conference you are in to begin with? For example, this year the Rangers made the playoffs as 8th seed in the East partly because it was a heck of lot easier to make it there than in the West. There were 2 West teams, Dallas and Calgary, who not only had more points than the Rangers this year, but they also earned those extra points in an overall better conference (and thus a harder schedule that was made even more hard by all the extra travel). Some years, no doubt, have even bigger discrepancies.

Just my opinion, but I also think both 50% and 57% of teams in conferences making the playoffs are too many to begin with. The regular season would be more meaningful if fewer teams made the playoffs. So, for example, I don't sympathise with Dallas or Calgary not making the playoffs this year with more points and a harder schedule than the Rangers because I think only the top 8-12 teams really deserve to make it anyway. Similarly, neither would I sympathise with a 9th place team failing to make it from the 16-team conference even though an 8th place team did from the 14-team conference.

 

[KevFu]

The Western teams gets an advantage in making the playoffs as there are only 7 teams in a division. The Eastern team that make the SCF gets an advantage in that they would have had far less travel and wear by the time they reach the finals.

I have never understood the mathematical concept that makes it "harder" to finish in the top four with an extra team. It's only "harder" if the schedule changes with the number of teams (like college sports, for example. Eight-team WCC plays 14 games, the 10-team Pac10 played 18).

I've heard (in baseball) someone say the NL is unfair because you have a one in six chance of winning the NL Central compared to a one-in-five chance of winning the NL East. But that's horsecrap. Because they are NOT pulling names out of a hat for playoff position. You're playing a SCHEDULE of the same number of games for the division. Put the Mets in the NL Central and they'd smoke that division. Every team in the NL is .500 or better vs the NL Central, AND the NL West (and four of the five were .500 or better in interleague!) It's not a "numbers game" it's a "number of quality teams" game.

What matters isn't 8 vs 7, but WHO THAT EXTRA TEAM IS. If they're great, it sucks. If they suck, it's great.

The only thing that changes is the odds the other team is better than you.

 

[RandR]

I have never understood the mathematical concept that makes it "harder" to finish in the top four with an extra team. It's only "harder" if the schedule changes with the number of teams (like college sports, for example. Eight-team WCC plays 14 games, the 10-team Pac10 played 18).

I've heard (in baseball) someone say the NL is unfair because you have a one in six chance of winning the NL Central compared to a one-in-five chance of winning the NL East. But that's horsecrap. Because they are NOT pulling names out of a hat for playoff position.

This is a good point. No team in the NL Central actually has a one in six chance of winning their division because:
- the winner amongst them is not being picked randomly
- the six teams are not equal to other (some are better than others)

Most teams would rather play in a smaller division if everything else was equal. Problem is, everything else isn't equal.

 

[MoreOrr]

How about this idea with only minor tweaks to current division alignment?

3 conferences, but very similar division structure.

Eastern or Atlantic Conference

New York
New York
New Jersey
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh

Washington
Carolina
Florida
Tampa Bay
Nasville


Central or Eastern Conference

Boston
Montreal
Ottawa
Toronto
Buffalo

Detroit
Columbus
Chicago
St Louis
Minnesota


Western Conference

Winnipeg
Colorado
Edmonton
Vancouver
Calgary

Dallas
Phoenix
Los Angeles
Anaheim
San Jose

Each team plays division rivals 6 times=24 games
...conference rivals 4 times=20 games
out fo conference teams 2 times=40 games
Total=84 games

Playoffs
All teams seeded 1-16, you could give the conference/division winners 1-3/6 seeds or just guarantee division winners a playoff spot.

Pros
-perfectly balanced schedule
-keeps most current division rivals together, without separating any major rivalries.
-allows midwest teams (Detroit, Columbus, Chicago, St Louis, Minnesota) to avoid travelling out west moreso than games in the east.
-puts 5 original six teams in one conference
-versatile for possible future relocations.

Cons
-Dallas, Winnipeg, Montreal, Boston, Ottawa get screwed to varying degrees regarding travel costs.
-Boston separated from New York area teams.
-Nashville is separated from all current division rivals, but gets some new southeastern rivals including Ovechkin/Stamkos.

I was about to post something very similar.
At least with respect to the proposed scheduling format, a 3-Conference structure would fit very well. A team would have its in-Divisions opponents/rivals and one other Division in the Conference which would consist of sort of a 2nd tier of rivals. And all other teams would be played against 2 times in a home and home.
24 games = 6 x 4
20 games = 4 x 5
40 games = 2 x 20
84 game total.

The only thing, as usual, is the teams that would make up each Division, and Divisions that would make up each Conference...

I think since the League seems to be on a path to try and eliminate 3 Time Zone Divisions, you'd have to change up the far-West a bit. You could try going a bit of a different route here:

WESTERN Conference
FarWest Division
Edmonton
Vancouver
San Jose
Los Angeles
Anaheim

InteriorWest
Calgary
Winnipeg
Minnesota
Colorado
Phoenix

(Of course, you could just go the standard route):
Pacific
Vancouver, San Jose, Los Angeles, Anaheim, Phoenix
Northwest
Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Minnesota, Colorado

CENTRAL Conference
Border Division
Montreal
Ottawa
Toronto
Detroit
Columbus

Midlands Division
Chicago
St Louis
Dallas
Nashville
Carolina

EASTERN Conference
Northeast Division
Boston
NY Islanders
NY Rangers
New Jersey
Buffalo

Atlantic Division
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Washington
Tampa Bay
Florida

Playoffs:
In each Conference, the Top seed in each Division makes the Playoffs, plus the next 2 best records. That makes 15 teams. The 16th team is the remaining "wildcard" team with the next best record in the 3 Conferences combined.

The 1st Round of the Playoffs would be primarily in-Conference, with the President's Trophy winner having the option of playing the 16th seed or the lowest seed in its Conference (which may be the same).
As for the other matchups, there are a few different scenarios, I won't go into them here.

The 3rd Round of the Playoffs would be the "Conference Elimination Round" in which the 4 remaining teams would be 2 from 1 Conference facing each other (thus that Conference is assured a Cup Final respresentative, and the other two Conferences facing each other, one being eliminated.

 

[MoreOrr]

So based on last year's results, the SE Division would have been:

Washington 107
Philadelphia 106
Pittsburgh 106
Detroit 104
Tampa Bay 103
Carolina 91
Florida 72

Um, can we get a re-do on that? I'd like to make the playoffs someday

Exactly! People want a strict Top-4 1st Round Divisional Playoff, and if you had a strong Division similar to that then Tampa wouldn't have made the Playoffs this past Season.

 

[MoreOrr]

Retail:

WOULD IT HAVE BEEN EQUITABLE though if Daly had said Winnipeg goes West instead of staying in the SE this season

They just didn't want to open the can of worms this Season, with Phoenix still up in the air especially. My question though, does the League have plans to have the Phoenix situation resolved by December? Or do they know now exactly where their emergency "out" location is, and how that location could effect their ultimate re-alignment plan in December? Because if they don't have that situation resolved, then shortly after they've done this re-alignment they may have to make some adjustments to it.

And also, let's just imagine that they decided simply to flip Winnipeg with Nashville for this coming Season (Winnipeg in the Central, Nashville in the Southeast)... Still there would be Detroit and Columbus up in arms, 'Why Nashville? This better be temporary!'

If push comes to shove, I'd just assume both Detroit and Columbus go east, and have 16 teams in the east, and 14 in the west. 2 teams hardly represents a HUGE imbalance. Two divisions of 8 in the east, two divisions of 7 in the west. I think it represents a fair compromise. The teams out west have far more travel than the teams out east.

Ok, sounds good, because really it's better that they both either stay in the West together (so as not to leave one solo ETZ team there) or they both go East. BUT, what happens if the Coyotes need to be relocated and Quebec City (or somewhere else east)? Or what happens with at least a hoped for Expansion team for Quebec City?

 

[KevFu]

Eaxctly! People want a strict Top-4 1st Round Divisional Playoff, and if you had a strong Division similar to that then Tampa wouldn't have made the Playoffs this past Season.

Yeah, you can't go by point totals, because those came against a schedule completely different than what they'd play. It'd be like saying a 6-6 SEC team would be 6-6 in the Sun Belt. Doesn't work like that.

you're pretty much have to take the avg points earned per game for versus each opponent, and multiply it times the number of times they'd play that opponent in the new setup. Then add it all together (for every team) and see what those numbers are.