Seattle III: All Along the Watchtower (UPD: Rumored expansion 2014-15 Post#829)

[Agalloch]

Where are they going to put the 4 teams that finally need to be relocated in the next 10 years if they expand 2 more teams?

What are these 4 teams ?

 

[danishh]

I some of these cases, I don't think it would immediately be a case of "would ????-team be willing to be in a western Division", but rather 'would it make sense for the League to put ????-team in a western Division for a prolonged period of time?' Generally, it's just better to have strong potential rivals together in the same Division, not in separate Divisions or Conferences,... better and more practical as well. And otherwise, it would ultimately just be an alignment glaringly waiting to be fixed.

I used to think that the leafs (and sens and habs) would want to 'punish' toronto 2 as much as possible, and in that case permanent placement in the west would make a lot of sense, as it would guarantee a bunch more TV games out-of-primetime on the east coast as well as contribute to mainstream media irrelevancy. Since the sale of MLSE though, i now see the most likely path to a 2nd toronto team as through a bell-rogers divorce, and the 'loser' of that battle will push as hard as possible to have a new team in the east to maximize their media rights profits.

 

[Riptide]

Yeah, I agree that just Seattle for 31 is fine.

For Quebec, well, we got a brand new arena, that can help our cause, good hockey market, media ownership, we will pay the price that NHL is asking and fill the arena for years even if the teams sux.

What he means is, is that QC (who with a new building and the new CBA) could easily handle an NHL team, would not bring in a lot of new fans. Most people in QC who would support hockey, are already fans, and already spend money and watch hockey. Going into the PNW would bring in more new fans, and a lot of new money. More so than QC.

That said... I think QC deserves a team. Much like Toronto deserves another team. Both could easily handle it, and would be putting monies into the RS pot. Unfortunately, those new monies they would be bringing in would also raise the cap and make things harder on the smaller teams around the league.

 

[TheStranger]

What are these 4 teams ?

I'm not an NHL finances expert like many of you on here, however I know there are a lot of teams that lose money each year. Probably 8-10 of them?

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that the Isles, Panthers, Coyotes could all be looking for a new home within 15 years.

 

[Riptide]

Spot on!

How do you think QC would hurt the other owners? All I can see if their sucess could cause the cap and subsequent floor to rise further but I don't see that as a deterrent.

How would the floor rising help Florida, et all?

 

[Grudy0]

Come on, that's ridiculous. Are you saying the NHL is allergic to money? Sure, by increasing the league revenue it'll increase the salary cap/floor. But I think the NHL's goal is to raise revenues and become a truly major league, not wallow in mediocrity and have many bankrupt teams in horrible markets just to save money!

Right now, the main outliers in revenues aren't the bottom revenue teams: it's the Leafs, Canadiens and Rangers. If those teams revenues were barely above the next team, the cap mid-point would drop by about $10 million, and that would make a whole lot more teams healthy.

You're forgetting that by creating a franchise that becomes one of the top five franchises in revenues immediately that it really impacts the bottom four franchises...

Where are they going to put the 4 teams that finally need to be relocated in the next 10 years if they expand 2 more teams?

What would those teams be? The only franchise I believe that is portable in the next five years is if the Coyotes cannot make money.

If Forbes' valuations are correct, you'd think that the St. Louis Blues were in imminent danger, if not for the lease on ScottTrade Center.

I think the reasoning behind getting a team in Seattle darn near immediately is to have the Seattle NHL team get more revenues from the arena for non-hockey events. The current MOU would have the NHL team as a tenant if an NBA team comes first, but if the NHL team is first it may work out like a Dallas Stars/Mavericks type scenario, where both control the non-NHL/NBA revenues together.

And as we've seen, there appears to be a group in Portland that would have been interested in the Coyotes, we know Hamilton is interested if the Leafs can get past it (and I'm hoping they do), and in five years the landscape may change sufficiently to garner a review.

 

[MoreOrr]

I used to think that the leafs (and sens and habs) would want to 'punish' toronto 2 as much as possible, and in that case permanent placement in the west would make a lot of sense, as it would guarantee a bunch more TV games out-of-primetime on the east coast as well as contribute to mainstream media irrelevancy. Since the sale of MLSE though, i now see the most likely path to a 2nd toronto team as through a bell-rogers divorce, and the 'loser' of that battle will push as hard as possible to have a new team in the east to maximize their media rights profits.

Of course. Setting out to "punish" the incoming new franchise would just be a case of 'cutting off your nose to spite your face'. The Maple Leafs and Sabres may not want another team in the area, but if another team does come there then it would be more of a benefit to them to have that team in their Division. And in the Canadiens case, they'd absolutely want a QC team in their Division, I can't imagine otherwise. Just the same as Vancouver would want Seattle in its Division.

 

[Mightygoose]

How would the floor rising help Florida, et all?

Not at all. Then again, having 6 outdoor games and the potential new Canadian TV next season along with the extra revenue that it would generate can also raise the cap/floor as well but the league doesn't seem to concerned on that front.

 

[tank44]

They NHL has done 1 team expansions a few times in the past few years as seen with San Jose in 91, Nashville in 98, & Atlanta in 99.

Bettman see's success in Seattle by beating the NBA to the city. The first league in will be the winners. The second team in will not have the edge the first one does.

Also, if talking about Drafts, Seattle Thunderbirds have Matthew Brazal who could be one of those good stories if the Seattle NHL drafts him to keep someone local in Seattle for the new franchise to build upon.

 

[MoreOrr]

They NHL has done 1 team expansions a few times in the past few years as seen with San Jose in 91, Nashville in 98, & Atlanta in 99.

Bettman see's success in Seattle by beating the NBA to the city. The first league in will be the winners. The second team in will not have the edge the first one does.

Precisely! And they might not beat them, but the NHL doesn't want to come in a year after them, though a year before would be better.

 

[Riptide]

Where are they going to put the 4 teams that finally need to be relocated in the next 10 years if they expand 2 more teams?

What 4 teams!?

I'm not an NHL finances expert like many of you on here, however I know there are a lot of teams that lose money each year. Probably 8-10 of them?

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that the Isles, Panthers, Coyotes could all be looking for a new home within 15 years.

The Islanders lose money due to their crappy arena deal. Which will be solved when they move to Brooklyn in the next year or so. Panthers and Yotes... both are a possibility if they can't sustain some on-ice success (I'm thinking more Florida). Phoenix is likely a lost cause. However since the NHL owned it, my understanding is they've done the bare minimum in terms of promoting the team and whatnot. It's possible that a new owner could turn things around there. Unlikely, but possible. Personally I'd write off Phoenix (sorry PHX fans), and move them - but that's me. However as long as there's someone who's willing to shell out money to keep the team there... then that's their issue.

However QC, Toronto2, etc are all options.

Not at all. Then again, having 6 outdoor games and the potential new Canadian TV next season along with the extra revenue that it would generate can also raise the cap/floor as well but the league doesn't seem to concerned on that front.

No argument here.

 

[Kodi]

They NHL has done 1 team expansions a few times in the past few years as seen with San Jose in 91, Nashville in 98, & Atlanta in 99.

Bettman see's success in Seattle by beating the NBA to the city. The first league in will be the winners. The second team in will not have the edge the first one does.

Also, if talking about Drafts, Seattle Thunderbirds have Matthew Brazal who could be one of those good stories if the Seattle NHL drafts him to keep someone local in Seattle for the new franchise to build upon.

For the future draft yes Barzal COULD be a feel good story but he has a lot to prove before that can happen. There are a lot of former Thunderbirds (and Tips) that are already in the system or on teams. That's what makes expansion drafts fun because i could hope that we pluck former players like Marleau, Laich, Thompson, Hickey, Pickard, etc.

 

[DowntownBooster]

I some of these cases, I don't think it would immediately be a case of "would ????-team be willing to be in a western Division", but rather 'would it make sense for the League to put ????-team in a western Division for a prolonged period of time?' Generally, it's just better to have strong potential rivals together in the same Division, not in separate Divisions or Conferences,... better and more practical as well. And otherwise, it would ultimately just be an alignment glaringly waiting to be fixed.

If the NHL plans on expanding by 2 teams and capping the number of teams at 32, that's why it would be better to have both new teams in western locations (i.e Seattle, Houston, Portland or Las Vegas, etc). That way there is no need to request either Detroit or Columbus to move back into the Western Conference as I'm sure that both teams would rather stay in the Eastern Conference especially since they've just moved there.

 

[sandysan]

Right now, the main outliers in revenues aren't the bottom revenue teams: it's the Leafs, Canadiens and Rangers. If those teams revenues were barely above the next team, the cap mid-point would drop by about $10 million, and that would make a whole lot more teams healthy.

You're forgetting that by creating a franchise that becomes one of the top five franchises in revenues immediately that it really impacts the bottom four franchises....

so the NHL's model of growth is to hope that anchor clubs are run soo poorly that teams that ARE being run poorly don't look so bad in comparison ? how long is that sustainable ? What's the alternative, more and more RS schemes that increasingly punish well run teams with no possibility of ever recouping this investment ?

An a lot of this " But quebec wont make new fans" argument seems to conveniently ignore the fact that the NHL is still ( and will likely be in the near future) predominantly a gate driven league. Are there currently NHL fans in QC ? sure, but except for a few road trips to long island I dont see them spending anywhere near what they would in the new collissee ( or whatever it is going to be called).

Based on sheer population a self supporting team in Seattle could bring in a lot of new fans, but I am not convinced if they will bring in more revenue in the near to mid future. Winnipeg has already demonstrated that small markets can do well. And as nice as the idea is, the current NHL has shown a completely inability to penetrate many of these non traditional markets.

This "pro-growth" approach, if left unfettered, has the real possibility to eventually alienate established markets and the notion that people in QC will always support the nhl even as they see less "deserving" cities as a real possibility.

 

[IceAce]

I could compare the Seattle market I think with maybe Philadelphia. It's the same type of rabid fans there. It would be a great market if they can start building finally.

But is it possible that there is only 1 expension?

Except that Philadelphia is like 3x the size of Seattle.

 

[LouisOlivier]

Except that Philadelphia is like 3x the size of Seattle.

2 times, but they are the same type of fans as Philadelphia, annoying rabid and loud. Seattle will be the first good expansion team since Minnesota, and before Ottawa.

 

[brewski420]

They NHL has done 1 team expansions a few times in the past few years as seen with San Jose in 91, Nashville in 98, & Atlanta in 99.

Bettman see's success in Seattle by beating the NBA to the city. The first league in will be the winners. The second team in will not have the edge the first one does.

Also, if talking about Drafts, Seattle Thunderbirds have Matthew Brazal who could be one of those good stories if the Seattle NHL drafts him to keep someone local in Seattle for the new franchise to build upon.

I think it would be more beneficial for the NHL to beat the NBA into Seattle as opposed to other way around. NBA already has a fanbase built from the past that the NHL needs to build w/o an NBA team in place.

 

[Guy Legend]

Except that Philadelphia is like 3x the size of Seattle.

Not at all. Metro areas for each are around 6 and 4 million.

 

[TheStranger]

What 4 teams!?

I'm just guessing as the cap floor rises to 60 million in a few years, we'll see more teams struggling to stay afloat. Lots of teams are already losing money. If the NHL expands to the few viable markets now, I'm not sure there will be anything left for relocating if necessary.

 

[MoreOrr]

If the NHL plans on expanding by 2 teams and capping the number of teams at 32, that's why it would be better to have both new teams in western locations (i.e Seattle, Houston, Portland or Las Vegas, etc). That way there is no need to request either Detroit or Columbus to move back into the Western Conference as I'm sure that both teams would rather stay in the Eastern Conference especially since they've just moved there.

1991, the League had 22 teams, 13 of which were ETZ, but in 1992 it expanded with 2 more ETZ teams

In 1993, the League added yet another ETZ team plus a PTZ team.

In 1995, the west gained 1 by the relocation of the Nordiques to Colorado...but still: 15-ETZ, 11-rest of the League.

By 1998, the rest/west gained one, but only to have the ETZ gain another in 1999.

Finally again, in 2000, the rest/west gets one but so does the ETZ.

In addition to all of that, during that period of time there had been a couple of failed bids made by Houston.

So, with all of that, I don't see a history of the League trying to establish some balance between the number of ETZ teams and non-ETZ teams.
And there's no guarantee that Portland, Houston, Kansas City or whichever is going to put forward a reasonable bid to get an expansion team.

 

[danishh]

Except that Philadelphia is like 3x the size of Seattle.

2 times, but they are the same type of fans as Philadelphia, annoying rabid and loud. Seattle will be the first good expansion team since Minnesota, and before Ottawa.

i'd compare seattle to denver as an nhl market. Would be in a similar situation as a 4-sport market (5 if you count MLS). Seattle does have a population advantage though.

 

[mouser]

Except that Philadelphia is like 3x the size of Seattle.

1.6x times. And Seattle is growing at a much faster rate than Philly.

2000-2010 Census population growth
Philadelphia city: 0.6%
Philadelphia metro: 4.9%

Seattle city: 8.0%
Seattle metro: 13.0%

 

[superdeluxe]

i'd compare seattle to denver as an nhl market. Would be in a similar situation as a 4-sport market (5 if you count MLS). Seattle does have a population advantage though.

I think the MLS crowd vs the rest of the sports crowd is a little different.

 

[MoreOrr]

i'd compare seattle to denver as an nhl market. Would be in a similar situation as a 4-sport market (5 if you count MLS). Seattle does have a population advantage though.

Funny, I'd compare Seattle to Minneapolis-St. Paul, without MLS of course.

 

[Wingsfan2965*]

Seattle is comparable to Buffalo, IMO.

Much bigger, which will help, but also going to benefit a lot from being so close to Canada.