Will Changes Weaken Parity?

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by salty justice, Jun 8, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
View Users: View Users
  1. salty justice

    salty justice Registered User

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    7,194
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Almost all of these changes that are aimed at increasing offense and "excitement" also seem like they are going to widen the gap between the good and bad teams.

    1. 20 Team Playoffs
    Seeds 7-10 now will play an extra 3-5 games before the real 16 team playoffs begin. I like the extra hockey, but it also IMO puts those teams at a disadvantage to the 1-6 seeds who are basically given a "bye" week. The 7-10 teams will be more fatigued and at a higher risk for injury. Could the Ducks or Canes have made it to the Finals with more fatigued and/or injured players?

    2. Shootouts
    This is a game for goal scorers only (and 2 goalies). Is it fair for a team who can afford to have 5 slick forwards be given an almost automatic advantage and extra point over a team who can only afford 3 or chose to ice a more defensive team? How likely is an upset in a shootout?

    3. Smaller Goalie Equipment, Bigger Nets etc
    I think we will see a clear distinction between the goaltenders who need the extra 2 inches of padding to be effective (we know who they are) and the top guys that dont. Instead of having a group of maybe 20-25 starting goaltenders with fairly comparable skill, there will be more varying skill levels or maybe just a couple greats and a bunch of 2nd rate guys. This would very likely increase the differences in pay even more between someone like Broduer and someone like Aebischer in that you are either very valuble or simply expendable. Do you think the NHLPA will want to make the difference between effective and non effective players more noticeable?

    4. Touch Up Offsides, Wider Neutral Zone etc
    It costs a lot more money to ice a heavily offensive or faster team over a team that can simply trap and win defense games. It's also harder based on the available talent between the teams.

    Im not saying Im for or against any of these changes, and I know some will not be implimented. But it seems like they will almost certainly hurt the worse off (or more defensive) teams and help the better (or more offensive) teams. Is it wise, for a league that is trying to increase revenue, to weaken the parity of the teams? Are you going to pay to see a game you know your team has almost no chance of winning, or even one that you think isnt going to be close either way?

    Most people loved the high flying 80s NHL because there was more offense. But, remember that back then the talent level wasnt nearly as watered down as it is today and those players grew up playing that all offense type of hockey. Younger players today have been taught defensive systems for most of their lives. Will they be able to adapt? Will the tons of "grinders" play a less effective role in the new NHL?

    I think there is a great chance that the NHL will be shooting themselves again in the pocketbook with decisions that could hurt worse than the lockout.
     
  2. MykeAbner

    MykeAbner Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2005
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Could the Ducks or Canes make it to the finals if they didn't even get into the playoffs to begin with?

    A salary cap should nullify that.

    I don't really think it matters if the NHLPA wants it because it should be done. The best goalies should remain the best goalies, and they should be good goaltenders due to their skill and not their pads.

    Again, we are looking at a salary cap here.
     
  3. salty justice

    salty justice Registered User

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Messages:
    7,194
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    -A salary cap isnt going to mean that every payroll is the same. Most teams arent going to be able to afford the same that they did before the lockout. A cap is just going to proportionately shrink payrolls, the differences will still be there.

    -And even if every team was close in payroll, that still doesnt mean the number of good goal scorers will be equal on every team.

    -The NHLPA does have a say in changes even if the changes "should be done." We'll see how eager they are when proposed changes will significantly lower the salaries of the majority rank and file membership.
     
  4. Sanderson

    Sanderson Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2002
    Messages:
    5,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Hamburg, Germany
    Home Page:
    Better star-players don't equal success in a shootout.

    Even borderline NHLers aren't talentless, they have made the league for a reason and have at least some ability to score.
    If DEL players can score against Giguere, Kölzig, Conklin and some former NHL-backups or top-of-the-line AHL-goalies, then NHL-players, who are clearly better, should have no problem as well.
     
  5. futurcorerock

    futurcorerock Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,831
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    I'm fine with a playoff with more than eight teams. They need to severely shift their focus from having every team play to having more divisional rivalries. The southeast division is going to do a much better job propping itself back up competitively if they are consistently chasing the Stanley Cup champion Lightning, rather than playing a game for merely 2 points vs someone like Nashville or the Mighty Ducks. Bracketing the divisions so that the top 3 teams in the division to earn autobids and then have a "wildcard" would be fantastic.

    This helps to eliminate the near-catastrophe of having the entire Northeast Division in the playoffs, and helps slight the parity as well as making it so non-playoff teams are always lurking in the background for that chance to make the playoffs. The Orioles sure aren't complaining this year about unfair competition in their division, so this would all-the-better make the playoffs as profitable for everyone as possible
     
  6. me2

    me2 Calling out the crap

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    33,587
    Likes Received:
    1,511
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Location:
    Blasting the bull***
    A better reward for finishing in the top 6. A bone for the weaker teams in that they get a half chance. A bit of everything for everyone.

    I don't like shootouts. One thing I can see is that this might create more rolls fors offensive players with holes in their games rather than grinding pluggers. Handy to have shootout specialist/PP specialist. This could open the games up a bit as these players will be weaker in defense and a little more offensive in 5-on-5.

    No problems here. Reward the better goalies with better contracts. The salary cap will mean that creates a gap somewhere else.

    Not a bad thing. A league needs a few better teams and a few weaker teams. Just so long as they all have a strong chance to grow into good teams.


    Watered down? The numbers don't bear that out. There are no more Canadians playing than their used to be. If the league was watered down there should be a lot more weak Canadians finding jobs. Its just not happening, other countries have filled the talent gap.




    I think there is a great chance that the NHL will be shooting themselves again in the pocketbook with decisions that could hurt worse than the lockout.[/QUOTE]
     
  7. Tiki

    Tiki Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    4,502
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Desk Job
    Location:
    Goo Lagoon
    Home Page:

    Gotta agree there. Darren McCarty scored the highlight reel goal of the '97 playoffs and he's not exactly first line material. If the NHL goes to shootouts, you can bet that every team will be able to put a good squad of 5 shoot specialists togeather.
     
  8. Any proof to that statement? Seems more like a Chicken Little statement than a well thought out argument.

    Personally I think this is the dumbest idea floated by the NHL. Allowing another four teams into the playoffs and creating an imbalanced format doesn't make much sense. Hockey is a sport of momentum where the ebb and flow of the game work for the team that has it in their favor. Teams that have several days off traditionally come out flat when they play their first game after the break. To me, this system places your top teams at risk and creates a greater opportunity for upset.

    Looking at you comment and the fatigue factor, I personally think its bull. Calgary made it to the finals and had more injuries than any other team during the playoffs. When the Flames took out the top seeded Red Wings they had six starters on the sidelines and it didn't affect them one bit. Depth is more a part of the game than having a star. I feel no pity for teams that don't see this and think that loading up on a few "stars" is the way to go.

    I think you are dead wrong and the shootout will actually be the catalyst for change in the game and will help open it up a bit, on multiple levels. First of all teams will now have to make a decision as to whether they dress their fourth line as a bunch of checkers/goons with little offensive talent, or whether they wish to dress an offensively gifted player that is maybe a little softer on the defensive side of the puck. This will open the game up to specialists who are there for only their offensive gifts and see these players get power play and shootout assignments. This will shorten the bench and cause other players to become a little more fatigued during a game and lead to more mental breakdowns. Mistakes is what causes opportunity so the changes made to the lineups will cause more mistakes and more opportunity.

    And that's a bad thing? This is one change the NHLPA will not be able to block. Everyone associated with the game at almost every level agrees that the Michelin Man has seen his last hockey game and that its time to get the equipment reigned in. Yes, some goaltenders are going to be exposed for the frauds they are, but that's life. It will create opportunity for other players along the way.

    As I mentioned, ebb and flow are key to the game. How can anyone see this as a bad thing?

    First of all, who are the more offensive and who are the more defensive? Seems to me that the best teams can open it up when they need to and shut other teams down when they need to. That's what leads to victory.

    I laughed out loud when you wrote this jewel. Are you going to pay to see a game you know your team has almost no chance of winning, or even one that you think isnt going to be close either way? And what do you think has been going on for the last decade?

    Well, this paragraph completely invalidated everything you said. When you trot out this old line of BS it casts the rest of your post in the same light. The player pool is at its deepest in NHL history. There have never been more players with skill playing the game at any one time. That is why scores are they way they are. The 1980's saw a period of disparity not only across the league but also on the rosters themselves. You had Wayne Gretzky playing alongside Dave Semenko for crying outloud. Dave Semenko wouldn't get a sniff of the NHL today. Heck, he may not have the ability to play in the AHL. There are no longer Brad Marshs in the game because of the depth available. Every team can ice 18 players that are similar in skill. The teams that have the advantage are the teams that have the 3-5 star players who do have a skill advantage. Those that can afford that talent will still have the advantage. A cap prevents all of that talent pooling in two or three pockets around the league.

    The damage has already been done. Nothing the NHL can do now will have any where near the effect of the cancelled season had. And with all the pissing and moaning from people like yourself about the game being bad ANY change is likely a change for the good.
     
  9. Weary

    Weary Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2003
    Messages:
    1,068
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's his thesis statement for crying out loud. He goes on to state why he believes it. It's just a bit ridiculous to attempt to take on a thesis as a complete argument.
     
  10. Yup, and part of a thesis is the defense. There was no defense, just conjecture.
     
  11. WC Handy*

    WC Handy* Guest

    This thread further proves that too many people don't get what kind of parity the league is seeking.

    They don't want a league of .500 teams. They still want good teams and bad teams every season. What they want is for every team to have a legit shot at being good over a span of a few years.
     
  12. Jester

    Jester Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    34,075
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    St. Andrews
    it absolutely puts the 7-10 at a disadvantage going into the second round... however, the revenue gained by the extra games would be good for the league, and getting these usually younger teams playoff experience will only help them as they go forward and hopefully move into the 1-6 group of teams in the years to come.

    how many young good teams have we seen get the high seed and then go out in the first round? happens a lot, quebec (pre-colorado) had excellent teams prior to the move, but struggled in the playoffs... they finally got their **** together when they got to colorado (Roy didn't hurt) and sealed the deal. i think a large part of that was learning how to play in the playoffs, which you can only do when you are in the playoffs in the first place.

    i also don't think it is necessarily a bad thing to help your "better" teams go farther in the playoffs. however, the bottom line is that revenue is what they are looking for if they do this, and given the state of the league i'm not going to argue with them on that.

    funny, i was just commenting via IM to a friend of mine about this. Russians are going to absolutely dominate this event...

    that being said, i'll point out a few things about this.

    1) you gotta get through three periods and an OT segment in order to take advantage of your 5 slick forwards.

    2) they are making a real effort to make this a game of scoring goals again, as opposed to stopping goals... this will help that trend.

    3) it's really fun to watch... you know it... even if you don't necessarily like ending games that way.

    4) an absolute sure-fire way to get on SC highlights every night... NOT a bad thing for the NHL.

    this will be really interesting... this *could* spell the end of positional goaltending as being the strongest factor in the NHL (Garth Snow's career is probably over). in philly we will have a brewing situation with Nittymaki coming up behind Esche... Nitty is MUCH quicker than Esche, and Esche is a classic positional goalie.

    It will be interesting to see how goalies are affected by this change, and which goalies cannot maintain the success they previously had. JSG?

    well.. there are a LOT of players out there that are more suited to playing this kind of style who aren't in the NHL due to the physical non-skating nature of the game the past 10 years. i think you will see a lot of 3rd and 4th line guys that were on the slow/unskilled side, but had jobs, go to the wayside for younger and quicker players.

    growth pains will exist, but i think we are a couple years away from knowing if they are for the good, or the bad.
     
  13. Biggest Canuck Fan

    Biggest Canuck Fan BCF

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2002
    Messages:
    10,922
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Document solutions expert
    Location:
    Abbotsford, BC
    Home Page:
    For the 4th point,I think it is essential for the NHL to do this. Why? Every kid growing up wants to play in the NHL. They emulate what they see. If they see 20 teams that hook, trap and hold... players that play within a system that encourges less skill and more positional play, then that is what the players will do.

    It is so important for the NHL to emphasize skill. THat way younger players will try to be more creative.
     
  14. joepeps

    joepeps Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,932
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Toronto
    Home Page:
    for the playoffs I want them to seed the teams properly.. and not in this divisional seed 1-3 ********.........

    most points gets first place and so on.....

    not

    110
    105
    87 ********
    104
    101
    100
    99
    97

    thats stupid....

    and if they want to increase money... play more playoff games... allow more teams to make the playoffs....

    out of 30 teams... 20 make the playoffs....

    1In 6In
    2In 7 plays 10
    3In 8 plays 9
    4In 9 plays 8
    5In 10plays 7

    1In 6In
    2In 7plays 10
    3In 8plays 9
    4In 9plays 8
    5In 10plays 7

    best of 3 maybe... for the pre round...

    The reason I say best of 3 is for the market to make money...

    you play 1st game away.. then the next 1 (2 if ness) at home....

    I know it's fatiguing but hey.. it's a job......
     
  15. Jester

    Jester Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    34,075
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    St. Andrews
    it's a double-edged sword. i understand where you are coming from, but simply seeding 1-whatever by points w/out looking at divisions when schedules are unbalanced isn't necessarily the fairest way to do things.

    imagine a scenario where a team x and team y are in different divisions. x's division is really strong, 3 of the top 6 teams in the conference, or something like that. y's division is really really weak, 1 other team in the top 5, and then doormats.

    team y comes in second in their division, and makes the playoffs with a point total helped along by the fact that they get to romp on some weak opponents more than team x.

    team x wins their division, in a close race, but has a lower point total than team y because they got chewed up by the other good teams in their division... so they end up seeded behind team y in your scheme.

    is that fair? team x played a harder schedule, one a tougher division, and still ends up seeded behind team y? i understand that this doesn't happen all that often, but it could happen, which is one justification for seeding with division winners getting the top seeds.

    perhaps more importantly, the way it is currently seeded makes games at the end of the season matter. the devils/flyers have decided the atlantic division on the last day of the season the last two years. THAT is really exciting... it makes teams not take their foot off the pedal in order to get that seeding. in the mid 90's the flyers/devils were regularly the top 2 teams in the east, but one would get bumped to the 4 seed... sux, but the way it is.

    personally, i'd much rather have divisional races matter in a big way, create rivalries, and playoff intensity than have two teams coast to the finish line because they know they got the 1/2 seeds locked up and unless they run into one another in the conf. finals, it won't make a difference.
     
  16. joepeps

    joepeps Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2004
    Messages:
    11,932
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Toronto
    Home Page:
    I get what your saying.. but I don't liek the fact that

    Washington plays tampa bay 1000 times and carolina is in that divsion too.. and everyone else in that **** division... and tampa gets points and seeds in 1st 2nd or 3rd when they deserve maybe 7th or 8th.... :dunno:
     
  17. Parity sucks.

    As a hockey fan, I'd rather have a bad team look very bad in a league without parity.
    It's better than a bad team looking like a mediocre team in a league with parity.

    The NHL needs to take the reigns off its best players.
    The stars have to shine, or this league is going nowhere.

    Seriously, imagine for a moment that Sidney Crosby is indeed the second coming of Gretzky.
    Don't we want a league that showcases that kind of talent? Instead, we've got a league that is stifling most of the great things about the game.

    Gretzky would have been be lucky to put up 110 points in today's NHL.

    So I live with this question:

    Which would you rather be:

    A fan of a 25-44-13 last place team that scores 178 goals and allows 204 goals playing in a league where the top scorer had 46 goals and 50 assists.

    Or a fan of a 16-57-9 last place team that scores 208 goals and allows 340 goals in a league where the top scorer scores 70 goals and 90 assists.

    I've gotta tell ya, regular season hockey has been an absolute snooze lately. WHy anyone would pay more than $10 to see Nasvhille vs Columbus is beyond me.
     
  18. i am dave

    i am dave Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2004
    Messages:
    2,182
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Corner of 1st & 1st
    Somebody needs to show me evidence on how having time off in the playoffs (or heading into) is beneficial to that team. It seems to me, come playoff time, the "well-rested" team always comes out flat, while the other team has momentum.
     
  19. Weary

    Weary Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2003
    Messages:
    1,068
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then why do Bettman and Daly always talk about every team competing for the Cup every year? And please not Mr. Daly's statement about "the more 'even' the competition."

    Gary Bettman:
    Our objective is to negotiate a CBA that will provide a partnership with our players, will provide them with more than 50 percent of every dollar of revenue, including an average salary of $1.3 million (U.S.) and will assure a stable business while giving your team the opportunity to compete for the Stanley Cup every season.

    Gary Bettman:
    Our intention throughout the collective bargaining process has been, and continues to be, the creation of an enduring partnership with our players that will allow you to enjoy a world-class product, at affordable prices, and enter each season confident that your favorite team can compete for the most cherished trophy in pro sports, the Stanley Cup. Our resolve to deliver on that promise will not change.

    Bill Daly:
    Rather, and as we have consistently maintained, the League is committed to significantly reducing or eliminating payroll disparities among Clubs, so that fans in all 30 of our Clubs' markets feel their team has the ability to compete for championships on an annual basis. That's what sports is all about -- attractive competition; and the more "even" the competition, the more attractive the sport is bound to be.
     
  20. Jester

    Jester Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    34,075
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    St. Andrews
    yeah... that worked for us in the Conf. Finals last year... wait...

    lets you get healthy, ready to go.
     
  21. London Knights

    London Knights Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    831
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The playoffs are fine aside from the fact that you can finish ahead of 5 teams that had a better record than you by winning a division.

    Teams need to be rewarded for being the divison leader IMO, but maybe the solution is giving division winners 1st round home ice advantage and after that it goes strictly by record.

    I don't want all teams able to compete for the Cup every year. I want to see some usual suspects at the top with other teams building up to be the usual suspects when those teams falter.

    joepeps, that is a misunderstood justification for Tampa's success. I too believed that once but then I took a look at their record. Tampa was little more than a .500 team against the Southeast division. Their success against the rest of the league is where they built up their team's record.

    Philly fans should know and respect the need for a rest in the playoffs after the past two years against the Leafs. They won both series, but they were heavy physical series that saw both teams come out limping in the end. Having time off would have given both teams (had either won) a much better shot in the next round. In both cases it was the Flyers who advanced, but they had less of a shot the way their team was decimated.
     
  22. WC Handy*

    WC Handy* Guest

    Still going on and on about a couple quotes, eh? Maybe you'll eventually realize that those quotes were nothing more than attempts to get simple minded fans on their side.
     
  23. Hoss

    Hoss Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,033
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And yet he has the quotes from the people involved in the negotiations and you only have your opinion.
     
  24. Weary

    Weary Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2003
    Messages:
    1,068
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Apparently it worked.
     
  25. WC Handy*

    WC Handy* Guest

    Because you say so? I have facts, not meaningless ******** quotes. The fact that, as I believe Weary has pointed out numerous times, if the league wanted a league full of .500 teams they wouldn't stop at capping salaries. They'd cap coaches salaries, management salaries, have 100% revenue sharing. They would cap how much money could be spent on scouts and on scouting expenses. If that was truly their goal, they'd have no choice but to consider a annual player re-distribution draft to even out the talent. Cause we can't have too many 30 goal scorers on one team if we want a league full of .50 teams.

    The FACT is that the league is only seeking even payrolls that put teams on an even financial ground.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"