It's Gone! 2004-2006 NHL Offseason and Lockout Thread

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by bbor

He's good enough to be playing on the USA WC team...If that means anything?

Is that saracasm?

[bbor]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

Is that saracasm?

Mayhaps

But the US did win the last WC no?

[Karim]

According to TSN, it's $2.5 million/year for Klee. That's too much. They've now committed $29 million in salaries next season for 5 players. I guess the organization is banking on grandfathering in the case of a hard cap or a luxury tax with no teeth.

[Karim]

dola,

Here's an article on how to revamp the NHL. I like the reallignment but other than that...
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hocke...ntgomery_x.htm

Here are a couple of good article about the draft...
http://www.hockeyjournal.com/bruins/...bradley18.html
http://www.nhl.com/futures/2004draft...pen061104.html

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by Karim

dola,

Here's an article on how to revamp the NHL. I like the reallignment but other than that...
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hocke...ntgomery_x.htm

I hate stuff like this that really doesn't seem to be done with any thought whatsoever. Contraction isn't going to happen, unless a team folds due to financial problems. An original six division? gag me.

Personally, I'd like to see a return to the format of two conferences with 2 divisions each. (I'll allow the NHL to keep "East" and "West" Conference names, but I'm bringing back all the cool division names...and, really, I think ALL sports should have divisions named after their founding fathers).

Like the idiot in the link, I'd cut down the season...I love hockey, and the season is just to fucking long. 70-72 games is plenty. 60 wouldn't break my heart, to be honest, but that's too extreme. In the 4 division structure (approx 8 teams per division), the bulk of the games would be in your own division. let's say 6 games against each division opponent (42 total), 3 games against the conference's other division (24 total). I would drastically cut inter-conference play, but not cut it entirely - you'd play one of the other conference's divisions in alternating years (so, the Avs would play the Bruins only every other year). That's 8 more games, 74 total. I think this would really maximize the inter-division rivalries, while limiting the LA v Fla snoozers. You'd also have less cross-country travelling - maybe you could squeeze games closer together so that we don't have 19 months of regular season hockey (it is 19 months, right?)

I know the divisions will be large, but that's ok, because we're also revamping the playoff structure. No more of the 1-8 seeding. It'll be back to the old days of the top 4 teams in each division making the playoffs; after 2 rounds, the two teams that get out of the division finals go to the conference finals. The regular season will MEAN something (60% of your games will be against teams you are directly battling for a playoff spot). Will we have teams with higher points than some playoff teams get left out? sure. but you'll get playoff matchups that mean something each and every year. Do we really want to see Mtl/TB and Cal/SJ? or do we want Cal/Edm & and Bos/Mtl every year? I'll take the latter, thank you.

my structure:

Adams:
Boston
Montreal
Toronto
Ottawa
Buffalo
Carolina
Washington
EXPANSION

Patrick:
Philadelphia
New Jersey
New York
New York
Pittsburgh
Atlanta
Florida
Tampa

Norris:
Detroit
St Louis
Nashville
Columbus
Chicago
Calgary
Edmonton
Minnesota

Smythe:
San Jose
Los Angeles
Anaheim
Phoenix
Vancouver
Colorado
Dallas
EXPANSION

yeah, room there for 2 expansion teams, to balance out the schedule. at least one should go to a Canadian city (Hamilton? Winnipeg again? One of the Maritime cities?). Anyways, that's my plan - I want to see rivalries. I want to see teams that hate each other play a LOT. I want to see GM's afraid to trade within the division, for fear of having to face a player they traded away 6 times a year, plus the playoffs.

oh yeah, almost forgot. We're getting rid of this silly "1 point for OT loss" crap. 2 pts for a win, one for a tie. OT becomes a full 20 minute period (still sudden death). You want to play for a tie? Go ahead, but the chance that you're going to make a mistake and leave with no points is now pretty significant. The words "shootout" and "overtime" do NOT go together.

[Karim]

Funny, I just posted on another board about how I hated the NHL for taking away the traditional conference and division names.

~~~
I know this is very biased and I know it's completely unfair because it favours the Canadian teams and will never happen but I want to dream for a while.

In my dream world, I'd change the draft. The worst Ontario team gets to pick the first Ontario born player. The worst Quebec team gets to pick the first Quebec/Maritime born player. The worst Western Canadian team gets to pick the first Western Canadian player. The worst American team gets to pick the first American player. Any team could pass and select a European if they chose. Each team would hold a veto so if Toronto wanted to select Mike Modano first overall, Minnesota could veto them. If they weren't interested in Modano, Toronto could select him but then Minnesota would be able to select from Ontario with their first pick. If you selected a European, any other team could select from your backyard.

It's like an exaggerated version of how Montreal used to always get the best Quebec player during the days of the Original Six.

This year's draft order would then be:

1 - Pittsburgh
2 - Edmonton
3 - Montreal
4 - Ottawa
----------------
5 - Chicago ...

So yeah, it's completely unfair. Ottawa jumps up 21 spots, Montreal jumps up 15 spots, Edmonton jumps up 12 spots and Chicago is the net loser dropping down 3 spots.

Well, it would be cool in a PC game if you could customize the draft rules...

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by Karim

Funny, I just posted on another board about how I hated the NHL for taking away the traditional conference and division names.

it just seems like such a no-brainer to keep these. The NHL supposedly did it to make it easier on the casual fan...does the casual fan give a rat's ass? The names gave the league character, and it was a great opportunity to honor those who contributed to hockey. if I'm ever hockey commish, that's the first thing I fix.

[Draft Dodger]

Originally Posted by Karim

In my dream world, I'd change the draft. The worst Ontario team gets to pick the first Ontario born player...

I've thought about this too...but you'd have to regionalize it in the US too (New England, Midwest) etc to make it fair, which means you're going to end up with a lot of Europeans on the Fla / SoCal teams.

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

it just seems like such a no-brainer to keep these. The NHL supposedly did it to make it easier on the casual fan...does the casual fan give a rat's ass? The names gave the league character, and it was a great opportunity to honor those who contributed to hockey. if I'm ever hockey commish, that's the first thing I fix.

I have to admit, when I was first getting into hockey, it was confusing for me.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

I have to admit, when I was first getting into hockey, it was confusing for me.

As someone who grew up with it, this surprises me. What about it makes it confusing? Aren't division names just labels? Couldn't we call each division A B C D etc, what difference would it make? In the end you just have to associate teams with the label they are under.

Please don't take the above as an insult, I'm asking this in all honestly.

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

As someone who grew up with it, this surprises me. What about it makes it confusing? Aren't division names just labels? Couldn't we call each division A B C D etc, what difference would it make? In the end you just have to associate teams with the label they are under.

Please don't take the above as an insult, I'm asking this in all honestly.

Because it was unfamiliar. Sure they are just names, but my football brain found it much easier to identify with geographic divisions rather then names of people I knew nothing about.

Obviously, I would have learned them in time, but I think it was much quicker for me after they changed them because I had a frame of reference.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

Because it was unfamiliar. Sure they are just names, but my football brain found it much easier to identify with geographic divisions rather then names of people I knew nothing about.

Obviously, I would have learned them in time, but I think it was much quicker for me after they changed them because I had a frame of reference.

I guess that makes sense. I guess with Hockey being my first sport, and my US geography being poor, combined with the inevitable inconsitincies in the divisions, I've never really thought of the divisions as anything more than labels. Thanks for answering.

[sachmo71]

Originally Posted by Fidatelo

I guess that makes sense. I guess with Hockey being my first sport, and my US geography being poor, combined with the inevitable inconsitincies in the divisions, I've never really thought of the divisions as anything more than labels. Thanks for answering.

Thanks for asking!

[Maple Leafs]

Since we're restructuring the NHL:

- merge TB and FLA - one team called Florida (maybe they play half their home games in each city?)
- merge ANA and SJ - one team called California
- fold Carolina - sorry, it was just a bad idea
- fold Atlanta, Nashville and Columbus - sorry guys, I know it's not fair but the NHL is dying and we just can't wait around for you to turn into real markets

That reduces us to 24 teams. I kept Phoenix because of Gretzky, but twist my arm and they could go. I kept the Islanders and Penguins because I'm a sucker for history. I didn't expand, even to Canada, because there's just too many teams as it is.

Then I can steal DD's divisions and they turn nicely into six teams each. I moved Washington back to the Patrick, but otherwise left things as is.

Adams:
Boston
Montreal
Toronto
Ottawa
Buffalo
Florida

Patrick:
Philadelphia
New Jersey
New York
New York
Pittsburgh
Washington

Norris:
Detroit
St Louis
Chicago
Calgary
Edmonton
Minnesota

Smythe:
California
Los Angeles
Phoenix
Vancouver
Colorado
Dallas

[Karim]

Phoenix won't be going anywhere because of their brand new building. Unfortunately, I read that it's located outside of Phoenix and that they only sold out the first couple games.

Atlanta has a great young team and Nashville is on its way but I don't know about the support.

Columbus stays. It was a good strategy to put a team in SJ where there were no professional sports as is the case in Columbus. Columbites? Columbians? Columbusians? are supporting the team from all indications.

Carolina is in serious trouble as is Pittsburgh. I don't foresee any contraction but I can see both franchises relocating but none to Hamilton as the Leafs would never go for it. Winnipeg apparently has been contacted by 5 NHL teams inquiring about its new arena. http://www.truenorthproject.mb.ca/ Pittsburgh isn't getting public funds for a new arena while there's a brand new one sitting in Winnipeg.... Hmmm..... It won't work though if the new CBA is not small-market friendly. Heck, if there's no salary cap Calgary owners have already indicated they'll sell and Edmonton won't be far behind.

[Draft Dodger]

Columbus ranked 15th in attendance last year - better than Boston, New Jersey and Anaheim, to name a few. Not bad for a team that only won 25 games. I don't think of Columbus as a hockey town, they have a stupid name, and terribly ugly uniforms...but you have to admit the town is supporting them.

Can we move Carolina back to Hartford? I didn't follow hockey well enough to know if the move was based out of financial need, or more like the North Stars were an owner moved a viable franchise just for some more cash. I would give Atlanta & Nashville a chance, because they both have teams that can possible contend in a few years (especially Atl). But Atlanta doesn't support it's damn baseball team that's only won the division 97 times in a row...will they really support hockey?

[sachmo71]

Columbians

[Karim]

I have done a little research on the Winnipeg story and I'd say it's a longshot at best. The MTS Centre will hold 15,015 for the Manitoba Moose of the AHL. This limited seating will only support a NHL franchise if there is a significant salary cap and extensive revenue sharing. Also, will Winnipegers support current NHL ticket prices? At best, NHL ticket prices will remain the same but they will not be substantially reduced. Winnipegers weren't setting any attendance records at 1996 ticket prices. At a population of approximately 700,000 will there be enough demand? Furthermore, although the downtown core is apparently undergoing a rejuvenation, it is not a corporate centre. Will there be enough corporate investment to sell 50 luxury boxes and NHL-priced rink boards and advertising? It's likely there would need to be some public investment to sustain the franchise such as tax concessions for the building but the lack of these type of initiatives were one of the reasons the Jets left in the first place.

There has no doubt been inquiries made by a team in the southeastern US. However, the Deputy Mayor has hampered matters by going public way to early in the process. One phone call inquiring about the arena and level of civic support does not mean a NHL team is on its way.

I'd love to have the Jets, Nordiques and Whalers back but even with a tailor-made CBA for small markets, it might be unfeasible.

[Karim]

dola,

TSN's UFA list...
http://tsn.ca/nhl/feature.asp?fid=9229

[sterlingice]

I know KC has a new $250M downtown arena they're building and they're trying to attract an NHL team. That may factor into things.

SI

[Schedule Junkie]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

We're getting rid of this silly "1 point for OT loss" crap. 2 pts for a win, one for a tie. OT becomes a full 20 minute period (still sudden death). You want to play for a tie? Go ahead, but the chance that you're going to make a mistake and leave with no points is now pretty significant. The words "shootout" and "overtime" do NOT go together.

The idea behind it was to encourage teams to try a bit harder to win, since there was an extra point at stake.

While I agree with you that the OT loss point should go, to better encourage going for a win I'd instead suggest adopting the European football system: 3 points for a win, 1 point for a tie. Doesn't matter whether you win it in OT or not, you get the same number of points.

The difference between a win and a tie is much more pronounced under this system and thus it makes a win much more valuable.

I'd leave OT in the regular season as either a 5-minute period or scrap it altogether. Ties really don't bother me that much.

[Karim]

I don't mind ties either but apparently we're in the minority. If we go the route of 3 points for a win and 1 point for a tie, I'd scrap OT completely.

[Karim]

dola,

Insider information from a respected poster on another forum:

"Without being able to reveal a whole lot of details, I can declare somewhat confidently that the WHA will not be happening this fall.

It is confirmed that both the Jacksonville and Orlando franchises will not be sold to the Calgary oilman as was reported a week or so ago, and will remain in the new yet to be named "A" level league in the Southern States.

That leaves 4 teams for the WHA including one that has no lease agreement with a building....Halifax.

Even had the Florida franchises been able to get a deal done, there was a pretty big caveat attached that would of assured they both would have stayed in the same league for at least one year anyways.

You heard it here first...the WHA was doomed and I see no way it can go ahead at this point. A bad development for some NHL players that were looking at the idea of making a couple million bucks while the CBA talks were ongoing. Good. One less option means a bit more heat on the union to get something done."

[Karim]

double dola,

2004 NHL Entry Draft Contest

1. With the 1st selection overall, does Washington draft Ovechkin (1 point), Malkin (2 points) or trade down (3 points)?

2. Name a team involved in the first trade of any kind. (3 points)

3. Who is the first Canadian-born player selected (2 points) and by what team (1 point)?

4. Who is the first American-born player selected (2 points) and by what team (1 point)?

5. Name a player who will be selected in the 2nd round. (3 points)

BONUS: Name the player your favourite team will select in the first round. (1 point)


~~~~
I'll go first.

1. Ovechkin
2. Rangers
3. Andrew Ladd, Chicago
4. Al Montoya, Phoenix
5. C Bruce Graham

Calgary, F Lauri Korpikoski

[Schedule Junkie]

Originally Posted by Draft Dodger

I'd cut down the season...I love hockey, and the season is just to f***ing long. 70-72 games is plenty. 60 wouldn't break my heart, to be honest, but that's too extreme.

While I don't disagree with you, it may surprise you to learn that, though hockey seems to run forever, the regular season actually takes less time to play than MLB's. The baseball regular season runs 183 days; the 2003/04 NHL regular season opened on Oct. 8 and ended on Apr. 4, a total of 180 days.

What really adds to hockey's season is the two months of playoffs; baseball's playoffs in contrast run only 4 weeks.

The NHL regular season is actually shorter now than it was a couple of years ago, and is the same length it was during the 1980's. The NHL calendar first took a big jump in the 1992-93 season, and then ran around 192 days for the next several years (excluding the winter Olympic years, when the break for the Olympics distorted the normal flow of the season), with 1999-2000 being the last season with 192 days. In 2000-01 it was trimmed to 187 days, and in 2002-03 it was cut again to the present 180 days. That's 12 days shorter than it used to be.

In comparison, from 1973-73 through to 1990-91 the regular season ran 179-181 days long, while in the classic 6-team, 70 game era it was normally 165-166 days long.

[Karim]

Confirmation from TSN that the WHA is likely dead for this upcoming season:
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=88202

[sachmo71]

1. Trade Down
2. Chicago
3a. Cam Barker
3b. Columbus
4a. Robbie Schremp
4b. Florida
5. Brett Carlson

Bonus: Mike Green to Dallas at 16 (trade up)

A guy can dream, can't he? Plus, Hicks is the ultimate parrot. Tampa won the cup with a strong corps of young players and some solid vets. Hicks will move this way, and so trade up to get a good Defenseman.

[sachmo71]

Dola, draft busts are always fun to discuss...

http://www.forecaster.ca/hockeynews/...irstRoundBusts

Looking at 16 and 17, while the Oilers did pass on some good players to take a couple of "busts", since Edmonton can't afford to hold onto their star players, would it have made much of a difference? Stupid hockey!

[klayman]

Originally Posted by sachmo71

Dola, draft busts are always fun to discuss...

http://www.forecaster.ca/hockeynews/...irstRoundBusts

Good stuff, sach. Thanks for the article.

[Draft Dodger]

Steve Kelly's played the last couple years with the AHL Manchester Monarchs. I liked him - a good, feisty player. Maybe TOO feisty. But I could see him doing decently if given a chance. But, looks like he's reluctantly headed to Germany next year.

[Draft Dodger]

dola...re: Danny Geoffrian..."He later scored 20 goals in a Winnipeg Jets uniform but wound up finishing his career in Japan"

Japan? I had no idea.

[bbor]

Awesome...i love reading about draft busts.

[Karim]

This is classic stuff...
http://www.thebrushback.com/nhllabor_full.htm

[Karim]

dola,

The index of the page sachmo listed has a lot of great stuff, including an all-time draft list for every team...
http://www.forecaster.ca/thestar/hoc...NHLDraft-Index

[Karim]

double dola,

It looks like some players have started the European exodus. These are all Group II RFAs:

Maxim Afinogenov, Pavel Datsyuk, Andrei Markov, Alexander Khavanov and Artem Chubarov have all signed with Moscow Dynamo. Niko Kapanen has signed with Zug in Sweden. All of these contracts will become void however, if a NHL CBA is in place and new contracts are negotiated with their respective teams.

[Karim]

triple dola,

It seems NHL VP Bill Daly is the moderate in negotiations and there is some talk of a $45-50 million soft cap, naturally denied by the NHL. Brooks is right that the small-markets should be more afraid of Detroit, Colorado, Philadelphia, New York and Toronto than the NHLPA. Those teams could throw a wrench into proceedings.
http://nypost.com/sports/23341.htm

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Karim

triple dola,

It seems NHL VP Bill Daly is the moderate in negotiations and there is some talk of a $45-50 million soft cap, naturally denied by the NHL. Brooks is right that the small-markets should be more afraid of Detroit, Colorado, Philadelphia, New York and Toronto than the NHLPA. Those teams could throw a wrench into proceedings.
http://nypost.com/sports/23341.htm

But, of course. That's how it is in baseball and what screwed things over in 1994. But there, it's gotten so bad that in 2002, it was George against the world because everyone was sick and tired of his money grubbing.

SI

[bbor]

Karim how come your script is all funky?

[Karim]

I'm playing around with Comic Sans MS...

Anyone other than sach going to take a shot at the draft contest? I know, prizes.....

[bbor]

Originally Posted by Karim

Anyone other than sach going to take a shot at the draft contest? I know, prizes.....

I'm gonna enter....just waiting till it's closer to the sctual date to see if i can here any juicy rumours

[Karim]

Ok, lots of good articles:

Lockout leading to organizational layoffs...
http://www.thn.com/en/headlines/deta...t=954945254360

An overview of New Jersey's successful scouting & drafting...
http://newsobserver.com/sports/story...-7479346c.html

Some potential NHLPA money-making & public relations initiatives...
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...=1044442957278

Finland may dominate this year's draft...
http://www2.nhl.com/futures/2004draft/finns062104.html

Top defencemen will be scare this year...
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hocke...-draft-d_x.htm

Longshots in this year's draft...
http://www.canoe.com/Slam040609/nhl_draft-mck.html

Naslund may be done as a Canuck...
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/artic...20_113049_4572

[Sun Tzu]

This thread needs more calzone.

[Chief Rum]

Hey Maple Leafs,

On the idea of merging Anaheim and San Jose, I'm not going to take issue with merging/contraction as I have in the past, because it's been there, done that, but one thing I gotta say.

Let me give you an analogy. What say we were in a position to have to merge two teams in your neck of the woods. Let's say Toronto and Ottawa. You think that would fly? I think not, since those two very disparate fan bases are not only devoted to their own teams, but quite belligernet to each other, right?

Well, that's essentially what you do when you combine a SoCal city like Anaheim with a NorCal city like San Jose. I realize Canada is huge, so maybe you think Cali is small, but I assure you, it's not.

Geographically, SoCal and NorCal share a state government, and that's about it. And for the most part, especially with regards to sports, we hate each other. Asking San Jose and Anaheim fans to join together to support a merged "California" team is like asking you as a Maple Leafs fan to support a merge with Ottawa, or Montreal, or Detroit, all of which i know you would find disturbing and completely undoable.

I just thought I would let you know that, in case you didn't know just how much of a spearation there is between the two halves of California. It makes far more sense, geographically and popluation-base-wise, to combine the two SoCal teams, if you were so inclined (I am against that, of course, but that's another discussion ).

CR

[Blade6119]

Phoenix is open to merging...whatever gives us some talent

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

I just thought I would let you know that, in case you didn't know just how much of a spearation there is between the two halves of California. It makes far more sense, geographically and popluation-base-wise, to combine the two SoCal teams, if you were so inclined (I am against that, of course, but that's another discussion ).

Yeah, I realize there are bigger issues at play. The "merger" idea just seemed like a kinder option than outright killing one of the teams.

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by Sun Tzu

This thread needs more calzone.

This thread has a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell!

[bbor]

CR..Glad to see you're still reading this thread

I was wondering your opinion on the Gerber deal?

Sounds like the Ducks go the shaft?

Also what do you think about losing your GM?

[Karim]

Yeah, I got no life.

Wojtek Wolski, a potential first rounder on Saturday, charged with assault...
http://www.canoe.ca/Slam040622/col_simmons-sun.html

Guerin could be headed to the Panthers...
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...col.a5508.html

Duhatschek's Top 20...
http://globeandmail.com/servlet/stor...NStory/Sports/

Bob McKenzie's Top 50...
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/draft/feature.asp?fid=9467

[bbor]

Karim..you looking forward to the draft at all?

[sterlingice]

I really hope the Hawks move into the top spot because otherwise, I think they just foolishly squander their pick. But you really can't go wrong with Ovechkin from everything I've read. Otherwise, I see them trading down and getting fleeced or just going with a bad pick. Can't say I have a lot of faith.

SI