SI Report: NHL expansion to Las Vegas is 'a done deal'

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

http://www.si.com/nhl/2014/08/26/report ... -done-deal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[mikey287]

It is not.

[Sam's Drunk Dog]

Odds above or below Hrdina for Zubrus?

[Beveridge]

Guess we won't have Tocchet as our AC for long.

[Beveridge]

I don't know if there is another big name out there like McDavid for the 2015 draft but it would make sense to expand this coming year and get him on one of those teams to grow that fan base. Plus it would lol at Buffalo.

[BurghersAndDogsSports]

The league has been doing feasibility studies on various cities for some time now. Expansion is coming, just not sold it will be a total of 4 teams as is being reported all over twitter and just on deadspin (Vegas, Seattle, Quebec and Toronto).

Not sure how I feel about it. At some point the product will just be diluted but they say that after every expansion in any sport and things seem to work out. Definitely not skilled enough to determine the impact on play.

[npv708]

Add Seattle, 2nd Toronto team, and Quebec City per SI.com

http://www.si.com/nhl/2014/08/26/report ... -expansion" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Pavel Bure]

I dunno, if I go to Vegas I don't think I'll want to waste 5 hours to go to a hockey game... although I did do that in Ireland.

[Beveridge]

9 divisions of 4 86 game season H/A for 4 games in own division H/A for 2 games vs everyone else?

[BurghersAndDogsSports]

Vegas does seem like an a odd choice. I mean I don't have any data or haven't done any research but just seems odd. I am sure the corporate support will be just fine. Casinos and other businesses have to have baller seats. They just have to, And a few hundred thousand is a drop in the bucket for all of them.

Just seems weird to get enough fan support but I don't know, they have done the reesrch I'm sure.

[Staggy]

I dunno, if I go to Vegas I don't think I'll want to waste 5 hours to go to a hockey game... although I did do that in Ireland.

I have no idea if the report is true, but Las Vegas is an attractive location because the people who actually live there don't have all that much to do for entertainment. I don't think they're expecting many people to visit Vegas and want to catch a hockey game while there.

[DelPen]

Vegas makes no sense unless there is an owner who doesn't mind wasting huge amounts of money. It won't last.

Seattle and Quebec make sense, KC can work right now for another team in the West too.

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

I can't imagine anyone wanting to go to a hockey game in Vegas. Not to mention the team would be terrible for a while.

[KennyTheKangaroo]

Breakfasts come and go, Rene, but Hartford, "the Whale," they only beat Vancouver once, maybe twice in a lifetime.

[MRandall25]

Hooray for adding 88 roster spots to an already diluted talent pool.

Can't wait for clutch and grab to return because of the influx of Dustin Jeffreys to the league.

[mikey287]

Yeah, this expansion likely isn't happening (the source is very flimsy and the feeling around a couple people in the league is that this is very premature, at absolute best)...but if it is, can we reduce rosters, please...10 F, 5 D...17 dressed. You lose 60 forward spots and 30 defense spots...but you're adding 40 forwards and 20 D with the expansion...that's fair and will create a better product...

[Beveridge]

No way player's union ever approves a decrease in the workforce. Unions ruin everything.

[count2infinity]

that would require a fairly substantial strategy overhaul, wouldn't it?

[mikey287]

that would require a fairly substantial strategy overhaul, wouldn't it?

Precisely. Longer shifts, slower game, skill can thrive more. Less players that are just in the league because they are fast and disruptive to skill. Minimize back pressure, allow patient players with puck poise to thrive and create on the fly: Crosby, Backstrom, Getzlaf, etc. - without feeling that constant, and often belligerent, pressure from all sides at all times, you get better passing lanes...you get better players, playing their game for longer, you get a better product. (Also, the incidental of this is more scoring...so that will satisfy the box scorers).

The next step is to reduce goalie AND player equipment. But that's another story. Those are the two steps and the game will turn golden again, like it once was in the 50's and 60's...in fact, dare I say, maybe even better...because of how athletics are different and more specialized today...

Won't ever happen because of the politics involved...but the game gets cleaner, more creative, organic increases in scoring (not artificial garbage like bigger nets or more power plays), safer...

The best time to do it is with expansion because not as many feelings are hurt with the loss of roster spaces...but with that lunatic at the helm of the PA, no chance it happens...I mean, he created a lengthy work stoppage without accomplishing anything at all really...he just did it to do it with no regard for the health of the game...so, like I said, politics will squash it...

[dodint]

Breakfasts come and go, Rene, but Hartford, "the Whale," they only beat Vancouver once, maybe twice in a lifetime.

[pcm]

I don't mind the added jobs, talent dilution, at least to the degree of 2 expansions. 4 would be much.

The game has changed since last expansion. Having 40 more guys on the ice every night would mean a lot more young players in the NHL sooner. There'd be a few aging vets who'd play an extra year or so. Guys like Whitney, Penner, Bryz, Leinno would probably have jobs right now. But I don't really think it would result in an influx of Andrew Ebbetts and Zach Boychucks. Instead we'd see teams bringing up their young guys sooner. And lo and behold, we'd find a bunch more Tyler Johnsons and Tanner Pearsons in the leauge. This IMO would be pretty darn exciting.

Curses on Detroit for keeping Nyquist and Tatar et all in the minors.... They'd still be there if not for injuries.

[mikey287]

Young players sooner will result in a lot of untapped potential. That's not a good thing. Smart teams will not do that. For every Nyquist, there will be 10 Ebbett's, Krog's, Haydar's...

The Red Wings shouldn't even count for that...they are a crockpot, not a microwave. They always let players cook slowly until they're overripe. People always go, "wow, look at how lucky they are at drafting..." I say, "look at good they are at developing..."

[Idoit40fans]

Yeah, this expansion likely isn't happening (the source is very flimsy and the feeling around a couple people in the league is that this is very premature, at absolute best)...but if it is, can we reduce rosters, please...10 F, 5 D...17 dressed. You lose 60 forward spots and 30 defense spots...but you're adding 40 forwards and 20 D with the expansion...that's fair and will create a better product...

I had typed something similar but didnt finish the post so i abonded it. I was thinking just drop the roster to 22 players and go to 18 total dressed players. Assuming 2 teams are added, youre still increasing the number of jobs while controlling the everyday talent on the ice.

[DelPen]

under a cap i doubt most teams use all 23 spots as it is.

The game would suffer greatly removing a 4th line and 3rd pairing, it would slow down to conserve energy. There is pplenty of talent to go around. I'd prefer that even elite teams have a few garbage players making the minium as regular skaters.

[Idoit40fans]

The point of reducing the roster size is to slow the game down...