The NHL Discussion Thread

[Yves]

But at the end of the day there is too much history between Toronto and the Leafs for an alternate team to have any sort of longevity. I could argue that Montreal is a rabid hockey town but I don't see anybody living here taking for another Montreal-based team. Québec is far enough away, and there's a built-in rivalry between the two cities. People here who do not support the Habs have their favorite teams they are loyal to. I don't see where a new team would sway enough people to be viable.


..and the ticket situation is the same in Montreal as in Toronto; all corporate-owned.

But let them try it and prove me wrong! The more teams in Canada, the better !

[ForeverAutumn]

The more teams in Canada, the better !

On that we can definately agree.

My husband agrees with you about a second team BTW. He doesn't think it can work. I think that there are enough disgruntled fans here that if the league strikes while the Leafs continue to disappoint, and the new team delivers, there is a group of fans who will defect. But you could be right about longevity. If the Leafs could turn things around and become a consistantly winning team, would a second team survive? Perhaps not.

It's likely that we'll never know whether a second team will work as I believe it's all spectulation and no substance.

Even if the league weren't denying it, the odds are against it. Although I've enjoyed our discussion.

[Yves]

Being disgruntled about the Leafs is the very definition of being a Leaf fan!

[Reginod]

..and the ticket situation is the same in Montreal as in Toronto; all corporate-owned.

One good thing about the non-rabid markets: tix are definitely easy to come by.

[Yves]

I haven't been to a Habs game in about 11 years!

Back in the 80s, at the old Forum, we'd pay 10.00 for SRO. We'd move all over the building and get some great sight lines. I don't even know if the Bell Centre offers SRO tix, but I'll bet they're probably 50.00!

[oilersfan]

I can guarantee you that, if and when expansion occurs, the league is going to try to fix the imbalance in numbers between conferences, which means putting two additional teams in the west. That issue and the fact that the NHL would be the only pro sport in the area may very well be the only reason why Vegas is still in any way a part of this discussion. Since the housing bubble collapsed, Vegas has been going through all kinds of economic trouble, including one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country. The idea that Vegas would publicly finance an arena (which they have) AND provide sufficient support for a NHL team is not only unlikely but somewhat naive on the part of those pushing for expansion to that market.

I'm actually not in favor of expansion at all. Relocation, perhaps, but not expansion. If expansion were to occur in the west, not only would Seattle be a logical place for a team but I would contend that there are several other markets in the central, mountain, and pacific time zones that would make more sense than Vegas (including Milwaukee, Houston, Kansas City, OKC, Salt Lake City, and Portland).

Of course, the NHL really stopped making sense when the owners handed the reins over to Bettman, so who knows what the hell is going to happen.

[Birdy]

I can guarantee you that, if and when expansion occurs, the league is going to try to fix the imbalance in numbers between conferences, which means putting two additional teams in the west. That issue and the fact that the NHL would be the only pro sport in the area may very well be the only reason why Vegas is still in any way a part of this discussion. Since the housing bubble collapsed, Vegas has been going through all kinds of economic trouble, including one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country. The idea that Vegas would publicly finance an arena (which they have) AND provide sufficient support for a NHL team is not only unlikely but somewhat naive on the part of those pushing for expansion to that market.

I'm actually not in favor of expansion at all. Relocation, perhaps, but not expansion. If expansion were to occur in the west, not only would Seattle be a logical place for a team but I would contend that there are several other markets in the central, mountain, and pacific time zones that would make more sense than Vegas (including Milwaukee, Houston, Kansas City, OKC, Salt Lake City, and Portland).

Of course, the NHL really stopped making sense when the owners handed the reins over to Bettman, so who knows what the hell is going to happen.

Yup. Pee Wee Herman sure has made a mess of things! Agree about location Brian. Portland makes sense IMO

[Scott Bails]

Since the housing bubble collapsed, Vegas has been going through all kinds of economic trouble, including one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country. The idea that Vegas would publicly finance an arena (which they have) AND provide sufficient support for a NHL team is not only unlikely but somewhat naive on the part of those pushing for expansion to that market.

I'm actually not in favor of expansion at all. Relocation, perhaps, but not expansion. If expansion were to occur in the west, not only would Seattle be a logical place for a team but I would contend that there are several other markets in the central, mountain, and pacific time zones that would make more sense than Vegas (including Milwaukee, Houston, Kansas City, OKC, Salt Lake City, and Portland).

Of course, the NHL really stopped making sense when the owners handed the reins over to Bettman, so who knows what the hell is going to happen.

Agree with all of this.

[Klonk]

Here are some rules I read are being mulled over by the NHLPA. No idea which ones, if any, will be approved...


1) Long change for OT

2) Zamboni after regulation

3) No shoot out lists. Pick as you go.

4) Bigger trapezoid

5) wider hashmarks

6) Divers will be punished on an escalated scale. Coaches too.

7) War Room can review everything if it's an illegal goal. Don't know about legal goals like after whistles etc

8) Puck-before-Skate on a trip is now a penalty.

9) only one center can take defensive icing faceoffs. Getting kicked out on purpose is DOG penalty.

#4 I'm not a fan of unless they put the whistle away when a goalie gets touched.

#6 Anything to limit diving I'm ok with.

#8 Will piss me the hell off if it happens. One of my favorite plays in this sport is a well timed, last second defensive wack at the puck preventing a breakaway.

The rest I'm fine with either way. Any thoughts?

[Scott Bails]

Here are some rules I read are being mulled over by the NHLPA. No idea which ones, if any, will be approved...


1) Long change for OT

2) Zamboni after regulation

3) No shoot out lists. Pick as you go.

4) Bigger trapezoid

5) wider hashmarks

6) Divers will be punished on an escalated scale. Coaches too.

7) War Room can review everything if it's an illegal goal. Don't know about legal goals like after whistles etc

8) Puck-before-Skate on a trip is now a penalty.

9) only one center can take defensive icing faceoffs. Getting kicked out on purpose is DOG penalty.

#4 I'm not a fan of unless they put the whistle away when a goalie gets touched.

#6 Anything to limit diving I'm ok with.

#8 Will piss me the hell off if it happens. One of my favorite plays in this sport is a well timed, last second defensive wack at the puck preventing a breakaway.

The rest I'm fine with either way. Any thoughts?

Hm..Interesting.

Not sure what you mean in #1 - do you mean a long intermission break between the end of the game and the OT period? If so, I'm not a fan of that unless they're going to play an actual whole period.

Regarding #4, I'd rather see it where the goalie is complete fair game when he's not in the trapezoid - so, I agree with Klonk, I suppose. If he's not in the zone, you should be able to cleanly check the hell out of him.

And yeah, diving needs to be punished more, and not just when you're actually making a call; i.e. embellishment. Call the dive when a penalty isn't actually committed by the other team. Pittsburgh will be in the box for the whole game.

If I understand #8 correctly, then I agree with Klonk again - kind of a dumb penalty. You're supposed to be playing the puck, right?

[Klonk]

"Not sure what you mean in #1 - do you mean a long intermission break between the end of the game and the OT period? If so, I'm not a fan of that unless they're going to play an actual whole period."

No. 'Long change' happens when the goalies switch nets in 2nd period putting the teams benches closer to their respective offensive zones. Defense has to travel farther to change. Apparently stats say most goals are scored in the 2nd period. The idea is that a 'long change' in OT may help in games being settled before a shootout.

[Scott Bails]

Ahh..okay. Thanks - never heard that referred to that way. I have no problem with that. Anything to hopefully reduce shoot-outs is fine with me.

[Dave (in MA)]

Ahh..okay. Thanks - never heard that referred to that way. I have no problem with that. Anything to hopefully reduce shoot-outs is fine with me.

GET RID of shootouts. Diving and deciding games by shootouts is for footsie, not hockey.

[Scott Bails]

GET RID of shootouts. Diving and deciding games by shootouts is for footsie, not hockey.

Couldn't agree more.

[ForeverAutumn]

Regarding #4, I'd rather see it where the goalie is complete fair game when he's not in the trapezoid - so, I agree with Klonk, I suppose. If he's not in the zone, you should be able to cleanly check the hell out of him.

Lacrosse works this way and it makes for some great plays. Not only is the goalie fair game if he's out of the crease, but it means that he can come out and check other players too. It doesn't happen all that often, but I've seen some beautiful physical defensive plays by goalies. I'd love to see this in hockey.

[Klonk]

I'd love it too, but the goalies are way too pampered and that's not gonna change. I see this as being an incredibly frustrating rule change.

[Obscured]

RIP Carol Vadnais
Such a wonderful piece of my childhood memories.

[TheLoony]

Oilersfan, can you fill me in on this publicly financed arena here in Vegas? I know nothing of this place. The only places here that I know of that a team could play are unusable as there are other things going on there. Or the T&M, which is too small for a rink. Color me confused, I don't know what place you are talking about.

[rottersclub]

RIP Carol Vadnais
Such a wonderful piece of my childhood memories.

Yup. He was a good one. A very smooth skater and very savvy. My kind of player.

[oilersfan]

Oilersfan, can you fill me in on this publicly financed arena here in Vegas? I know nothing of this place. The only places here that I know of that a team could play are unusable as there are other things going on there. Or the T&M, which is too small for a rink. Color me confused, I don't know what place you are talking about.

My mistake about it being publicly financed--it's wholly private. They broke ground last May...

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/la...ruction-begins

[TheLoony]

Thanks for that. I hadn't heard of that arena. Well, they are building it, maybe someone will come. I think it's foolish but whatever I think is moot.

[ForeverAutumn]

A settlement has been reached in the Todd Bertuzzi and Steve Moore lawsuit. Actually I thought this had already been settled, shows what I know. It's hard to believe that it's been 10 years since this happened. I remember seeing the hit on news and being just sick to my stomach. I can still picture it in my head...and it still makes me sick to my stomach.

https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/can...9585--nhl.html

[Klonk]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=7...d=nhl:topheads

I'm ok with pretty much all of the changes. I'm especially curious to see if the OT 'long change' makes a difference. The tripping rule is the only one I'm not too big a fan of.

[oilersfan]

If anyone is interested we a team in the PE fantasy hockey keeper league that needs a manager. The current roster for the team includes P.Kane, Malkin, Duchene, Landeskog, Parise, and some other solid fantasy players for you to choose your keepers from. If you think you'd be up for it, send me a PM.

[Yves]

Habs open camp tomorrow with no captain, but 4 assistant captains! Markov and Plekanec will be full-time assistants while Pacioretty and Subban will split duties wearing the 3rd "A". Is there another team in the league that attaches so much importance to wearing the "C" ? Gionta wore it for years! It can't be THAT sacred!

We keeping this thread going or starting fresh?