View Single Post
Old
12-28-2012, 09:05 PM
  #59
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 12,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mightygoose View Post
24 is an ideal size IMO. Though that ship sailed a long time ago and there's no chance of going back.

I just remember that size of being the perfect blend of growth, yet not thr over-saturation that followed.
My opinion as well. 24 would be the ideal number of teams. Assuming a 6 team contraction, 10 players (six top 6 forwards, 4 top four defensemen, give or take) per team, it would mean an extra 2 or 3 players for the remaining teams (or, in other words, a replacement 4th line).

That said, aside from the logistical hurdles of contracting teams, I'm not sure there is even six teams one would want to contract. Phoenix, definitely. Florida, maybe. Anaheim, maybe (reducing the number of LA teams to 1). Islanders or Devils, maybe (reducing the number of NYC teams from 3 to 2). Who else?

Such a contraction would also spell the end of Quebec City's, Hamilton's, and Seattle's NHL aspirations.

For those reasons, I'd prefer the NHL to go the expansion route to 32. Adding (or subtracting for that matter) a mere two teams would not have a significant impact on the talent pool and it would provide an immediate boost of cash for the NHL, especially if the two expansion locales are Southern Ontario and Quebec City.


Last edited by htpwn: 12-28-2012 at 09:11 PM.
htpwn is offline   Reply With Quote