The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Divisional pairings across conferences. (MOD: Playing Matrix)
Divisional pairings across conferences. (MOD: Playing Matrix)
Alright I know everyone is talking about realignment as if it`s the main problem, but in reality it`s not realignment that is the real issue, it`s the unique needs of scheduling for an entire continent.
So why forget realignment.
To me there are three complaints that seem to contradict each other at first glance which is why realignment won`t solve a thing.
1) Divisions are too small, or in other words we want less games with the hurricanes, and more games with new york.
2) Conference`s are too small, or in other words we want less games with nashville and more games with toronto(detroit)
3) Conference`s are too big we want more games in our timezone(van-la-etc)
So if we can`t have more divisional games, we seemingly can`t have more interconference games as travel is already too extreme within in a conference what can be done.
So here`s my idea, keep the current system, goto 5 divisions, 6 divisions, 4 divisions, it don`t matter. But here`s the key. Pair divisions independent of their conference.
Keep inter conference 15 team x 1.2 games= 18
Keep divisional 4 teams x 6 games = 24
Reduce rest of conference games 10 teams x 2 games = 20
and throw in a new game type
Inter divisional crossover for 5 teams x 4 games =20
This mean pairing the Norwest and pacific divisions reducing their travel issues for a series of 20 games.
Pair central with northeast, giving Detroit^Chicago their blessed chance for a few games with toronto, boston, and montreal.
Finally giving a chance for the Atlantic, to leave their backyard seat for 20 games with the south.
The arrangement breaks up none of those coveted rivalries.
Reduces the travel time for those in the west.
Gives central teams to play games with the east.
Does not interfere with play off seeding.
And allows the weakest division(the south), for a chance to have more games with their most natural rivals the Atlantic division.
This is actually brilliant. A three conference, six division setup would do wonders. I have a different idea for playoff seeding though. Have the six division winners plus three wild cards out of each conference (two best non-division winners in the conference) plus a single league-wide wild card (best team in the league that has not already qualified) for 16 teams. There will be so many dimensions to playoff implications that the amount of meaningful games will skyrocket.
Does that mean home-and-away games against every team in the league, every season? That's my baseline requirement for making a change.
We could keep div/conf as currently implemented, play 29*2=58 against the entire league, rest is for divisional rivals, every division sends three teams to the playoffs (18 teams, then), division winner gets a bye, first round is best of 3 or 5 between #2 and #3 in the division, then either reseed or have #1 play winner of first round and then reseed.
In this scenario, conferences can be eliminated completely.
Alright I know everyone is talking about realignment as if it`s the main problem, but in reality it`s not realignment that is the real issue, it`s the unique needs of scheduling for an entire continent.
So why forget realignment.
To me there are three complaints that seem to contradict each other at first glance which is why realignment won`t solve a thing.
1) Divisions are too small, or in other words we want less games with the hurricanes, and more games with new york.
2) Conference`s are too small, or in other words we want less games with nashville and more games with toronto(detroit)
3) Conference`s are too big we want more games in our timezone(van-la-etc)
So if we can`t have more divisional games, we seemingly can`t have more interconference games as travel is already too extreme within in a conference what can be done.
So here`s my idea, keep the current system, goto 5 divisions, 6 divisions, 4 divisions, it don`t matter. But here`s the key. Pair divisions independent of their conference.
Keep inter conference 15 team x 1.2 games= 18
Keep divisional 4 teams x 6 games = 24
Reduce rest of conference games 10 teams x 2 games = 20
and throw in a new game type
Inter divisional crossover for 5 teams x 4 games =20
This mean pairing the Norwest and pacific divisions reducing their travel issues for a series of 20 games.
Pair central with northeast, giving Detroit^Chicago their blessed chance for a few games with toronto, boston, and montreal.
Finally giving a chance for the Atlantic, to leave their backyard seat for 20 games with the south.
The arrangement breaks up none of those coveted rivalries.
Reduces the travel time for those in the west.
Gives central teams to play games with the east.
Does not interfere with play off seeding.
And allows the weakest division(the south), for a chance to have more games with their most natural rivals the Atlantic division.
Hugo, it all sounds nice and well-thoughtout, but essentially it's the 3-Conference structure presented in another way.
Quote:
Western Conference
Central Conference
Eastern Conference
PACIFIC
MIDWEST
ATLANTIC
Vancouver
Detroit
Montreal
San Jose
Columbus
Boston
Los Angeles
Chicago
NY Rangers
Anaheim
St Louis
NY Islanders
Phoenix
Dallas
New Jersey
NORTHWEST
SOUTHEAST
NORTHEAST
Edmonton
Washington
Ottawa
Calgary
Carolina
Toronto
Colorado
Nashville
Buffalo
Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Pittsburgh
Minnesota
Florida
Philadelphia
(Of course that Eastern Conference alignment will be chewed up and spit out; but you can align them as you wish.)
Regular Season Schedule:
24 games = 6 x 4
20 games = 4 x 5
40 games = 2 x 20
84 game total
Look familiar??
Of course, you could keep those two Eastern Conference Divisions exactly as they are now; and you could reduce that 2 x 20 to 2 x 18/1 x 2 and still have the 82 games.
Virtually everyone here in the alignment discussions, in all the threads, (or in almost whatever discussion really), has something in mind that they particularly want or that they think they want. Everyone gives their arguments or explanations for why a certain format would be better; everyone tries their best to tie it up with a nice little bow to present the preference in the most attractive way,... But in the end, none of the explanations really matter to most involved in the discussions, even to the ones giving the explanations. More than half the those explanations are flawed anyway, or they go very contrary to what another group of hockey fans want. In the end, all that's important is what You want; trying to justify it with explanations of how it's better is nothing more than fluff. And you know, in the end, whether it's you changing your preference in 3 years or so, or another group of people who become more outspoken for a different preference 3 years or so down the road,... sooner or later there's going to be cries to make changes again because some group of fans will have gotten tried of the way things are. And just like always, explanations about 'what is better and for what reasons',... that will again all be pointless dribble. You want what you want, or what you think you want!
To all my HFBoard friends and friendly discussion combatants... I'm included in the above.
Virtually everyone here in the alignment discussions, in all the threads, (or in almost whatever discussion really), has something in mind that they particularly want or that they think they want. Everyone gives their arguments or explanations for why a certain format would be better; everyone tries their best to tie it up with a nice little bow to present the preference in the most attractive way,... But in the end, none of the explanations really matter to most involved in the discussions, even to the ones giving the explanations. More than half the those explanations are flawed anyway, or they go very contrary to what another group of hockey fans want. In the end, all that's important is what You want; trying to justify it with explanations of how it's better is nothing more than fluff. And you know, in the end, whether it's you changing your preference in 3 years or so, or another group of people who become more outspoken for a different preference 3 years or so down the road,... sooner or later there's going to be cries to make changes again because some group of fans will have gotten tried of the way things are. And just like always, explanations about 'what is better and for what reasons',... that will again all be pointless dribble. You want what you want, or what you think you want!
Lol take her easy it is HFBoards, I don't think NHLPA, is looking to us for answers.
Anyways I wouldn't call it a three conference system, because playoff seeding doesn't change, and you would still have conference based games.
It'd be simply using another game type, call a three conference model if you like, but what I espcially like about it, is that it doesn't need to be enforced on everyteam, and there is the option to change it an annual basis.
Regardless, I think mathematically this idea does have some merit.
Lol take her easy it is HFBoards, I don't think NHLPA, is looking to us for answers.
Anyways I wouldn't call it a three conference system, because playoff seeding doesn't change, and you would still have conference based games.
It'd be simply using another game type, call a three conference model if you like, but what I espcially like about it, is that it doesn't need to be enforced on everyteam, and there is the option to change it an annual basis.
Regardless, I think mathematically this idea does have some merit.
Hey, it was an observation meant good-heartedly, myself included. I'd better add a smily face at the end of it.
Would anyone want to comment on what they think WILL happen. I agree with MO above that everyone has their own preference. I also think we all know that my preference does not necessarily agree with the BoG.
My own preference: Start with home/home with everyone, and work it out from there.
What I think will happen is that the NHL will show the PA a proposed travel schedule that will have some equality in it for everyone. And, they will come up with a playoff structure that makes equitable chances for each team - but it will be a variant of the 4-conference proposal from earlier.
How would the NHL do a 4 division x 8 team/division setup ? (assuming Seattle, QC & Markham) ?
West: SJ, Seattle, LA, Anaheim, Calgary, Vancouver, Edmonton & Winnipeg
Central: Chicago, Detroit, Nashville, Dallas, St Louis, Minnesota, Columbus & Colorado
anyone want to take a stab on the teams in the EC ? ... I'm flabbergasted
How would the NHL do a 4 division x 8 team/division setup ? (assuming Seattle, QC & Markham) ?
West: SJ, Seattle, LA, Anaheim, Calgary, Vancouver, Edmonton & Winnipeg
Central: Chicago, Detroit, Nashville, Dallas, St Louis, Minnesota, Columbus & Colorado
anyone want to take a stab on the teams in the EC ? ... I'm flabbergasted
Not saying this is best, but what would happen is:
1) Swap Winnipeg with Colorado in what you have (We know this because that is what they did propose).
2) Most likely, QC, OTT, MONT, BOS, TOR, TOR2, BUFF for the "Eastern" and
NYR, ISLE, NJ, PIT, PHIL, WAS for the "Atlantic"
Which, of course, leaves out, CAR, TB, and FLA. So, since the Atlantic needs 2 teams, and there are 2 teams in Florida, I think that TB and FLA would be in the Atlantic, and CAR in the Eastern in this scenario.
Other possibility here would be:
PACIFIC: VAN, CAL, EDM, SEA, SJ, LA, ANA, COL
MIDWEST: WINN, MINN, CHI, DET, STL, DAL, CAR, NASH (Note it's Carolina rather than Columbus).
NORTHEAST: QC, MON, BOS, OTT, TOR, TOR2, BUFF, CMB
COLONIAL or ATLANTIC: NYI, NYR, NJ, PITT, PHIL, WAS, TB, FLA
Would anyone want to comment on what they think WILL happen. I agree with MO above that everyone has their own preference. I also think we all know that my preference does not necessarily agree with the BoG.
My own preference: Start with home/home with everyone, and work it out from there.
What I think will happen is that the NHL will show the PA a proposed travel schedule that will have some equality in it for everyone. And, they will come up with a playoff structure that makes equitable chances for each team - but it will be a variant of the 4-conference proposal from earlier.
Any one else have a guess as to what WILL happen?
The 4 division, 8 team per will happen. Exact details will vary.
But the reality is that nearly every major franchise/ownership group (with the obvious exception of DET) is in the Atlantic and Northeast, and those teams like the current arrangement, so the rest of the teams will move around them. The will expand the divisions to 8 to accommodate the fact that there will be 1 or 2 new eastern Canadian teams in the next 5 years.
Okay, I'm responding to this here because I think it's more correctly a matrix post. Hope that's ok. And I was sort of asked to respond to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolboarder
When I took a second look at the map with the colorful realignment map, I thought, why not play with the map and see what I have got. At first, I tried to do with 5 teams division, and 4 teams division but when I got to 3 teams division, it is much better to go with 3 teams division. Let me explain: With the 3 team division, set-up, you could easily group the divisions with the game breakdown:
Divisional game: 2 teams x 8 games = 16 games
Conference games: 12 teams x 3 games = 36 games
Interconference games: 15 teams x 2 games = 30 games
Total games: 82 games
Conference when Phoenix is relocated to Quebec City
Western Conference
Northwest Divison: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary
Pacific Division: LA, Anaheim, San Jose
Midwest Division: Colorado, Minnesota, Winnipeg
Central Division: St. Louis, Dallas, Nashville
West Great Lakes Division: Chicago, Detroit, Columbus
Eastern Conference
East Great Lakes Division: Toronto, Ottawa, Buffalo
Northeast Division: Montreal, Quebec City, Boston
New York Division: NY Rangers, NY Islanders, New Jersey
Mid Atlantic Division: Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington
Southeast Division: Carolina, Tampa Bay, Florida
Comment: teams aren't happy but better compromise with main rivalry intact. Dallas gets it better deal with better travel in the division and majority of the east rivalry is kept and Quebec City is added to Northeast Division with Montreal and Boston.
Realignment with Phoenix staying
Western Conference
Northwest Division: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary
Pacific Division: LA, Anaheim, San Jose
Southwest Division: Colorado, Dallas, Phoenix
Central Division: St. Louis, Columbus, Nashville
Midwest Division: Chicago, Minnesota, Winnipeg
Eastern Conference
Great Lakes Division: Toronto, Detroit, Buffalo
Northeast Division: Montreal, Ottawa, Boston
New York Division: NY Rangers, NY Islanders, New Jersey
Mid Atlantic Division: Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington
Southeast Division: Carolina, Tampa Bay, Florida
Comment: Detroit getting the first dibs of moving to the east as promised years ago. The main rivalries kept intact. Detroit playing in the east and regain the rivalry with Toronto. Dallas probably isn't happy with the division set-up but is better than going to California but plays in Phoenix instead with only one hour difference. Chicago will miss Detroit a lot. Columbus is the only loser out of this arrangement.
First off, coolboarder, you might possibly guess that with me this also isn't the first time I've discussed something a bit similar to what you're suggesting above. I can't remember exactly who it was with, but quite a while back another poster and I talked about what he named it as being 3-team pods. I think that we had 3 and 2-team pods that we said could form Divisions together; I don't think we ever actually thought of the 3-team groups as Divisions themselves, though I have seen someone post that idea before as well.
Anyway, a simple comment about why I didn't respond to this idea originally is that I just simply don't think such a thing would ever be considered. Sorry, but that's the first big negative. Secondly, there's still going to be dispute as to which teams should be part of which 3-team group. Just for example, I haven't analyzed your groups closely, and I'm not looking at them now (they're above where I'm writing), so let me put together what I would think could be appropriate 3-team groups, and then I'll/we'll check to see how similar or different my groups are from yours....
Okay, first with 30 teams, keeping Phoenix:
Van, Cal, Edm
SJ, LA, Ana
Pho, Col, Dal
Win, Min, Chi
StL, Nas, Clb
Det, Tor, Buf
Ott, Mon, Bos
NYR, NYI, NJ
Phi, Pit, Was
Car, TB, FLo
Now 30 teams with the Coyotes to Seattle/Portland
Van, Sea/Por, SJ
LA, Ana, Col
Edm, Cal, Win
Dal, StL, Nas
Min, Chi, Clb
Det, Tor, Buf
Ott, Mon, Bos
NYR, NYI, NJ
Phi, Pit, Was
Car, TB, FLo
Now 30 teams with the Coyotes to Quebec City
Van, Edm, Cal
SJ, LA, Ana
Col, Dal, StL
Win, Min, Chi
Nas, Clb, Pit
Det, Tor, Buf
Ott, Mon, QC
Bos, Phi, Was
NYR, NYI, NJ
Car, TB, Flo
Now changing to 33 team, with (and I'm just going to do this with my preference for what teams I'd hope there to be)... Phoenix to Portland, plus Seattle, QC, and Hamilton
Van, Sea, Por
SJ, LA, Ana
Edm, Cal, Win
Col, Dal, Min
StL, Chi, Nas
Det, Clb, Pit
Tor, Ham, Buf
Ott, Mon, QC
Bos, Phi, Was
NYR, NYI, NJ
Car, TB, Flo
So first off, again before comparing with your combinations, I can see that there could be a lot of permutations depending on where teams go (relocation or expansion), so that in itself is a problem because the 3-team groups/Divisions would have to be changed up a fair bit if you wish to create a logical new group for the new city.
Now, let's compare...
Wow, in keeping Phoenix we have it exactly the same.
With moving the Coyotes to QC... Not too different actually. The biggest difference seems to be where we put Detroit.
Anyway, it was an interesting little task,... but still I think with almost no hope of ever being considered. And I didn't even consider your scheduling matrix.
Jesus,
As a red wings fan, I might hang myself if we saw a "central conference" like that.
Seriously!
You see that as worse than the current Western Conference in which Detroit might have to play the Alberta teams or the California teams, or Phoenix in the Playoffs?
I mean, you've got 7 ETZ teams there, plus Chicago and St Louis. Nashville has been building a bit of a rivalry with Detroit, and then plus Dallas. I just can't see how that isn't an improvement over the current Western Conference. And you've still got pretty much the whole current Central Division intact.
This kind of an alignment seems popular with people. The League should just do it in a 6-Division format...
CANSUR (excuse the spanish)
Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Tampa Bay, Florida
NORTHEAST
Boston, NY Rangers, NY Islanders, New Jersey, Buffalo
EAST CENTRAL
Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington, Carolina, Nashville
PACIFIC
Vancouver, San Jose, Los Angeles, Anaheim, Phoenix/Seattle
GREAT PLAINS
Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Colorado, Dallas
WEST CENTRAL
Minnesota, Chicago, St Louis, Columbus, Detroit
Putting those far south teams in with the far north teams, you know, to "fix" things. Sorry Atlantic Division, you have to pay your price too.
Oh, but Minnesota is happy, Chicago keeps its strangle hold on Detroit, and Detroit doesn't let Columbus get away.
Now we just do...
4 x 10 = 40
3 x 4 = 12
- - - -
2 x 15 = 30
Gotta have those home-and-home against every team in the League.
Here's a solution... Since it seems so hard for the League to just get rid of 3 Time Zone Divisions; and because it's apparently not fair that one Canadian team should be in a Division alone without another Canadian team, and therefore the same should go for US-based teams. And since the League seems to insist that in a 6-Division alignment Vancouver must be in a Division with Minnesota...
FAR WEST
Edmonton, Calgary, San Jose, Los Angeles, Anaheim
FAR-FLUNG WEST
Vancouver, Colorado, Phoenix (hopefully to be Seattle), Winnipeg, Minnesota
No single UB-based team in a Division, no single Canadian-based team in a Division.
Other possibility here would be:
PACIFIC: VAN, CAL, EDM, SEA, SJ, LA, ANA, COL
MIDWEST: WINN, MINN, CHI, DET, STL, DAL, CAR, NASH (Note it's Carolina rather than Columbus).
NORTHEAST: QC, MON, BOS, OTT, TOR, TOR2, BUFF, CMB
COLONIAL or ATLANTIC: NYI, NYR, NJ, PITT, PHIL, WAS, TB, FLA
Which at least leaves everything continguous...
I'd do it like this
PACIFIC: VAN, CAL, EDM, SEA, SJ, LA, ANA, COL
MIDWEST: WINN, MINN, CHI, DET, STL, DAL, TOR2, NASH
NORTHEAST: QC, MON, BOS, OTT, TOR, BUFF, CMB, CAR
COLONIAL or ATLANTIC: NYI, NYR, NJ, PITT, PHIL, WAS, TB, FLA
i strongly believe toronto and toronto 2 should be split up. my other approach would be this from the last re-alignment proposal by the league. you could switch Columbus and TOR2. That way the highly popular atlantic teams are coming into toronto more often
PACIFIC: VAN, CAL, EDM, SEA, SJ, LA, ANA, COL
MIDWEST: WINN, MINN, CHI, DET, STL, DAL, TOR2/CMB, NASH
NORTHEAST: QC, MON, BOS, OTT, TOR, BUFF, TB, FLA
COLONIAL or ATLANTIC: NYI, NYR, NJ, PITT, PHIL, WAS, CMB/TOR2, CAR
i strongly believe toronto and toronto 2 should be split up. my other approach would be this from the last re-alignment proposal by the league. you could switch Columbus and TOR2. That way the highly popular atlantic teams are coming into toronto more often
Wouldn't have been better all along if they had split up the NYC area teams as well. The mistakes that are made in this League. I suppose they could still try to do it.
I prefer the two Conference system in part because of the number of teams involved. It feels more like the Playoff teams are more closely to accurately being the best teams in that particular Season, and the matchups are based on a broad spectrum of teams and their records for the Season. I'd much rather have a matrix like that than some condensed little group of teams with repeated matchups regardless of how those teams can compete with the rest of the League. And if the games against the rest of the League really do have a strong effect on determining their positions in the Standings, then I want those teams competing in the Playoffs against the other teams in the League which did the best in that Season; not just against a 1/4 of the League Divisional group.
Each Playoff matchup presents its own unique dynamic. It's somewhat unfortunate that it can't be a top-16 Playoffs. Division 1st Round, Conference 2nd Round, League 3rd Round, and then a Final. But I'd be happy to continue with the current two Conference system; incorporate a Divisional 1st Round if they want... can be done right now, if they want to do it.
Here's a solution... Since it seems so hard for the League to just get rid of 3 Time Zone Divisions; and because it's apparently not fair that one Canadian team should be in a Division alone without another Canadian team, and therefore the same should go for US-based teams. And since the League seems to insist that in a 6-Division alignment Vancouver must be in a Division with Minnesota...
FAR WEST
Edmonton, Calgary, San Jose, Los Angeles, Anaheim
FAR-FLUNG WEST
Vancouver, Colorado, Phoenix (hopefully to be Seattle), Winnipeg, Minnesota
No single UB-based team in a Division, no single Canadian-based team in a Division.
Doesn't much solve the issue of teams having to travel two time zones for divisional games.
Whatever is decided, I'd like to see:
-At least home and home with every other team
-divisons only spanning at most one time zone away
-no divisions with only one CDN or one US team in them
Which could only be solved by splitting up Cal and Edm or grouping Winnipeg with Eastern time Zone CDN team
Doesn't much solve the issue of teams having to travel two time zones for divisional games.
Whatever is decided, I'd like to see:
-At least home and home with every other team
-divisons only spanning at most one time zone away
-no divisions with only one CDN or one US team in them
Which could only be solved by splitting up Cal and Edm or grouping Winnipeg with Eastern time Zone CDN team
That's why I like mine the best ... 4 divisions x 8 per
West Coast teams + Edmonton, Calgary & Colorado
Nashville, Detroit, Winnipeg, Dallas, Minnesota, Columbus, St Louis & Chicago
QC, MON, BOS, OTT, TOR, TOR2, BUFF, CAR
NYI, NYR, NJ, PITT, PHIL, WAS, TB, FLA
That's why I like mine the best ... 4 divisions x 8 per
West Coast teams + Edmonton, Calgary & Colorado
Nashville, Detroit, Winnipeg, Dallas, Minnesota, Columbus, St Louis & Chicago
QC, MON, BOS, OTT, TOR, TOR2, BUFF, CAR
NYI, NYR, NJ, PITT, PHIL, WAS, TB, FLA
