HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Other Leagues > ECHL and other Minor Pro Leagues
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2

WPHL 2008-09 alignment thoughts?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-04-2008, 12:13 PM
  #1
HansH
Unwelcome Spectre
 
HansH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 3,450
vCash: 500
WPHL 2008-09 alignment thoughts?

All right, assuming the list of teams stays as it is now, there will be 15 teams playing in the WPHL (dba the CHL) next season. So, that makes alignment interesting... I've got the following thought -- any counter-proposals?

EASTERN CONFERENCE
Northeast Division
Mississippi
Oklahoma City
Wichita
Tulsa

Southeast Division
Texas
Bossier-Shreveport
Laredo
Rio Grande Valley

WESTERN CONFERENCE
Northwest Division
Rapid City
Colorado
Rocky Mountain

Southwest Division
Amarillo
Odessa
New Mexico
Arizona

Division winners plus the next 2 (three if you must) teams in each conference make the playoffs, seeded with 1 v 4, 2 v 3 on a conference basis in the first round...

Thoughts?

HansH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 01:43 PM
  #2
pelts35.com
Registered User
 
pelts35.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 11,612
vCash: 500
Any thoughts of doing away with divisions and just having 2 conferences with the top 4 teams in each conference making the playoffs?

pelts35.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 01:56 PM
  #3
HansH
Unwelcome Spectre
 
HansH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 3,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pelts35.com View Post
Any thoughts of doing away with divisions and just having 2 conferences with the top 4 teams in each conference making the playoffs?
Personally, I'd prefer that if I were running a league, but the owners seem to have not enjoyed that thought... maybe because it brings up the possibility of being an "eighth-place team" instead of no worse than a "fourth-place team"... image, etc. I'd be mildly (not hugely, but mildly) surprised if they went to a 2-conference/no-division format... but pleasantly so.

HansH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 04:58 PM
  #4
Kevin Wey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Des Moines
Posts: 1,927
vCash: 500
I personally wonder how many of the WPHL/CHL teams will be able to survive with some of the predicted obligations the upcoming collective bargaining agreement with the PHPA will create.

As far as CHL divisional alignment, what Hans has there makes perfect sense. Plus, with gas prices going sky high, I'm thinking it'll be handy if there are divisions, especially compact divisions.

Fuel is but one of a number of economic factors that make me wonder if the future of pro hockey involves only one Double A league with compact divisions and a few compact Single A leagues.

Kevin Wey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 07:37 PM
  #5
nosl
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Nord de l'Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 487
vCash: 500
Merger

The ECHL should let the WPHL(CHL) take control of the Western based clubs. Geographically, it makes sense. I'm sure the Flordia Everblades & teams in the Eastern Half of North America are probably annoyed with making trips across the continent to California, Victoria & Anchorage (I imagine vice versa as well - even thought it's perhaps once a season for each club). How about a three League setup to cut down on costs:

Western AA Hockey League (14 teams)

Anchorage
Arizona
Bakersfield
Colorado
Fresno
Idaho
Las Vegas
Ontario (California)
Pheonix
Reno
Rocky Mountain
Stockton
Utah
Victoria

Central AA Hockey League (12 Teams)

Amarillo
Bossier-Shreveport
Laredo
Mississippi (Seawolves)
Mississippi (Riverkings)
New Mexico
Odessa
Oklahoma City
Rio Grande Valley
Texas (Brahmas)
Tulsa
Wichita

Eastern AA Hockey League (14 Teams)

Augusta
Charlotte
Cincinnatti
Dayton
Elmira
Florida
Gwinnett
Johnstown
Pensacola
Reading
South Carolina
Trenton
Wheeling
Youngstown

nosl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2008, 10:21 PM
  #6
HansH
Unwelcome Spectre
 
HansH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 3,450
vCash: 500
A grand total of ONE team is making ONE trip out West this next season -- Reading is playing in Idaho and Utah. So much for "probably getting annoyed at the trips".

HansH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 01:47 AM
  #7
Shootmaster_44
Registered User
 
Shootmaster_44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lloydminster, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HansH View Post
A grand total of ONE team is making ONE trip out West this next season -- Reading is playing in Idaho and Utah. So much for "probably getting annoyed at the trips".
I'm surprised they didn't schedule Reading to play Ontario next year. You'd think the parent club would want to see their two AA teams fight it out.

Shootmaster_44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 09:47 AM
  #8
CrazyEddie20
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 419
vCash: 500
There's only one Class-AA league as it is. The CHL and IHL are definitely Class-A.

And there's no way that a league is just going to hand over half of it's clubs to a lower-level competitor.

CrazyEddie20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2008, 11:47 AM
  #9
pelts35.com
Registered User
 
pelts35.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 11,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shootmaster_44 View Post
I'm surprised they didn't schedule Reading to play Ontario next year. You'd think the parent club would want to see their two AA teams fight it out.
You are assuming that Reading will still be a Kings affiliate next season. I'm still not convinced as I see absolutely no benefit to an NHL team having 2 ECHL affiliates.

pelts35.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-11-2008, 05:43 PM
  #10
AlanMSaunders
Registered User
 
AlanMSaunders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 637
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AlanMSaunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by pelts35.com View Post
You are assuming that Reading will still be a Kings affiliate next season. I'm still not convinced as I see absolutely no benefit to an NHL team having 2 ECHL affiliates.
Detroit has two AA affiliates in the same league, IIRC.

AlanMSaunders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2008, 04:14 AM
  #11
Shootmaster_44
Registered User
 
Shootmaster_44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lloydminster, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pelts35.com View Post
You are assuming that Reading will still be a Kings affiliate next season. I'm still not convinced as I see absolutely no benefit to an NHL team having 2 ECHL affiliates.
Its an ownership deal in Reading. The Kings' parent company AEG owns 50% of the Royals. I think its one of those things where you might as well have a second affiliate as a place to "work out" those players who are diamonds in the rough but need work. This is basically the hockey version of how most MLB teams have two single A teams.

Really, I have this feeling of all the teams that might get the shaft from the Kings, it will be Manchester. I'm thinking Ontario was born from the goaltending woes the Kings have had as of late. Having to fly goalies in from the opposite side of the country was a bit of a pain. In fact, seems to me one game the Kings did not have a backup last season. They had a guy in uniform who was so severely injured that someone had to dress him. Basically, they were stuck if the active goalie was hurt. However, if you have a ready and able goalie in Ontario, he could be at the rink in a few hours (as I'm not sure exactly the distance from Ontario to Staples).

It also allows the Kings' coaching staff to take a bit of a hands-on development strategy. I have heard Royals fans bemoan the lack of coaching of the various goalie prospect the Kings dump on Reading. With the team in Ontario, the coaches can teach more and still be home in time for supper.

The Kings ladder I think will look like this:

AAA Ontario (ECHL)
AA Reading (ECHL)
A Manchester (AHL)

Basically, the Kings will allot those players who will yo-yo in Ontario (giving the Reign an AHL caliber roster), unless an East Coast roadtrip is on the schedule. Reading will get their usual allotment of "prospects" on their way out of the organization and Manchester will get the rest. In otherwords, Manchester will not have the most NHL ready prospects, as they will be in Ontario. I've noticed that Vancouver tends to operate this way with Victoria and Manitoba, so this isn't the most unheard of scenario, except there's the enigma of Reading in this mix.

Shootmaster_44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-16-2008, 11:34 AM
  #12
AlanMSaunders
Registered User
 
AlanMSaunders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 637
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AlanMSaunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shootmaster_44 View Post
Its an ownership deal in Reading. The Kings' parent company AEG owns 50% of the Royals. I think its one of those things where you might as well have a second affiliate as a place to "work out" those players who are diamonds in the rough but need work. This is basically the hockey version of how most MLB teams have two single A teams.

Really, I have this feeling of all the teams that might get the shaft from the Kings, it will be Manchester. I'm thinking Ontario was born from the goaltending woes the Kings have had as of late. Having to fly goalies in from the opposite side of the country was a bit of a pain. In fact, seems to me one game the Kings did not have a backup last season. They had a guy in uniform who was so severely injured that someone had to dress him. Basically, they were stuck if the active goalie was hurt. However, if you have a ready and able goalie in Ontario, he could be at the rink in a few hours (as I'm not sure exactly the distance from Ontario to Staples).

It also allows the Kings' coaching staff to take a bit of a hands-on development strategy. I have heard Royals fans bemoan the lack of coaching of the various goalie prospect the Kings dump on Reading. With the team in Ontario, the coaches can teach more and still be home in time for supper.

The Kings ladder I think will look like this:

AAA Ontario (ECHL)
AA Reading (ECHL)
A Manchester (AHL)

Basically, the Kings will allot those players who will yo-yo in Ontario (giving the Reign an AHL caliber roster), unless an East Coast roadtrip is on the schedule. Reading will get their usual allotment of "prospects" on their way out of the organization and Manchester will get the rest. In otherwords, Manchester will not have the most NHL ready prospects, as they will be in Ontario. I've noticed that Vancouver tends to operate this way with Victoria and Manitoba, so this isn't the most unheard of scenario, except there's the enigma of Reading in this mix.

Another way to do the same thing would be to sign a lot of veterans to two way contracts and stuff them all in Manchester in case of a long term injury or something like that, and put all the real prospects, guys 19 - 23, in Ontario. Reading would then get guys who have a possibility of getting called up to Manchester during the year.

AlanMSaunders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2008, 06:49 AM
  #13
Shootmaster_44
Registered User
 
Shootmaster_44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lloydminster, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlanMSaunders View Post
Another way to do the same thing would be to sign a lot of veterans to two way contracts and stuff them all in Manchester in case of a long term injury or something like that, and put all the real prospects, guys 19 - 23, in Ontario. Reading would then get guys who have a possibility of getting called up to Manchester during the year.
The only slight problem with this is on a two-way NHL contract don't players have the right to refuse to be sent to the ECHL? I know my theory of the ladder has the same problem too. For this to work more easily is the Kings would have to have Manchester sign the Ontario players to two-way AHL/ECHL deals and when the Kings wanted to call up a player, they would have to sign them to a two-way NHL/AHL deal. Sounds complicated, so perhaps Manchester will be utilized the same as it always has. Ontario just may receive a few more NHL-ready prospects than usual.

I realize I am taking this thread on a further tangent asking this, but how much control does the NHL club have in regards to the players on ECHL contracts? What I mean is would the Kings interfere with Ontario signing Matthew Yeats, since the Kings had given up on him years ago as a prospect? I mean he may have a bad attitude toward the team since they cut him loose. I don't know him at all or have really ever followed his minor league career so it might be unfair to use him as an example, but he is a legit example of this.

Conversely, do NHL teams "release" certain prospects with the idea that their ECHL clubs will sign them and if they perform better they will be re-signed with the NHL team? Say the Kings were to release Dany Roussin and no other NHL team wanted him, would be unusual for him to sign an ECHL deal with Reading immediately afterward (since he's likely playing there already)?

Shootmaster_44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-17-2008, 10:17 AM
  #14
pelts35.com
Registered User
 
pelts35.com's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 11,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlanMSaunders View Post
Another way to do the same thing would be to sign a lot of veterans to two way contracts and stuff them all in Manchester in case of a long term injury or something like that, and put all the real prospects, guys 19 - 23, in Ontario. Reading would then get guys who have a possibility of getting called up to Manchester during the year.
With the AHL veteran rule it is impossible to stuff a bunch of veterans in Manchester.

Besides, why would you put your top prospects in a weaker league which could hurt their development? If anything I would rather stuff a bunch of veterans in Reading and Ontario.

pelts35.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-19-2008, 12:11 PM
  #15
AlanMSaunders
Registered User
 
AlanMSaunders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 637
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AlanMSaunders
Quote:
Originally Posted by pelts35.com View Post
With the AHL veteran rule it is impossible to stuff a bunch of veterans in Manchester.

Besides, why would you put your top prospects in a weaker league which could hurt their development? If anything I would rather stuff a bunch of veterans in Reading and Ontario.
I didn't mean veterans as in players that counted against the veteran rule, simply players that the team does not consider to have a ceiling high enough to consider to be a true prospect. I chose poor terminology.

It was Shootmaster's idea to put the prospects closer to LA in the ECHL. I'm not saying it's a good idea, I'm just saying this is a way to do it without not having an AHL affiliate.

FWIW, baseball does this all the time by keeping young prospects in AA and then promoting them straight to the majors. I know it's apples and oranges, but it does happen quite frequently.

AlanMSaunders is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:40 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.