Ryan Wilson: Expansion Thoughts Expansion Thoughts

I'm ok with 32, just depending on where. Seattle or Portland would be nice, same with Quebec. Vegas is interesting. I think SLC could be a decent market as well, but they are never thrown around. I am guessing that Bettman and the higher ups have a good feel on the level of NHL talent that will be available in 10 years. With more and more prospects coming from CA and TX, there could be enough talent to support it. Not sure about right now.

Fold any team where the closet thing to ice is in their fruity drinks.

Las Vegas doesn't have any sports teams, it'd be interesting if the NHL would put a team there.

NHL should have thought about expansion two years ago. The 2015 amateur draft, with two potential franchise players, would have been the ideal year to add two new teams, which would be awarded the first and second overall picks. This would also have eliminated any incentive for non-playoff teams to "tank" in an effort to get the top pick!

Question: Would players with no-trade or no-movement clauses in their contracts be exempt from an expansion draft? If not, could the threat of not being protected be used to convince such players to accept a trade in order to go to a (presumably) better team?

There is just something about the idea of a team in Vegas that pisses me off. What are they going to be called? The slot machines? Are tourists in Sin City going to take time out of gambling, coke, hookers to go see a game? It just seems like the NHL saying "look what we are doing" to other major sports which they in no way have to compete with at all for legitimacy. The NHL already has one struggling team in the desert why make it 2?

I have always been a supporter of expansion into areas that do not have hockey as a major sport. I firmly believe that this creates hockey players over 10-20 years as evident in Southern California, Arizona, Florida, Texas, etc... The amount of players in young leagues of all types and high schools adds tons more competition in the junior system which trickles up to give us better Young NHL prospects in the end. This is why the overall talent level in the NHL has increased dramatically since the 80s and 90s, especially with young draftees and college players. 20 years ago, unless you were a bonafide future superstar, it was unheard of to break into the nhl at 18 or 19. Also, the league was full of 4th liners that could barely skate. Hockey as a sport in general has grown because of expansion into non traditional markets. The fruit bares years down the line and the 4 Billion Dollar HRR Revenue is a result of the sport growing all over the US.

But that being said, it is my opinion that expansion into "frontier areas" should not shouldered by the poor owners that bought into those franchises. These owners are pioneering the sport in those areas which the entire NHL benefits from with time. Profit sharing with these teams is essential. Its like marketing fees for the established teams to market the sport to new unborn fans. These teams like potentially Seattle or Las Vegas should receive help from the rest of the league to subsidize the cost of being the front line to grow the sport.

I disagree with the diluting theory of expansion. I think it actually makes the league stronger and the players better in due time.

There is just something about the idea of a team in Vegas that pisses me off. What are they going to be called? The slot machines? Are tourists in Sin City going to take time out of gambling, coke, hookers to go see a game? It just seems like the NHL saying "look what we are doing" to other major sports which they should feel in no way they have to compete with at all. The NHL already has one struggling team in the desert why make it 2?
- Grinder47

Have you ever been to Vegas? There is a substantial population of people who live and work there. I kinda like The Las Vegas "Lights" as a team name...

Have you ever been to Vegas? There is a substantial population of people who live and work there. I kinda like The Las Vegas "Lights" as a team name...
- xcheckmajor

Does that population have a passion for hockey?

Does that population have a passion for hockey?
- Grinder47

Who cares? If they don't now, they will eventually.

You put out a quality product, people will buy it.

Also, good (frank)ing luck telling MGM they can't have a hockey team.

Also they should move the Canes to Vegas please.

Also they should move the Canes to Vegas please.
- BINGO!

Las Vegas Whalers.

Does that population have a passion for hockey?
- Grinder47

If you only put hockey in front of people who like hockey, the sport as a whole never grows. You need to cater to existing fans as well as grow new fans. Thats business economics basics.

What are the chances that the NHL has zero intention to put a team in Vegas, but is using the idea of Vegas to drive up expansion pricing leverage to other cities?

Las Vegas Whalers.
- YzermanIsTheMan

- BINGO!

Las Vegas Whale Wranglers.

Have you ever been to Vegas? There is a substantial population of people who live and work there. I kinda like The Las Vegas "Lights" as a team name...
- xcheckmajor

Problems are that there aren't a ton of natives there, so it will be kind of like the Florida teams where transplant fans go when their hometown teams are in town.

And like Scott Burnside wrote, A LOT of the locals are service employees, so they work a lot of nights. Not great for selling season tickets.

I'm all for expansion though... Diluted talent means sloppy hockey, and sloppy hockey is fun to watch. Who doesn't want to see Crosby or Malkin going one on one with a defenseman who should be playing in Norfolk instead of the NHL?

I'm all for expansion though... Diluted talent means sloppy hockey, and sloppy hockey is fun to watch. Who doesn't want to see Crosby or Malkin going one on one with a defenseman who should be playing in Norfolk instead of the NHL?
- rival22

I know why you're all for expansion (in hope someone picks up Scuds!)

I have always been a supporter of expansion into areas that do not have hockey as a major sport. I firmly believe that this creates hockey players over 10-20 years as evident in Southern California, Arizona, Florida, Texas, etc... The amount of players in young leagues of all types and high schools adds tons more competition in the junior system which trickles up to give us better Young NHL prospects in the end. This is why the overall talent level in the NHL has increased dramatically since the 80s and 90s, especially with young draftees and college players. 20 years ago, unless you were a bonafide future superstar, it was unheard of to break into the nhl at 18 or 19. Also, the league was full of 4th liners that could barely skate. Hockey as a sport in general has grown because of expansion into non traditional markets. The fruit bares years down the line and the 4 Billion Dollar HRR Revenue is a result of the sport growing all over the US.

But that being said, it is my opinion that expansion into "frontier areas" should not shouldered by the poor owners that bought into those franchises. These owners are pioneering the sport in those areas which the entire NHL benefits from with time. Profit sharing with these teams is essential. Its like marketing fees for the established teams to market the sport to new unborn fans. These teams like potentially Seattle or Las Vegas should receive help from the rest of the league to subsidize the cost of being the front line to grow the sport.

I disagree with the diluting theory of expansion. I think it actually makes the league stronger and the players better in due time.
- xcheckmajor

Some areas it can work, TX has an ever growing population from other regions that enjoy the sport. All those kids need other sports to play other than football and baseball. From what I understand they have a pretty strong youth program. The Stars teams of the 90's helped.

But moving a team to Canada does not necessarily mean the league would grow. I guarantee that the Canadian market is pretty maxed out. There will be 0 new fans of the sport if a team moves there. You will increase revenue by ticket sales and merchandise. On paper ATL had much more potential than Peg. Owners/management and stadium location messed that one up.

Why is every so concerned about "growing" the NHL?

There is just something about the idea of a team in Vegas that pisses me off. What are they going to be called? The slot machines? Are tourists in Sin City going to take time out of gambling, coke, hookers to go see a game? It just seems like the NHL saying "look what we are doing" to other major sports which they in no way have to compete with at all for legitimacy. The NHL already has one struggling team in the desert why make it 2?
- Grinder47

Wow, when was the last time you've been to Las Vegas? Covered every stereotype pretty quickly.

I'm there at least 3 times a year on business. I was just there for a convention, this week. and am going back again the week after next for another. It's a pretty cool, growing (again) city that has lots of tourists with lots of cash to spend and looking for things to do. I've been out to the minor league games there, and would absolutely go to see an NHL game or two when in town.

It would also be a great place for fans of teams that sell out (Chicago, Boston, Toronto, Montreal, etc.) to make a trip to see their team on the road.

I'd like to see the NHL move 2 teams, and add 2. Quebec should absolutely have a team, as well as a second in the Toronto area. Seattle, Portland, Vegas, Milwaukee & Salt Lake City are all viable options.

And there are plenty of players, both in NA and Europe to form 2 new teams.

Why is every so concerned about "growing" the NHL?
- Grinder47

People are worried about the "dilution of talent in the NHL" which is completely stupid. How many current AHL players are playing in the AHL because they are rookies or because other players keep them down there? I think 46 players could be pulled from thirty teams with ease and no one would notice a "dilution of talent."

Seattle makes sense. That area has financial clout and growth out the whazoo. Not sure about Vegas. A second team near the Toronto area makes sense. Definitely NO MORE than two for expansion.

People are worried about the "dilution of talent in the NHL" which is completely stupid. How many current AHL players are playing in the AHL because they are rookies or because other players keep them down there? I think 46 players could be pulled from thirty teams with ease and no one would notice a "dilution of talent."
- YzermanIsTheMan

You hope. I am not as sure.