My Thoughts on NHL Re-Alignment

While spinning through my Google Reader items this evening, I came across an epic post from Bob McKenzie of TSN about all the NHL Re-alignment Scnearios that may, or may not be, on the table for the Board of Governors meeting in December.  While a lot of them are intriuging, there was one that jumped out at, partially because its what I had in mind as soon as I heard word that Winnipeg was coming back.

First, here’s the quote:

The conference format would be scrapped for four divisions built strictly on time zones/geography.

There would be two eight-team divisions and two seven-team divisions. No way to get around the imbalance in a 30-team league, unless there’s a Plan Gor three 10-team divisions or conferences and if that’s Plan H, for argument’s sake, no one in the NHL is seriously considering it at this point. So back to Plan G.

One eight-team division would consist of only Pacific and Mountain Time zone teams — Anaheim, Los Angeles, San Jose, Phoenix, Colorado, Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary.

One seven-team divison would consist of all Central Time zone teams and one Eastern team — Dallas, Nashville, Chicago, St. Louis, Minnesota, Winnipeg and one of Columbus or Detroit

Another seven-team division would include one of Detroit or Columbus plus Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal and Boston.

The other eight-team division would be the three New York area teams — Rangers, Islanders and Devils — plus Philadelphia, Washington, Carolina, Tampa and Florida.

Bob then goes on and talks about the possible caveats of this proposal:

Honestly, when you look at those four divisions, from a practical viewpoint, there isn’t any single franchise that would have a significant beef with the time zones or the geography in the regular season. It would address the needs and desires of Dallas, Nashville, Detroit, Minnesota, Columbus, Winnipeg, take your pick.

But things start to get complicated once we get into the Plan G playoffs.

In other words, we would have to move away from the Conference playoff format and return to the days of first two rounds of the Stanley Cup playoffs being contested entirely within the division.

 

Here’s what bob is getting to: With the shrinking of the amount of divisions per conference from 3 to 2, it introduces two glaring “issues”, the first being that instead of the playoff format going by the top 8 teams making the playoffs in the conference (with 1st, 2nd, 3rd place decided by divisional winners), it would go back to the old days where the first two rounds of the playoffs would be fought inside the division, with the winner facing the winner of the other division. To me, this is a benefit, not an issue, but everyone seems to think its a problem.

See, back when I started watching hockey, we had 2 conferences (Wales and Campbell), and 4 divisions (Smythe, Norris, Patrick and Adams), and the playoffs were always exciting.  The rivalries would build each and every season, because there were only a few teams each team could face in the first and second round.  Others argue that this setup gets boring after a while because you get the same old teams facing each other each year.  But I beg to differ.

This is a different NHL than it was back in the old 4 division format. Back then, there were 21 teams, with each division having 5 teams and 1 division having 6.  This meant that out of each division, there was only 1 team that didn’t make the playoffs (2 in the Patrick division).  So yes, I can see how this can get boring year after year, especially in a time where dynasties were more common, the same teams were making the playoffs just about every year.  But, its a different time now.  Rather than the 21 teams back then, we now have 30.  With the 4 divisional format, you would have 2 divisions of 8 and 2 of 7, so each division would have 3-4 teams not make the playoffs.  Plus, with the parity that now exists in the NHL thanks to the 2004 lock-out and subsequent salary cap, turnover happens much quicker, so teams would be in and out of the playoffs each and every year, tough to get sick of that.  But, rivalries still have a chance to flourish.

However, one other thing pops up with what I mentioned in the last paragraph, in each conference, one division will have 8 teams, and one will have 7.  On the surface, this makes it seem that it would be easier to make the playoffs in one than the other.  Honestly, I don’t think this is as big of a deal.  Remember what I said earlier about the “old” system, and the Patrick division having 6 teams while everyone else had 5, and I don’t remember any complaining about it at the time.

So, I suggest the NHL give this a shot, it fixes a lot of problems like teams playing out of their time zone a lot, it makes the playoffs more exciting, and it just seems to work for everyone.  So, here’s my idea:

Pacific

  • Vancouver
  • San Jose
  • Los Angeles
  • Anaheim
  • Phoenix
  • Calgary
  • Edmonton
  • Colorado

Central

  • Winnipeg
  • Dallas
  • Minnesota
  • St. Louis
  • Chicago
  • Nashville
  • Detroit*

Eastern

  • Detroit
  • Toronto
  • Pittsburgh
  • Ottawa
  • Montreal
  • Buffalo
  • Boston

Atlantic

  • New York Islanders
  • New York Rangers
  • Philadelphia
  • New Jersey
  • Washington
  • Carolina
  • Florida
  • Tampa Bay

And the playoff format would be 1 v 4, 2 v 3 in each division for the first round, then the winners of each play each other in the second round, divisional winners face each other in round 3 and conference winners face each other in the final.  In other words, as it was years ago

Now, a couple of things jump out when you look at my proposal above:

  • Winnipeg is the lone Canadian team in their division.  I don’t see this as an issue, being a new team and all.  It may be disappointing to fans not to see as much of Canadian teams, but that’s all you can do.
  • I have Detroit in the Western Conference as they are now.  Anyone following this stuff will know that Detroit have been lobbying to move to the East due to travel.  But, under this new layout, Detroit would be playing less games on the Pacific coast then they are now.  Plus, the team I moved to the East, Columbus, would fare much better market-wise in the East.
  • Philadelphia and Pittsburgh are in two different divisions, meaning they will play each other less, and may only meet in the playoffs in round 3.  I’m not sure of the rivalry there, or if its a big issue, but geographically, it was the best way to do it.

I guess its only a matter of time to see what the results may be in December.  If i were to bet on it, I would say the NHL will be very conservative and make only 2 moves: Either Detroit or Columbus move to the East while Winnipeg moves to the West.  But I would very much love to see the return of the 4 division league and the old playoff format.