Moving Pieces

MONTEREY, Calif.--Let the Great Realignment Debate begin.

At least, that's what is anticipated here in northern California. NHL commissioner Gary Bettman has mused aloud about the "30 different preferences" of his 30 owners, and most believe the debate will be contentious. A much larger contingent of media from the U.S. and Canada has gathered for this snynod of the NHL powers-that-be, and the hopes of the various members of the board of governors ranges from being ferociously dedicated to maintaining the status quo to looking for dramatic change.

Then again, with less than three hours of meetings scheduled for today and only four tomorrow before the meetings break off, there's only so much time that has been allotted to hash this out. Maybe because Bettman, always superb in organizing the vote beforehand, has the necessary two-thirds vote in place. Or maybe because this meeting is destined for deadlock and no decision on realignment, which is entirely possible.

From a Maple Leafs point-of-view, there's nothing to be gained here, only lost. While Leaf representatives, likely to include Brian Burke and Larry Tanenbaum, probably recognize the urgent hope of the Detroit Red Wings to either be allowed to move to the Eastern Conference or to a drastically revamped, four-division setup in which they'd be essentially in a mid-west grouping, any significant change to the status quo would cause team like the Leafs, Rangers, Canadiens, Sabres, Flyers, Devils etc. to assume significantly enhanced travel demands because of a balanced schedule. Naturally, after having it so good for so long, those teams would like to keep having it good for some time longer.

But there is a great good, right? A few teams - notably Detroit, Dallas, Colorado and Minnesota - have really carried a heavy burden in terms of both travel and TV/time zone issues, and it would be fair to help those teams out. Mike Ilitich with the Red Wings has been a good soldier for a long time, while in Dallas the new ownership group headed by Tom Gaglardi could use a hand rebuilding what was not so long ago a very strong franchise.

So I'm in favour of the four-division (conference?) set up. Don't care that two would have eight teams and two would have seven teams. A similar setup in MLB doesn't seem to be much of an issue. Really like the idea of playoffs within a division; it would make the standings and the playoff race that more interesting. As it is, nobody really pays much attention to the divisions. Only the conference standings really matter.

Under the drastic realignment scenario, rather than going for one of eight spots in a 15-team conference, a team like the Leafs would be fighting for one of four spots in a seven- or eight-team group. Having the four teams play off against each other would almost certainly enhance rivalries.

I like it, and it's time for a change. The simplest alteration would be to swap Detroit and Winnipeg, or Columbus and Winnipeg, either of which could happen.

But the big change promises bigger results. We'll see what the guvs decide.

 

 

Comments

[bill]

I'm all for a realignment....but not til Phoenix (etc.) gets sorted out. What would happen if (when?) a team is put in Quebec City and/or Southern Ontario? What then?

[KD]

While fewer divisions might even out the travel load a bit, my biggest problem with travel differences is in the playoffs. The Western teams travel considerably more than the eastern teams. By the time the finals started last year, Boston's longest trip (to Tampa) was comparable to Vancouver's shortest trip (to San Jose). If they want to tweak the divisions or conferences a bit, moving Winnipeg and Detroit, and maybe Phoenix once we know where they're moving, that's fine. However, I think the playoff differences could be reduced by simply scrapping the whole notion of conferences once they start. Simply seed the teams from 1-16 (with the top 4 or 6 seeds being the division winners), with the teams reseeded by regular season results after each round (again with surviving division winners always given the top seeds).

[NP_TO]

Damien, I really like your approach of the greater good. I've found throughout the NHL Realignment discussions on the 'net that everyone thinks very selfishly about their own team. For the East Coast teams like the Leafs, Rangers, etc. to make an extra trip to the West Coast every season isn't really a huge sacrifice, when it will make such a significant reduction in travel for the Detroit's, Minnesota's and Dallas's of the NHL world. One solution to the 7-team vs. 8-team conference/division anomaly would be to have a CFL-style cross-over (whereby if the 5th place team in one of the divisions has more points than the 4th place team in the other division, then the 5th place team gets into the playoffs instead of the 4th place team). Looking forward to what the Board of Governors decide, and then... let them play golf :-)

[James Weiss]

This does not relate to NHL realignment in the slightest. As much as the issue is interesting and semi thought provoking, that is not my area of interest. I am from a wealthy affluent family the type of kid to become an avid leafs fan. I really study the management side of hockey, and what that area pertains too. I have never taken issue to the leafs and their style, Ron Wilson's cynicism was never to strong. This year the team seems to have put media restrictions to anyone except their "homer" Paul Hendrick. Brian Burke has made many excellent trades, but his ego and style are simply disgusting to me at least. He has an obvious feeling of greatness. So my question is this in all honesty why does he not fire Wilson. Is it really his dedication to Ron. Btw I like your view on many topics. You don't give Ron Wilson a hard enough time, Howard Berger I would say challenged him lightly. Why aren't the leafs ever condemned and Ron's excuses challenged. Geese reporters are soft, maybe you need more truculence. Please call him out on their excuses. It seems weird to write this when they are winning but they are not playing all too well so....

Thanks,

Grade 10 Student

[Glen]

The realignment vote has passed. Seems like a good idea. Divisional playoff races are like before, when there were 4 divisions (Norris, Adams, Patrick and Smythe.
I like the idea of all the teams in the league playing each other too. Can only be a good thing for the league. At least cities like Columbus, Tampa, Phoenix will have large crowds when teams like the Leafs, Montreal, Pittsburgh come to town. Might get more fans out to other places too.

[Fred]

I like it, but I'd drastically change the playoffs. First I'd let the top 6 teams in each division into the playoffs. In each division the top 2 teams get byes while 3 plays 6 and 4 plays 5 in best of 5 series. 3 and 4 start on the road for two games and then come home for three, with a day off between game 2 and 3 and 4 and 5. There is minimal travel and it's done in a week. To give the 3rd place team more of an advantage, you could make the 6th seed win 4 out of 5 while the 3rd seed only needs 2 wins. Second round, bye teams play the first round winners in traditional (2-2-1-1-1) best of 7 series within the division. For the Quarter finals, reseed surviving teams 1 plays 8, 2 plays 7 etc. In the Semi-finals reseed again with 1 vs 4 and 2 vs 3. The Final is obviously the last two teams. This format accomplishes several things. More markets get playoff fever and the revenue it generates. First 2 rounds are inner divisional to enhance rivalries and help ensure rivals meet. Last 3 rounds are played without the divisions to make travel luck of the draw and also to give divisional foes like the Leafs and Habs a small chance of meeting in the Final.

[Greg]

" A similar setup in MLB doesn't seem to be much of an issue."
-------------------

Aren't they in the process right now of moving Houston to the AL in order to "fix" this?