Rex425 Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Maybe the idea is two of the existing teams eventually fold so it goes to 32? Florida and Phoenix? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaos Giraffe Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Las Vegas Nuggets, Quebec Nordiques, Seattle Totems and Toronto St. Pats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imuzi Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Woah, anyone who can remember the expansion drafts from just a little while ago can imagine the havoc that these four teams are going to reap on rosters around the league. But more Canadian teams so I'm all for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummer4now Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 No.... I dont want to see a team in seattle. There goes the unity between BC and WA state in terms of hockey. Its too close and imagine what tne border wait times would look now on game days... I think they should have tried somewhere in Oregon. Also las vegas is not a good idea because of the potenial for gambling and substance abuse. Some hockey players seem to lack control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Florida and Phoenix? Maaaaaayyyyyyybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 We can let Seattle have all the scrubs... We keep our young guns and destroy Seattle for years 26 of the 28 teams existing in the league at the time of the draft were each allowed to protect either one goaltender, five defensemen, and nine forwards or two goaltenders, three defensemen, and seven forwards. The Atlanta Thrashers andNashville Predators had their entire rosters protected, as they were the two newest franchises in the league, only being in existence for one and two years respectively. For teams protecting only one goaltender, there was no experience requirement for those left unprotected. For teams protecting two goaltenders, each goaltender left unprotected must have appeared in either 10 NHL games in the 1999–2000 season or 25 games in the 1998–99 season and 1999–2000 seasons combined. A goaltender had to be in net for at least 31 minutes in each game for the game to be counted against these totals. At least one defenceman left unprotected by each team had to have appeared in at least 40 games in the 1999–2000 season or 70 games in the 1998–99 season and 1999–2000 seasons combined. At least two forwards left unprotected by each team had to have met the same requirements. Wonder if this will stay the same for the next expansion draft..if so let the proposals begin to take form for the next 2 years haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummer4now Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Imagine if Seattle won the cup before us... I can also imagine them ripping of the seahawks 7th man thing to garner more support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-SN- Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 No.... I dont want to see a team in seattle. There goes the unity between BC and WA state in terms of hockey. Its too close and imagine what tne border wait times would look now on game days... I think they should have tried somewhere in Oregon. Also las vegas is not a good idea because of the potenial for gambling and substance abuse. Some hockey players seem to lack control. I'd love it. Seattle will have a rabid fanbase and Vancouver will finally have a rival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 So the East has 2 teams more than the West - how does this help with alignment? Maybe the new "Toronto" team should be in Thunder Bay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nux4lyfe Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 So the East has 2 teams more than the West - how does this help with alignment? Maybe the new "Toronto" team should be in Thunder Bay Tampa Bay moves NHL team to Thunder Bay....Thunder Bay Lightning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingAlex Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William_Clarkson Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 Meh, Coyotes to Seattle, Panthers to Quebec. Cut Vegas and another Toronto team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gretzky_Sedins Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 relocating would be better IMO... Coyotes to Seattle.... Panthers to Quebec.... then see if a team in Vegas would be successfully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FelixPotvin29 Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 I can't see this happening. But could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 :S Why expand when they have so many teams in the red. Wasn't it pre-lockout when they announced only 8 teams were truly profitable? And now they want to add 4 more teams, of which 1 (LV) is destined to fail? This is a sideshow. 30 teams is perfect, if anything the talent is already spread out, and 4 more teams now to pick off good team's depth? I don't like this one bit. Who would we protect in an expansion draft? The Sedins are well past their prime, and we have such depth in young players and prospects now, I worry about losing them. 4 teams! All with 22 men rosters to fill, poaching from the half decent teams. Gross. If the NHL is trying to become profitable, move their teams with the greatest deficit, namely Arizona and Florida. Arizona to Seattle, and Florida to Quebec City. There's your profit margin, Bettman. This is beyond stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoneypuckOverlord Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 god awful idea. It's bad for the leauge, it's only good at that moment when Bettman collects some fees at the cost of starting an expansion team. Hard to believe Seattle gets their NHL team before we get a chance another NBA team. Washington State is not even a hockey hub, what a joke. It's not even close. It's like us getting a baseball team out of nowhere, unbelieavable the leauge the NHL has become. From the suspensions. to the diving, to the incompetent officiating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:D Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 With this many teams, I'll get a call-up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdubuya Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 im skeptical. 4 teams in one year? teams are going to lose a lot of players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asian player Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 So.. We're keeping teams that are losing money and we'll expand... Stick a team in a place that already has a team and stick another team in a tourist attraction. Meanwhile, we water down the quality in the NHL. Ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin-B Posted August 27, 2014 Share Posted August 27, 2014 As much as I want an NHL franchise here in the Puget Sound (Seattle) I'm a Canucks fan first, been on this boat a very long time and refuse to jump ship. I'm also taking these reports with a grain of salt. One thing I'm familiar with is Seattle politics and I'm almost certain that they can derail this. The Seattle City council is great with blowing things up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.