Those who think today's NHL is too diluted?

Question

I think it is as well, maybe a little less than most. Remember that in the Original 6 days we did not have all the Euros but still it is diluted talent without question.
Many believe that the league should cut down the number of teams- most think that 4-8 teams should be nixed and this would put the talent level back where it should be.

How about this instead? Cut roster sizes. Teams dress 16 players instead of 18. That is 2 less players on every team (the worst players) so you get rid of the worst 60 players in the league, therefore making it a bit more talented. I am sure the NHLPA would be dead set against this but................

Do you think this idea has a leg to stand on?????

288-LMAO- 3 x 2=6. Boy, are you feeling dumb now........jk

Yes, it is pretty much what I am proposing- 3 lines and the team could either dress an extra forward or Dman. The only problems I see are if a team has a couple of injuries early in the game and then gets into penalty trouble but it would be the same for everyone so there is a measure of fairness in it. I have actually heard it mentioned as being a good idea, even out of the mouths of many former players.

LITY- Yes, it is maybe not that over-stated then. Of course with only 6 teams as compared to 30 BUT, the league would be similiar if there were more teams because of the influx of Euros, I agree that the league is diluted, there is no question.
BUT do you think my idea is viable as at least a partial solution to the dilution? Pros and cons?
To me, it is not the question of whether it is or not-you are preaching to the choir. MANY guys would not be in the league of yesteryear. AHL teams of even the 70's could compete for the cup in today's NHL. Especially the Habs farm teams.

Answer 1

Bob, how'd you get 18 players? There are four lines of three forwards (12), and three lines/pairings of 2 d-men (9). That's 21. In order for that to work, I think you're going to have to first experiment with three forward lines for the whole season (most likely in the AHL, or even the lower profile ECHL) to see the actual pros and cons with that. On paper, I think it can work, but I'm not even 75% convinced.


LOL Yeah, I just realized that now!! Duh!!!! Tell me, is there a hooked on phonics for math?

Answer 2

I don't believe that the NHL is at all diluted. There are plenty of minor leaguers good enough to play in the NHL, but no teams for them to play on. Keep in mind how few players were available in the pool when the Original Six were all the NHL had. There was a short time in the late 60's-early 70's when the talent pool was dilitued because of sudden expansion, but that gap closed a long time ago. The game is better than it has been in ages, the talent better than ever, and I don't think major changes are needed.

If you cut the rosters to 16, you increase the ice time of the remaining players, lessen the entertainment for the fans, increase the chance for injury, and even shorten careers. Some of this would be major change, some barely noticeable, but all part of the result. Best to leave it be.

Answer 3

2Eighty8
3 pairs of defenceman is 6....not 9

Bob, this has been an age old problem (or an old age problem, whichever)

Let's look at this mathematically.....

In the 6 team NHL (I rarely use the word Original as the 6 team league was the SECOND 25 year segment in the NHL's history)
6 teams, 12 forwards/team = 72 forwards

That is 72 TOTAL forwards in the entire league.

That will make up the first line for 24 teams....we have 30 now. That is 18 extra forwards that need to be accounted for to make up the FIRST line.

In 1965, 196 players played at least 1 NHL game, 185 of these were Canadian. Canada had a population of 22 million in 1967.
So, in 1965, a Canadian kid had a 1 in 118,919 chance of making it to the NHL

Last year, 858 players played at least 1 NHL game (from the Stats section on NHL.com), 452 were Canadian. Canada's population is 31,612,897 (StatsCan 2006 Census).
So, a Canadian kid has a 1 in 69,940 chance to play in the NHL today........almost twice as good as 1965

Note: I was born 40 years too early obviously!

So, the fact that twice as many Canadians (per capita) are playing tells me that product is diluted.

In layman's terms. In 1965, the top 1% of Canadian hockey players is in the NHL. In 2007, the top 1.8% of Canadian hockey players are playing in the NHL. That means that we are now allowing players ranked from 1.01% to 1.80% to play, when in 1965, they weren't good enough (or were in the minors) for the NHL.

So, to sum up...in the early 60s - I the fact that I was invited to camp tells me I wasn't in the top 1%, but I was in the 2%. Therefore, in today's NHL....I'd be a regular. In 1965.....I wasn't good enough.




We'll pretend for a moment that the NHLPA doesn't exist (because they wouldn't go for it in a million years)........at which point I think your option is viable. Playoff hockey is played by many teams with 3 lines and 3 pairs. The NHL had 16 skaters per team up until 1971 so it isn't a totally strange idea

Answer 4

I think it could work. And to solve the issue Joe B. brought up, maybe the roster could be expanded the last month of the season, similar to what baseball does( sorry to mention baseball in the hockey section, just trying to show a point), then go back to the smaller roster for the playoffs. I don't think anybody would disagree with you about the talent dilution.

Answer 5

It seems to me many players get tired by the end of the year so cutting down roster sizes would be a problem.But I feel the league is too diluted.Also what teams would you cut out?Warm weather teams?
PS.Bob Its questions like this that makes me happier to go to this site than others.(Look at some of the questions in the football section.)

Answer 6

on condition that the team is an identical one which performed in the 50s or 60 or so and is now of their 80s or 90s or so. you could desire to undergo in thoughts that with the unique 6 there have been purely the 6 communities on the time and the competition to MAKE the team became into particularly stiff. you're purely stupid to think of that the junior communities could have the means to compete against those communities.

Answer 7

It's all about the $$$! I was thinking of starting a hockey player farm....hmmm?

Answer 8

I think its more competition more money Tradition lost.


I think ESPN needs to broadcast the NHL Again.

Answer 9

Better yet, Excommunicate Bettman and the rest will take care of itself.