jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (05/30/85)
As I said in my last article, if we have a couple of American teams
transferring to Canada, we could have a Canadian Conference and an American
Conference, possibly with the winners of each meeting in the finals.
The NHL executives would like that because it would guarantee a US-based
team in the finals, and they could try to promote it to TV audiences as
"USA vs. the rest of the world", a marketing strategy that seems to work
well in other sports. This would work even better if the American teams
were more American and the Canadian teams were more Canadian. With the
increasing number of great players coming out of the US, I think it would
be possible to develop a fair and reasonable scheme that would allow that,
especially if the ratio of Canadian to American teams was higher than it is
now.
One possibility would be to have the current NHL entry draft preceded by
territorial draft. In the territorial draft, each NHL team would be assigned
its own local territory (the territories would be assigned after a careful
analysis of where all the NHL players have come from over the years), and it
would be permitted to draft only players from that area. The territorial
draft could go for three rounds, and then the regular entry draft would be
used to distribute the remaining players. To make up for the fact that the
territorial system is not as beneficial for the weaker teams as the current
system, the entry draft phase could be changed so that each team picked two
players at a time. Since most NHL players still come out of Canada, but
there are more American teams, the American teams' territories would not
have as much total player potential as the Canadian teams' territories,
assuming all of Canada is divided up among the Canadian teams and all of
the US is divided up among the American teams. That can be compensated
for by allowing the American teams to pick more players in the territorial
draft (say, 5 or 6 vs. 3 for the Canadian teams) and making Europe part of
the American teams' territories.
There are several advantages to giving the teams more local flavour, ranging
from allowing the fans to better identify with their team, thereby increasing
fan interest, to making it beneficial for teams to spend money improving
the local and regional hockey leagues for young players.
I'd love to hear some comments on this idea.
--
Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073
{linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsri!dciem!jeff
{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeffrick@ucla-cs.UUCP (06/05/85)
In article <1564@dciem.UUCP> jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) writes: > ... >One possibility would be to have the current NHL entry draft preceded by >territorial draft. In the territorial draft, each NHL team would be assigned >its own local territory (the territories would be assigned after a careful >analysis of where all the NHL players have come from over the years), and it >would be permitted to draft only players from that area. You MUST be a Leafs fan, Jeff, because they would be about the only team to benefit. Ontario supplies more NHL players than any other region on the continent. I haven't got the stats handy but I assume a significant number of those are from the Toronto area. But, nonetheless, let's examine the possibilities. For argument's sake let's move the Penguins to Hamilton and the Devils to Saskatoon. We then have conferences and divisions sort of like: Canadian Conference USA Conference East West East West Quebec Vancouver Hartford Los Angeles Montreal Calgary Boston St Louis Toronto Edmonton NY Islanders Minnesota Hamilton Saskatoon NY Rangers Chicago Buffalo Winnipeg Philadelphia Detroit Washington (I arbitrarily moved Buffalo to Canada, no one else wants the city anyway :-)). Would you want to have the territorial rights of, say, Los Angeles. There are as many NHL caliber players here as there are NBA players in Toronto (with apologies to Leo Rautins). You could give LA all the players in the western USA and it wouldn't be close. The only American teams with a chance to prosper are the New York teams (I wouldn't want to define the territories there), Hartford, Boston, and Minnesota. Detroit (with that Compuware team locally) and Chicago, too, maybe. And the caliber of players from those areas, in general, isn't as good as Junior A players in Canada. No, I'm afraid that this isn't going to work Jeff - you can't legislate the American teams to cut their own throats. But, Jeff offers a solution: > ... Since most NHL players still come out of Canada, but >there are more American teams, the American teams' territories would not >have as much total player potential as the Canadian teams' territories, >assuming all of Canada is divided up among the Canadian teams and all of >the US is divided up among the American teams. That can be compensated >for by allowing the American teams to pick more players in the territorial >draft (say, 5 or 6 vs. 3 for the Canadian teams) and making Europe part of >the American teams' territories. Great, they can have 5 or 6 awful players that will never make the NHL as opposed to 3 that have a solid chance. Even throwing in Europe isn't going to help much. >There are several advantages to giving the teams more local flavour, ranging >from allowing the fans to better identify with their team, thereby increasing >fan interest, to making it beneficial for teams to spend money improving >the local and regional hockey leagues for young players. I can only think of 2 examples of this: the Rangers with Fotiu, and the Black Hawks with Olczyk. The Rangers bow to the fans by playing Fotiu who is a marginal player. They don't get anything out of it, they just hurt themselves. The Hawks have a good player in Olczyk so he is a good example for you. However, I think he is something of a fluke. >I'd love to hear some comments on this idea. Ok, the idea is bad. But interesting to think about. -- Rick Gillespie ARPANET: rick@ucla-locus.ARPA or (soon) rick@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU UUCP: ...!{cepu|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|ucbvax}!ucla-cs!rick SPUDNET: ...eye%rick@russet.spud
jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) (06/11/85)
>In article <1564@dciem.UUCP> jeff@dciem.UUCP (Jeff Richardson) writes: >> ... >>One possibility would be to have the current NHL entry draft preceded by >>territorial draft. In the territorial draft, each NHL team would be assigned >>its own local territory (the territories would be assigned after a careful >>analysis of where all the NHL players have come from over the years), and it >>would be permitted to draft only players from that area. > >You MUST be a Leafs fan, Jeff, because they would be about the only team to >benefit. Ontario supplies more NHL players than any other region on the >continent. I'm not a Leafs fan now, but since they're on TV and in town more than any other team, I'd like to see them get better and then I probably would be a fan. But that's beside the point. I said that a careful analysis would be done before the territories were assigned, to ensure that no team gets an advantage. If that many more players come from Ontario, then the province would be divided up among Winnipeg, Montreal and Hamilton as well as Toronto. No team would benefit talent-wise, but all would benefit by increased fan interest. >For argument's sake let's move the Penguins to Hamilton and the Devils to >Saskatoon. We then have conferences and divisions sort of like: > > Canadian Conference USA Conference > East West East West > Quebec Vancouver Hartford Los Angeles > Montreal Calgary Boston St Louis > Toronto Edmonton NY Islanders Minnesota > Hamilton Saskatoon NY Rangers Chicago > Buffalo Winnipeg Philadelphia Detroit > Washington It's really a different subject, but those look like great divisions, especially in the Canadian conference where you have the same East vs. West rivalry that the Canadian Football League has proven successful (By the way, I must admit that the CFL did have territorial picks until this year, and they didn't seem to make much difference, but I think that's because they didn't have enough of them, and they often got traded away anyway.), plus a Canada vs. US final on top of that. I know a lot of people here that were cheering for the Oilers in this year's final just because they wanted to "keep the Cup in Canada." The advantage for the US teams would be guaranteeing an American championship, followed by a US vs. Canada final. Getting back to the original topic, I think the American championship and the US vs. Canada final would mean more to the American fans if the teams had more of a local flavour. >Would you want to have the territorial rights of, say, Los Angeles. >....The only American teams with a chance >to prosper are the New York teams (I wouldn't want to define the territories >there), Hartford, Boston, and Minnesota. Detroit (with that Compuware team >locally) and Chicago, too, maybe. That 7 of 12 (again assuming Pittsburgh and Jersey move to Canada), which is not a bad percentage. The Kings would have to be given a very large area, but I'm sure it could be done. They wouldn't have much local flavour, but they would probably end up with more American players, which is probably good. >And the caliber of players from those areas, >in general, isn't as good as Junior A players in Canada. No, I'm afraid that >this isn't going to work Jeff - you can't legislate the American teams to >cut their own throats. >But, Jeff offers a solution: > >> ... Since most NHL players still come out of Canada, but >>there are more American teams, the American teams' territories would not >>have as much total player potential as the Canadian teams' territories, >>assuming all of Canada is divided up among the Canadian teams and all of >>the US is divided up among the American teams. That can be compensated >>for by allowing the American teams to pick more players in the territorial >>draft (say, 5 or 6 vs. 3 for the Canadian teams) and making Europe part of >>the American teams' territories. > >Great, they can have 5 or 6 awful players that will never make the NHL as >opposed to 3 that have a solid chance. Even throwing in Europe isn't going >to help much. I think you're underestimating American and European hockey talent, but you're right; that idea probably won't work. Hovever, there are other ways of making it so that the American teams aren't disadvantaged. Here's my latest plan: Suppose 75% of the young NHL talent comes from Canada. (I'm talking about total talent, not necessarily just number of players, i.e. if 80% of the star players come from Canada but only 70% of all players do, that must be considered. That's where the "careful analysis" I mentioned above comes in.) Divide up all of the US equally among the American teams, (giving Detroit and Buffalo small parts of Ontario too may be worth considering) but divide up only about two-thirds of Canada among the Canadian teams, leaving the rest of the world and about one-third of Canada neutral. The players from the neutral areas go into the regular phase of the draft along with the players not picked in the territorial draft. The American teams should then be given first crack at the players from the neutral areas by allowing them N picks (where N is about half of the number of territorial picks each Canadian team gets, or whatever number seems to be appropriate according to the careful analysis) in the regular phase of the draft before the Canadian teams get any. I'm sure this is the best way to do it. It maximises local flavour while still guaranteeing fairness to all teams. >>There are several advantages to giving the teams more local flavour, ranging >>from allowing the fans to better identify with their team, thereby increasing >>fan interest, to making it beneficial for teams to spend money improving >>the local and regional hockey leagues for young players. > >I can only think of 2 examples of this: the Rangers with Fotiu, and the >Black Hawks with Olczyk. The Rangers bow to the fans by playing Fotiu who >is a marginal player. They don't get anything out of it, they just hurt >themselves. The Hawks have a good player in Olczyk so he is a good example >for you. However, I think he is something of a fluke. The Fotiu example proves my claim that the fans would like to see local heroes on their team. If they had more New Yorkers, they wouldn't have had to play Fotiu to satisfy the fans. With my scheme there would be a lot more Ed Olczyks. Let's not forget that this would help the Canadian teams too. I've heard that Lanny McDonald is in greater demand for endorsements in Alberta than Gretzky is (McDonald's from Alberta but the Flames had to trade a lot to get him back there), and I'm sure the Canadiens and Nordiques would be more popular if their teams were led by French-Canadian players instead of Americans and Czechs. It would be a better rivalry too because it would mean something to the players as well as the fans. >>I'd love to hear some comments on this idea. > >Ok, the idea is bad. But interesting to think about. >-- > Rick Gillespie I've thought about it and now that I've come up with the new plan I've described above, I'm convinced that it's a great idea. Even if it increases fan interest for only half of the teams in the league, it will be of great benefit to everybody. -- Jeff Richardson, DCIEM, Toronto (416) 635-2073 {linus,ihnp4,uw-beaver,floyd}!utcsri!dciem!jeff {allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!dciem!jeff