Having Fun With Realignment

With the NHLPA's unwillingness to provide their consent to the four-conference re-alignment plan recently approved by the NHL's Board of Governors, I thought it would be fun to hear what everyone's alternative ideas are on this subject. Of course, I'll offer up my own thoughts.

The NHLPA loosely cited divisional imbalance as one of the reasons for rejecting the proposed plan. For that, I'm going to stick with the 5-team 6-division format. The way the divisions are currently set up has (to varying degrees) the Jets, Wild, Stars, Red Wings, Blue Jackets, and Predators wanting an improvement to their situations, which is a primary focus of this plan.

The Northeast and Atlantic divisions will remain unchanged. The strength of the existing rivalries and proximity of these teams to each other is not something the league should tinker with.

On the opposite side of the continent, my goal was to keep teams from playing divisional games 2 time zones away. This leaves us with a true Pacific Division with the Canucks, Sharks, Kings, Ducks, and Coyotes. Then, I'd create a Midwest Division with the Oilers, Flames, Jets, Wild, and Avalanche.

The remaining Central and South East teams can really be split in a number of different ways. Because I titled the post "Having Fun With Realignment," that's just what I'll do with my newly formed NASCAR South Division with the Panthers, Lightning, Stars, Predators, and Blues. The Red Wings, Blackhawks, Blue Jackets, Capitals, and Hurricanes complete the final division, which I'll call the East Division. You could trade Carolina and St Louis here, but I felt it would be best to keep them in the same division as their closest geographical neighbors (Washington and Nashville, respectively).

In summary:

Northeast - BOS, MTL, OTT, BUF, TOR

Atlantic - NYI, NYR, NJD, PHI, PIT

East - DET, CHI, CBJ, WAS, CAR

South - STL, NAS, DAL, TBL, FLA

Midwest - EDM, CAL, WPG, MIN, COL

Pacific - VAN, SJS, LAK, ANA, PHO

You may notice that I have no real East-West split for the 2 conferences. That's because I'm scrapping them. One of the things I liked about the NHL's recent realignment plan was that there was no more East-West Conference split, opening up the possibility of any two teams meeting up in the Cup Final (e.g. Bruins-Flyers). Another thing I liked about the NHL's realignment plan was the thought of a home-and-home with every team in the league. My idea keeps that alive, with teams also playing division rivals 6 times per season. To fill the remaining 8 games would be selected cross-divisional rivalry games. The NHL's proposed plan would only have the Bruins playing bigger rivals, like the Rangers, only twice per year. These added games would allow for fans to take in an extra Canucks-Oilers, Blackhawks-Canucks, and/or Penguins-Capitals matchup.

I'd have 16 teams making the playoffs with the regular season division winners locking into a top-8 seed. The remaining 10 teams make the playoffs based on their regular season record. I believe this scheduling format puts the best teams in the playoffs and reduces the redundancy in matchups provided by divisional playoffs. You also have more teams fighting for those final playoff spots at the end of the year as compared to a four-conference system.

So, what to do with the Campbell Bowl and the Wales Tropy? I dunno, award them to players with the best Corsi and Fenwick numbers (I kid).

So what does this re-alignment proposal accomplish? Primarily, geographical improvement. No longer will you have teams (Minnesota, Dallas) playing divisional games 2 time zones away. Detroit, Columbus, and Nashville find themselves making a visit to California and British Columbia much less frequently. Hockey fans get their home-and-homes with every team in the league. Rivalries stay intact.

What don't you like about this? What's your idea?

Go Bruins.