Talk:National Hockey League

Template:FAOL

Season Structure Misinformation

I think I'm a bit confused and some things might need to be updated.

In the NHL article:

Currently, of the 82 games, teams play 32 games within their division (8 games against each team in the division)...

In the Season structure of the NHL article:

Beginning in the 2008-2009 season...each team plays 6 games (3 home, 3 away) against the other teams in its division (a total of 24 games).

What is the schedule format exactly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.150.190.50 (talk) 05:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Some stats

Hello. Can someone answer the following two questions? I have searched the internet and wikipedia and have come up empty.

1- Who was the last player to score 5 goals in a game?

2- Who was the last player to score 100 assists in a season?

Thank you--154.20.78.130 (talk) 01:49, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Gretzky was the last person to record 100 assists in a season in 1990-91 NHL season but Thorton came close with 96 recently. As for 5 goals a game that would be alot harder to find. --Djsasso (talk) 02:04, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

With some difficulty, I have the potential answer for the 5 goals in one game question. Of the four players listed in the 2008 Record Book as having scored 5 goals in a game (Peter Bondra, Sergei Fedorov, Mike Ricci, Mats Sundin), all of whom did so just once, this is the dates of their achievement:

Bondra, Feb. 5, 1994

Fedorov, Dec. 26, 1996

Ricci, Feb. 17, 1994

Sundin, Mar. 5, 1992

No one else scored later than Fedorov, so the NHL has gone almost 11 years without someone getting a 5 goal game. Kaiser matias (talk) 04:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

And of course that is only players who are still playing as of 2008. Anyone who retired prior to this year could have scored 5 goals in a game between 96 and now. --Djsasso (talk) 04:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I did some looking up for that as well, with mild success. I went as far back as players from 2004, and no one reached that level. Of course that still leaves 8 years and several players unaccounted for. Kaiser matias (talk) 04:51, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much to both of you. I kept googling but could not come up with it. Thanks so much! Appreciated.--154.20.78.130 (talk) 18:00, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Marion Gaborik scored 5 goals on December 20, 2007. http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey/articles/2007/12/21/gaboriks_5_goal_outburst_lifts_wild/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.50.246.46 (talk) 00:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Notable Players

Hey...great article! I am enjoying the clear, thorough layout and format of the information as we speak (and I type).

In the 'Notable players' section, do you think it would be nice if the players could be labelled by team, similar to how mentions of congressmen are labelled by their party and state? I think it would shed some light on the respective strengths of the teams as a reflection of their players. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 13:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't quite get what you mean, could you give an example? --Krm500 (talk) 14:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

How about like Joseph Mason (Calgary) scored the most points in the season and Kurt Weisner (Anaheim) had the most assists. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I like the idea. It makes the text busier; the interested reader can always click on the player's wikilink for more info. Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 02:44, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Re: History

As I understand things, the NHL had a four-division lineup at one time, as the Wales and Campbell Conferences. Smythe Division was one of the four divisions; it included primarily teams in the Pacific Northwest. What were the other three Divisions named prior to the reorganization of the 1990's, which resulted in the six extant Divisions? - B. C. Schmerker (talk) 17:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Well the names changed a few times but I believe if you go to the articles for the individual conferences that it explains the history of each of the divisions. But basically they were Norris Division, Smythe Division, Patrick Division, Adams Division. Then they changed Atlantic Division, Northeast Division, Central Division, Pacific Division. After that they changed to the current format. But prior to this there were other divisions as well. -Djsasso (talk) 17:08, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Championship Templates

Hello. The other league all have championship templates to show who was on championship rosters. I think the NHL should also add them.

Agree? Disagree?

Portlygrub (talk) 23:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Do you mean a template such as "Roster of 2007 Stanley Cup Winning Anaheim Ducks", etc.? Jmlk17 23:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. It would be like one of these:

Portlygrub (talk) 06:29, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why not... Jmlk17 06:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I can see why not. Championship roster templates have been routinely deleted as non-defining, and a risk for ridiculously high overhead (imagine Richard's article with a ton of similar templates) Such templates wouldn't survive much longer than the previous ones have. Resolute 15:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at Bill Russell to see how big a mess these templates can make of an article. That is an absolute joke... Resolute 16:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes the hockey project as a whole decided against them and had most of them deleted a few times now. As Resolute has mentioned players who have had a number of cups would start to have rediculously messy pages because of them. When these get created they get deleted rather fast. -Djsasso (talk) 16:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

That's what I had thought originally. :) Jmlk17 21:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Season Ticket Prices?

I removed the part under "Popularity" that said that the NHL had the highest season ticket prices out of the US big four. The reference that it gave didn't say anything about it, and I did a little bit of my own research (read: googled some stuff) and I don't see any evidence of this being true. If I'm wrong, give me proof and I'll be happy to put it back. Tracer Bullet (talk) 20:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree I deleted out that part as well as the NHL fans being more "affluent" than any other sports fans, this seems biased and not fact based. (Rongotti (talk) 21:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC))

And that is your POV. A study was done on this as quoted in the reference which is from a reliable source. -Djsasso (talk) 21:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

"Norris House League"

It really isn't made up, either. The Norrises, at one point, controlled both the Black Hawks and the Red Wings, as well as owning significant shares of Madison Square Garden and Boston Garden.  RGTraynor  05:09, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

That's something worth exploring in further depth, and doesn't necessarily mean it's a negative, either. It was their league, they could run it as they chose. My objection was to some user deleting it without explanation, presumably on the grounds that it was a slam, but it's hard to tell, since he didn't say why he deleted it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 05:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

We see people put using {{Fact}} in all the time, that would have been more appropriate if there was a concern it was "made up"... am I right?

Yes. But the guy didn't give a reason for deleting it, so it's anybody's guess. If he does it again without comment, then I'll ask him. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 11:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

First of all it's not notable in this article. If you want, put it in the History of the NHL article. Secondly, they way it was written was not encyclopedic; especially the "jokingly called" part. Instead just stating that much of the league was controlled by the Norris family would be much more appropriate. Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 12:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

And how do you figure it "isn't notable?"  RGTraynor  13:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

As I recall, the "classic 6" teams were in a league that operated like a country club. They nearly got caught napping, but they headed off the second-major-league threat by expanding... which of course brought in a bunch of money to the old guard from the entrance fees. Also, they aligned the new teams in a separate division, which essentially made the Stanley Cup finals an exhibition series for the winners of the "classic 6" playoff rounds. Further evolution of the league evened out a lot of that stuff, of course, but there's some intrigue connected with their initial expansion. I noticed there were many references to "Norris House League" in Google, so it's not like this is unknown. Maybe the comment could be written better and/or with more detail, but it's an important part of the nature of the NHL as it existed during that time period. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 13:32, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree "media jokesters" is inappropriate. I think there was better text not that long ago. One sentence is not enough. When the Norrises ran the league, the Blackhawks, Bruins and Rangers were deliberately held back so that the Red Wings would do well. The Red Wings had a farm system, and on and on. It really goes back into the 30s, when Norris Sr. picked up assets on the cheap. Alaney2k (talk) 13:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

More intrigue. The Norris House League joke was just the tip of the ice-hockey-berg, as it were. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Luckily, this kind of thing never happens in baseball. Oh, except for the New York Yankees, who managed to get their hooks into clubs like the Red Sox and the Athletics, who at various times essentially served as major league level farm teams to the Yankees. These things don't happen just by pure chance. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:10, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

And your revisions are well-done. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 14:12, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. In fact, the Calgary Stampeders was the first farm team the Black Hawks had, and that wasn't until the 1950s. One of the books I have on that timeframe has people arguing that the Stamps were at least as good as the Hawks... that says something about how mismanaged Chicago had been at the time. Meanwhile, the Edmonton Flyers became the Red Wings affiliate at the same time, and was stocked with several future hall of famers. The after-effects of the Norris House League were felt for some time. Resolute 15:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

NHL Teams with the most players from Saskatchewan

Can anyone tell me the top 5 NHL teams in players that were born in/ grew up in Saskatchewan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.119.163 (talk) 23:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Mandarin broadcasts

Over the last while, the note about the Islanders broadcasting games in Mandarin has been added and removed from the article several times. While I understand the rational for removing it, seeing how it is only for Islanders games, I would like to show that the CBC has been broadcasting games in Mandarin for the 2008 playoffs. It would be a good thing to point out, a way to show that the NHL is trying to reach the Chinese market, and the latter article proves that is not just involving the Islanders. Would like to see what others think of it. Kaiser matias (talk) 18:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Current Champion

It says that the Detroit Red Wings are the current champions when that is not necessarily true. The earliest that could happen is Monday, June 2. I have changed it back to the Mighty Ducks. --Striker1057 (talk) 15:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

That was just IP address vandalism. He's been warned. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Founded on November 22, 1917?

I've seen it referenced on more than one occasion in my lifetime that the National Hockey League was formed on November 22nd. I noticed that it showed the 26th on Wikipedia, so I corrected it. Unfortunately, although I have published material showing the correct date I am not really familiar with how to place a reference on here using HTML. So... if someone wants to put up a reference I can leave a comment here with the information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Archangel-22 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

this page states that "While most historians cite November 22, 1917 as the birth date of the NHL, it wasn't until four days later, November 26, that five clubs officially joined the new circuit." So I guess that is where the November 26 date came from. Thus, the paragraph should be clarified further. Any other thoughts? Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:16, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes. The 22nd is a bogus date; that was a meeting of the NHA, at which according to Coleman no official report was ever released on the discussions. The 26th was when the decision to form the new league was actually made, Calder was elected president and the franchises were awarded.  RGTraynor  22:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

That is my understanding as well. I believe the teams withdrew from the NHA on the 22nd, and created the NHL on the 26th. Inconvienently, I have two different books that quote either date as the NHL's founding date. I trust the 26th better, however, either way, History of the National Hockey League (1917–1942) will need to match what this article says. Resolute 01:44, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

It's a bit more muddled than that. The NHL teams never formally withdrew from the NHA, remaining shareholders to the amount of their respective stakes, and the NHA actually had two meetings a year later, one to suspend operations permanently and the other in December 1918 in an attempt by Eddie Livingstone to get the league's minority shareholders to restart.  RGTraynor  06:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Naming

Why is the group called the NHL or National Hockey League, when the NHL clearly covers 2 countries. I know this website obvioudly has to stick with the real world name but has anyone ever wondered why the group don't rename themselves the NAHL (North American Hockey League). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Series premiere (remake) (talk • contribs) 04:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The NHL, when formed consisted of four active and one inactive team, all from Canada. I suppose the same question could have been asked of the NBA, which originally called itself the Basketball Association of America despite being founded with a Canadian team, and today remains the NBA rather than the NABA. Or the AHL, which has consistently had Canadian teams. I suspect the leagues never renamed simply because it was trivial to do so. Resolute

Nope, I've never wondered. Leagues are named what they're named, and not all of them change names at the drop of a hat just because the promoters want to grab a different demographic.  RGTraynor  06:06, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Inconsistency

I think the section describing the number of teams that started the league could be tightened up. The intro says there were four teams, but then under history it names three teams under which the league started. Following that it refers ambiguously to some unnamed Toronto team which may have been the fourth team?--Skarsa72 (talk) 19:13, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, three active NHA teams formed the NHL with a new team in Toronto that had no name. It is my intention to look over this article once I'm done with the NHL history articles.  :) Resolute 19:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

In the meantime, I've reworded the passage you expressed concern over. Hopefully it will be less ambiguous. Resolute 19:41, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Intro

The introduction says "the percentages of American and European players have increased because of the NHL's continued expansion into the United States". However, in the link provided, there was nothing about the higher percentage of American players. I would have guessed the percentage of American players has dropped off over the last ten years. Hence I believe this should be re-written. Any objections? Canking (talk) 03:12, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I might suggest rewording it to set a finite time period. i.e.: The percentage of Europeans and Americans in the NHL has increased since 1980. That statement remains true. I can't cite it, obviously, but based on the increasing numbers of Americans playing in the Western Hockey League, especially from California and Arizona, I would believe the number of Americans in the game is either steady or increasing. Resolute 05:01, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

North American

Greetings, I agree to use the word "American" to refer to the United States citizens in English, what I see in the top US-Canada leagues (not just NHL) is the omission of the other top-leagues in the rest of North America. However, many of your reverts omited more correct stataments for example, the NHL is "not" the only league to field teams that play in two countries' capital cities, the Central American League for Clubs include more than two countries' capital cities. The NHL games in fact can be seen on SKY Latin America. JC (talk) 21:15, 6 November 2008 (PST)

This is a tough one — I see Jcmenal's point here; I certainly consider Mexico to be part of North America. However the article is written in Canadian English, and my experience is that in Canadian usage, North America almost uniformly means the United States plus Canada (OK, Canada plus the United States :-) ). Still, it would be better if the term could be avoided in contexts where it excludes Mexico. --Trovatore (talk) 06:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

On the statement of how the NHL is the only league to field two teams in capital cities, I've always found it ridiculous, trivial and pointless. I'd say to simply remove it. However, many of your changes of "North American" to "American/Canadian" were pointless and unnecessarily confused statements. Whether or not there is a team in Mexico, the NHL is still a North American league, and most of the statements you changed are correct as is. About the only other statement I would change is the lead to state that the 30 teams exist in Canada and the United States, simply for clarity. Also, for an encyclopedic tone, "American" probably should not be used as a synonym for "United States" in any statements that are revised. They are not technically equal. Resolute 06:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

American is the adjective for the United States; there isn't another one. This is pretty much settled throughout the English Wikipedia, and for that matter the English language — it's very rare in English to use it to refer to inhabitants of the Americas in general. (In some other languages it's quite common, but that doesn't matter here.)

Where United States, used appositively, can be substituted without coming off awkward, fine. But if you talk about, say, American players and Canadian players, it doesn't really work to say United States players. --Trovatore (talk) 06:44, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Trovatore. In English, American is perfectly acceptable as an adjective to refer to the United States. I seem to recall that this issue has come up many times in the past on Wikipedia, an the consensus has always in the end been as Trovatore describes it. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:22, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm with Resoulte on this one. That there are no teams in Mexico does not make the league a non-North-American league; all of the teams are in North America, and cover most of North America. Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 13:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Point taken, Trovatore, though I do think there should be care taken in whether to use American or United States in each statement. It would depend on context. Resolute 17:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

People, this is not about the "American" word usage, as I said before I have no problems to use it as an adjective to refer to the United States, this is about the exclusion of Mexico, Central America and the West Indies as North American entities. I admit it, I changed more "North America" than need it, and I'm agree, NHL is the top hockey leagu not just in North America, it is the best league of the world. BTW, Mexico is going to start the MHL (Mexico Hockey League) the next summer. JC (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2008 (PST)

I've randomly visited the talk pages of the North American Big 4 sports leagues, and since this page has the longest discussion I'll post my thoughts here.

The fact that this league is played in North America (U.S.+Canada+Mexico+Central America+West Indies) means it is correct to label this as "North American." If we're going to this logic, the phrase "India is a South Asian country." is wrong since India doesn't occupy all of South Asia. –Howard the Duck 11:20, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Waivers System

Is there currently anywhere in Wikipedia where the NHL waivers system is covered? I was looking and couldn't find anything- it isn't listed on the waivers (disambiguation) page if it exists. There seems to be even split between leagues that cover the waiver system in their own article, and those that cover it as part of the article on the league- not sure where it would belong for the NHL. --Clay Collier (talk) 12:59, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The differences between the one-way and two-way contracts could be covered, as well as the teams acquiring a player before he clears waivers only paying half the salary. It's a pretty extensive subject with many subtleties that could use a page.Kingdomcarts (talk) 00:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

inter- / intra- in "Season Structure" section

Wiktionary defines these two prefixes as:

• inter: A prefix signifying among, between, amid, during, within, mutual, reciprocal
• intra: A prefix signifying inside, within, interior, during

I am well aware "INTER-CONFERENCE" is the common way in any sport to discuss teams in opposing conferences, but that doesn't mean it's correct. As far as I can tell, these prefixes mean the same thing. I know "EXTRA-CONFERENCE" sounds weird, but it may be the accurate adjective. I have seen the term "INTER-LEAGUE" play, but that doesn't denote games outside of a team's own conference either - just within the same league.Kingdomcarts (talk) 00:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)