Would you prefer the NHL realign in the 2 division format (or some form of it) or make suble changes to the 3 division format (i.e. move 2-4 teams among the divisions) until the NHL settles some outstanding issues (i.e. sale of the Coyotes, relocation of other teams, expansion, etc)? It just seems to me that it may not be in the NHL's best interest to shake things up until it has settled/defined a few of the unknowns. I say that because in a few years the NHL could end up expanding 2 more teams. Would the NHL only expand in western cities (i.e. Seattle, Kansas City, Houston, Portland, etc) or could an eastern city (i.e. Quebec City, Hartford, Atlanta, Markham, Hamilton, etc) be a part of the expansion plan? If the NHL awarded expansion franchises to 2 eastern cities, then would the NHL move 2 teams (back?) to the West or allow the conferences to be unbalanced even it has 32 teams (Eastern Conference = 18 teams and Western Conference = 14 teams)?
If the Eastern Conference did happen to expand to 18 teams, then are there enough western cities to where the Western Conference could expand by 4 (i.e. Houston, Kansas City, Portland, Seattle)? What I don't want to see happen is goes through a period where it is frequent realignment because teams are either relocating to cities in the other conference or because of expansion. I don't think it would be good for the league to see any team flip flop between the conferences multiple times within a relatively short period of time (i.e. 20 years) for one reason or another because it will be tough for the team to rebuild and maintain any sort of rivalry since the scheduling format could lead to breaks or reductions in games.