Blues and Kings are not "window dressing expansion teams". They've been around since the 60's. They have plenty of tradition.
And "deserving and quality teams"? Makes it sound like you haven't watched any Blues or Preds hockey this year. Both teams are INCREDIBLY deserving of going all the way to the cup finals, imo. They're a HELL of a lot more deserving than the Hawks or Wings who seem to be relying on past success to do well instead of realizing that teams need to be improved upon every year.
As a fan of the sport in general, I'd like for the popularity to grow and for more people to get into the game. The Wings and Hawks winning every year are not going to do that. Those potential fan bases have been exhausted. Any potential fans are already fans. A team like the Preds or the Panthers winning the cup would do WONDERS for the growth of the sport. The same old teams doing well every year do nothing for me.
I also find it weird you mention Canadian teams but want tradition. Some of those "window dressing expansion" teams have a hell of a lot more tradition that the Sens or Nucks. What does being Canadian have to do with it?
BBM. Note your second line in bold, and apply that to the first sentence in bold. The Predators or the Panthers winning the cup would do nothing for the league but further mire it down financially. The league has enough trouble getting ratings, and you think 2 teams that are ranked 20/21 in attendance will help that?
And that is my overall point. These teams aren't doing the league any favors, but sucking money.
Let's look at the "modern" era of expansion and see how these teams have fared in terms of bringing in the people:
1) San Jose - No brainer, has had 100% attendance for the last 3 seasons.
2) Ottawa - Again, 3 straight seasons in the top 13 of attendance (99-99-101 in terms of %)
3) Minnesota - One of the best things the NHL did was correcting the error of letting the North Stars leave for Dallas. The Wild have had been ranked 16th, 15th, 10th in attendance the last 3 seasons wih 98-100% capacity.
... and that's where it ends, here are the rest of the expansion teams, and their respective attendance ranks/percentages over '11-'12, '10-'11, '09-'10.
Tampa Bay - 13 (96%), 18 (87%), 21 (78%)
Florida - 21 (87%), 22 (81%), 25 (79%)
Anaheim - 26 (86%), 26 (86%), 24 (88%)
Nashville - 20 (98%), 21 (94%), 26 (88%)
Atlanta - TEAM MOVED in 2011, 28 (73%), 28 (73%)
Columbus - 27 (81%), 27 (75%), 22 (85%)
One step further would be looking at teams that were relocated.
Dallas (see above about leaving Minnesota) - 28 (77%), 23 (81%), 17 (93%)
Colorado - 23 (86%), 24 (82%), 27 (78%)
Phoenix - 30 (73%), 29 (71%), 30 (69%) - Dreadful
Carolina - 22 (86%), 20 (88%), 23 (81%)
Winnipeg - The might return of the Jets ranked 25th in attendance due to their arena size, but they had 100% capacity.
Now, let's look at the 100% club. These teams have had 100+% capacity for ALL of the last 3 seasons.
Chicago
Philadelphia
Washington
San Jose
Pittsburgh
Montreal
Calgary
Toronto
Vancouver
Edmonton
Take a look at those last 5 and you'll see why I specifically mentioned Canadian teams. Calgary hasn't made the playoffs in ANY of those 3 seasons, but still fill the stadium.
The league made terrible financial moves by trying to go to warmer climates to spread hockey, but it has been a failure. Hockey fans are purists and traditionalists. They want to see teams return to Quebec and Hartford. That is how this league will grow, along with old time rivalries in the playoffs.
Obviously this is all JMO, but having watched the Calgary Flames lose the Stanley Cup to the Tampa Bay Lightning...a team that actually had a section on their website called "Learn the game of hockey" was just disgusting. I'm hoping for positive changes, too, but I don't see a team like the Coyotes deserving of anything.
I'll agree with you about the Blues & the Kings, but I'd rather that have been the Conference Final.