There's been a lot of discussion here at From The Rink lately concerning expansion/relocation and possible arenas for NHL use. However, few arenas/locations that have been tossed around are checked against the following criteria:

1.) Is there a current arena ready for use?
-This is important to note. No matter the passion or fanbase in a given area, there must be up-to-date facilities for any NHL-caliber club to use should an owner expect a market to be viable and profitable. Given the trickiness of public funding for sports facilities, nothing is guaranteed (if you think otherwise, I'd suggest a case study of the 1976 Winter Olympics that were supposed to be held in Denver).

2.) Does the arena in this location have a suitable capacity *for hockey*?
-As some of you have noted, many people seem to be looking at a map of current/past NBA locations and throwing darts. What people forget (and Phoenix is a good example of this, given their original arena) is that not all arenas that have a high capacity for basketball can be configured in a manner that produces a high enough capacity for hockey to meet NHL standards. Conseco Fieldhouse (in Indianapolis), for example, loses nearly 4,000 seats in its configuration for hockey, which is about 2,000-2,500 more than most arenas lose between set-ups (in Toronto, the Air Canada Centre only loses 1,000 seats when crossing from basketball to hockey).

3.) Was the arena constructed or significantly renovated in the past 20 years?
-An arena should have been constructed or renovated in the past 10-15 at the latest, given the many changes that have been applied to arena architecture in the most recent building boom. Ideally, the arena will have been built in the past 10 years (or under construction now) to ensure it doesn't become outdated quickly.

Now, after using just those 3 criteria, I was able to run through the 29 largest U.S and 3 largest Canadian markets without NHL clubs, and narrow the list of NHL-ready arenas down to the following:

Houston
Portland
Cleveland
Orlando (arena under construction)
Kansas City
Oklahoma City

Now, James and many others have suggested that non-hockey-crazed American markets should ideally have a metropolitan area of at least 2 million to support a hockey club. Myself and a few others have argued that market saturation is also a critical element, as there are only so many entertainment dollars to go around. As such, sometimes smaller markets can support a team if it's not trying to support many (or any) others, and larger markets sometimes can support many, many teams (such as New York or Los Angeles) due to their massive size. To put this argument in terms of the '2 million' figure, Cleveland, for example, has over 2 million people, but is still about 450,000 people smaller than Denver, which is the smallest metropolitan area to have a team in all 4 'major' North American sports leagues. Notably, Denver also has an MLS team and numerous outdoor opportunities to distract, so it's probably safe to say that any area smaller than Denver shouldn't have a team in each major sport. As such, I'd subtract Cleveland from that discussion. Comparatively, Portland has about 150,000 people more than Cleveland (and is still roughly 300,000 people smaller than Denver), but only has 1 'major' sports team - the Trail Blazers - with an MLS team on the way. Without a team in the NFL or MLB, Portland is a much more viable market than Cleveland, despite similarly-sized metropolitan areas. It's also worth noticing that Portland is growing at a decent clip, with 14.5% growth between 2000 and 2008, which is above average.

Obviously, these factors aren't limited to their ability to host teams in the 'major' (NHL, NBA, MLB, NFL) sports - Miami is the 7th largest metropolitan area in the U.S./Canada, but has trouble drawing fans in anything that's not the Dolphins, a fact perhaps attributed to the South Beach lifestyle. Las Vegas is under the heralded '2 million' mark, but just barely. In fact, it is the first metropolitan area under this mark, and will likely surpass the 2 million mark in the next 5 years or so, growing at a 35.6% clip in 2008 before the economic turndown. It also doesn't have a major professional sports franchise, but it does have about a million other options for consumers to spend their disposable income on, not to mention it lacks an NHL-ready arena. This whole issue is an imperfect science, but the point is that many things aren't always immediately evident in looking at just arenas and population size. Some areas are major college football crazy (Austin), some places have major NASCAR events all over the calendar (Charlotte), and some places are just too dreamy (Miami, San Diego). Not that anyone's suggesting such places (and Miami, for example, already has the Panthers), but it's worth noting nevertheless.

As such, let's re-visit the markets that passed the first 3 criteria:

Houston: the 6th-largest metropolitan area in the U.S. and Canada combined, Houston has a metro population of 5.728 million and an arena (the Toyota Center) built in 2003 with a hockey capacity of 17,800. There aren't a terrible number of non-sports distractions in this area, and only Texas A&M (which is a healthy drive away) has major college football nearby. The area is also incredibly wealthy and continues to grow. Sunbelt-haters will rip on me for it, but this is a solid, solid market if done right (worth saying given the Phoenix clusterf*ck).

Portland: Portland is the 7th-largest U.S./Canadian metropolitan area without an NHL team, and the 25th largest metropolitan area on the continent north of Mexico. It only has 1 'major' sports competitor for sporting dollars, but it's arena is already 14 years old. The Rose Garden was notably renovated in 2007, however, and it has a hockey capacity of 18,280. Yes, it doesn't have a deep hockey history, but it's still much larger than many markets where NHL hockey currently resides, and it doesn't have near as much competition as many of those markets. It's also a relatively wealthy area with crazy population growth. Portland would definitely be a wise place to look.

Cleveland: Cleveland fits the '2 million' mark, but just barely. It's also shrinking and has teams (unsuccessful ones, at that) in all 3 other 'major' sports. Sadly, Cleveland has also taken an economic beating in recent years, with the current recession falling particularly hard on the area. On a positive note, Quicken Loans Arena is one of the U.S.'s nicer arenas despite being built in 1994, and it had recent renovations in 2007. It's hockey capacity is 19,941, which is amazing, but unfortunately not enough to overcome Cleveland's shortfalls. As mentioned above, the area is smaller than Denver, which is currently the bar for 4-sport markets - a bar Cleveland, most likely, won't surpass.

Orlando: Orlando is a tricky market. It's getting ready to have a beautiful new arena, but it has entertainment options galore (admittedly, however, mostly for tourists). It's also very near the Tampa market, despite being a separate metropolitan area. Notably, Orlando only has 1 'major' sports franchise, but enthusiasm for even this team (the Magic) is tepid at times it isn't experiencing great success. Orlando is likely a great fall-back option for a re-location of the Lightning or Panthers, should that ever happen.

Kansas City: With all the press this market receives, it probably surprises some to learn the facts on KC. This area has just the 13th-largest metropolitan population without an NHL team, and is the last market to be over the '2 million' figure. It does have a beautiful arena (the Sprint Center), which holds 17,752 for hockey, but the pre-season draw was mild at best. I'm not terribly sure this market can handle 3 franchises, as it would be the smallest market attempting to do so (if you don't count Milwaukee and Green Bay as the same area, which the census bureau doesn't), but the area seems Hellbent on filling their white elephant of an arena somehow. Basketball seems like a much better fit for this area given the deep basketball tradition in the area (rock, chalk, Jayhawk), and maybe they can even have their Kings back (?). Currently, Cleveland is the smallest area to host 3 'major' sports teams, with Pittsburgh running second (again, without counting Milwaukee and Green Bay as one), and both of those areas are larger than KC.

Oklahoma City: No. No, no.... no. I don't even think Oklahoma City is kidding itself on this one. Despite steady population growth and a nice arena (that can hold 18,036 for hockey), OKC is still a green market for the 1 'major' team it does have. Nor does it have much of a hockey tradition. And, it would easily be the smallest market not hit by Hurricane Katrina to attempt to have 2 'major' teams. If you subtract New Orleans (and, I do), Milwaukee is the smallest metropolitan area with 2 'major' teams, and it has about 350,00 more people than OKC. As such, 1.5 million appears to be the threshold for 2 teams.

Notable things I found while researching this:
Denver is the smallest area with 4 'major' teams and has a metro pop. of 2.506 million.
Cleveland is the smallest area with 3 'major' teams and has a metro pop. of 2.088 million.
Milwaukee is the smallest area with 2 'major' teams and has a metro pop. of 1.549 million.
Perhaps a basic formula for team support in an area (other factors aside) is 500,000 + (500,000  x  # of teams)?

Now, what does all this seem to prove? Basically, what James has been saying (in a roundabout way). Houston is currently the best market for an NHL team that doesn't already have one. As always, these things can't be decided by pure numbers. I certainly think a team in Southern Ontario would be a force to be reckoned with, but without an NHL-ready arena, this area can't honestly claim to be the best prepared (for now). Portland is also an important market to monitor, as it has incredible potential and continues to grow. Cleveland's at it's limit, and Orlando has a lot working against it due to extraneous factors (proximity to Tampa, entertainment options, being in Florida) despite a beautiful new arena on the way. Kansas City has a white elephant in its hands and egg on its face. I can only hope for its sake that it gets a basketball team. It can probably host a 3rd team (it's only marginally smaller than Cleveland, and KC's still growing), but I doubt a hockey team is more ideal than a basketball team. Oklahoma City? No.

But what about everywhere else? As you may recall, I said at the beginning that I looked at 29 U.S. markets and 3 Canadian markets at the start of my research. Well, I'd say they're all non-factors without an arena or a guarantee to build one. A lot of the places at the '2 million' mark don't have the plans or the desire to build a new arena, especially not for a hockey team. In my best estimation, I'd say Houston and Portland have the best shots inside the United States, with situations in Southern Ontario and possibly Quebec City worth monitoring in Canada. It's worth noting, however, that no matter how hockey-mad Quebec City is, it's still ultimately the 77th-largest metropolitan area in the United States and Canada combined. And no, I don't care to hear, "but... but... if you include X, X, and X nearby...." because you could do that with just about any metropolitan area. At the end of the day, Quebec City is slightly smaller than the McAllen-Edinburg-Mission (TX) metropolitan area, and slightly larger than the Greensboro, NC area. Haven't heard of those areas? That may be your sign.

This isn't to damn Quebec City. Nor is it to defend the Sunbelt (Houston) or the emerging (Portland) over the proven. Nor is it to damn or support Southern Ontario. Honestly, I think Southern Ontario's a non-issue without an arena and some sort of word on the resistance Toronto and Buffalo might be able to provide.

So, then what's the point? Basically, to give you something to think about. We can argue 'til the cows come home about the most viable markets for NHL teams, but having an actual NHL-ready arena and a sizeable population will always be important contributions to the discussion, as well other market factors (wealth, enthusiasm, saturation, etc.).

<!--Session data-->