As already mentioned, I’m not in favour of increased parity (and I already made the weak interaction joke*, so I can’t even say anything clever about this fact). My opinion on this as of very recently was that there are star hockey players and their scarcity will ensure “nightmare scenario” level parity of every game being a coin flip never occurs. Having seen the NHL playoffs that just occurred**, I am no longer sure this is the case. The team with both the best and second-best position player in the world was out in the first round. The Red Wings were too. The Caps won a round, but did Hunter even play Ovechkin? Obviously having a core of elite position players is not sufficient for a good hockey team. It’s also not a necessary ingredient for the Stanley Cup. In light of these playoffs, I’m kind of wondering whether it’s even all that beneficial. So the NHL has come much closer to parity than we dared to admit. But is getting there making the games more worth watching? I don’t think so.
*in case you were wondering, that was meant to be parsed ((weak interaction) joke) and not (weak (interaction joke)).
**I didn’t watch any games of the final, though, so, you know, don’t trust me or anything.