DeNiro Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 1 minute ago, Master Mind said: False. Vegas can select a UFA, they could take Oshie if they want and try to sign him. Similarly, Washington could protect Oshie if they think there's a chance to re-sign him. Clearly they don't think it will happen. I thought a player had to be signed for next season in order to be eligible, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 Just now, DeNiro said: I thought a player had to be signed for next season in order to be eligible, no? To meet exposure requirements, yes. After that, they are eligible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 1 minute ago, DeNiro said: I thought a player had to be signed for next season in order to be eligible, no? That's only for the minimum requirement where each team has to expose at least 2 Fs and 1D who have played 40/70 games and are signed through next season. Every player not protected is available to Vegas unless they are exempt (2 years pro). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 1 minute ago, DeNiro said: I thought a player had to be signed for next season in order to be eligible, no? To meet the minimum requirements for the 2 forwards and 1 d man to be made available - yes. However, Vegas now has exclusive rights with all UFA's to make a deal. As an example, Vegas could make a deal with Miller and he would count as the 1 player Vancouver would lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted June 17, 2017 Share Posted June 17, 2017 27 minutes ago, Horvat is a Boss said: I have a question. Given that if Vegas signs a UFA from a team it counts as their Expansion pick, is Vegas not allowed to pick a player from that team? For example, Vegas is interested in Oshie as a UFA. Does that mean they can't take Grubauer in the Expansion Draft? If they are allowed to take Grubauer AND sign Oshie, then what's the point of having UFA's count as picks for Vegas? Because they get exclusive rights during the expansion window. In free agency a player can talk to every team in the league and there's more competition to sign the player. Free agency starts on 1 July and until then the player's rights belong to his team - no one else can sign him. There's an exception for Vegas during the expansion window where they can try and reach an agreement with unprotected UFAs (if the UFA is protected - they are not authorised to talk to him). The Stars traded for Bishop - he was a UFA this summer. They could have waited until free agency but he would have had more suitors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PassittoBoeser Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 49 minutes ago, Master Mind said: False. Vegas can select a UFA, they could take Oshie if they want and try to sign him. Similarly, Washington could protect Oshie if they think there's a chance to re-sign him. Clearly they don't think it will happen. semantics - exempt meaning you 'don't have to protect them or risk losing them' - CLEARLY an NHL team will have had discussions ALREADY with their UFA's agents and if a guy would PREFER to go to vegas anyways why would you waste a protected player on him Sometimes common sense, logic and just thinking about how things work in REAL LIFE MATTERS a bit too guys JESUS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luckylager Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 Maybe JB has a deal in place with Vegas that hasn't been leaked. What would be a fair price to have LV pick Gaunce over Sbisa - Subban and a 3rd? CBJ's 2nd? (heard somewhere we can't trade that pick, which seems kinda ridiculous) Would be a shame to lose Sbisa, his game has really come around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 16 minutes ago, PassittoBoeser said: semantics - exempt meaning you 'don't have to protect them or risk losing them' - ... Exactly, semantics. You're arguing pretty heavily for someone to admit they were wrong when they're right from their perspective. You jumped the gun - and did so with a not so polite reply which made you look like a bit of a fool. Time for you to admit he may have had a point considering the discussion he was replying to and move on. But on topic: I'll be interested to see the list of players that will be exposed as a result (rather than the ones protected). There will likely be a couple categories Vegas will want to pick from, like higher end players, depth players, players with enough cap to help them hit the floor, players to be used as trade bait after, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PassittoBoeser Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 5 minutes ago, elvis15 said: Exactly, semantics. You're arguing pretty heavily for someone to admit they were wrong when they're right from their perspective. You jumped the gun - and did so with a not so polite reply which made you look like a bit of a fool. Time for you to admit he may have had a point considering the discussion he was replying to and move on. How am I wrong? Is any UFA going to choose to sign in Vegas over their own team if they are talented and getting paid and have a chance at a cup? Ie a high value ufa? No they wont, they will sign with their own team or another team where they can win a cup. That is 'reality' so you dont need to protect them So whether you want to use 'exempt' or pointless -its the same outcome right? So my POINT is correct - you dont need to bother protecting UFAs -they are 'effectively exempt' that is the POINT Proof is in the pudding is it not? Name me one UFA that was protected sir? Why is that? Is it because there is no high value UFAs out there? Or do GM's know how the process will play out and don't need to waste a pick protecting them? Sorry I'm right - and how I am right is by that last comment and FACT- the OUTCOME is the same whatever WORD you want to use = Semantics Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 Just now, PassittoBoeser said: How am I wrong?... A pending UFA with an early negotiation window may get scooped by a good offer from Vegas. They wouldn't even be able to negotiate early if their team protected them because they thought they were close to a deal but maybe still had doubts. It's certainly an easy option to protect a valued pending UFA if you have room over a marginal depth player. And I didn't say your were wrong, but rather the other poster might have had a point. There's a difference and you're failing to see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckpuckluck1 Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 18 hours ago, PassittoBoeser said: semantics - exempt meaning you 'don't have to protect them or risk losing them' - CLEARLY an NHL team will have had discussions ALREADY with their UFA's agents and if a guy would PREFER to go to vegas anyways why would you waste a protected player on him Sometimes common sense, logic and just thinking about how things work in REAL LIFE MATTERS a bit too guys JESUS Wow stop eating all those angry pills, a bit to much rage going on here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 5 hours ago, mll said: Players exposed - * UFAs Calgary F: Brouwer, Frolik, Stajan, Bouma, Shinkaruk, Poirier, Hamilton, Vey, Chiasson, Bollig*, Versteeg* D: Bartkowski, Kulak, Culkin, Wotherspoon, Engelland*, Stone*, Kostka*, Wideman* G: McCollum, Elliott 1 hour ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: Is Frolik exposed or protected. Where did you get that list from mll? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ftmN Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 I'm assuming once a team has announced their exposed players, those players cannot be traded anywhere(including VGK?) until VGK announce their team on the 21st? Deals can be made with VGK for protection purposes between those dates? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noble 6 Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 5 hours ago, mll said: Because they get exclusive rights during the expansion window. In free agency a player can talk to every team in the league and there's more competition to sign the player. Free agency starts on 1 July and until then the player's rights belong to his team - no one else can sign him. There's an exception for Vegas during the expansion window where they can try and reach an agreement with unprotected UFAs (if the UFA is protected - they are not authorised to talk to him). The Stars traded for Bishop - he was a UFA this summer. They could have waited until free agency but he would have had more suitors. Thank you for the answer. That makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted June 18, 2017 Author Share Posted June 18, 2017 2 hours ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: Thanks, added to OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamhuis Hip Check Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 1 hour ago, ftmN said: I'm assuming once a team has announced their exposed players, those players cannot be traded anywhere(including VGK?) until VGK announce their team on the 21st? Deals can be made with VGK for protection purposes between those dates? There is a trade freeze in effect right now until after the expansion draft I believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted June 18, 2017 Author Share Posted June 18, 2017 Statement from Knights: Throwing curve balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-AJ- Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 6 hours ago, luckylager said: Maybe JB has a deal in place with Vegas that hasn't been leaked. What would be a fair price to have LV pick Gaunce over Sbisa - Subban and a 3rd? CBJ's 2nd? (heard somewhere we can't trade that pick, which seems kinda ridiculous) Would be a shame to lose Sbisa, his game has really come around. I don't think it's worth doing anything about it. What we're losing is nothing compared to some other teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted June 18, 2017 Share Posted June 18, 2017 3 hours ago, Ryan Strome said: Is Frolik exposed or protected. Where did you get that list from mll? Protected - my mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.