Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Expansion Draft Angst - Why?

Rate this topic


Rob_Zepp

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

The other wrinkle in this is Seattle probably won't be getting the high picks that Vegas got, a lot of GMs have learned their lessons (well, I'm assuming). If thats how it goes Jim might be able to coax Seattle to pick a player we want to move for the cost of a 2nd or 3rd round pick, or a prospect to move things in a favourable direction. 

 

We'll lose more than Sbisa this time, but maybe we're due for a little more pain, I mean that was really unfair to Vegas :lol:

 

(sorry Luca)

 

The fun part to me, is that if we do plan to expose Myers as I outlined earlier, does that free us up to perhaps pick up an even better/younger etc D for dimes on the dollar (we're not getting anyone for pennies) from a team unable to protect them? ::D

 

That TDL could be VERY interesting for us ::D

  • Cheers 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

As much as I love Tony Stretcher, I'd be pretty surprised if he's still here next year, let alone for the ED.

 

He's due a raise and we need cap space next year = bad mix for our third pair RD. We also have a plethora of near ready options to replace his spot (Rafferty, Juolevi, Brisebois...not to mention Tryamkin likely returning).

Clearly, you don't love Troy that much. ::D

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pettersson

Horvat

Boeser

Miller

Ferland

Virtanen

Gaudette

Myers

Stecher

Juolevi

Demko

 

Sign and trade (Markstrom) after this season, possibly to WPG to replace Helly. Could even package him with Stecher or Tanev and try to get a player like Connor in return?

 

Next season, Demko is the starter, with a cheap, veteran netminder to backup. Let Thatch run with it. As much as I like Marky, Demko is the future.

 

 

 

 

  

  • Cheers 1
  • Wat 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully they take Myers or Ferland.  They better not give up a quality player to keep another, they had plenty of time to plan for this.  This is were I have zero faith in Benning and his track record is to blame for that.  Hopefully this Chris Gear guy, a Gillis hire iirc, specializes in this kind of thing.  

  • Wat 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just thought of something.... they should have protected/exposed list released in order from the worst team to the best, with the next subsequent team allowed like 15 minutes before releasing their team.

This will allow the higher ranking team the advantage of knowing who is exposed and can adjust accordingly.  

 

It will be sort of a punishment for teams that tanks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I don't know why there is a panic for ED , it doesn't happen till next year  and in that time there is 2 trade deadlines , one draft day,  one free agent  day and a off seasons of trades and deals  before the ED. even happens . Even  when the ED comes around we can always protect an asset by making a deal  , no matter what we are going to lose a player and JB will have it covered  by then .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the early success of Vegas, I think GM's have learned you don't try to bribe your way out of the expansion draft.

I think teams will be smarter on who they expose. I don't think we'll see another Vegas, despite what the league might want.

I still think Vegas should be included. It's not like they have had a rough expansion so far.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, the grinder said:

 I don't know why there is a panic for ED , it doesn't happen till next year  and in that time there is 2 trade deadlines , one draft day,  one free agent  day and a off seasons of trades and deals  before the ED. even happens . Even  when the ED comes around we can always protect an asset by making a deal  , no matter what we are going to lose a player and JB will have it covered  by then .

This is true, there is plenty of time between now and then, and I'm sure they have a plan on how they'll stick handle this. For all we know by then Ferland will be retired due to health issues, Loui will be playing in Sweden, Stecher or Tanev could be playing somewhere else, Edler will be retiring, Tryamkin, Hoglander and Podkolzin could be on the team. Could be a lot of player movement over the next year+.

Heck, the Canucks could even be SC champs by then. :bigblush: who knows?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well we are more likely to lose Demko or Markstrom because everyone else we would be forced to expose are trash in comparison to those two.

 

Expansion as shown by McPhee isn’t just about who you are going to ice, it is about accruing the most valuable assets that you can also flip.

 

With so many players either exempt or UFA, we don’t really have much to pick from.

 

It isn’t angst, but it is certainly something to keep in mind, as the Canucks brass has explicitly said.  Weisbrod said that Edler’s contract was made with expansion in mind, and future contracts will also include it as a variable.

 

They could for example, structure Markstrom’s contract to have a butt ton of money owed in signing bonuses or salary right when he could be exposed to make him less attractive as a target, especially one that they might plan on flipping for other assets.

  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, NUCKER67 said:

This is true, there is plenty of time between now and then, and I'm sure they have a plan on how they'll stick handle this. For all we know by then Ferland will be retired due to health issues, Loui will be playing in Sweden, Stecher or Tanev could be playing somewhere else, Edler will be retiring, Tryamkin, Hoglander and Podkolzin could be on the team. Could be a lot of player movement over the next year+.

Heck, the Canucks could even be SC champs by then. :bigblush: who knows?   

yep and it isn't just us either, 29 other teams will be doing the same Then you have Vegas factor since they aren't taking part in the ED are going to be scooping up assets to gain picks , there is just too many factors in play to be worried about the ED this early,  just wait till the next season is over then panic away  

Edited by the grinder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aGENT said:

The fun part to me, is that if we do plan to expose Myers as I outlined earlier, does that free us up to perhaps pick up an even better/younger etc D for dimes on the dollar (we're not getting anyone for pennies) from a team unable to protect them? ::D

 

That TDL could be VERY interesting for us ::D

yeah I don't really see a disaster scenario. I'd prefer to move Demko (maybe Demko+) for a 1st and leave Vegas with a mid-range player if at all possible, but we have a year to worry about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, the grinder said:

 I don't know why there is a panic for ED , it doesn't happen till next year  and in that time there is 2 trade deadlines , one draft day,  one free agent  day and a off seasons of trades and deals  before the ED. even happens . Even  when the ED comes around we can always protect an asset by making a deal  , no matter what we are going to lose a player and JB will have it covered  by then .

If you wait to close to the ED its very hard to get full value for players in trades as teams know you are in a pickle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

An undertone in many threads right now is concern about "Marky versus Demko" and similar player discussions with often cited "we will lose xxxxx to Seattle".    I don't think many fully understand how the process works.   Seattle will select one player from each of the other teams in the league (excluding Vegas) for a grand total of 30. Specifically, those 30 players must include at least 14 forwards, nine defensemen and three goalies.    The rules for the teams is a bit more complex:

 

  • Current NHL teams can protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goalie, or eight skaters (forwards/defensemen) and one goalie, under the following conditions.
    • All players with no movement clauses at the time of the draft, and who decline to waive those clauses, must be protected and will be counted toward their team's applicable protection limits.
    • All first- and second-year NHL players, and all unsigned draft choices, will be exempt from selection (and will not be counted toward protection limits.
  • In addition, all NHL teams must meet the following minimum requirements regarding players exposed for selection in the draft:
    • One defenseman who is a) under contract in 2021-22 and b) played in at least 40 NHL games the prior season or played in at least 70 NHL games in the prior two seasons.
    • Two forwards who are a) under contract in 2021-22 and b) played at least 40 NHL games the prior season or played in at least 70 NHL games in the prior two seasons.
    • One goalie who is under contract in 2021-22 or will be a restricted free agent at the end of his current contract immediately prior to 2021-22. If a team elects to make a restricted free agent goalie available to meet this requirement, that goalie must have received his qualifying offer prior to the submission of the team's protected list.
    • Players with potential career-ending injuries who have missed more than the previous 60 consecutive games (or who otherwise have been confirmed to have a career-threatening injury) may not be used to satisfy a team's player exposure requirements unless approval is received from the NHL. Such players also may be deemed exempt from selection.

 

So, what does this mean for the Canucks?   They can only lose one player directly to the draft BUT will likely lose two through the "process" so to speak (trades, waivers etc.).   However, why are people so convinced they will lose one of Marky and/or Demko?    Seattle cannot ice 30 goalies - they are limited to three.   While, as I pointed out in another thread, both are really good goalies neither is "great" and even with Demko have that potential, there are other young goalies that are in similar situations with similar potential.   I think odds of losing one of these goalies is, at best, in the unlikely (waaaay less than 50%) range.   Teams like the Rangers are in way more of a goalie pickle IMHO.    Next to position players, they are going to close someone and likely a younger Dman (I think Stecher) and through the process a decent depth forward (I have a feeling Leivo for some reason).    Those will sting but not be fatal.

 

EVERY team will have some "sting" but I see no reason why Vancouver will be in any grave danger.   I think the angst is far over stated by many and the Canucks are in much better shape for this draft than many teams around the league and most certainly better off than other Pacific Division teams (except Anaheim and Vegas...the latter due to exemption the former due to nature of roster and contracts) as those teams have their younger elite talent needing some of it exposed.   

 

Short story to the above - be more worried about something worth worrying about (like running out of beer before Jake is done scoring this season).   At best, the Seattle draft will be a bee string to this team given the depth it finally has.

As some might notice, I am one of the greatest proponents of not signing Markstrom. Where you, I believe are wrong is the the expansion draft is actually a minor reason as not to sign Markstrom. The expansion draft is just another element in the long list to not sign Markstrom.

 

So here in point form and in order of major reason to minor reason is the list why not to sign Markstrom.

 

1) Markstrom next season, will be 30 years old, why does this matter, I agree he could have maybe 3 more good years before he starts to decline, he could also start to decline next year and ever year during his new contract.

2) He is a UFA that could seek 6-7mill per year and ask for term of 5-7 years. IMO this would handcuff the Canucks if he where to start to decline. Examples SJS and NJ.

3) We as fans must ask what would be the purpose of signing Markstrom, the only purpose IMO would be if we were a cup contender now and in the next 1-2 years. My belief, is we are not. We are 2-3 years from even having that window open as this year we are fighting to make the playoffs never mind compete for a cup. So if my assumption is correct 32-33 years old by the time the window is opening to contend for a cup and 34-35 before the Canucks might actually win it.

This is based on guys like Hughes, Boeser and Petey coming into their primes 23ish years old.

4) who else would be coming into his prime in 2-3 years? Demko is now 24 will be 25 at the end of this year and will be 27-28 years of age in 2-3 years. Demko will develop into a starter as the Canucks players are going in to their prime.

5) There are better options then Markstrom next year and going forward. The Canucks could sign a veteran goalie for 2 years for 3.5-4 mill to back up Demko. 1 suggestion is Cory Crawford, he is 35 currently and a UFA.  He is no longer a starter in this league and 4 million would be an over payment but might convince him to sign a shorter term deal and become a back up. In this case Demko could play 55ish games well Crawford could pick up the rest. Who knows Crawford or a guy like him could still have a good season or 2 left on a better team.

6) A guy like Crawford could be exposed in the expansion draft as he meets the requirements. The Canucks could protect Demko.

7) If Crawford like goalie gets picked up then Dipietro has had another year in th Ahl and could be Demko's back up or if he is not ready the Canucks could find another back up for that season.

8) This is just my believe, IMO Demko is ready to be a starter, and the arguement doesn't fly with me. A starter doesn't need to play 60 games.

9) If Crawford wasn't taken in the Expansion draft then that would allow Dipietro 2 years in the Ahl before he becomes Demkos back up.

 

IMO, the only reason to sign Markstrom is if Benning and crew believe this team Can compete for the cup now and for the next 3 years. I also believe if it is greater then 6 mill per and longer then 3 year term it will handcuff the team in the back end of a long term contract and we will lose good goaltenders in the process. Demko for sure either by trade, expansion draft, or when he becomes a UFA.

 

Edited by Arrow 1983
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should be relieved of this because of the cap situation in Seattle must absorb one of our cap hits.  If Demko is taken, we would save a lot of cap space and that money could go toward the cap relief from Luongo's recapture for one year after Seattle expansion draft especially with Demko RFA status in that year and he will look for a raise even if we choose to keep Markstrom.  If Markstrom is taken, it's a lot of cap hits being saved toward signing Hughes, Petterson, etc. This also would allow us to bridge a guy for one year contract and when Luongo's recapture penalty is taken off the book then can sign that player for a long term.  Expansion draft actually helps us a lot rather than hurting us this time.   Take Markstrom, it will save us 5 to 6 million dollars and we do not have to sign him with NMC if he is seeking a long term with fair price.  We do not have to offer him NMC to retain his service.    I'm pretty sure that there are better back-up than Demko in the league or back-up ready for a starting position within 2 years.    I am not confident having Demko as our starting goaltender yet.   

 

If Seattle choose to take one of forward or defence instead, it still helps us a lot as the cap hit will be reduced either way and we retains the best 7 skaters, 3 defence (that not including Hughes) and 1 goalie.     We could easily expose Beagle, or Rousell, Sutter and even Eriksson save one of our cap hit.  I'm sure that Seattle would rather having one of them needing for the shutdown line instead.  They are one of the better shutdown line in the league by far as far as I know.  We will know more on who is signed for next two season in this coming off-season.  There is nothing on defence that is worthy protecting because only Myers is signed a long term while rest of other defencemen worthy protecting whose contract expires that year and only Stecher is RFA.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think a lot of people on here are scared about the expansion draft. 

But I don't think there is a reason to be concerned.

Let's have a look:

 

Exempt: Hughes, Woo, Tryamkin, DiPietro, Eliot, Kielly, Silvos

 

Goalies: Protect either Markstrom or Demko, Expose rest

At the draft Markstrom will be 31.5 years old while Demko will be

25.5 years old. So far Demko has only played 26 NHL games in

his entire career, Sv% like .906 total. He had concussion issues

already too. I think at the expansion draft we will have a much

clearer picture of who to protect and who to expose, also 

considering the cap as well.

 

Defense: Protect: Tanev, Juolevi, Stecher

If we acquire another Dman that needs protection or Myers or

one of our other prospects is lightning it up we leave Stecher

unprotected. Edler can re-sign after the draft if he wants to stay here.

Unprotected: Myers (31 years old, 3 years on 6 mill) and the likes of

Fantenberg, Brisebois, Rafferty, Chatfield, Sautner, Teves

 

Forwards to protect 100%: Pettersson, Horvat, Boeser, Miller

Then most likely as of now Virtanen and Gaudette

Leaves 1 spot between: Motte, Leivo, Ferland (if he actually gets 

healthy again), Lind or a top 6 that we trade for.

As of now I would protect Motte as I think he would

get picked up and he hasn't reached his offensive ceiling yet, is

great defensively and on the PK and has the highest energy level.

We need a player like that on our roster..

That leaves following players unprotected/without contract:

Leivo, Lind, Sutter, Pearson, Ferland, Roussel, Beagle, MacEwen, Boucher,

Palmu, Gadjovich and a few others

 

No idea who they would pick but I think it would be between Demko, Myers,

Leivo, Pearson, Ferland, Roussel, Lind

What do you guys think?

 

  • Cheers 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

An undertone in many threads right now is concern about "Marky versus Demko" and similar player discussions with often cited "we will lose xxxxx to Seattle".    I don't think many fully understand how the process works.   Seattle will select one player from each of the other teams in the league (excluding Vegas) for a grand total of 30. Specifically, those 30 players must include at least 14 forwards, nine defensemen and three goalies.    The rules for the teams is a bit more complex:

 

  • Current NHL teams can protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goalie, or eight skaters (forwards/defensemen) and one goalie, under the following conditions.
    • All players with no movement clauses at the time of the draft, and who decline to waive those clauses, must be protected and will be counted toward their team's applicable protection limits.
    • All first- and second-year NHL players, and all unsigned draft choices, will be exempt from selection (and will not be counted toward protection limits.
  • In addition, all NHL teams must meet the following minimum requirements regarding players exposed for selection in the draft:
    • One defenseman who is a) under contract in 2021-22 and b) played in at least 40 NHL games the prior season or played in at least 70 NHL games in the prior two seasons.
    • Two forwards who are a) under contract in 2021-22 and b) played at least 40 NHL games the prior season or played in at least 70 NHL games in the prior two seasons.
    • One goalie who is under contract in 2021-22 or will be a restricted free agent at the end of his current contract immediately prior to 2021-22. If a team elects to make a restricted free agent goalie available to meet this requirement, that goalie must have received his qualifying offer prior to the submission of the team's protected list.
    • Players with potential career-ending injuries who have missed more than the previous 60 consecutive games (or who otherwise have been confirmed to have a career-threatening injury) may not be used to satisfy a team's player exposure requirements unless approval is received from the NHL. Such players also may be deemed exempt from selection.

 

So, what does this mean for the Canucks?   They can only lose one player directly to the draft BUT will likely lose two through the "process" so to speak (trades, waivers etc.).   However, why are people so convinced they will lose one of Marky and/or Demko?    Seattle cannot ice 30 goalies - they are limited to three.   While, as I pointed out in another thread, both are really good goalies neither is "great" and even with Demko have that potential, there are other young goalies that are in similar situations with similar potential.   I think odds of losing one of these goalies is, at best, in the unlikely (waaaay less than 50%) range.   Teams like the Rangers are in way more of a goalie pickle IMHO.    Next to position players, they are going to close someone and likely a younger Dman (I think Stecher) and through the process a decent depth forward (I have a feeling Leivo for some reason).    Those will sting but not be fatal.

 

EVERY team will have some "sting" but I see no reason why Vancouver will be in any grave danger.   I think the angst is far over stated by many and the Canucks are in much better shape for this draft than many teams around the league and most certainly better off than other Pacific Division teams (except Anaheim and Vegas...the latter due to exemption the former due to nature of roster and contracts) as those teams have their younger elite talent needing some of it exposed.   

 

Short story to the above - be more worried about something worth worrying about (like running out of beer before Jake is done scoring this season).   At best, the Seattle draft will be a bee string to this team given the depth it finally has.

Lets say the Canucks protect

 

Miller

Boeser 

Petterson

Virtanen

Guad

Horvat

Roussel

Forwards remaining 

Ferland 

Beagle

UFA and does not need Protecting

Sutter is UFA

Pearson UFA

Baer UFA

 

Dmen

 

Hughes exempt

Edler UFA 

Benn Ufa

Tanev if we re-sign longer than 1 year

Juolevi 

Rafferty

Myers

Stecher

my guess Canucks protect Tanev if re-signed Juolevi and Rafferty. Unless Myers proves worthy of keeping.

 

Goaltenders 

 

Markstrom if re-signed 

Demko cause he is RFA and would need to be protected or could be losed.

 

So really, Only non protected forwards are, Ferland and Beagle and I do not see Seattle taking either of them unless Ferland has a big time season and then with his injury issues I still can't see it.

Non-protected D-man this does get interesting and could help prevent a goalie being taken. Only 3 of Joulevi, Rafferty, Myers, Stecher, and Tanev. 

 

First, lets start with Stecher, he is a RFA July 1, and if his asking price is 3.5 mill or greater, will Benning want to pay that to a #4-5 dman. IMO anything over 3 and Benning Should walk away.

 

Second, Tanev, UFA July 1st, what is he worth, I would argue no more then 5mill per and 3-4 year term. If he signs for Less I could see his camp asking for a NMC.

 

Third, Joulevi and Rafferty, this comes down to asset management. If not protecting these guys these guys will have to get traded can't lose these guys for nothing.

 

And finally, Myers, If they expose him it will be cause he is not playing well and I can't see Seattle handcuffing themselves with his contract. If he is playing well then why would the Canucks expose him.

 

That leaves, Markstrom and Demko. If Seattle wants success right away Markstrom could easily be their starter. But if Benning Protects him, Seattle could look elsewhere for a starter and pick up Demko as a backup and then as there future starter in a couple years. Leaving the Canucks to have to play against Markstrom or Demko. Or we let Markstrom walk and he signs with another team that is most likely a non Pacific rival. So if the Canucks sign Markstrom, Demko is more likely traded. Look for my rational above in my post on why we shouldn't sign Markstrom.

 

Edit I forgot Leivo as well, Leivo is a UFA this season and I think is made redundant with the emergence of Virtanen as a top 6 forward. Honestly, most would probably agree Leivo type players are a dime a dozen. Not good enough to be a fixture top 6 and not enough skill set to play a bottom 6 roll. You might disagree I just don't see him as a grinder or a very good defensive forward. Green hasn't even tried him on the PK. 

 

 

Edited by Arrow 1983
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...