goog16 Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 16 minutes ago, billabong said: No chance in hell they take eriksson so get that crap out of your head Hell no,it's AHL/ECHL or retirement for "little things"!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 13 hours ago, canuktravella said: seattle probably ends up picking roussel next yr would free up 3 mill helps resogn hughes petey Seattle is taking Markstrom. If we protect him over Demko we will regret it, but I doubt that happens. I think we re sign Markstrom and expose him to Seattle. Demko will (if not already) be ready to take over and we would really lose no1 of importance for our future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Brock Botanen said: Seattle is taking Markstrom. If we protect him over Demko we will regret it, but I doubt that happens. I think we re sign Markstrom and expose him to Seattle. Demko will (if not already) be ready to take over and we would really lose no1 of importance for our future I get why we'd want him back but why does he want to return to a team, at a discount, less term, with no trade/ED protection, looking over his shoulder at the guy who wants his starting job, only to be taken by Seattle a year later? Or... He can pick the team he wants to play for at more money, with more security, ED protection and no established young backup looking to take over his starter role.... Edited September 21, 2020 by aGENT 1 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 26 minutes ago, Brock Botanen said: I think we re sign Markstrom and expose him to Seattle. Or we sign Markstrom (modified NTC), wait 30-40 games into next season to see how things shake down and trade either Markstrom or Demko to some team (Detroit) for their 1st (unprotected) or a top prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
189lb enforcers? Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 We have depth at forward and in net, but D could be tough. I’m curious what Benning will do. I know this will sound nuts, but I’d explore trading Horvat while he’s cheap. Gaining possession by winning face offs is key, but he might bring in enough to complete the “rebuild” with more quality youth. Tough to replace him, yes. I understand all his benefits to the team, but it just might be a crazy sleek pre-expansion move too. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 6 hours ago, NewbieCanuckFan said: Markstrom will give them a chance to win many nights (as he did for us). If he has to go, I rather it be outside our division (outside conference, even better). Absolutely. That’s exactly what I have been saying for a while now. Demko might not be ready but he showed enough to back him up. Markstrom might not be ok next year or beyond given his knees. Risks both ways - but I’m 100% behind not giving Seattle any either one. Would rather see Calgary get him at 6 x 6 as per a rumour floating around. Vegas was hard enough to stomach, don’t want Seattle pulling the same sort of crap. Wish one of these teams wasn’t even in our division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 1 hour ago, aGENT said: I get why we'd want him back but why does he want to return to a team, at a discount, less term, with no trade/ED protection, looking over his shoulder at the guy who wants his starting job, only to be taken by Seattle a year later? Or... He can pick the team he wants to play for at more money, with more security, ED protection and no established young backup looking to take good starter role.... OCT 9 couldn’t come quick enough. We should have a pretty good idea by then how far JB is willing to go with all three of these guys - and who’s the priority as well. Whomever signs first probably is. Tanev is waiting patiently- not much news on that front. Dobber Hockey recently came out with their goalie predictions..As in what they deserve to be paid. Canucks fans might be disappointed but it was 6.3....highest on the list - a little over Lehner. Holtby could be anywhere from 7 to 2 as a backup ha ha ... some very very decent names in the 1.5-3 million range. Or even take a flyer at Ryan Miller for 700k ha ha and bring him home. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuktravella Posted September 21, 2020 Share Posted September 21, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, Baggins said: I've read it many times thanks. Your point? juolevii is clear of expansion we wont be losing him like suggested Edited September 21, 2020 by canuktravella 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, canuktravella said: juolevii is clear of expansion we wont be losing him like suggested I believe he qualifies as he'll be a three year pro when the draft occurs. Edited September 22, 2020 by Baggins 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuktravella Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 1 hour ago, Baggins said: I believe he qualifies as he'll be a three year pro when the draft occurs. no he needs actual nhl games over 40 so thats incorrect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 5 minutes ago, canuktravella said: no he needs actual nhl games over 40 so thats incorrect There needs to be a minimum of one defenseman and two forwards exposed to the draft meeting that NHL games played criteria. * All first- and second-year professionals, as well as all unsigned draft choices, will be exempt from selection (and will not be counted toward their club's applicable protection limits). * All Clubs must meet the following minimum requirements regarding players exposed for selection in the Expansion Draft: i) One defenseman who is a) under contract in 2017-18 and b) played in 40 or more NHL games the prior season OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the prior two seasons. ii) Two forwards who are a) under contract in 2017-18 and b) played in 40 or more NHL games the prior season OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the prior two seasons. https://www.nhl.com/goldenknights/news/expansion-draft-full-rules/c-289403076 Juolevi will be playing his third professional season this year. Las Vegas took Tomas Nosek, who had only played 17 NHL games in two season, from Detroit. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 9 hours ago, canuktravella said: no he needs actual nhl games over 40 so thats incorrect Even the above makes it hard to understand the first time around when it says NHL games. AHL games count too. It’s a little hairy because QHs as we all know - doesn’t need protection. Where as Rafferty does - and QHs played a few more pro games then he has. OJ, Lind and Rafferty are all not on their exemption list... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted September 22, 2020 Share Posted September 22, 2020 (edited) 59 minutes ago, IBatch said: Even the above makes it hard to understand the first time around when it says NHL games. AHL games count too. It’s a little hairy because QHs as we all know - doesn’t need protection. Where as Rafferty does - and QHs played a few more pro games then he has. OJ, Lind and Rafferty are all not on their exemption list... The 40 games is not an exemption rule but an exposure requirement. They want to make sure that teams will at least expose players who have NHL experience and not simply guys who have spent most of their time in the minors. Every team is obliged to leave unprotected at least 2Fs + 1D who have played 40 NHL games (or 70 over 2 seasons). Even if a player has not reached 40 NHL games he will be exposed if he is not exempt and has been left unprotected. Players with 2 years pro or less are exempt. A pro-year is 10 NHL games for teenagers and only NHL games - not games in other pro-leagues. For players 20 and older it's 1 game in any top-tier pro league while signed to an NHL contract - AHL, SHL, Liiga all count and 1 game is sufficient to be called a pro-season. Hughes was 19 when he signed in March and played 5 NHL games. It was not considered a pro-season because he was still a teenager and did not play 10 NHL games. Last season was his 1st pro-year for expansion and this coming season will be his 2nd. Rafferty was 24 when he signed in March that same year. He played 2 games in the NHL and that counted as his 1st pro-year because he was no longer a teenager. Last season was his 2nd pro-year. Lind's ELC started in 2018/19 and it was his 1st year in the AHL as a 20 year old - it was his 1st pro year for expansion as the AHL is a top-tier pro-league. He will be starting his 3rd year this season. He will be available for expansion if they don't protect him. Edited September 22, 2020 by mll 2 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
189lb enforcers? Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 10 hours ago, mll said: The 40 games is not an exemption rule but an exposure requirement. They want to make sure that teams will at least expose players who have NHL experience and not simply guys who have spent most of their time in the minors. Every team is obliged to leave unprotected at least 2Fs + 1D who have played 40 NHL games (or 70 over 2 seasons). Even if a player has not reached 40 NHL games he will be exposed if he is not exempt and has been left unprotected. Players with 2 years pro or less are exempt. A pro-year is 10 NHL games for teenagers and only NHL games - not games in other pro-leagues. For players 20 and older it's 1 game in any top-tier pro league while signed to an NHL contract - AHL, SHL, Liiga all count and 1 game is sufficient to be called a pro-season. Hughes was 19 when he signed in March and played 5 NHL games. It was not considered a pro-season because he was still a teenager and did not play 10 NHL games. Last season was his 1st pro-year for expansion and this coming season will be his 2nd. Rafferty was 24 when he signed in March that same year. He played 2 games in the NHL and that counted as his 1st pro-year because he was no longer a teenager. Last season was his 2nd pro-year. Lind's ELC started in 2018/19 and it was his 1st year in the AHL as a 20 year old - it was his 1st pro year for expansion as the AHL is a top-tier pro-league. He will be starting his 3rd year this season. He will be available for expansion if they don't protect him. You are like the lawyer on here for this kind of thing. Good job, as usual. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuktravella Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 On 9/22/2020 at 6:12 AM, IBatch said: Even the above makes it hard to understand the first time around when it says NHL games. AHL games count too. It’s a little hairy because QHs as we all know - doesn’t need protection. Where as Rafferty does - and QHs played a few more pro games then he has. OJ, Lind and Rafferty are all not on their exemption list... weird how does that work hughes has 77 games played already plus playoffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erkayloomeh Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 On 9/21/2020 at 6:59 AM, IBatch said: Of course this all comes down to how JB deals with our goaltending. If that’s out of the picture as in he’s made a decision on who to keep and makes a trade with the other to get an asset back for his time developing both and doesn’t add too many players that creates a situation where we have to expose someone we really shouldn’t be then for sure we both could come out looking great and jump on the opportunity train. A few things on this. Seattle if smart will add as many fourth Ds as they can afford, and as many Theodore types as he can too (OJs lets just pretend - high upside Ds). However if they treat us like they should - anyone in our division and especially Vancouver given the close proximity - shouldn’t be their first choice when it comes to trade partners. Figure the best case is we shed some payroll and don’t end up giving them JM or Demko. Well JM actually would be a good case I suppose as it would shed payroll, show that Demko is ready for prime time and start a bitter rivalry ha ha. It's looking like they won't be getting a goalie from us. Wonder who they get? To early to tell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 On 9/21/2020 at 12:40 PM, Baggins said: Wishful thinking? They'd be more likely to take Motte, Virtanen, Gaudette or Stecher if still here. I'd even seriously consider Juolevi over Roussel. no brainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 52 minutes ago, erkayloomeh said: It's looking like they won't be getting a goalie from us. Wonder who they get? To early to tell My guess is Jake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aGENT Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 7 minutes ago, rekker said: My guess is Jake. Doubt he's still here to be available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rekker Posted September 23, 2020 Share Posted September 23, 2020 1 minute ago, aGENT said: Doubt he's still here to be available. May very well be true. At this point, I'd take a high second for him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now