[Discussion] Article: The Score's Mock Expansion Draft Protection Lists for teams in Pacific Div.

[Rick Blight]

If you are the GM of the offence starved Canucks and you have the opportunity to sign the player that was 19th in goal scoring and 28th in overall points for the entire NHL, would you sign him? If, during your salary negotiations, you could strike a deal where 47 other players would have a higher salary cap and a further 19 would have the same salary cap, would you, as the GM, make that deal and think you received fair value? If you could structure the deal such that more money would be paid up front so that, in the event said player's performance declined over the course of the contract, it would make it easier to facilitate a trade or buyout, would you do it?

 

This is exactly what Benning was faced with during the past off-season when reaching a decision on whether or not to sign Eriksson. Those that constantly, in almost every thread, moan about this "horrible" contract do so only with the benefit of hindsight. He has not had the kind of year we would have liked or expected but I believe that is more an overall team issue than an issue specific to Eriksson.

 

Sorry for not making this specific to the expansion exposure topic but got really tired of always reading about Eriksson's contract.

[ItsMillerTime]

Ya protect the guy with no goals.

[Team Bagues]

7 hours ago, Art Vandelay said:

As long as we protect Horvat, Tanev, Baertschi, Granlund, and Gaunce; I don't really care who else we protect. 

 

I can see these players being apart of the solution going forward. Along with hutton, Stecher, Tryamkin, a few of our prospects and a couple years of draft picks. Protect whatever else has most value. 

 

I see a lot of people see Gaunce as "replaceable". On a nightly basis, he consistently has the best corsi on the team, and is excellent  at board battles, PK'ing, and D-zone positioning. Those are not replaceable skills especially at his young age. IF... Gaunce can find a way to start scoring he will be a fantastic 3rd line player(maybe more) and it will be worth protecting him. If not, he will be a servicable minute cruncher on the 4th line. Worth losing a player who will be either gone or buyout candidate in 3-4 years.

 

Gaunce has turned into one of my favourite players, so maybe I'm biased here.

 

I see Baer as being more replaceable than the rest, but most people here have a real 'heart-on' for him.

Sure he scores sometimes, but I haven't seen a great defensive game from him.

Time will tell - and it depends how far along the next generation of scorers are from showing up.

I agree on Gaunce, he's taking big leaps this year - I hope he continues the trajectory toward being a Momesso/Sandlak type guy.

[PhillipBlunt]

13 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

No one east of Calgary knows any of these names, other than maybe Guddy. The guy was at the end of his article and wrote the 1st crap that came into his head.

People know Sutter's name. It just goes to show that even "established" writers are full of $#!+ these days.

[JM_]

1 minute ago, PhillipBlunt said:

People know Sutter's name. It just goes to show that even "established" writers are full of $#!+ these days.

Sure but they don't know "which" Sutter it is. There are so many to choose from.

[2009cupchamps]

I'm surprised that no one is mentioning that LV may be interested in picking up Dorsett.  He foes bring a element that is hard to find, someone willing to stick up for his teammates. Sibisa rarely drops the gloves. That is why Gudbranson is being protected over Sibisa and the fact he shoots right. Tryamkin replaces what Sibisa brings. 

[aGENT]

2 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

Sbisa is the "easiest" for these reasons: Edler has the say if he stays or goes. Guddy was traded for a 1st rounder, and is hurt. He's not going anywhere. Tanev is likely headed for surgery too, I bet you a coke on that. So its Sbisa.... now whats the likelihood? Probably low, but if some other team does a deal with Vegas, then that team is free to grab up a guy like Sbisa.

 

The most likely scenario, and its not a bad one really, is Sbisa is exposed. He presents really good value for Vegas. He'd solidify the likely D group, add some hitting, and his highish salary is good for Vegas to meet the floor. For us, we need the cap space for extending Bo, Guddy and Tryamkin, and maybe have to sign a goalie, and roster space if OJ is going to be given a chance to make the team.

 

So for me the ideal situation is Sbisa being picked by Vegas, barring a low likelihood trade for him.

I wouldn't call it 'ideal' but I do agree it's most likely. Though I do think Benning will try his darnedest to move a D ahead of the ED, right now, we have to assume we lose Sbisa until/if Benning can make that move.

 

'Ideally' we convert one of Edler/Tanev + one of Baer/Granlund in to an upgrade at forward allowing us to also protect Sbisa in the process. 

 

Agree Gudbranson isn't going anywhere though and not because of who he was traded for or that he was hurt.

 

I'd not be surprised if Edler was fairly open to waiving actually given all the writing over all the walls. That said, I'm fine moving him at the TDL in his last year too if that's not the case.

 

Tanev would receive huge interest, surgery or not and has no NTC until July. 

 

Sbisa'a interesting in that there'll likely be very little market for him ahead of the ED IMO but likely a fairly large one after it, as teams scramble to replace the #4,  2nd pair D they just lost. Ideally we move another D and then trade Sbisa later in the summer for higher value or at the TDL.

[aGENT]

3 minutes ago, 2009cupchamps said:

I'm surprised that no one is mentioning that LV may be interested in picking up Dorsett.  He foes bring a element that is hard to find, someone willing to stick up for his teammates. Sibisa rarely drops the gloves. That is why Gudbranson is being protected over Sibisa and the fact he shoots right. Tryamkin replaces what Sibisa brings. 

Might not be eligible:

 

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592

Quote

* 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 club's player exposure requirements, unless approval is received from the NHL. Such players also may be deemed exempt from selection by the League.

 

[JM_]

5 minutes ago, J.R. said:

I wouldn't call it 'ideal' but I do agree it's most likely. Though I do think Benning will try his darnedest to move a D ahead of the ED, right now, we have to assume we lose Sbisa until/if Benning can make that move.

 

'Ideally' we convert one of Edler/Tanev + one of Baer/Granlund in to an upgrade at forward allowing us to also protect Sbisa in the process. 

 

Agree Gudbranson isn't going anywhere though and not because of who he was traded for or that he was hurt.

 

I'd not be surprised if Edler was fairly open to waiving actually given all the writing over all the walls. That said, I'm fine moving him at the TDL in his last year too if that's not the case.

 

Tanev would receive huge interest, surgery or not and has no NTC until July. 

 

Sbisa'a interesting in that there'll likely be very little market for him ahead of the ED IMO but likely a fairly large one after it, as teams scramble to replace the #4,  2nd pair D they just lost. Ideally we move another D and then trade Sbisa later in the summer for higher value or at the TDL.

I know what you're saying but if Benning actually moved out that much D we'd be in real trouble

 

We just need to move one D man to have a big impact. I do like your idea of packaging one D + a F for a big upgrade on the F group, but it would have to be pretty good. But given that both Baer and Granny will be 20 goal scorers with super-friendly contracts its very possible imo.

 

So what would Colorado give us for Tanev + Baer e.g.? Or maybe Tampa? Toronto? I think there'd be a ton of interest in a package of those two players.

 

Also forgot to post that along with the trade and current injury, I also like what Guddy brings to the team so he's a keeper.

 

 

[Inge34]

Whoever wrote this article is a knob. They did zero research. They probably look at our current roster and just made a quick list of players then moved to the next team. Guddy and Sutter not protected after what the Canucks gave up for them to protect Sbisa and Gaunce, give your head a shake. 

[Canuck Surfer]

9 hours ago, Ossi Vaananen said:

I've kicked around the idea of exposing Sutter. It makes sense considering what he's being paid for what he brings. I don't know about Gaunce vaulting into the protection list though, seems like a waste. 

 

Guddy vs. Sbisa will be debated on here until the actual expansion draft. Guddy is an unknown with us, and could be looking at a fat and undeserved extension this summer. Sbisa is on contract, and we know what he brings. 

 

The choices facing management will be tricky heading into the expansion draft. Though I think there are only a few players worth debating, as the likes of Tanev/Edler/Sedins/Granlund/Baertschi/Horvat should be locks, with Eriksson as an obvious afterthought (though our hands are tied). 

 

4

The problem with this debate is Sbisa is effectively a rental. Entering the last year of his contract. Summer 2018 Sbisa will probably have the only chance in his career to shop his wares as a UFA in his prime. I doubt he will pass on it... 

 

Where Guddy is an asset we can keep for the long haul

 

Sbisa is also only having his first real good year. Its true Guddy has not completely found his game in Vancouver yet? But it took Sbisa 3 years. I would take the Gudbranson who played 20 plus minutes a game, against top comp for Florida, in last years play-off's. And as much as Sbisa does bring it physically, is a guy players do not like to play against? Playing physical in a mid-size package is one thing. Being completely physically dominant, 2 or 3 inches taller, 20 lbs heavier? A guy players cannot handle is another. Also bearing a meat cleaver for a right hook. Gudbranson brings it more!

 

My opinion is the debate already has too many legs. We should protect Gudbranson. 

[ilduce39]

8 hours ago, Art Vandelay said:

As long as we protect Horvat, Tanev, Baertschi, Granlund, and Gaunce; I don't really care who else we protect. 

 

I can see these players being apart of the solution going forward. Along with hutton, Stecher, Tryamkin, a few of our prospects and a couple years of draft picks. Protect whatever else has most value. 

 

I see a lot of people see Gaunce as "replaceable". On a nightly basis, he consistently has the best corsi on the team, and is excellent  at board battles, PK'ing, and D-zone positioning. Those are not replaceable skills especially at his young age. IF... Gaunce can find a way to start scoring he will be a fantastic 3rd line player(maybe more) and it will be worth protecting him. If not, he will be a servicable minute cruncher on the 4th line. Worth losing a player who will be either gone or buyout candidate in 3-4 years.

 

Gaunce has turned into one of my favourite players, so maybe I'm biased here.

 

Gaunce has shown to be an effective scorer in the AHL and already has a physical, defensive game in the NHL.  He's also a versatile C/Winger.

 

I think the lack of speed factor is overstated based on his ability to lay the body... you don't make hits if you're slow.

 

Most of all I've always heard he's a very smart kid... he hasn't transferred his ability to score to the NHL yet but at his age and looking at Granny/Baer there's reason to believe he'll figure it out.

 

I don't see them protecting him above Sutter or Granny/Baer, nor do I think they should, but I'd hate to lose him.  He's got more to give... just hope LV doesn't gamble on that potential.

[aGENT]

31 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

I know what you're saying but if Benning actually moved out that much D we'd be in real trouble

 

We just need to move one D man to have a big impact. I do like your idea of packaging one D + a F for a big upgrade on the F group, but it would have to be pretty good. But given that both Baer and Granny will be 20 goal scorers with super-friendly contracts its very possible imo.

 

So what would Colorado give us for Tanev + Baer e.g.? Or maybe Tampa? Toronto? I think there'd be a ton of interest in a package of those two players.

 

Also forgot to post that along with the trade and current injury, I also like what Guddy brings to the team so he's a keeper.

 

 

Oh, I'm not saying we move all of them! Sorry if that wasn't clear. These are options, not a grocery list. I think we move one of Edler/Tanev.

 

Then as the season progresses and we see how far we are out of the playoffs, and how guys like Pedan, McEneny progress, is Juolevi deemed 'ready' etc, Sbisa could be moved either this summer or at the TDL depending on those answers.

 

Wouldn't be terribly surprised to see Hutton packaged with one of Baer/Granlund ahead of the ED either. Hutton's exempt and would have a LOT of value ahead of the ED IMO. Hutton + Baer would likely go a long way towards Landeskog....

 

Pick up Landeskog with Hutton/Baer and mover Edler/Tanev for one of the better teams having a tougher year (TBL, LAK, DAL etc) in exchange for their 1st pick (+)... 

 

Just spit balling 

[JM_]

18 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Oh, I'm not saying we move all of them! Sorry if that wasn't clear. These are options, not a grocery list. I think we move one of Edler/Tanev.

 

Then as the season progresses and we see how far we are out of the playoffs, and how guys like Pedan, McEneny progress, is Juolevi deemed 'ready' etc, Sbisa could be moved either this summer or at the TDL depending on those answers.

 

Wouldn't be terribly surprised to see Hutton packaged with one of Baer/Granlund ahead of the ED either. Hutton's exempt and would have a LOT of value ahead of the ED IMO. Hutton + Baer would likely go a long way towards Landeskog....

 

Pick up Landeskog with Hutton/Baer and mover Edler/Tanev for one of the better teams having a tougher year (TBL, LAK, DAL etc) in exchange for their 1st pick +... 

 

Just spit balling 

Yah Hutton is interesting.... I wonder what he'd really bring? I like him paired with Tryamkin and I like his offensive potential. OJ and Guddy could be an interesting pairing to try out.

 

Tanev-Stecher

Hutton-Tryamkin

OJ-Guddy

 

all between 19-27 years old... that looks like a rebuilt D to me. There's a good puck distributor on each pair, and offensive potential, and toughness on the bottom 2.

 

So for sure moving Edler and Sbisa would be great. OK Jim.... git er dun.

 

 

[aGENT]

14 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said:

Yah Hutton is interesting.... I wonder what he'd really bring? I like him paired with Tryamkin and I like his offensive potential. OJ and Guddy could be an interesting pairing to try out.

 

Tanev-Stecher

Hutton-Tryamkin

OJ-Guddy

 

all between 20-27 years old... that looks like a rebuilt D to me. There's a good puck distributor on each pair, and offensive potential, and toughness on the bottom 2.

 

So for sure moving Edler and Sbisa would be great. OK Jim.... git er dun.

 

 

Landeskog, Horvat, Eriksson

Sedin, Sedin, Granlund

Cramarossa, Sutter, Dorsett (sheltering line)

(...and I'd like to see a kids line next year that could get more minutes depending on their play and could move in to the top 6 with injuries. Not sure who centres it though)

Boucher/Rodin, Shore???, Goldobin

 

Sbisa, Tanev

Tryamkin, Stecher

Juolevi/UFA?, Gudbranson

 

Pedan, McEneny?

 

Edler moved for a mid 1st (+?), draft one of the nice D there perhaps? Stars align and we get our top 5 pick(Centre), mid first from Edler, 31st from SJS, our early 2nd and CBJ 2nd from Torts.

 

Rebuild-Ho! 

[Canuck Surfer]

1 hour ago, S'all Good Man said:

Anyone that thinks Benning would expose Guddy or Sutter knows nothing about this team. Benning will probably try to do a draft day deal for Sbisa, maybe Edler depending on the location (wouldn't count on it tho) but Sbisa is the easiest to move, and replace. Even if McPhee for some reason doesn't pick Sbisa (which would be really dumb on his part imo) Jim can still trade a D man post-draft once all the smoke clears from expansion.

 

 

 

3

Totally agree. 

 

And if he doesn't that means Sbisa, Bulldog, Gaunce, Boucher are the guys on our available list. My thoughts are, considering his contract runs only one more year, then he's UFA, they actually pass on pizza man. Grab a forward asset they can actually retain.  

 

Unless they think they can score a first or better for him at the 2018 deadline. And they play their card as a short term boost, longer term asset building play... 

[JM_]

8 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Landeskog, Horvat, Eriksson - love this

Boucher, H.Sedin, Granlund - elite passer, two shooters

Sedin, Sutter, Goldobin - elite passer, solid 2 way C, shooter

Cramarossa,  Chaput Dorsett - energy, solid D, odd goal maybe

Shore (press box/injuries)

 

Sbisa, Tanev

Tryamkin, Stecher

Juolevi/ Gudbranson

UFA, McEneny, or maybe Subban rocks the last 10 games up here and shocks the world?

 

Edler moved for a mid 1st (+?), draft one of the nice D there perhaps? Stars align and we get our top 5 pick(Centre), mid first from Edler, 31st from SJS, our early 2nd and CBJ 2nd from Torts.

 

Re-built-Rebuild-Ho! 

 

[Canuck Surfer]

19 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Landeskog, Horvat, Eriksson

Sedin, Sedin, Granlund

Cramarossa, Sutter, Dorsett (sheltering line)

(...and I'd like to see a kids line next year that could get more minutes depending on their play and could move in to the top 6 with injuries. Not sure who centres it though)

Boucher/Rodin, Shore???, Goldobin

 

Sbisa, Tanev

Tryamkin, Stecher

Juolevi/UFA?, Gudbranson

 

Pedan, McEneny?

 

Edler moved for a mid 1st (+?), draft one of the nice D there perhaps? Stars align and we get our top 5 pick(Centre), mid first from Edler, 31st from SJS, our early 2nd and CBJ 2nd from Torts.

 

Rebuild-Ho! 

 

Love the forward group.

 

Not convinced we'll move on from Edler and Sbisa.

[aGENT]

Just now, Canuck Surfer said:

Love the forward group.

 

Not convinced we'll move on from Edler and Sbisa.

Yeah but you don't want to move Tanev either One of them HAS to go IMO.

 

Tanev + Baer for Domi instead?

 

Domi, Horvat, Eriksson

Sedin, Sedin, Granlund

Cramarossa, Sutter, Dorsett (sheltering line)

Boucher/Rodin, Shore???, Goldobin

 

Edler, Stecher

Hutton, Gudbranson

Sbisa, Tryamkin

 

Pedan, McEneny?

[Canuck Surfer]

2 minutes ago, J.R. said:

Yeah but you don't want to move Tanev either One of them HAS to go IMO.

 

Tanev + Baer for Domi instead?

 

Domi, Horvat, Eriksson

Sedin, Sedin, Granlund

Cramarossa, Sutter, Dorsett (sheltering line)

Boucher/Rodin, Shore???, Goldobin

 

Edler, Stecher

Hutton, Gudbranson

Sbisa, Tryamkin

 

Pedan, McEneny?

 

We can afford to lose one of Sbisa or Edler. Can't afford to lose Tanev full stop.  

 

Hutton could be the odd man out.