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

[Bruce Boudreau]

14 hours ago, Honky Cat said:

Most draft lists (including Bob McKenzies,which is considered the standard) had Virtanen at around #7...so it wasn't really a stretch to draft him at #6..McCann was also rated much higher than where he was selected..so he was BPA

 

I the case of Joulevi,Tkachuk was clearly the #6 BPA....only time will tell if that was a mistake or not.

When they got Goldy they mentioned they picked McCann as a natural center because the Canucks had a need over Goldobin.

 

Asking you could argue Virtanen was a need pick a power winger over a small skill forward like Nylander .

 

Before drafting Juolevi all Benning said we are gonna draft d if all things are equal.

 

They choose Juolevi having more value long term as a d over a power winger like Takchuk because Stecher and Tryamkin had not emerged yet.

[WHL rocks]

3 hours ago, Conscience said:

You mean Gaunce or sbisa ?

Yes . Thx .. I mean Sbisa or gaunce. 

 

 

[Nooks]

Craig Hagerman should never get to write another article after that Canucks protection list.  Absolutely stupid.

[WeneedLumme]

Of course the Canucks won't expose Guddy or Sutter, they obviously have far too much value. It's often pretty funny when eastern writers write about the Canucks based on pure ignorance. In a previous version of this thread a few months ago, one of those clowns had us protecting Burrows. Hard to say which of these suggestions is sillier.

[Canuck Surfer]

6 hours ago, J.R. said:

No, we've got too many NHL bodies that can't all get playing time/require waivers and need more NHL ready (or near-ready) prospects who don't need to clear waivers to fill in with injuries. The prospects are coming but we still need to sort out the NHL bodies.

 

Then there's the ED.

 

Nobody's suggesting tearing anything down. I'm suggesting we get value for ONE D who's not part of long term plans and convert that to assets that will be part of the rebuild.

We've got 7 NHL bodies, 8 if you include Biega. That's debateable. You need that many. And we don't have to make room for anybody.

 

Edler, Tryamkin, Sbisa, Hutton, (Biega) Stecher, Tanev & Gudbranson. are our NHLérs. I'm not including Larsen. He's just a failed experiment.  We have no need to make space, because I don't believe McEneny, Pedan, nor Subban have proven a "serviceable" NHL player at this stage. Maybe adequate ''fill'' in a pinch? Maybe if given the chance they could play well enough they could "force" the GM to make room for them?

 

A couple certainly have that potential. As do guys like Brisbois & Juolevi in the prospect pool. But they haven't done so, forced the GM's hand to this point.      

 

 

 

Look, if we could score Landeskog, would I make an exception? Help the rebuild...  Most certainly. In the meantime, in reality JB has been using "fill"players at forward. Not as a luxury. As a necessity. But that's so we don't have to force our forward prospects either. But I complained for 5 years, campaigned for guys like Juolevi & Gudbranson. Now we have some D depth; I'm personally inclined to not give it up that easily.

 

I'll wait to trade Edler till when Juolevi has fully arrived. And similarly I'll take my lumps with forward fill players so & until we can accumulate the same circumstance up front. Unlike most here, I frickin love Megna!  Skille for MVP! The price of keeping Boeser in college, Jake in Utica.  JB btw, knew full well we were rebuilding when we started to ice guys like that.  Everything else is just for public consumption. We're just deeper into it now that he's also really admitted it by trading Hansen & Burrows.

 

At the deadline in 2 years, we also likely won't have to take a bath on Edler's value. To convince him to waive his NTC? That is when we should be trading Edler or Tanev. Only sooner if a rookie blows them off the ice!    

 

[Canuck Surfer]

My idea of kids playing (now having some fun with it?), some token twin;

 

PP of;      Granlund Bo Boucher    2knd PP  Goldy Hank Baer

                    Stecher Hutton                           Tryamkin Danny

 

Pk of         Gaunce Sutter              2knd PK Horvat Cramarossa

                Tryamkin Tanev                            Sbisa Stecher

[theo5789]

Instead of just giving up Gudbranson for nothing in the expansion an option is that we trade him to Vegas for their 2nd and maybe a player that we would like for them to select to trade to us as well. They have 48 hours to negotiate with UFAs and RFAs, so if they can work out a deal and instead of offer sheeting, they can work out a trade that works for the both of us. There are many options, but exposing him in the draft is not one of them.

[nickels]

Hope this is seen....didn't feel like starting a thread.

 

Can players waive their NMC's ?

 

There isn't a chance in hell that LV would take on the Sedins 7m salary.

 

They should both waive NMC's for the good of the team if able to

 

 

[Art Vandelay]

4 hours ago, nickels said:

Hope this is seen....didn't feel like starting a thread.

 

Can players waive their NMC's ?

 

There isn't a chance in hell that LV would take on the Sedins 7m salary.

 

They should both waive NMC's for the good of the team if able to

 

 

It's been reported that non-injured players with NMC can waive, and be exposed. 

 

And injuried (career ending or threatening) NMC players, will be exempt entirely from the draft if the league decides so (case by case). Meaning they possibly can't be protected or exposed nor meet the minimum games played requirement of 1F an 2D. This is also for injured non-NMC players.

 

Can't see the Sedins waiving. Though I agree they wouldn't be picked. Would be very interesting if they did. 

[Baggins]

4 hours ago, nickels said:

Hope this is seen....didn't feel like starting a thread.

 

Can players waive their NMC's ?

 

There isn't a chance in hell that LV would take on the Sedins 7m salary.

 

They should both waive NMC's for the good of the team if able to

 

 

1 - Yes players can choose to waive their nmc

2 - Why would they?

3 - Vegas only gets to take one player from each team not two.

 

The Sedins have one year left on their current deal and there's still ahl quality guys on the roster, There's absolutely no reason to move the Sedins this year or next. Yours is the type of ignorant comment that gives Nucks fans a bad rep. The Sedins deserve nothing but respect for all they done for this team and city. If retiring here is what they want they've earned that right and more.

[stawns]

4 hours ago, Baggins said:

1 - Yes players can choose to waive their nmc

2 - Why would they?

3 - Vegas only gets to take one player from each team not two.

 

The Sedins have one year left on their current deal and there's still ahl quality guys on the roster, There's absolutely no reason to move the Sedins this year or next. Yours is the type of ignorant comment that gives Nucks fans a bad rep. The Sedins deserve nothing but respect for all they done for this team and city. If retiring here is what they want they've earned that right and more.

It's pretty nifty way to protect Gaunce though, don't you think?  Zero chance that LV picks one old, declining twin at that cap hit.

 

Of course it's out of the box, but an interesting idea.

[Baggins]

23 minutes ago, stawns said:

It's pretty nifty way to protect Gaunce though, don't you think?  Zero chance that LV picks one old, declining twin at that cap hit.

 

Of course it's out of the box, but an interesting idea.

Honestly, I could care less about Gaunce. I'd see us as getting off easy if he's who we lose to Vegas.

[Canucklehead73]

Like others have said, unless Gudbranson is asking for the moon for his next contract, no way he is getting exposed...

 

And I would still protect Sutter over Gaunce. I'm not sure where you're seeing scoring potential...

 

And remember we can still trade Sbisa before the draft.

[Googlie]

23 hours ago, Gnarcore said:

If we want to keep Gaunce it is pretty simple ....you trade another asset for LV to not pick him.  The question is what would be the cost.  

Give them Subban on the condition they pick Megna or Skille

[aGENT]

12 hours ago, Canuck Surfer said:

We've got 7 NHL bodies, 8 if you include Biega. That's debateable. You need that many. And we don't have to make room for anybody.

 

Edler, Tryamkin, Sbisa, Hutton, (Biega) Stecher, Tanev & Gudbranson. are our NHLérs. I'm not including Larsen. He's just a failed experiment.  We have no need to make space, because I don't believe McEneny, Pedan, nor Subban have proven a "serviceable" NHL player at this stage. Maybe adequate ''fill'' in a pinch? Maybe if given the chance they could play well enough they could "force" the GM to make room for them?

 

A couple certainly have that potential. As do guys like Brisbois & Juolevi in the prospect pool. But they haven't done so, forced the GM's hand to this point.      

 

 

 

Look, if we could score Landeskog, would I make an exception? Help the rebuild...  Most certainly. In the meantime, in reality JB has been using "fill"players at forward. Not as a luxury. As a necessity. But that's so we don't have to force our forward prospects either. But I complained for 5 years, campaigned for guys like Juolevi & Gudbranson. Now we have some D depth; I'm personally inclined to not give it up that easily.

 

I'll wait to trade Edler till when Juolevi has fully arrived. And similarly I'll take my lumps with forward fill players so & until we can accumulate the same circumstance up front. Unlike most here, I frickin love Megna!  Skille for MVP! The price of keeping Boeser in college, Jake in Utica.  JB btw, knew full well we were rebuilding when we started to ice guys like that.  Everything else is just for public consumption. We're just deeper into it now that he's also really admitted it by trading Hansen & Burrows.

 

At the deadline in 2 years, we also likely won't have to take a bath on Edler's value. To convince him to waive his NTC? That is when we should be trading Edler or Tanev. Only sooner if a rookie blows them off the ice!    

 

As nice of a luxury having seven 'top 6' D is, it's not realistic to maintain long term. All of those seven players need to play (especially the young guys who are still developing) and they're not going to be happy, indefinitely waiting for injuries to do so. There's a reason 7 and 8 D's don't already have starting roles.

 

It's also ignoring that we're bound to lose Sbisa for free ANYWAY.  How about instead of losing him for free, we move one of our eligible D for a return that helps the rebuild?

 

We're going to be down to six 'NHL' D either way thanks to the ED. I'd prefer we get rebuild assets for one vs nothing. I honestly don't even know how this is debatable?! Something vs nothing doesn't seem like a complicated debate to me 

 

I do tend to agree that we should hang on to Edler until some mix of Tryamkin, Hutton, Juolevi, Brisebois etc are more prepared to take on those minutes on the left. One of the many reasons I've advocated moving Tanev instead as we already have guys I'd feel comfortable playing those minutes on the right 

 

I'd also say the Burr and Hansen trades were pretty clear signs that we're at the point of the rebuild where the kids are starting to take over and vets WILL be moved regardless of short term issues that may or may not cause.

[Team Bagues]

21 hours ago, Art Vandelay said:

I have a heart-on for a Gaunce! Haven't felt this way since Salo. 

 

I don't think Baertschi will ever become a top line player, but I can see a consistent 15 goal scorer with 40 points. Considering he has 10 minor penalties over the last 2 seasons and that he isn't horrible in his own end, I think he can be a good middle six scoring forward. 

 

Canucks definitely still need the top line talent. Probably only 1 forward on the current roster with that potential.

Yeah, I know. At present he works, and fits.

I just have a hard time seeing him on a good team, as we'd have better top 6 guys.

But who knows, guys can adjust.

I've never equated penalty minutes to d-zone coverage; it's mostly just been the eye-test when watching games.

Oh Salo, how we've missed thee!!!!

 

[nickels]

7 hours ago, Baggins said:

1 - Yes players can choose to waive their nmc

2 - Why would they?

3 - Vegas only gets to take one player from each team not two.

 

The Sedins have one year left on their current deal and there's still ahl quality guys on the roster, There's absolutely no reason to move the Sedins this year or next. Yours is the type of ignorant comment that gives Nucks fans a bad rep. The Sedins deserve nothing but respect for all they done for this team and city. If retiring here is what they want they've earned that right and more.

My suggestion was they would be helping the team(their team) by agreeing to be exposed.

 

There is no way that Vegas takes on a 7m contract for either of the Sedins

 

Their waving allows the team to protect 2 players they wouldn't be able to otherwise.

 

Yours is the type of ignorant comment that...well ..makes you ignorant.

[Baggins]

Just now, nickels said:

My suggestion was they would be helping the team(their team) by agreeing to be exposed.

 

There is no way that Vegas takes on a 7m contract for either of the Sedins

 

Their waving allows the team to protect 2 players they wouldn't be able to otherwise.

 

Yours is the type of ignorant comment that...well ..makes you ignorant.

If Henrik Sedin was exposed I'd take him If Fleury is available from the Pens. If the Pens manage to move Fleury before the expansion draft my choice from Vancouver would be offering Miller a deal. Miller declines and Henrik is available I'd take him.

 

Vegas does have to hit a percentage of the cap (60%) with the expansion draft and still make the cap floor before the start of the season. Meaning it's likely they'll be looking for some higher contracts that aren't long term in the expansion draft. What 2 extra forwards do we need to protect? Gaunce? Highly unlikely he'd be taken if Sbisa is available. Dorsett? We've gotten along without him most of the season if they want a tough guy. Hansen was moved so we wouldn't be losing a forward of real value.

 

It would be an absolute insult to the Sedins to even ask them to waive to save the likes of Gaunce and Dorsett. There's the true ignorance of the idea.

[Art Vandelay]

46 minutes ago, Team Bagues said:

Yeah, I know. At present he works, and fits.

I just have a hard time seeing him on a good team, as we'd have better top 6 guys.

But who knows, guys can adjust.

I've never equated penalty minutes to d-zone coverage; it's mostly just been the eye-test when watching games.

Oh Salo, how we've missed thee!!!!

 

I think I was more saying he doesn't take penalties than saying he is good in his own end. It's a good point about him being on a good teams top 6. Depends on the other players though really. 

[oldnews]

Evidently any wannabee can publish for the Score.

Get your submissions in - anything goes.