mll Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 1 minute ago, Ossi Vaananen said: I think if Biega is exposed as a F or a D, Vegas will likely look past him onto anyone else who is available. This could however be the basis for a trade heading into the expansion draft. I'm thinking after the season for a team that doesn't have the required 2 F/ 1 D exposed. Move Beiga for a pick prior to the draft in that case. Still a headscratcher. Canucks have 2Ds that meet the requirements but no Fs right now. The players have to be under contract. It allows them flexibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaudette Celly Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 If nothing else, good to see that they are wrangling around in preparation for the draft. Would expect they really do not want to lose Sbisa or Guance without at least attempting something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 19 minutes ago, Warhippy said: Actually...it's not a bad idea if they can pull it off. It would still leave Sbisa exposed on the back end but almost ensure our forwards were expansion free. If true, it guarantees Sbisa as our exposed D doesn't it? Are there some specific rules out there for exposing guys in a certain position? It seems odd, most of his games were as a D so why would a few at F make a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where's Wellwood Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, mll said: They need 2Fs that are under contract for next season and who have played the 40/70 games. Right now they have none. Dorsett might not qualify because he missed too many games. So they need to get 2 Fs who have played the minimum games under contract by expansion draft. Megna and Skille are UFA and they might not want to bring them back. Boucher and Shore are RFAs but don't have the minimum games. So it leaves to sign 2 between Cramarossa, Chaput and Gaunce (all three RFAs) by the expansion draft. They might not want to bring back Cramarossa (apparently he was claimed to replace injured Skille and not recall someone from Utica). Chaput has arbitration rights - so if he elects arbitration he won't be signed on time. I think Dorsett's long term injury disqualifies him from selection. it should be fairly easy to get at least one of Megna, Skille, Cramarossa, or Chaput to sign in addition to Gaunce. Re-signing Biega and Bachman last year for expansion draft purposes went just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 1 minute ago, mll said: Canucks have 2Ds that meet the requirements but no Fs right now. The players have to be under contract. It allows them flexibility. We should be able to pretty easily tho. Crammer, Boucher and Chaput would be foolish to turn down contract extensions. I'm sure 2/3 would jump at a guaranteed 800k for next year. Plus Dorsett might be eligible if he gets cleared soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where'd Luongo? Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Edler is gone next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Just now, Where's Wellwood said: I think Dorsett's long term injury disqualifies him from selection. it should be fairly easy to get at least one of Megna, Skille, Cramarossa, or Chaput to sign in addition to Gaunce. Re-signing Biega and Bachman last year for expansion draft purposes went just fine. Signing Skille takes up a contract spot and if Vegas doesn't select him then he is a Canuck (or a Comet) for next season. Gaunce's agent could drag it out and ask for a one-way or a multi-year deal. It just allows more flexibility. Also who knows maybe a team needs a D or a F to expose and the Canucks could get a draft pick in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 8 minutes ago, S'all Good Man said: If true, it guarantees Sbisa as our exposed D doesn't it? Are there some specific rules out there for exposing guys in a certain position? It seems odd, most of his games were as a D so why would a few at F make a difference? Exposing players doesn't really mean much. It's about protection Canucks can protect 7F/3D/1G Everyone else that is not age exempt is technically exposed. It's not like we chose which player gets exposed, all players not protected are exposed The only reason canucks would make Beiga a F is because Dorsett is hurt and under LTRI which makes him exempt, And rules state that we need two Forwards who've played over 40+ games and are under contract for the 17-18 season, The other option would be to sign Skille, Megna, Chaput for a one year extension so they meet that guideline. It really has nothing to do with which players can't be claimed it's just to meet expansion draft guidelines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 I like how much of a heat seeking missile Biega is. He will be missed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tre Mac Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 4 minutes ago, Where'd Luongo? said: Edler is gone next season. Don't tease me hehe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: I like how much of a heat seeking missile Biega is. He will be missed. He won't get claimed, Sbisa or Gaunce will get chose long gone before Beiga Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where'd Luongo? Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Just now, Tre Mac said: Don't tease me hehe I just can't see a situation where he stays. Why would JB ever get rid of Sbisa or GUD to keep Edler? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 9 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said: He won't get claimed, Sbisa or Gaunce will get chose long gone before Beiga Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 what is the penalty for not offering up enough players? I actually think Miller gets signed by Vegas. Can anyone name 2 better goalies available? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Where'd Luongo? Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 1 minute ago, lmm said: what is the penalty for not offering up enough players? Everyone on your roster is eligible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmm Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Just now, Where'd Luongo? said: Everyone on your roster is eligible. I meant 40/70 two Fs and 1 D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckinEdm Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 how does this even matter? I thought that you needed to expose everyone but the protected list with a minimum amount of players exposed (2F,1D,1G). We have this covered unless we are trading one of Horvat, Sutter, Sedins, Eriksson, Granlund, Guance, Dorsett or Baertschi without picking up another expansion player. Protected Players G-Mark D-Edler D-Tanev D-Gud F-Horvat F-Sedin F-Sedin F-Sutter F-Eriksson F-Granlund F-Baer Exposed players G-Bachman D-Sbisa D-Biega F-Gaunce F-Dorsett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beni Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 29 minutes ago, winthecup said: have to protect players with no trade clauses I believe no move clauses only. If it would work to keep Gaunce that would be awesome Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 It's purely a meet guidelines move Forwards 2 under contract in 2017-18, AND played in 40 or more NHL games last season, OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the last two seasons Defense 1 under contract in 2017-18, AND played in 40 or more NHL games last season, OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the last two seasons Goalies 1 under contract in 2017-18, OR who’s contract is expiring & is an RFA in 2017-18 Gaunce is the only forward we have in that criteria to meet the forward requirement, Dorsett is LTIR so he becomes exempt. That leaves canucks with 2 options Sign a forward to an extension (megna, Chaput, Skillet) or, qualify Biega as a forward It has nothing to do with who will be protected, and it doesn't change that one of the following will still be claimed at the draft: Gaunce, Sbisa, Larsen, Biega, Skilled,Chaput Megna, Miller, Rodin, Boucher, Pedan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silky mitts Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Lmao wish I could see the video of them trying to convince biega is a forward for the draft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.