Seattle Expansion Draft - Who do the Canucks protect?

[gong_8]

As long as they don't do what some of the other teams did for Las Vegas like trade a first round pick or a pick with a bad contract.  In the end we are going to lose one player.

[HockeyHarry]

It’ll be funny Seattle starts with an NHL walkout.

hopefully Canucks are a winning team before that and get a high draft pick in the walkout lottery.

Pen got Crosby , but the Ducks almost lucked out they got 2nd overall.

Edited December 5, 2018 by HockeyHarry

[Toyotasfan]

I hope Benning is already planning his protection list . Maybe it’s better Joulevi isn’t called up this year if it means he’s not eligible to be picked.

[FireGillis]

54 minutes ago, Toyotasfan said:

I hope Benning is already planning his protection list . Maybe it’s better Joulevi isn’t called up this year if it means he’s not eligible to be picked.

AHL counts as pro hockey, so leaving him there doesn't affect his expansion status.

[MattJVD]

20 hours ago, dm_ranger said:

Before the 2021 season, which means anyone not on a professional contract now will be safe.  Hughes is safe the other 4 are not.

Joulevi, Demko, Dahlen, and Lind ARE on professional contracts. The "pro" eligibility slides if the player is 19 or younger on Dec 31 of that year (Why Nylander's year in the AHL didn't count last time). All of these players are 20 or older now, so this year in the AHL counts as a "pro" year. If Lind didn't turn 20 until January, this season would not count. 

 

[canuck2288]

Expose our coaching staff

[canuck2288]

10 hours ago, HockeyHarry said:

It’ll be funny Seattle starts with an NHL walkout.

hopefully Canucks are a winning team before that and get a high draft pick in the walkout lottery.

Pen got Crosby , but the Ducks almost lucked out they got 2nd overall.

Will be a lockout not a walkout 

 

billionares run the show not the millionaires 

 

 

 

 

[TheGuardian_]

One really big question,

 

What happens if the 2020/2021 season is cancelled due to another labour disruption?

 

Seattle wanted to join next year, really wanted to.

 

I think that they delayed it one year indicates a probable labour dispute. Combine that with numerous player contracts that minimize salary (loss) and/or increase bonus payments (July 1, before deadline) for that year show a great possibility.

 

There are many important issues for the players, Olympics, Euro games, escrow, FA issues, contract length, maybe even contract structures and revised draft rules.

 

IF the 2020/2021 season is dissolved how will that impact Seattle expansion? I am sure it will be clear like mud until just before so Seattle can take advantage of mistakes.  

Edited December 7, 2018 by TheGuardian_

[TheGuardian_]

On ‎12‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 8:48 AM, HockeyHarry said:

It’ll be funny Seattle starts with an NHL walkout.

hopefully Canucks are a winning team before that and get a high draft pick in the walkout lottery.

Pen got Crosby , but the Ducks almost lucked out they got 2nd overall.

Wrong year, new CBA will be done before May 2021.

And hopefully the Canucks have one more year of training kids to play and get another top 7 pick. IF there is a labour dispute for that year, previous years standings are used for the draft. If they revise the draft to do what it was supposed to do they might revert to 2014 rules with some qualifier exceptions, like multiple seasons at the bottom of the standings.

[theo5789]

Honestly I wouldn't be worried about the expansion. I mean we should plan for it, but not let it dictate the direction of the team (make Hughes not play pro this year, etc). If we have too many good players that we might lose our 8th best forward or 4th best dman, then so be it. It also would mean our team is in a position that we are good enough to actually lose a decent player, which to me is a positive sign for our rebuild. We shouldn't be in fear of losing anyone. Vegas capitalized on this fear and were able to make many favourable deals that in the end bit those teams in the rear more so than benefitting them by being to protect more guys. I believe Columbus made a deal, only to make sure they picked Karlsson (or other options as well I believe) and look how that worked out. Florida traded Reilly Smith and let them pick up Marchessault, look how that worked out. And this list goes on.

 

Just let them pick whoever and move on, so even if they do end up taking a decent player from us, at least it's one player versus potentially a good player and other assets on top of that.

[Guest]

The main issue here is that we stand to lose a really good dman if we sign Hughes to play 7 or 8 games for us when his season finishes.  

 

Juolevi, Brisebois and Chatfield will all be eligible to be drafted.

[theo5789]

2 hours ago, VancouverHabitant said:

The main issue here is that we stand to lose a really good dman if we sign Hughes to play 7 or 8 games for us when his season finishes.  

 

Juolevi, Brisebois and Chatfield will all be eligible to be drafted.

We will still have Rathbone, Woo, plus whoever we draft or sign in the next couple of years. I like Brisebois and Chatfield, but I'm not going to lose any sleep if they get taken in the expansion at this point. We will see where they are at in a couple more seasons.

 

There's always the option to leave someone exposed that would be hard for them to pass on which effectively protects everyone else. Not sure who that would be just yet.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, theo5789 said:

We will still have Rathbone, Woo, plus whoever we draft or sign in the next couple of years. I like Brisebois and Chatfield, but I'm not going to lose any sleep if they get taken in the expansion at this point. We will see where they are at in a couple more seasons.

 

There's always the option to leave someone exposed that would be hard for them to pass on which effectively protects everyone else. Not sure who that would be just yet.

Right, but Juolevi might be the odd man out then. 

 

Hughes, Tanev, Hutton, Stecher, Juolevi... which 3 do you want to protect? 

[theo5789]

3 minutes ago, VancouverHabitant said:

Right, but Juolevi might be the odd man out then. 

 

Hughes, Tanev, Hutton, Stecher, Juolevi... which 3 do you want to protect? 

Hughes, Juolevi for sure. We will have to see how players progress by the expansion for the 3rd player. I don't think I'll be worried losing any of Tanev, Hutton or Stecher at this point and they will only be older by then.

[FedorFedorov]

Let Pettersson go to Seattle if green is still coach 

[IBatch]

On 12/5/2018 at 12:01 PM, Toyotasfan said:

I hope Benning is already planning his protection list . Maybe it’s better Joulevi isn’t called up this year if it means he’s not eligible to be picked.

Agreed, same with signing Hughes and giving him games to burn his first year, but I’d forgive that given what he did for Boeser etc, and to be honest I can’t wait to see him in uniform.  If things go as they are supposed to, the Canucks could lose a lot more than a Sbisa this time around, I remember how many CDCers were freaking out over losing Gaunce, where other teams were up against the wall and let guys that would play on our first line right now go (not talking about Karlsson, no way CLB exposes him if they thought he’d go on and score forty plus goals).  Florida let a thirty goal scorer go because he was undersized and they had other assets they believed were better,  Theodore is at least a comparable or better for OJ too.   We are deluded ourselves into thinking they’d pick LE, by then he might not even be on the team, and Vegas passed on those anchor types in favour for guys that were decent and close to finishing their contracts (Neal, Perron etc).  And they for Fluery...I sure bet PIT wishes they traded Murray for something when his stock was high and kept MAF, five shutouts in NOV, first star of the month etc.  

 

Hes not even that old, younger than Rinne by a couple years and NSH is still kicking that can hoping for a cup.   And his cap hit is palatable too.  Weird.  Vancouver might lose a Gaudette, Goldobin type, and that’s a lot better than a Gaunce...the CDC is going to implode...at least so far we don’t have any NMC to deal with and NTC dont count.

[theo5789]

11 minutes ago, IBatch said:

Agreed, same with signing Hughes and giving him games to burn his first year, but I’d forgive that given what he did for Boeser etc, and to be honest I can’t wait to see him in uniform.  If things go as they are supposed to, the Canucks could lose a lot more than a Sbisa this time around, I remember how many CDCers were freaking out over losing Gaunce, where other teams were up against the wall and let guys that would play on our first line right now go (not talking about Karlsson, no way CLB exposes him if they thought he’d go on and score forty plus goals).  Florida let a thirty goal scorer go because he was undersized and they had other assets they believed were better,  Theodore is at least a comparable or better for OJ too.   We are deluded ourselves into thinking they’d pick LE, by then he might not even be on the team, and Vegas passed on those anchor types in favour for guys that were decent and close to finishing their contracts (Neal, Perron etc).  And they for Fluery...I sure bet PIT wishes they traded Murray for something when his stock was high and kept MAF, five shutouts in NOV, first star of the month etc.  

 

Hes not even that old, younger than Rinne by a couple years and NSH is still kicking that can hoping for a cup.   And his cap hit is palatable too.  Weird.  Vancouver might lose a Gaudette, Goldobin type, and that’s a lot better than a Gaunce...the CDC is going to implode...at least so far we don’t have any NMC to deal with and NTC dont count.

I don't think we have enough depth to worry about losing a guy like Gaudette unless there are some big surprises in the next couple of years (and that's not a bad thing). If Goldobin is the worst case scenario, I'm fine with that, but I have a suspicion that he might be gone by then and perhaps someone like Dahlen will have taken over already who I would probably protect.

[IBatch]

6 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said:

One really big question,

 

What happens if the 2020/2021 season is cancelled due to another labour disruption?

 

Seattle wanted to join next year, really wanted to.

 

I think that they delayed it one year indicates a probable labour dispute. Combine that with numerous player contracts that minimize salary (loss) and/or increase bonus payments (July 1, before deadline) for that year show a great possibility.

 

There are many important issues for the players, Olympics, Euro games, escrow, FA issues, contract length, maybe even contract structures and revised draft rules.

 

IF the 2020/2021 season is dissolved how will that impact Seattle expansion? I am sure it will clear like mud until just before so Seattle can take advantage of mistakes.  

I was thinking the same thing.  If ever there was a time that the players could put the league over a barrel again this is it.  They still don’t acknowledge that they want to work under cap, Ferh has been both diplomatic and clear on this point, almsot like he’s making sure that the media and the league knows this.   I also wonder if the league itself timed it for their own benefit, to show a vote of confidence that there will be no labour dispute and its business as usual.

 

 

The cap works for what its intended to do for the LEAGUE, and approximately 20% of the union.   The bulk of the guys get their pay trimmed mostly in how many years they can expect employment.  The wily vet demographic no longer gets another contract after their third one, or if they do it’s for peanuts and one year deals - see Vanek, 50 pts and 2 million last year etc, and he’s the lucky one, see Hartnell and a whole pile of others who are a tier down barely make it into their 30.    Personally I think this is something the majority of the NHLPA holds against the cap in general and at some point might go to task again over it.  Can’t be fun for the stars either, knowing that their paycheques cut into their peers longevity and the clubs ability to ice a winner.  Tavares cashed out on what TO is promoting as a team friendly deal using SJ 13 million offer etc...well funny thing is SJ taxes are higher and the bottom line isn’t far off,  plus his endorsement deals are better in the hockey capital too.  Once Mathews and Marner signs they will be in tight to make the rest work...Horvat makes the same as Messier did when he was here, not saying pre-cap was good because it wasn’t, personally I think a hybrid would help with this a lot, allow each team a franchise player or dollar amount that doesn’t count towards the cap, with the same monetary restrictions (say 15% of the total cap or something, 20% is too much).

[J.I.A.H.N]

The Trainer...…..that guy is the hardest working guy we got!

Edited December 7, 2018 by janisahockeynut

[TheGuardian_]

17 hours ago, IBatch said:

I was thinking the same thing.  If ever there was a time that the players could put the league over a barrel again this is it.  They still don’t acknowledge that they want to work under cap, Ferh has been both diplomatic and clear on this point, almsot like he’s making sure that the media and the league knows this.   I also wonder if the league itself timed it for their own benefit, to show a vote of confidence that there will be no labour dispute and its business as usual.

 

 

The cap works for what its intended to do for the LEAGUE, and approximately 20% of the union.   The bulk of the guys get their pay trimmed mostly in how many years they can expect employment.  The wily vet demographic no longer gets another contract after their third one, or if they do it’s for peanuts and one year deals - see Vanek, 50 pts and 2 million last year etc, and he’s the lucky one, see Hartnell and a whole pile of others who are a tier down barely make it into their 30.    Personally I think this is something the majority of the NHLPA holds against the cap in general and at some point might go to task again over it.  Can’t be fun for the stars either, knowing that their paycheques cut into their peers longevity and the clubs ability to ice a winner.  Tavares cashed out on what TO is promoting as a team friendly deal using SJ 13 million offer etc...well funny thing is SJ taxes are higher and the bottom line isn’t far off,  plus his endorsement deals are better in the hockey capital too.  Once Mathews and Marner signs they will be in tight to make the rest work...Horvat makes the same as Messier did when he was here, not saying pre-cap was good because it wasn’t, personally I think a hybrid would help with this a lot, allow each team a franchise player or dollar amount that doesn’t count towards the cap, with the same monetary restrictions (say 15% of the total cap or something, 20% is too much).

I think this announcement of the expansion date just guaranteed the league will act first to insure Seattle starts on time with a number of years without interruption. IMO the league presses really hard for the new CBA and cuts the season short or down right off the bat when a lot of FA's are still looking for work.

 

Next September will tell, I am sure the NHL will elect to end the CBA, the side of the negotiations that moves first usually has an advantage at least in perception. They will be side negotiating from a position of strength.