Expansion Draft Angst - Why?

[JM_]

1 minute ago, NUCKER67 said:

 My hope is that SEA doesn't end up with one of our goalies.  

the flip side of that is we have the complete book on him. Seattle may not want that, given how much we'll play them. 

[theo5789]

9 minutes ago, aGENT said:

I don't know, I think there's a fairly high chance we expose Myers personally. 

 

As for Pearson, in all likelihood we probably won't be able to afford to keep him by that point (or soon after) anyway, regardless of how much we might 'like' to. He's not likely here long term either way...

 

 

A couple of factors for Myers getting exposed. Does Tryamkin need to be protected? How will Rafferty look at the NHL level? And will we acquire anyone else that needs to be protected? Losing a top 4 RD would be a bit of a hit. We have Woo, but he could be a few years away. Tanev and Stecher may not be here. There's the option of moving Quinn to the right, but then with Tryamkin as well, that puts 5 lefties on defense. I like that we have the option, but I'm not so certain about it unless we are banking on him being a sacrificial exposure and assuming he would get taken.

 

If Myers does get taken and someone move on from LE. I think we could retain Pearson assuming he isn't looking for a massive payout. If he takes 4.5 for like 4 years or something, then that's very workable.

[aGENT]

29 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

A couple of factors for Myers getting exposed. Does Tryamkin need to be protected? How will Rafferty look at the NHL level? And will we acquire anyone else that needs to be protected? Losing a top 4 RD would be a bit of a hit. We have Woo, but he could be a few years away. Tanev and Stecher may not be here. There's the option of moving Quinn to the right, but then with Tryamkin as well, that puts 5 lefties on defense. I like that we have the option, but I'm not so certain about it unless we are banking on him being a sacrificial exposure and assuming he would get taken.

 

If Myers does get taken and someone move on from LE. I think we could retain Pearson assuming he isn't looking for a massive payout. If he takes 4.5 for like 4 years or something, then that's very workable.

If Tryamkin comes back, he'd need to be protected (assuming he's worth protecting when he gets back).

 

Yes of course exposing Myers assumes Tryamkin is back and showing well, Juolevi has gotten past his injuries and is worth protecting and Rafferty has come in and earned protection as well. (Plus likely that Woo has continued to show well.)  And/or that in the interim we've made other signings/trades that would warrant exposing Myers (watch Benning clear enough cap to nab Pietrangelo this summer  ).

 

Myers is certainly a capable 2nd pair D but he'll also be on the wrong side of 30 by that point and it's fairly easy to see that we might not require his services further and be able to put that $6m cap to better use. 

 

 

[LegionOfDoom]

And then dipietro emerges as a star in the league, we are fine at the position we got 2 great young goalies, also demko has a year and half to earn the net still, if he’s showing glimpses of being a star in the next year maybe canucks decide to run with him, markstroms will be entering his 31/32 season and if there is any promise shown from demko it’s a no brainer to protect him, like I seen above in benning we trust he seems to make the correct moves more often than not 

[oldnews]

I'd love to know how many people would have predicted that Sbisa would have been selected in the previous ED.

The answer would be very few people on these boards.

 

The pretense to attempt to assert - this far in advance - that Markstrom or Demko would not be selected = is pretty comical.  There are countlessly too many contingencies involved.

Edited January 25, 2020 by oldnews

[JM_]

1 hour ago, oldnews said:

I'd love to know how many people would have predicted that Sbisa would have been selected in the previous ED.

The answer would be very few people on these boards.

 

The pretense to attempt to assert - this far in advance - that Markstrom or Demko would not be selected = is pretty comical.  There are countlessly too many contingencies involved.

We just don't know what Seattles strategy will be. I really doubt they're counting on a cup final showing year 1. All the picks will be driven by the timescale they're looking  at, and if they're fine with picking top 4 for their first 2 or 3 years. If they go into it as if they are "tanking" then I can see them picking and trading for a lot of RFAs, and a few expensive veterans to meet the cap floor. If they want to be more competitive out of the gate, then they'll take more vets.  They also have free agency too to spend to the floor.

 

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, aGENT said:

If Tryamkin comes back, he'd need to be protected (assuming he's worth protecting when he gets back).

 

Yes of course exposing Myers assumes Tryamkin is back and showing well, Juolevi has gotten past his injuries and is worth protecting and Rafferty has come in and earned protection as well. (Plus likely that Woo has continued to show well.)  And/or that in the interim we've made other signings/trades that would warrant exposing Myers (watch Benning clear enough cap to nab Pietrangelo this summer  ).

 

Myers is certainly a capable 2nd pair D but he'll also be on the wrong side of 30 by that point and it's fairly easy to see that we might not require his services further and be able to put that $6m cap to better use. 

 

 

Rafferty hasn't earned that protection spot yet IMO, not until we have seen what he can do in the NHL. Will be interesting if they want to fork out Myers' bonus that is due on July 1st of that expansion year.

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Rafferty hasn't earned that protection spot yet IMO, not until we have seen what he can do in the NHL. Will be interesting if they want to fork out Myers' bonus that is due on July 1st of that expansion year.

Did I say he had?

[theo5789]

4 hours ago, aGENT said:

Rafferty has come in and earned protection as well.

 

15 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Did I say he had?

I don't know, did you?

[Gurn]

34 minutes ago, aGENT said:

Did I say he had?

 

17 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

 

I don't know, did you?

[aGENT]

27 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

 

I don't know, did you?

Reading comprehension...

4 hours ago, aGENT said:

 

Yes of course exposing Myers assumes Tryamkin is back and showing well, Juolevi has gotten past his injuries and is worth protecting and Rafferty has come in and earned protection as well.

 

[theo5789]

2 hours ago, aGENT said:

Reading comprehension...

 

My bad I misread.

[theo5789]

3 hours ago, gurn said:

 

[Rob_Zepp]

On 1/25/2020 at 7:36 AM, IBatch said:

AHL games count as well - im sure you know that.   This means OJ will meet the requirements and Rafferty will not (first and second year pros don't have to be protected - most third year ones do).   Hard to say exactly what Seattle will do - one strategy could be to load up on 4th defenseman, but I also think they will look at each team and pick the BPA once their roster mostly set (minimum requirements met).  The question is would they pass on Demko, who could make a great back-up with future starter potential given his age (25 by then), for a Stetcher like guy (who is definitely NOT a 4th defense man) take a flyer on a young winger like Lind?  At this point anyways and a lot could change in a year - Demko is definitely their best choice.   They can always trade assets later for picks/prospects or whatever too - Vegas did. 

 

Edit:  the point is Seattle isn't limited to taking 3 goalies - they have to take at least 3, and they will be looking at teams BPA as well as making the minimums - both for down the road as trade bait and to maximize value.   Don't think our forward group will interest them much - our D maybe - Demko absolutely. 

I don't think Demko will be on their radar as he will be protected by Vancouver.    

[IBatch]

17 hours ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I don't think Demko will be on their radar as he will be protected by Vancouver.    

That would be fine - then we'd likely have to pay to keep Markstrom (assuming Holtby isn't available) - you could be right we won't know until we see what Markstroms next contract is like - and if he's getting a NMC or not for the expansion draft.  It's probably not worth the worry (yet) - think I'm going to wait and be see what his and maybe even Demkos next contract looks like before worrying too much ...

[IBatch]

On 1/25/2020 at 7:11 PM, theo5789 said:

Rafferty hasn't earned that protection spot yet IMO, not until we have seen what he can do in the NHL. Will be interesting if they want to fork out Myers' bonus that is due on July 1st of that expansion year.

Will he even qualify though as first and second year pros are exempt?  Rafferty won't need protection anyways from how I read the rules - OJ yes for sure.  Same with Lind etc. 

[Rob_Zepp]

3 minutes ago, IBatch said:

That would be fine - then we'd likely have to pay to keep Markstrom (assuming Holtby isn't available) - you could be right we won't know until we see what Markstroms next contract is like - and if he's getting a NMC or not for the expansion draft.  It's probably not worth the worry (yet) - think I'm going to wait and be see what his and maybe even Demkos next contract looks like before worrying too much ...

Vancouver has it pretty good with timing of the draft and, in the case of goalies, age and likely contractual status of their two NHL tenders.   Time will obviously tell but this draft would hurt the organization a LOT more if it was two years further out.....as it is, the timing is just fine.

[theo5789]

1 hour ago, IBatch said:

Will he even qualify though as first and second year pros are exempt?  Rafferty won't need protection anyways from how I read the rules - OJ yes for sure.  Same with Lind etc. 

Capfriendly lists him as needing to be protected.

[aGENT]

2 hours ago, IBatch said:

Will he even qualify though as first and second year pros are exempt?  Rafferty won't need protection anyways from how I read the rules - OJ yes for sure.  Same with Lind etc. 

Next year will count as his 3rd pro year as soon as he plays a game in the AHL or NHL. If he's worth protecting, we'll need to use a spot on him.

[Rob_Zepp]

On 1/22/2020 at 10:52 AM, VegasCanuck said:

I had actually considered started a similar thread as you see in a lot of posts, people want Benning to make decisions now, based on what "could" happen in the expansion draft in summer of 2021.

 

When the expansion draft comes up. We will lose someone, but not too worried about that now. With the depth that we now have as an organization, we can always make a deal with Seattle, to flip them a 2nd rounder or something, in exchange for taking the player that we want them to take. We know that Benning is good at finding other solid prospects in later rounds, losing a 2nd round pick would be a good option to control who gets chosen.

 

For now, let's just enjoy the team that we have, and trust Benning to make it work in future, that we don't lose anyone that we need around for the long term.

THIS is a really good post.