Popular Post HKSR Posted June 17, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted June 17, 2021 Whaaaaaat?? https://thehockeywriters.com/blue-jackets-serious-looming-issue-with-expansion-draft/?fbclid=IwAR1MKKdEYUjpU3vhzpC0SNT1a1LFHe0oWR2Ia7WRgbFCqVShyraqvsCtHjQ I'm here when you need me CBJ... 2 8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 Doesn't seem to be an issue. CapFriendly shows them with 9 forwards under team control for next season who have the required number of games. They can only protect 7. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morrissex95 Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 the last player they'd take is Eriksson lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 We'll let you pick Jarmo: 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted June 17, 2021 Author Share Posted June 17, 2021 12 minutes ago, mll said: Doesn't seem to be an issue. CapFriendly shows them with 9 forwards under team control for next season who have the required number of games. They can only protect 7. Sounds like the problem is a team must expose a minimum of 2 forwards if they are protecting 7. CBJ protects: Atkinson, Nyquist, Domi, Jenner, Bjorkstrand, Roslovic, and Robinson as their 7. These guys are the outliers: - Grigorenko is off to Europe under contract so won't be available for exposure - Laine is an RFA - Stenlund is an RFA That's it. They have a problem for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mll Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 1 minute ago, HKSR said: Sounds like the problem is a team must expose a minimum of 2 forwards if they are protecting 7. CBJ protects: Atkinson, Nyquist, Domi, Jenner, Bjorkstrand, Roslovic, and Robinson as their 7. These guys are the outliers: - Grigorenko is off to Europe under contract so won't be available for exposure - Laine is an RFA - Stenlund is an RFA That's it. They have a problem for sure. Stenlund just got re-signed. Laine is their only RFA and he will be protected. Leaves 8 who meet the requirements and there's only 6 spots left with Laine protected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Blight Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 (edited) I don't think the writer of this article is any brighter than the Vancouver media. Under the caption "Who Are the Blue Jackets Likely to Protect?" he does not include Laine as he goes on to say "Technically, Laine does not need to be protected because he is not under contract for the 2021-22 season". He is correct in saying they don't have to protect Laine but Seattle is free to select him if they don't. Edited June 17, 2021 by Rick Blight 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
204CanucksFan Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Rick Blight said: I don't think the writer of this article is any brighter than the Vancouver media. Under the caption "Who Are the Blue Jackets Likely to Protect?" he does not included Laine as he goes on to say "Technically, Laine does not need to be protected because he is not under contract for the 2021-22 season". He is correct in saying they don't have to protect Laine but Seattle is free to select him if they don't. Exactly. It'd be like if Vancouver didn't protect Pettersson. RFA's still require protection because unlike UFA's the team still owns their rights even if they aren't under contract. Edited June 17, 2021 by 204CanucksFan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted June 17, 2021 Author Share Posted June 17, 2021 Just now, mll said: Stenlund just got re-signed. Laine is their only RFA and he will be protected. Leaves 8 who meet the requirements and there's only 6 spots left with Laine protected. Oh ok, didn't know Stenlund just got re-signed... I guess CBJ could very well lose a pretty good forward. I'm sure CBJ doesn't wanna lose any of these guys for nothing: Atkinson, Nyquist, Domi, Jenner, Bjorkstrand, Roslovic, Robinson 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted June 17, 2021 Author Share Posted June 17, 2021 4 minutes ago, mll said: Stenlund just got re-signed. Laine is their only RFA and he will be protected. Leaves 8 who meet the requirements and there's only 6 spots left with Laine protected. 4 minutes ago, Rick Blight said: I don't think the writer of this article is any brighter than the Vancouver media. Under the caption "Who Are the Blue Jackets Likely to Protect?" he does not included Laine as he goes on to say "Technically, Laine does not need to be protected because he is not under contract for the 2021-22 season". He is correct in saying they don't have to protect Laine but Seattle is free to select him if they don't. 1 minute ago, 204CanucksFan said: Exactly. It'd be like if Vancouver didn't protect Pettersson. RFA's still require protection because unlike UFA's the team still owns their rights even if theu aren't under contract. Stop making sense people! REMEMBER LOUI ERIKSSON SAYS HI! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhillipBlunt Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 Loui? You're on the way to Columbus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post HKSR Posted June 17, 2021 Author Popular Post Share Posted June 17, 2021 8 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said: Loui? You're on the way to Columbus. "What's a Columbus?" 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NHL'er Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 1 hour ago, Fanuck said: We'll let you pick Jarmo: Alternative pictures of each of the above: 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 I bet they leave Domi unprotected. He's not playing for 6 months minimum. But can you expose an inured player? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nuxfanabroad Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 3 hours ago, Rick Blight said: I don't think the writer of this article is any brighter than the Vancouver media. Under the caption "Who Are the Blue Jackets Likely to Protect?" he does not included Laine as he goes on to say "Technically, Laine does not need to be protected because he is not under contract for the 2021-22 season". He is correct in saying they don't have to protect Laine but Seattle is free to select him if they don't. Absolutely not the most brilliant pen in the study drawer! We all squandered 60-90 secs of precious life on this?! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EternalCanuckFan Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 3 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said: I bet they leave Domi unprotected. He's not playing for 6 months minimum. But can you expose an inured player? That's an interesting question. I don't see why not if there isn't a NMC in place although it seems like an issue the NHLPA would possibly have brought up. Still, it seems more risky for the drafting team than it is for the player being picked, and outside of a NMC, I can't recall other situations that would force a team to protect a player. Perhaps some may recall if VGK selected any players who were recovering from injuries and not expected to start the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 3 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said: I bet they leave Domi unprotected. He's not playing for 6 months minimum. But can you expose an inured player? Regardless, considering the Domi contract Seattle (without sweetener from CBJ) isn’t taking Domi. Domi and Drouin will be exposed, and neither will be selected, because of their contracts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM_ Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 41 minutes ago, Alflives said: Regardless, considering the Domi contract Seattle (without sweetener from CBJ) isn’t taking Domi. Domi and Drouin will be exposed, and neither will be selected, because of their contracts. Drouin for sure, I could see Seattle flipping Domi for a 2nd if they retain salary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kragar Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said: I bet they leave Domi unprotected. He's not playing for 6 months minimum. But can you expose an inured player? Not a legal document, so perhaps the article is incomplete, but this was the best thing found so far about injuries and the expansion draft 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 team's player exposure requirements unless approval is received from the NHL. Such players also may be deemed exempt from selection. https://www.nhl.com/news/seattle-kraken-2021-nhl-expansion-draft-rules-same-as-vegas-golden-knights-followed/c-302586918 Edit: found this later on, with some interesting info, giving insight into what happened with Vegas' draft, and some interesting perspectives: https://soundofhockey.com/2020/11/12/breaking-down-the-seattle-kraken-nhl-expansion-draft-rules/. A better read than the NHL.com one, and repeats the same injury rule above. Edited June 17, 2021 by Kragar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Western Red Posted June 18, 2021 Share Posted June 18, 2021 So the Stenlund signing makes this moot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now