Nicklas Bo Hunter Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 NYI are going to lose a great young forward in the expansion draft. Vancouver might be able to take advantage. To Van: Kiefer Bellows To NYI: 2022 2nd round pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 Let me understand. Instead of just losing him in the draft they would lose him in a trade and still have to lose someone else in the draft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
204CanucksFan Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 2 minutes ago, goalie13 said: Let me understand. Instead of just losing him in the draft they would lose him in a trade and still have to lose someone else in the draft? The question every GM has to ask themselves in all of these exploiting the expansion draft scenarios is 'Do I want to lose a good player for nothing or do I want to lose a good player I'm going to lose anyway for some kind of return and then lose a mediocre, replacement level player for nothing?' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewbieCanuckFan Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 10 minutes ago, goalie13 said: Let me understand. Instead of just losing him in the draft they would lose him in a trade and still have to lose someone else in the draft? Cut out the middle man and have the Islanders just offer a 2nd round pick to Seattle to select a prospect they can afford to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 1 hour ago, 204CanucksFan said: The question every GM has to ask themselves in all of these exploiting the expansion draft scenarios is 'Do I want to lose a good player for nothing or do I want to lose a good player I'm going to lose anyway for some kind of return and then lose a mediocre, replacement level player for nothing?' I would think most teams will have to expose more than one good player. And then, the scenario still only works if the team trading for said player doesn't have enough good players to protect, otherwise they are losing a good player too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanuck Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 I remember when people were irate when Sbisa was claimed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c00kies Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 We don't have anyone that crazy to worry about, which is nice. However, I'm not that high on Bellows, and would rather keep the pick since we lost quite a few last draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzipunch Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 2 hours ago, goalie13 said: Let me understand. Instead of just losing him in the draft they would lose him in a trade and still have to lose someone else in the draft? So why did nashville trade arvidsson then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 Just now, Bertuzzipunch said: So why did nashville trade arvidsson then? He's 28, had some injury troubles. Maybe trying to get value for him while they can? Maybe admitting they aren't good enough to contend and are trying to retool without going full tank? Could be so many reasons. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzipunch Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 15 minutes ago, goalie13 said: He's 28, had some injury troubles. Maybe trying to get value for him while they can? Maybe admitting they aren't good enough to contend and are trying to retool without going full tank? Could be so many reasons. So nothing to do with the expansion draft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 Just now, Bertuzzipunch said: So nothing to do with the expansion draft? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe a combination of factors. I didn't ask Poile, so I don't know for sure. I just don't see the whole concept behind trading a "great young forward" away for peanuts just to avoid losing him in the draft when they will still have to lose someone in the draft. I tend to agree with @NewbieCanuckFan's idea of tossing Seattle a pick (or other player) to avoid taking certain players. We saw that happen with Vegas, although GMs may be shy to do that again. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthWestNuck Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 Trading a player they would lose in a ED situation IS possible, however harder to accomplish then you’d think. Basically you would have to trade back someone who is not as good as the player you’re getting, but better then the next best player exposed on the team. Then you improve slightly, they lose the guy they were expecting to lose anyway, their team doesn’t change, and they get a pick out of it. ex. Carolina expects to lose Jake Bean. We trade them Juolevi and a 3rd for Bean. Juolevi, now being the best available player on Carolina, gets picked up by Seattle. Carolina roster is still same as expected after ED plus they walk away with an extra 3rd. We upgrade slightly on D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 3 hours ago, 204CanucksFan said: The question every GM has to ask themselves in all of these exploiting the expansion draft scenarios is 'Do I want to lose a good player for nothing or do I want to lose a good player I'm going to lose anyway for some kind of return and then lose a mediocre, replacement level player for nothing?' it's not that simple though you have to look at the next guys down - that they are likely to lose if they made this move to avoid losing Bellows - and then calculate the difference. And I think you're not looking at the larger picture - because they are also at risk of losing a very good defenseman - ie how would trading Bellows protect them from potentially losing a player like Mayfield? I'd prefer to target a young RHD on a great contract - something this team needs more - but still don't think it would be an easy - or cheap - task to pry a Mayfield out of there. Sometimes it's better to simply bite the bullet on losing one player than making a bunch of pre-emptive deals for picks and risking losing even more value in the process - on the underpayments on those assets. Another thing to consider - they are in relatively 'win now' mode - so trading back for picks might not exactly interest them - they may be more likely to send youth/picks/alternative assets to Seattle to protect their own roster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzipunch Posted July 6, 2021 Share Posted July 6, 2021 1 hour ago, goalie13 said: Maybe, maybe not. Maybe a combination of factors. I didn't ask Poile, so I don't know for sure. I just don't see the whole concept behind trading a "great young forward" away for peanuts just to avoid losing him in the draft when they will still have to lose someone in the draft. I tend to agree with @NewbieCanuckFan's idea of tossing Seattle a pick (or other player) to avoid taking certain players. We saw that happen with Vegas, although GMs may be shy to do that again. Well poline said it was because of the ED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTramFan Posted July 7, 2021 Share Posted July 7, 2021 NYIs seem much more likely to lose either Leddy or Mayfield to Seattle (whichever of the two they don't protect)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flickyoursedin Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 Bellows is no home run type prospect barely being able to play in the NHL at the moment at 23 years old. We have enough prospects that project like him at the moment that I’d rather not create too big of a log jam with what we have already. I’d honestly rather have the 2nd round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzipunch Posted July 8, 2021 Share Posted July 8, 2021 On 7/6/2021 at 5:44 PM, BigTramFan said: NYIs seem much more likely to lose either Leddy or Mayfield to Seattle (whichever of the two they don't protect)... Why would they want leddy? 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