FrostyWinnipeg Posted March 11, 2016 Report Share Posted March 11, 2016 http://selanne.com/ban-dopers-for-life/ What's interesting is that Teemu has some insight into who is playing in the Oct. alumni game. Brandon 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 11, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2016 That lawyer is 2 for 2 when it comes to getting Kane's out of trouble! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 I thought the same thing. Might have to leave Comrie exposed... if it came down to Comrie or Petan, who do you expose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Can the expansion team take players who aren't in the NHL? I find it hard to believe the other GMs would allow prospects to be up for grabs. Also, what happens to guys with no movement clauses? Is their team forced to protect them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 It really depends on the rules the NHL agrees on in the expansion draft. I could see the possibility of prospects being opened up. Team gets to protect x prospects or x prospects and players combined. The NMC and NTC are interesting scenarios. I think it would depend on the language in the standard player contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 These were the rules of the last expansion draft. NMC and NTC were not a thing back then, so no precedent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_NHL_Expansion_Draft Quote 26 of the 28 teams existing in the league at the time of the draft were each allowed to protect either one goaltender, five defensemen, and nine forwards or two goaltenders, three defensemen, and seven forwards. The Atlanta Thrashers and Nashville Predators had their entire rosters protected, as they were the two newest franchises in the league, only being in existence for one and two years respectively. For teams protecting only one goaltender, there was no experience requirement for those left unprotected. For teams protecting two goaltenders, each goaltender left unprotected must have appeared in either 10 NHL games in the 1999–2000 season or 25 games in the 1998–99 season and 1999–2000 seasons combined. A goaltender had to be in net for at least 31 minutes in each game for the game to be counted against these totals. At least one defenceman left unprotected by each team had to have appeared in at least 40 games in the 1999–2000 season or 70 games in the 1998–99 season and 1999–2000 seasons combined. At least two forwards left unprotected by each team had to have met the same requirements. 52 players were chosen in the draft, two from each participating franchise. Only one goaltender or one defenseman could be selected from each franchise. Both the Blue Jackets and the Wild were to use their first 24 selections on three goaltenders, eight defensemen, and thirteen forwards. The final two picks for each team could be any position. Edit: Found this rule as well which would imply prospects were not available last time: Quote Players on entry-level contracts are automatically exempt, and every existing team will have exactly two players selected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 If they keep ELC exempt that helps a lot. Part of it depends on when they do the draft or when this team enters. Surely they wont be awarding Vegas for 2016/2017. It would have to be 2017/2018. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrostyWinnipeg Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said: I thought the same thing. Might have to leave Comrie exposed... if it came down to Comrie or Petan, who do you expose? I doubt expansion teams would want Comrie who has yet to play a single game in NHL. They would want vets or at least I would. You build your team starting with the goalie yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 I doubt very much that players with ELCs will be available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 2 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said: I doubt expansion teams would want Comrie who has yet to play a single game in NHL. They would want vets or at least I would. You build your team starting with the goalie yes? I guess it depends on what we have as far as exposed players. If they have two veterans and we protect all our good players but Comrie is an option they might choose him. If the draft is summer 2017, I imagine Pavs is gone. Would be nice if it was this summer. Then we could leave Pavs unprotected. It would also protect Morrissey. Hopefully they allow ELC's to be protected. Then I think we're ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrostyWinnipeg Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Yeah for sure Pavs/Stuart be up for grabs in 2017 but they also be at end of their contracts here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 http://www.tsn.ca/nhl-presents-potential-expansion-draft-plans-1.454239 Quote The NHL presented its plans for a potential expansion draft to GMs on Wednesday morning. Essentially, teams would risk losing one player under a one-team expansion and a pair in a two-team scenario. Teams under the current plan could protect seven forwards, three defencemen and one goaltender or eight skaters and a goaltender. First- and second-year pros in any league are automatically exempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrostyWinnipeg Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 9 minutes ago, Rich said: The NHL presented its plans for a potential expansion draft to GMs on Wednesday morning. Essentially, teams would risk losing one player under a one-team expansion and a pair in a two-team scenario. Teams under the current plan could protect seven forwards, three defencemen and one goaltender or eight skaters and a goaltender. First- and second-year pros in any league are automatically exempt. Too bad Jets v1 not get that. Ducky 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Stuart's deal doesn't end until 2018. If the draft happened next year it would only be one team. Comrie, Morrissey and Lemieux would be exempt??? For me... The 3 D would have to be Buff, Trouba and Myers. Goalie would have to be Hellebuyck. Scheif, Ehlers, Dano, Copp, Armia, Wheeler, Little and Lowry are eight forwards. Who do we leave unprotected? Lowry? Little? Copp? Teams under the current plan could protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goaltender or eight skaters and a goaltender. I don't get the bolded. Is it 10 players and a goalie or 8 and a goalie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Based on the last expansion rules, the overall number of players protected goes down if you protect 2 goalies. So I'm guessing it should read 8 skaters with 2 goalies. Atomic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Teams under the current plan could protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goaltender or eight skaters and a goaltender. Hmmm that's a bit weird. So if you wanted to protect more than 3 D, you could only protect 9 players total. If you only protect 3 D, then you can protect 11 total. I imagine Jets would protect 7 forwards (Scheif, Wheeler, Little, Lowry, Dano, Armia, Perreault), 3 D (Buff, Trouba, Myers) and Helle. 1st/2nd year player exemptions protects Petan, Ehlers, Copp, Connor, Lemieux. If I understand correctly. Of the remaining Jets, we might not lose anyone too substantial. With 29 other teams, the Jets left overs wouldn't be too great. However, next summer, Morrissey and Petan would be going into their 3rd season so are they no longer exempt? Actually, Ehlers would be too, so would Copp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 (edited) I forgot about Ehlers and Copp. Perreault would have to be re-signed to protect. Let's hope the draft isn't in 2018. Edited March 16, 2016 by Ducky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Ducky said: I forgot about Ehlers and Copp. Perreault would have to be re-signed to protect. Let's hope the draft isn't in 2018. Depends how they see it. This year is Ehlers/Copp (and Morrissey) first year as a pro. So next season is year two. If the draft is summer 2017, are they "2nd year players" or are they third year players? Technically they are in between years. If they are third year players, then you *have* to protect Ehlers and Morrissey. You might gamble that Copp isnt selected... Edited March 16, 2016 by The Unknown Poster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ducky Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 they would be considered 2nd year players wouldn't they? Atomic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Interesting way of looking at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted March 16, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 I think expansion draft should be slanted to protect existing teams. I know there is always the desire to create a competitive expansion team but why? If they cant create popular support in the first five years, then they shouldnt be there. Plenty of teams suck every year. An expansion team has the same opportunity to draft and sign free agents as everyone else and get better in 5-6 years. In fact, they are probably awarded the #1 draft pick in Year One anyway so an even better chance, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted March 16, 2016 Report Share Posted March 16, 2016 Teams will leave bad contracts exposed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iso_55 Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 How can the Oilers be so bad for so long? Getting the very first round pick for multiple years & they still can't win. Now the NHL GMs want to bring in a rule so shitty teams like the Oilers who never seem to improve can't keep stockpiling the first pick in the Draft every year. Connor McDavid has shown flashes of brilliance this year & has had injury issues but one thing is clear & it was discussed last season. McDavid, Hall & all the other high draft pick studs on that team have no idea of what it takes to win in the NHL. Instead, McDavid is learning how to lose in Edmonton. Ducky and The Unknown Poster 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted March 17, 2016 Report Share Posted March 17, 2016 19 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said: I think expansion draft should be slanted to protect existing teams. I know there is always the desire to create a competitive expansion team but why? If they cant create popular support in the first five years, then they shouldnt be there. Plenty of teams suck every year. An expansion team has the same opportunity to draft and sign free agents as everyone else and get better in 5-6 years. In fact, they are probably awarded the #1 draft pick in Year One anyway so an even better chance, It will be slanted towards protecting existing teams. As the LeBrun tweet above said, teams will probably lose a 4/5 D or 6/7 F. That is protecting the existing teams because it sure as hell isn't doing the expansion team any favours. Imagine picking a team and having to use Mark Stuart on your first line or Burmistrov as your number one center. Conversely, how much does losing one of those players hurt the Jets? Not that much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts