The rules are set to come out on the 30th...................discuss.

Put me in the who really cares at this point category. I mean... Reality is we won't lose a player who the Jets want to be part of our future. We will lose a player but it's probably likely that it's 1 of the following... Lowry Dano Armia Burmistrov Copp. 

Ehlers. Connor. 2016 picks. Morrissey. Comrie De Leo Petan Lemieux are exempt.

You know Scheif Wheeler aren't going anywhere and neither is Buff or Trouba if signed. 

You know they will also protect hellebuyck 

Personally... we are going to lose a player that is more than likely easily replaceable. I'd suspect a guy like Armia needs to have a good year this coming season otherwise it's likely we won't protect him. 

 

It's so early. Who knows with possible trades and all this stuff. Potential ufa or rfa like stafford Burmi Perreault etc. Who knows what happens.  

Edited April 30, 20169 yr by Goalie

So, you don't care that we have to protect Myers, Buff and Enstrom?

 

Why would I.  I'm just a fan. It's not my job or concern on who they protect or don't.  Myers isn't a given and neither is enstrom. Trades can and probably will happen. It's April 30th. 

http://www.tsn.ca/talent/the-watercooler-all-quiet-on-the-expansion-front-1.485149

 

Not so fast...

 

Rumors of Carolina to Vegas tho. 

It behooves the NHL to get into Vegas before the NFL does.  If they want to be there as much as they seem to, they will do it ASAP.  And Carolina moving isnt a bad idea at all...gives Vegas a leg up over expansion.

Also, as far as expansion goes, keep in mind that nothing prevents a team from making a deal with the expansion franchise to *not* pick a player.  So if you have to leave Enstrom exposed, you trade another asset to the expansion team for future considerations (ie. dont pick Enstrom) and the expansion team gets to pick someone else off your team AND gets another asset.

The Carolina rumors remind me a lot of Atlanta before they moved.  A lot of whispers and rumours with NHL denials.  The only difference is Winnipeg was so gung ho that you had amateur detectives examining every little thing including tracking private aircraft routes to try and learn something.  If there were people in Vegas or Quebec as determined as Winnipeg was, I bet there is a lot more fire to the smoke.

Hurricanes want to sell.  The owner probably doesnt care if its to someone in Carolina or to move it.  Attendance is down.  Team has lost money for years.  The only issue is they have a lease agreement.  Well...those things are meant to be broken.  A few million year and there and a lease is bought out.

Although, it sounds like they have people in Vegas and Quebec willing to fork over the expansion money...in that case you dont move a team.  But the NHL REALLY wants to be in Portland where the NHL is secondary to their desire to bring in the NBA.  I doubt there is half a billion dollars ready in Portland.  So moving Carolina there might make more sense.

I'm pretty sure You mean Seattle and not Portland cuz Portland already has an NBA team. 

10 minutes ago, Goalie said:

I'm pretty sure You mean Seattle and not Portland cuz Portland already has an NBA team. 

Yes, Seattle.  Brainfart. 

Seattle council just denied a new arena tho so hard to say what happens there. The Carolina to Vegas thing makes sense, Gives Vegas a team that might not suck, they will still suck but it's better than having an expansion team, some nice pieces there in Carolina especially on the D side moving forward. It makes sense actually. I could see it happening for sure. 

Be too bad if Carolina moved, Seems like the support is there.

Too bad about the arena getting dumped on. Strange thing about Seattle is any new arena is with NBA in mind first and NHL second. The loss of the Supersonics must still be hurting. Still would be nice to beat the NBA into that town.

 

The support really isn't there in Carolina tho, they are losing money.. The attendance is down. I honestly don't care one way or the other about Carolina and it makes no difference to me if they stay in Carolina or move to  Vegas. I understand the reasoning if they were to move to Vegas tho. 

Carolina to Vegas could happen sooner than later, Carolina is losing money hand over fist with an owner that wants out, sound familiar, Seattle just shot down the NBA backed arena plans for downtown  Plus a relocation fee and arena ready to go, even up the conferences and this is a no brainer.

I think Vegas would largely be successful. 

Meanwhile in QC, their state of the art 18,000 seat arena sits empty. Makes you really feel lucky we got an NHL team  back. QC should be a no brainer... Yet the NHL STILL wants to go into  cities that are untried.

I would be ecstatic if a team moved to Vegas and there was no expansion draft...

Easier on the new owners too.

 

The NHL are kinda dropping the ball here with the expansion draft aren't they?

When are they going to let everyone know what the rules are for the draft? A day before the entry draft?????

found this

 

Teams can protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goalie

Players are required to be protected if their contract extends through the 2017-18 season

Teams CAN ask players with NMC to waive it for the expansion draft

"Players with two years of professional experience or less will be exempt from the process. Determining who that covers is based on the definition included in the collective bargaining agreement – meaning that 10 games played in the NHL at age 18 or 19 counts as a season, as does any American Hockey League or NHL season for players older than that."

 

 

 

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/nhl-teams-receiving-information-potential-expansion-draft/

Under these rules, sure looks like the Jets have to protect Stuart... and expose Trouba...  seems crazy.

Stu has an NTS not an NMC. Stu wouldn't be protected.

What I find interesting is the fact that the unprotected ahve to be signed to the 2017-2018 season...Staf and MP are not...

 

Everyone is saying Myers doesn't have an NMC so, he wold be left unprotected/traded.

2 hours ago, Ducky said:

found this

Teams can protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goalie

Geezus, that gives expansion teams an easy way to start.

Should be 11F, 5D and 2 goalies.

Let them pick up goalies from the minors.

That's what half a billion dollars buys you...

From the Globe & Mail:

The NHL’s 31st team, in Las Vegas, is expected to be greenlit at the board of governors meeting on June 22 and begin play to start the 2017-18 season. That’s a key concern for general managers of the existing 30 teams, as they could lose a key player in order to fill out the new team’s roster.

NHL commissioner Gary Bettman has pledged that any new expansion team will be given a more competitive roster than they have in the past.

Las Vegas will be required to draft one player from every existing team, including at minimum at each position: three goalies, nine defencemen and 14 forwards.

Some of the other parameters for an expansion team that were recently released to teams include:

• Teams cannot reacquire players they trade after Jan. 1, 2017 prior to Jan. 1, 2018. This is to prevent teams from entering arrangements to “hide” players from the expansion draft. There will likely be a lot more guidelines as part of this rule.
• Teams have to expose at least two forwards and one defenceman who have played either 40 games in the previous season (2016-17) or 70 games in the previous two seasons (2015-17). Teams can only lose a max of one player.
• The expansion team must select players that have a total value of between 60 and100 per cent of the 2016-17 salary cap.
• The expansion team can’t buy out anyone it picks in the expansion draft until the following off-season (2018).
• he expansion team will be given the same draft lottery odds as the team that finishes third last in the league and cannot pick later than sixth in the 2017 NHL entry draft. It’s possible the expansion team could end up with the first overall pick, if it wins the lottery.
• Teams must protect players that have no-movement clauses active in the 2017-18 season. No-movement clauses active in 2016-17 will have no impact. There will likely be exceptions made for players with no-movement clauses who are out with career-ending injuries (i.e. Ryane Clowe and Nathan Horton). Teams are not expected to be forced to protect those contracts.

These guidelines are in addition to previously determined rules, the biggest of which was that all players with two years or less of pro hockey experience are exempted from the draft.

Teams will have a choice between protecting seven forwards, three defencemen and one goaltender (11 players) or eight skaters and one goaltender (nine players). The second option allows for teams to protect four defencemen but forces them to expose three more forwards in order to do so.

Bye bye Stuart or Thorburn or Lowry or Armia pretty much.  How will we survive 

What would happen if you is more players on NMC then spaces allowed to protect?