Speculation: Armchair GM / Speculation / Rumours Thread XXIV - Beware of Doug

[Pirate King Luffy]

I don't get the idea of paying Vegas to not take players. Just seems silly to me. Why not take them themselves?

I feel people are over exaggerating losing a player when the other 29 teams will also be losing one. Not a big deal.

 

[Sparky93]

I'd really like to bring in Oleksiak, learn the ropes from Engelland for the rest of the season and replace him next year.

 

[Lunatik]

I don't get the idea of paying Vegas to not take players. Just seems silly to me. Why not take them themselves?

I feel people are over exaggerating losing a player when the other 29 teams will also be losing one. Not a big deal.

Exactly! For Vegas not to take a player we would have to pay them more than what that player is worth to them and likely more than that player is worth to us. The only team that should possibly considering this route is Pittsburgh if they have to expose Murray

 

[Sparky93]

I don't get the idea of paying Vegas to not take players. Just seems silly to me. Why not take them themselves?

I feel people are over exaggerating losing a player when the other 29 teams will also be losing one. Not a big deal.

I think you have to look at it from a long term business stand point too. Using the Flames as an example....say we thought we had a very legit shot at a cup over the next couple years. We added some pieces and are forced to leave Backlund unprotected, with a year left to UFA status.

Backlund already voiced his desire to stay in Calgary and doesn't want to play anywhere else to the press.

No one else of significant value is left unprotected.

So we offer Jankowski to pass on Backlund. I think in this scenario, you don't have to offer fair value for a player but only top his UFA value, potentially.

 

[SmellOfVictory]

As the cap goes up and with escrow taking money, contracts go up.

The salary cap has gone up about 6% since 14-15 when Orpik and Girardi signed their $5.5M contracts. Staal's 5.7 was signed in 15-16 (cap 3% lower than this year). An equivalent increase on these godawful contracts would still not see Alzner hitting 6 million, and again, that's using three of the league's worst contracts as examples.

 

[Lunatik]

The salary cap has gone up about 6% since 14-15 when Orpik and Girardi signed their $5.5M contracts. Staal's 5.7 was signed in 15-16 (cap 3% lower than this year). An equivalent increase on these godawful contracts would still not see Alzner hitting 6 million, and again, that's using three of the league's worst contracts as examples.

Except Alzner is better than any of them ever were, but that little detail is apparently not important. The most I would offer Alzner is 5 million per, but I have little doubt that if he hits the market he will get a 6+million offer

 

[Fig]

I don't get the idea of paying Vegas to not take players. Just seems silly to me. Why not take them themselves?

I feel people are over exaggerating losing a player when the other 29 teams will also be losing one. Not a big deal.

Depends how you view it. Let's say we go the 8 skater route because acquisition and the pieces exposed we want to keep are Ferland and Frolik. Would you offer Poirier and another B prospect (let's say Culkin or rights to Jokkipakka) to Vegas to take Brouwer and ignore those two? It would have to be one hell of a good deal and a great player who can grow with the club as a top 4 D man for Treliving to consider such a trade and risking an 8 skater route IMO.

From Vegas' perspective, they get extra depth and still get a decent winger. We maintain the pieces we want that fit our system and also make room for some of our other prospects to move up.

Obviously it isn't as simple as that, but knowing Treliving, he's pulled off weird moves before.

I'd really like to bring in Oleksiak, learn the ropes from Engelland for the rest of the season and replace him next year.

I recall suggesting this, and it wasn't well received the first time. He is good buddies with the Hamilton bros and I think we could shelter him enough to develop him into a good dman.

I also think part of the chaos is the fact no organization has really made any trades yet this season.

RE Alzner: I'm thinking he's about as unicorn as Ben Bishop. I hope Calgary can nab them, but I really think plan B and C should be concocted. Just in case.

 

[SmellOfVictory]

Except Alzner is better than any of them ever were, but that little detail is apparently not important. The most I would offer Alzner is 5 million per, but I have little doubt that if he hits the market he will get a 6+million offer

Better than Girardi and Staal used to be? Doubtful. Both those guys were easily top pairing dmen at one time (Staal in particular). I mean, I certainly wouldn't bet money against Alzner getting over 6 million simply because no one can fully predict the stupidity of NHL GMs when free agency hits, but I don't think it's the most likely scenario.

 

[Lunatik]

Better than Girardi and Staal used to be? Doubtful. Both those guys were easily top pairing dmen at one time (Staal in particular). I mean, I certainly wouldn't bet money against Alzner getting over 6 million simply because no one can fully predict the stupidity of NHL GMs when free agency hits, but I don't think it's the most likely scenario.

Yes, better than either Girardi or Staal ever was. Alzner IMO is the premier physical/shutdown defenseman in the NHL.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

Snip

So what you're saying is that Vegas will take Brouwer and get Culkin, Poirier and rights to Jokipakka? They would be better off just taking Frolik or Ferland. And as much as I like Ferland, he shouldn't be protected since there are similar guys like him that would be exposed as well.

And what's the point of paying them quantity? What's keeping Vegas from taking the assets and then still taking the guy? Just doesn't make sense from either side, especially Vegas. Unless they get offered studs and high picks there's no incentive for them. We can offer all the Culkins we want, and they wouldn't do it.

Geez, we'll be fine.

 

[Lunatik]

Brouwer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ferland

Paying Brouwer++ to protect Ferland is downright ****ing stupid.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Expansion draft rules saY

The Las Vegas franchise must select one player from each presently existing club for a total of 30 players (not including additional players who may be acquired as the result of violations of the Expansion Draft rules.

Nowhere does it say a team can trade assets to prevent this from happening, unless I've missed something.

Much of the initial consternation was how to protect Kevin. That's less of a problem now imo.

 

[Zirakzigil]

Expansion draft rules saY

Nowhere does it say a team can trade assets to prevent this from happening, unless I've missed something.

Much of the initial consternation was how to protect Kevin. That's less of a problem now imo.

Its not preventing Vegas from taking a player, its trading assets for "future considerations" and then Vegas selecting a previously agreed upon player.

 

[Fig]

Brouwer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Ferland

Paying Brouwer++ to protect Ferland is downright ****ing stupid.

I'm not saying that's the actual situation that Treliving would be doing that. I'm saying perhaps there are options where we do the 8 skater route. Moving Brouwer would give us cap space to acquire a guy like Bishop and Oshie for instance. Again, not saying that's what we'd do, it's a "no stone unturned" idea. Immediately dismissing the 8 skater route option might limit options.

 

[Fig]

Its not preventing Vegas from taking a player, its trading assets for "future considerations" and then Vegas selecting a previously agreed upon player.

This.

This was done in previous expansion drafts.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

This.

This was done in previous expansion drafts.

Previous expansion drafts were subject to different rules.

Would like to see a reputable source where this method of circumvention has been stated as a possibility.

 

[InfinityIggy]

Previous expansion drafts were subject to different rules.

Would like to see a reputable source where this method of circumvention has been stated as a possibility.

I haven't seen anywhere this has been directly addressed in releases from the league. My understanding is that such potential deals would be 'handshake' type of agreements.

 

[Pirate King Luffy]

Like I said, it doesn't make sense for Vegas to do these " please don't take my player" deals unless they are getting stud players and assets. Not the Culkins and Jokipakkas that everyone else has.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Like I said, it doesn't make sense for Vegas to do these " please don't take my player" deals unless they are getting stud players and assets. Not the Culkins and Jokipakkas that everyone else has.

It also doesn't make sense for the Flames to acquire a top four defenseman (long term) prior to the deadline, and then expose three extra forwards in the expansion draft.

Assuming it's a protection strategy of 8/1, then the four defense (Gio, Brodie, Hamilton, New Guy) and four obvious forwards (Gaudreau, Monahan, Bennett, Backlund) leaving Frolik Brouwer Ferland all exposed.

Would rather just acquire a #4 D in the offseason and let Vegas take Jokipakka or one of the other forwards.

 

[Calculon]

People have some bizarrely and awfully narrow point of views when it comes to expansion for some reason.

In the last round:

In return for agreeing not to select certain unprotected players, the Blue Jackets and Wild were granted concessions by other franchises. The trades not involving Blue Jacket or Wild draft picks were booked as being for "future considerations":

Columbus

-San Jose traded Jan Caloun, a ninth-round pick (Martin Paroulek) in the 2000 NHL Entry Draft, and a conditional pick in the 2001 NHL Entry Draft to Columbus on June 11, 2000, after the Blue Jackets agreed not to select Evgeni Nabokov.
-Buffalo traded Jean-Luc Grand-Pierre, Matt Davidson, and two fifth-round draft picks, one each in the 2000 (Tyler Kolarik) and 2001 (Andreas Jämtin) Entry Drafts, to Columbus on June 23, 2000, after the Blue Jackets agreed not to select Dominik Hasek or Martin Biron.

Minnesota

-San Jose traded Andy Sutton, a seventh-round pick (Peter Bartoš) in the 2000 Entry Draft and a third-round pick (later traded to Columbus - (Aaron Johnson)) in the 2001 Entry Draft to Minnesota on June 11, 2000, for an eighth-round pick in the 2000 Entry Draft after the Wild agreed not to select Evgeni Nabokov.

McPhee on how he wants to build his team:

“Unless somebody really has upside that their own team didn’t see and we didn’t see, it’s going to be hard to get a difference-maker,” McPhee said. “It’s going to be a guy that develops that no one expected - a hidden surprise.”

Vegas’ concentration, instead, is on the Entry Draft. Those Flyers hit home runs with Bobby Clarke and Bill Barber. The Islanders loaded up on Denis Potvin, Bryan Trottier and Mike Bossy.

This spring, the Golden Knights will receive draft lottery odds equal to the third seed, the 28th place finisher in the standings. Who knows, maybe Vegas will get lucky and land the No. 1 pick and a potential star such as Nolan Patrick or Timothy Liljegren?

“It’s going to come down to how we do in the Entry Draft,” McPhee said. “That’s how we’re going to build this team. That’s how it’s always been in this league. Teams that have one have built through the Entry Draft - it’s not through free agents, it’s not through the expansion draft.”

A GM that wants to load up on picks instead of more bottom line forwards and defenseman? Inconceivable!

Las Vegas May Be Allowed To Trade Before Expansion Draft

TSN and ESPN’s Pierre LeBrun reported on Friday on Winnipeg’s TSN 1260 that the NHL may allow the Las Vegas Expansion team to make trades up to three weeks before the expansion draft. No NHL expansion team has ever been granted the opportunity to make pre-expansion draft trades before.

The rationale behind the move is that the NHL wants Las Vegas to be as competitive as soon as possible. While the team won’t have any players to dangle, it will have both Entry Draft picks and Expansion Draft options. This gives Las Vegas some flexibility as it attempts to build a team from scratch. It could use its draft picks to acquire players not eligible for expansion protection, or to broker a deal not to take a certain player.

Not that 8/1 makes any kind of sense for the Flames (it's a terrible idea really) but expecting McPhee to approach the draft with a singular mindset (i.e, draft BPA and only BPA, ignore all trade possibilities or loading up on future draft picks or looking for scouting gems or getting compensated to take certain bad contracts or taking certain players to trade to another team for more assets and so on) is ridiculously narrow minded.

 

[Ace Rimmer]

Calc, thanks for the last link - what I was looking for.

Vegas has to hit the cap floor, too. They can't just say "nah I don't want your garbage we'll take draft picks & prospects" because they still need to take on salary.

Where they may make bank is by taking on bad contracts via trade.

 

[Lunatik]

In the current CBA "future considerations" trades are not allowed. That is a massive difference from what was allowed the last time there was expansion. There is a decent chance that Vegas will not be allowed to make these backroom deals, the NHL has never confirmed they are allowed the only statements I've seen about it (forever ago) was that the league was undecided.

 

[Boomstick]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone dislike the idea of bringing Iginla in at the trade deadline just to have him retire as a Flame. Whether we're in the playoffs or not.

I don't mind it, he can't be any worse than some of the guys we've had on our team since he left. Scrubs like David Jones, Niklas Hagman, TJ Galiardi, Bollig, Setuguchi, Mason Raymond and I'm even including in Chiasson. I kind of hope he's one and done with us.

If there's no interest from Washington, Chicago, Minnesota, Pittsburgh or other favorites I'd gladly take him back for 20 + games. I'm sure it won't cost us anything. And who knows, maybe he'd be a good closer that Chiasson isn't.

 

[MonyontheMoney]

Is it just speculation that Iggy will retire after this year or has anything been reported?

 

[Lunatik]

I dislike the idea of bringing Iginla back for any more than a 1 day contract to retire