Speculation: Jets General Rumour, Trade, Free Agent and Waiver Speculation 15-16 Part XI

[almostawake]

With Schiefle, Little, Wheeler, Ehlers, Laine*, Connor, Dano, Petan, Etc. there really isn't going to be much room in the top 6. If you are looking at Free Agency you are mostly looking at someone as an upgrade on the third line (most likely) or someone for the first line (out of left field) or on defense.

In today's NHL the 'traditional' 3rd line is virtually non-existent. The goal is to put as many lines on the ice capable of outscoring their matchup.

The Jets already have enough young wingers to fill out three reasonable lines, with a few left over to bump up from the 4th line when necessary.

In addition to the guys you mentioned, the Jets also have Roslovic, Lemieux and Harkins in the system.

Bringing a veteran in for one year is one thing, but in UFA guys get to dictate their terms. By the start of the 17-18 season the Jets may have another 3 or 4 forward prospects banging down the door.

You definitely aren't giving a NMC clause to a third liner, and I don't even think giving a NMC to a defenseman is an option, with Byflugien and Enstrom both having one, who knows what happens with Trouba but alot of players around his age and skill are getting NMC out of their RFA deal which puts them at the limit for defense (with proposed expansion rules).

A NMC for someone playing on the First Line wouldn't be awful, but I'd rather see them spend the money on defense.

Players can't have a NMC/NTC until after their 7th service year. So Trouba cannot have an NMC for the expansion draft.

Myers, however, is believed to have an NMC that will come into effect next summer.

Also, there really isn't much out there in UFA, at least that the Jets are in a position to be competitive on. Here's UFA forwards ordered by points.

For defence, it is even worse. Here is a list of UFA defencemen that have averaged 20+ minutes a night this season:

Goligoski, Russell, Campbell, Hamhuis and Demers (maybe throw in Yandle who was just under 20). And of those, maybe the most attractive from an age perspective, Demers, is RH. Campbell and Hamhuis are quite old and will most likely sign with contenders or for personal reasons. Russell is an awful puck possession player. Goligoski is good, but can probably pretty easily get 6M+ for 5+ years.

One of the reasons Arm-chair GMing is so fun is that, from one perspective you are correct, the main strength of the team (prospects) is 5 years out, so why be a player now.

The other side of the coin is that the best players are in their prime now, you wait 5 years and their time has passed, so why not cash in some lottery tickets and see what kind of noise you can make now.

IMO the players we have right now who are in their prime are not the players we should be trying to contend with. IMO when Scheifele is reaching his prime, that is when they should try to peak.

 

[Puckatron 3000]

The expansion draft plans should massively influence Chevy's approach to off-season wrangling. I could imagine trading some expansion draft-eligible players for protected younger rookies or future picks just so as to not lose the asset. That could also help alleviate some of the problems we'll have fitting in all our forwards into the roster this year.

But it could lead to some sour grapes around here. Nobody is going to like seeing a beloved prospect or young player get traded away, while HF's fav whipping boys like Thor or Stafford stick to the roster (to accommodate the expansion salary exposure).

Wouldn't surprise me to see it happen, though.

 

[buggs]

The expansion draft plans should massively influence Chevy's approach to off-season wrangling. I could imagine trading some expansion draft-eligible players for protected younger rookies or future picks just so as to not lose the asset. That could also help alleviate some of the problems we'll have fitting in all our forwards into the roster this year.

But it could lead to some sour grapes around here. Nobody is going to like seeing a beloved prospect or young player get traded away, while HF's fav whipping boys like Thor or Stafford stick to the roster (to accommodate the expansion salary exposure).

Wouldn't surprise me to see it happen, though.

Not much fun, but reality creeps in.

I'd really like to see a firm set of rules on the expansion draft so we can seriously consider the situation appropriately. Obviously we won't for some time but I completely agree with you that we might see some of our promising youth taking an odd turn in their career direction.

I think we're just going to end up having to accept (as are the Jets) that we're going to lose somebody like an Armia, Dano, Petan, Lowry and that's the way it will go. On the plus side we surely overrate our prospects much the same as any other team does with theirs. So maybe we get lucky and lose only one or none at all?

 

[surixon]

Not much fun, but reality creeps in.

I'd really like to see a firm set of rules on the expansion draft so we can seriously consider the situation appropriately. Obviously we won't for some time but I completely agree with you that we might see some of our promising youth taking an odd turn in their career direction.

I think we're just going to end up having to accept (as are the Jets) that we're going to lose somebody like an Armia, Dano, Petan, Lowry and that's the way it will go. On the plus side we surely overrate our prospects much the same as any other team does with theirs. So maybe we get lucky and lose only one or none at all?

Well we shouldn't have to loose a 2nd year pro like Petan if the draft is in 2017. I'm quite ok loosing a Lowry or Burmie type though.

 

[MikeRahl]

That's interesting about the NMC starting at 7 years. Looking at some players who I thought had it, it is clear that it takes affect some time into their contract!

It does look like there is pretty slim pickings in the UFA class. I wonder how RFA will play out with the expansion draft looming.

Wonder if someone like the Ducks who have Fowler, Theodore, Vatanen, and Lindholm (last 2 both RFAs) would be looking to move any of them because they figure to lose one of them in the expansion process anyways!

And I agree with the slow burn, and build for 2 or 3 years into the future, but these things have a funny way of repeating themselves.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I'm hearing Tyler Myers.

Not worth that. We would have to add quite a bit. And then find another D man ourselves.

 

[CaptainChef]

The expansion draft plans should massively influence Chevy's approach to off-season wrangling. I could imagine trading some expansion draft-eligible players for protected younger rookies or future picks just so as to not lose the asset. That could also help alleviate some of the problems we'll have fitting in all our forwards into the roster this year.

But it could lead to some sour grapes around here. Nobody is going to like seeing a beloved prospect or young player get traded away, while HF's fav whipping boys like Thor or Stafford stick to the roster (to accommodate the expansion salary exposure).

Wouldn't surprise me to see it happen, though.

Yep, especially when it comes to D, we will need to make a couple moves so that we can protect a good portion of our young Fs. Thor & Staff kept for salary exposure makes perfect sense as I doubt we get anything for them in trade anyway. As long as Mau doesn't feel that they're here so they have to be used.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

Well we shouldn't have to loose a 2nd year pro like Petan if the draft is in 2017. I'm quite ok loosing a Lowry or Burmie type though.

I think more likely Dano, maybe Armia but my guess is Dano. That is unless Chevy can make some moves. For example if Myers was traded for an exempt player or a future or any forward who did not come with an NMC. Then we could go the 3 & 7 route instead of 4 & 4. Then we are down to losing Burmi.

Just curious, has anybody looked over any of the contender teams to see how they look? With as many young players as we have we probably have more exempt players than most. That is why the 4 & 4 option is not quite so terrible for us. We will lose a good young player but not a core piece. And we can probably make sure the loss comes in an area where our depth makes it less painfull than otherwise.

 

[MikeRahl]

That is unless Chevy can make some moves. For example if Myers was traded for an exempt player or a future or any forward who did not come with an NMC. Then we could go the 3 & 7 route instead of 4 & 4. Then we are down to losing Burmi.

Maybe an out there kind of scenario, but have they mentioned the specific start date for the potential draft, or how buyouts would work?

Could you say, buy out Enstrom at the end of the 2017 season (happens between June 16th-30th) and then not have to protect him as a NMC contract?

 

[surixon]

I think more likely Dano, maybe Armia but my guess is Dano. That is unless Chevy can make some moves. For example if Myers was traded for an exempt player or a future or any forward who did not come with an NMC. Then we could go the 3 & 7 route instead of 4 & 4. Then we are down to losing Burmi.

Just curious, has anybody looked over any of the contender teams to see how they look? With as many young players as we have we probably have more exempt players than most. That is why the 4 & 4 option is not quite so terrible for us. We will lose a good young player but not a core piece. And we can probably make sure the loss comes in an area where our depth makes it less painfull than otherwise.

I've said it before but if there is any way we can move Enstrom this summer you have to do it. I'm not ok with loosing a player like Myers for futures at this point.

 

[Gil Fisher]

I think more likely Dano, maybe Armia but my guess is Dano. That is unless Chevy can make some moves. For example if Myers was traded for an exempt player or a future or any forward who did not come with an NMC. Then we could go the 3 & 7 route instead of 4 & 4. Then we are down to losing Burmi.

Just curious, has anybody looked over any of the contender teams to see how they look? With as many young players as we have we probably have more exempt players than most. That is why the 4 & 4 option is not quite so terrible for us. We will lose a good young player but not a core piece. And we can probably make sure the loss comes in an area where our depth makes it less painfull than otherwise.

a team like philly has young LHD (Ghost, Provo, Sanheim, Hagg, Morin) and no D needing protecting. i think ghost/provo are as close to untouchable as you can get, but what about something around Myers-Sanheim?

Enstrom-Buff
Morrissey-Trouba
Sanheim-Postma

 

[Gil Fisher]

against my better judgment, i posted on the main forum the following...we can discuss here too

I am a Jets fan and even when i think i'm not, i'm biased. So get your useless insults out of the way and then constructively respond to the following:

Jets have four D likely requiring protection in an expansion draft and are very thin on the left side.

Flyers have likely no D requiring protection in an expansion draft and have 5 young LHD. (granted I'm not sure how the rules will view said 5)

(i) Ghost for Myers + ah you probably don't even want to go there....forget it.

(ii) Provorov for Myers + ah you probably don't even want to go there but I am desperately in love with Ivan....so + #22, Lowry, and Petan or Dano

(iii) Sanheim for Myers

(iv) Hagg + #18 for Myers + #36

(v) Morin for Kostalek

C'mon man...stop hoarding your LHD!

(oh yeah...no mentioning Ehlers, Connor and Laine, please)

 

[Puckatron 3000]

How realistic is it that Enstrom waives his NMC?

 

[almostawake]

How realistic is it that Enstrom waives his NMC?

Depends where he is going. The overlap between teams that need him and teams he'd be willing to waive to is likely a bit thin.

Buffalo fans have showed interest. As have Oilers fans, obviously.

But I'd find it incredibly surprising if Enstrom were willing to waive for a teams like that.

A team that always seems to come up around Enstrom is Detroit. That strikes me as a place he would waive to and also has a fairly distinct need for a player like him.

The question really is, what would the return be if there's only one team interested?

Although trading him for free next summer would probably be worth it if the Jets end up in a bind over the expansion draft situation.

 

[Puckatron 3000]

Thanks almostawake. Man, TNSE is going to be earning their paycheck this summer. So many moving pieces.

 

[almostawake]

Thanks almostawake. Man, TNSE is going to be earning their paycheck this summer. So many moving pieces.

Yes, although I'll say that regarding Enstrom, it won't clear if that needs to be dealt with this summer, or next, until the full expansion draft rules come down.

If teams are allowed to trade before the expansion draft, I could certainly see the Jets waiting to pull the trigger on an Enstrom trade until the end of next season if they've had solid bites from a few teams they figure he'd waive the NMC for.

Basically, if you're going to give him away for close to free, may as well get this next season out of him, because it isn't as if he's not a solid LH 2nd pairing guy on a team that desperately needs that.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I've said it before but if there is any way we can move Enstrom this summer you have to do it. I'm not ok with loosing a player like Myers for futures at this point.

Futures covers a pretty wide range of possibilities, all picks and prospects. That was not a proposal, just an example. The list is simply all those that would result in opening up the option to only have to protect 3D and therefore be able to protect 7 Fs.

Edit: Agree about Enstrom but I don't see it happening. The acquiring team would need to protect him. That puts a huge hole in his value. Lawless talked about this a bit today. I agreed with him for a change. Would you waive if you were Enstrom? Or would you be looking forward to playing with the team that is coming together here?

 

[surixon]

Futures covers a pretty wide range of possibilities, all picks and prospects. That was not a proposal, just an example. The list is simply all those that would result in opening up the option to only have to protect 3D and therefore be able to protect 7 Fs.

Edit: Agree about Enstrom but I don't see it happening. The acquiring team would need to protect him. That puts a huge hole in his value. Lawless talked about this a bit today. I agreed with him for a change. Would you waive if you were Enstrom? Or would you be looking forward to playing with the team that is coming together here?

True, I just think that teams will be reluctant to deal their prime expansion protected young players in advance of the draft. We would most likely be looking at draft picks or players who aren't expansion protected.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

a team like philly has young LHD (Ghost, Provo, Sanheim, Hagg, Morin) and no D needing protecting. i think ghost/provo are as close to untouchable as you can get, but what about something around Myers-Sanheim?

Enstrom-Buff
Morrissey-Trouba
Sanheim-Postma

No D to protect? Well then lets do it! They value Sanheim pretty highly I think. They would also be trying to take advantage of not having to protect any D. So we would have to add something good to Myers.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

against my better judgment, i posted on the main forum the following...we can discuss here too

I like the direction. 1 & 2 are out of the question. You offer way too much for Provorov IMO. I already posted that I think we have to add to Myers to get Sanheim. I think Lowry should be about the right value. Or maybe #36.

Really not much interested in Hagg or Morin.

 

[surixon]

Futures covers a pretty wide range of possibilities, all picks and prospects. That was not a proposal, just an example. The list is simply all those that would result in opening up the option to only have to protect 3D and therefore be able to protect 7 Fs.

Edit: Agree about Enstrom but I don't see it happening. The acquiring team would need to protect him. That puts a huge hole in his value. Lawless talked about this a bit today. I agreed with him for a change. Would you waive if you were Enstrom? Or would you be looking forward to playing with the team that is coming together here?

I do agree that it would be difficult, possibly impossible but it just takes one team that has a need and values him. As for him waiving, well it depends, if he feels his role will be reduced here and he wont be able to show well for his next contract he may elect to move on. Does that happen probably not, I just don't like having to leave more players available to the expansion process than necessary. Nor do I like loosing a piece that I think fits well moving forward in Myers.

 

[KingBogo]

I think more likely Dano, maybe Armia but my guess is Dano. That is unless Chevy can make some moves. For example if Myers was traded for an exempt player or a future or any forward who did not come with an NMC. Then we could go the 3 & 7 route instead of 4 & 4. Then we are down to losing Burmi.

Just curious, has anybody looked over any of the contender teams to see how they look? With as many young players as we have we probably have more exempt players than most. That is why the 4 & 4 option is not quite so terrible for us. We will lose a good young player but not a core piece. And we can probably make sure the loss comes in an area where our depth makes it less painfull than otherwise.

I think they protect Dano over most of the other players that get lumped into the bottom 6. First off he is on the younger side being a 2013 pick. He has produced more at the NHL level. 31 points in 69 games. And he leads most of that bottom 6 in possession numbers and Points per 60.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

True, I just think that teams will be reluctant to deal their prime expansion protected young players in advance of the draft. We would most likely be looking at draft picks or players who aren't expansion protected.

We could take a non-exempt F though. With Myers gone we can protect 7 F instead of only 4. So add the one received in trade we still gain 2 protections.

I agree though. The effect of the expansion draft is going to be that everybody wants to trade players they don't want to protect but seriously don't want to trade those who are exempt.

It is hard to figure its effect on the trade market and also the UFA market. I think over all it will depress those markets. Who will give Ladd 6x6 knowing he will have to be protected? Or they expose him and gamble that he doesn't get taken (pretty sure he would be myself). The same for the trade market. Nobody is going to want to acquire players they will have to protect or part with players who are exempt. OTOH though once the GMs get it all thought through there may be a bunch of extra activity. Hard to say.

 

[Mortimer Snerd]

I think they protect Dano over most of the other players that get lumped into the bottom 6. First off he is on the younger side being a 2013 pick. He has produced more at the NHL level. 31 points in 69 games. And he leads most of that bottom 6 in possession numbers and Points per 60.

Yah, depends on a few things. I want to keep Perreault. I really want to keep Perreault since I looked at his warrior chart. My first inclination is to extend him but maybe I leave him as UFA until after the expansion draft and then sign him. If he elects UFA then so be it. If he has been extended then it is a decision whether to protect him or Dano. That decision would depend on their play next year. If Dano finds his fit and takes off then it is a fairly easy choice to keep him. If not it might not be that difficult to expose him. We only have to lose 1 player. Maybe we expose MP and he isn't taken. Or maybe that is wishful thinking.

A lot of the decisions are best left as long as possible. Keep the options open and make decisions with more info.

 

[surixon]

Yah, depends on a few things. I want to keep Perreault. I really want to keep Perreault since I looked at his warrior chart. My first inclination is to extend him but maybe I leave him as UFA until after the expansion draft and then sign him. If he elects UFA then so be it. If he has been extended then it is a decision whether to protect him or Dano. That decision would depend on their play next year. If Dano finds his fit and takes off then it is a fairly easy choice to keep him. If not it might not be that difficult to expose him. We only have to lose 1 player. Maybe we expose MP and he isn't taken. Or maybe that is wishful thinking.

A lot of the decisions are best left as long as possible. Keep the options open and make decisions with more info.

We could have a handshake deal with him worked out and sign him on July 1st. I imagine it might be a strategy more than one team trys. I'm not sure what the league could do about it.