Speculation: Upcoming Expansion Draft Discussion

Lunatik

Normal is an illusion.
Oct 12, 2012
56,185
8,337
Padded Room
Seems like we have enough interest in the upcoming expansion draft, and who will be selected to justify a dedicated thread.
I'm interested, but have no idea who may or may not be taken for the purpose of trades. Or who could be traded beforehand for that matter.

However I would rank the odds of Flames players being taken as:

Troy Brouwer: 50%
Matt Stajan: 20%
Alex Chiasson: 15%
Deryk Engelland: 5%
Hunter Shinkaruk: 5%
Brett Kulak: 5%
 
Last edited:

Johnny Hoxville

The Return of a Legend
Jul 15, 2006
37,549
9,343
Calgary
If LV is smart, they'll take Brouwer. He's overpaid, but he's a lot better than he showed last season. Under a different coach, I think Brouwer would look like a different player.
 

Calculon

unholy acting talent
Jan 20, 2006
16,578
4,035
Error 503
I expect the Vegas Legionnaires will take five goalies in the draft, keeping three while auctioning off two of them. Aside from the Flames who are most desperate for a goalie, there's at least a handful of other teams likely to be in the market for at least a backup; Winnipeg, Vancouver, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh, so there's a market there for McPhee to leverage.

Fleury will be there starter

All three of Pickard+Raanta+Grubauer: one to be their backup/1B starter while the other two are auctioned off to the highest bidders

Korpisalo to be their AHL starter/goalie of the future

So I surmise there should be ample opportunity for Treliving to get his guy but hopefully it doesn't involve the the first round pick or any of the good expansion exempt prospects.

In terms of which Flames player gets taken, I think it's down to three names: Brouwer, Stajan and Chiasson. None of the other guys are likely due to a variety of reasons.
 

dcookson

Registered User
Aug 20, 2014
32
0
Just happened to be looking the Hockey News website and their expansion draft preview. They were discussing how Treliving needs to get the goalie situation figured out before the draft by acquiring/signing a goalie to protect and having McCollum available to be exposed. I can't recall ever seeing anything so I'll ask here: Is there a penalty for not having a goalie to protect? Or is it just for not having players that meet the exposure requirements?
 

Tkachuk Norris

Registered User
Jun 22, 2012
15,602
6,639
Just happened to be looking the Hockey News website and their expansion draft preview. They were discussing how Treliving needs to get the goalie situation figured out before the draft by acquiring/signing a goalie to protect and having McCollum available to be exposed. I can't recall ever seeing anything so I'll ask here: Is there a penalty for not having a goalie to protect? Or is it just for not having players that meet the exposure requirements?

Pretty sure they can protect the UFA rights of Elliot or Johnson.
 

InfinityIggy

Zagidulin's Dad
Jan 30, 2011
36,068
12,852
59.6097709,16.5425901
Just happened to be looking the Hockey News website and their expansion draft preview. They were discussing how Treliving needs to get the goalie situation figured out before the draft by acquiring/signing a goalie to protect and having McCollum available to be exposed. I can't recall ever seeing anything so I'll ask here: Is there a penalty for not having a goalie to protect? Or is it just for not having players that meet the exposure requirements?

I don't believe there are any penalties for not having a goalie or other player to protect.

I believe they simply must meet the exposure requirements.
 

DFF

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
22,275
6,525
My pick for LV

1)Brouwer
2)Stajan
3)Bouma
4)Chaisson
5)Shinkaruk
6)Kulak
 

BurnEmUp

Registered User
Feb 27, 2009
1,616
143
Anybody think there is any chance they just sign Versteeg in their UFA window and forgo a selection?

I know Versteeg wants to stay in AB if he can, but if they call him up and offer him $3-4 million total over a couple seasons I don't see how he says no after almost having to go to Switzerland last season because NHL offers were so sparse.

And from Vegas' viewpoint the guy had 15g and 37p last season. Way better year than any of the other schlubs they have to choose from off our roster, and skilled scoring forwards are going to be hard to come by for Vegas in the ED.
 

Volica

Papa Shango
May 15, 2012
21,391
11,074
Anybody think there is any chance they just sign Versteeg in their UFA window and forgo a selection?

I know Versteeg wants to stay in AB if he can, but if they call him up and offer him $3-4 million total over a couple seasons I don't see how he says no after almost having to go to Switzerland last season because NHL offers were so sparse.

And from Vegas' viewpoint the guy had 15g and 37p last season. Way better year than any of the other schlubs they have to choose from off our roster, and skilled scoring forwards are going to be hard to come by for Vegas in the ED.

There's a chance, but I think it's really minor.
Vegas is going to try and get the most amount of free assets they can.

Their idea won't be to ice a real NHL team, their goal will be to get the 30 most valuable assets they can across the league and parlay as many as those as they can into draft picks and prospects over the next year or two.

So why double dip. The only reason to dip into FA early is to get core pieces... and if you're building your core from FA, you're ef'in up.
 

BurnEmUp

Registered User
Feb 27, 2009
1,616
143
There's a chance, but I think it's really minor.
Vegas is going to try and get the most amount of free assets they can.

Their idea won't be to ice a real NHL team, their goal will be to get the 30 most valuable assets they can across the league and parlay as many as those as they can into draft picks and prospects over the next year or two.

So why double dip. The only reason to dip into FA early is to get core pieces... and if you're building your core from FA, you're ef'in up.

True, but none of the assets they can take from Calgary are valuable. They aren't going to be able to take Stajan or Brouwer or Chiasson and flip that player for anything of value. So the player they take from Calgary will likely be a member of their opening night roster.

Who would you rather have on your roster if you were GMGM?

Versteeg?
Brouwer?
Stajan?
Chiasson?
Bouma?

Best bang for the buck would be Versteeg all day long. Even if Brouwer returned to 35+ point form he'd still be making more than twice as much than what Versteeg would likely sign for.

Guess we will have to wait and see.
 

Volica

Papa Shango
May 15, 2012
21,391
11,074
I'd do Chiasson or Stajan, tbh.
Give Stajan top 6 minutes, he'll score 20-25 points before the TDL; and you have yourself a potential top 6 return candidate. Chiasson gives you something a little more; he's not a young guy, but he's certainly shown to be an effective NHL'er in the past (even this past year, it wasn't bad).

You're going to have to overpay to get Versteeg before July 1. Their best bet is to make their pick, and if they do really like him, continue to talk to see if you can sign him in actual UFA.
 

SKRusty

Napalm
Jan 20, 2016
2,611
1,062
Even Treliving believes Calgary will lose a young player in the expansion draft. The only way it is Brouwer is if BT trades a pick for Las Vegas to take Brouwer. (Likely a fourth or higher)

Young indicates either Shinkaruk or Kulak with the latter being most likely.
 

Anglesmith

Setting up the play?
Sep 17, 2012
46,442
14,718
Victoria
Even Treliving believes Calgary will lose a young player in the expansion draft. The only way it is Brouwer is if BT trades a pick for Las Vegas to take Brouwer. (Likely a fourth or higher)

Young indicates either Shinkaruk or Kulak with the latter being most likely.

Treliving has said on multiple occasions that Vegas' pick will likely help our salary cap situation, and that they may be taking on salary on the wings. Unless you're able to reconcile that statement and your own, it definitely seems like you're just making stuff up here.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->