2021 Expansion Draft Discussion

[Brian39]

Also this is exactly how professional sports works. I mean did we not just have an agreement with Hoffman to wait to sign with us until the opportune moment? Get real man.

What the hell are you talking about? Are you comparing a PTO after a summer of negotiating with 30 other teams to a handshake deal where a player passes up the opportunity to talk to 30 other teams?

It was widely reported that Hoffman talked to a number of teams before coming to an agreement with the Blues. That is the polar opposite to what you are asking of players. Get real.

 

[Xerloris]

It was reported that he talked to many other teams, it was expected for a long time he would be in St.Louis and then it was announced. He never signed a deal with us until we were able to put players on LTIR to have the cap. He had a handshake deal with f***ing Armstrong to sit and wait for us.

Here let me be more specific.

Players had to quarantine
he signed a PTO so he could participate in camp
Means clearly he was here and quarantined
Then he signed his contract once we could LTIR players for cap
This was a handshake deal between him and Armstrong

 

[Brian39]

He could be honest and tell Seattle he wants to be in St.Louis and has no interest moving to the west coast. That is every players right.

Which would 100% lead to the NHL finding that we violated the CBA and take punitive action against the team. That would literally be all the proof needed for the NHL to take a draft pick from us. Probably a 1st rounder given the NHL's track record of violating the spirit of the CBA. The NHL made it clear to owners that they would punish teams who tired to get around exposure requirements with handshake agreements on pending UFAs.

So no, he could absolutely not be honest with Seattle in that situation.

 

[Xerloris]

Which would 100% lead to the NHL finding that we violated the CBA and take punitive action against the team. That would literally be all the proof needed for the NHL to take a draft pick from us. Probably a 1st rounder given the NHL's track record of violating the spirit of the CBA. The NHL made it clear to owners that they would punish teams who tired to get around exposure requirements with handshake agreements on pending UFAs.

So no, he could absolutely not be honest with Seattle in that situation.

That's absurd to think that a player can't decide where they want to play. Players do it all the time and turn down offers to visit/negotiate with teams they have no interest in playing for.

 

[Brian39]

That's absurd to think that a player can't decide where they want to play. Players do it all the time and turn down offers to visit/negotiate with teams they have no interest in playing for.

Literally no one is suggesting that.

Punishing a team for cap circumvention is not punishing a player for choosing where he wants to play. The Devils didn't get punished for Kovalchuk wanting to play there. They got punished for the way they tried to bring him there (and the player wasn't punished at all). No prospects were punished for participating in the Coyotes unauthorized prospect testing programs. The team was punished.

Evidence that cap circumvention happened is not a prohibition on a player wanting to play for the team that circumvented the cap. The handshake deal you are describing is cap circumvention. Any statement made by Schwartz that he intends to sign with the Blues while exposed in the expansion draft is evidence of a handshake deal that is circumvention. Friedman openly reported that the league warned teams about such handshake deals in 2017 and reported that punishment for such deals would be severe. There is a reason that we didn't see notable UFAs re-signed after the expansion draft.

 

[Zezel’s Pretzels]

The NHL made it clear last time that it will investigate any situation where an exposed UFA re-signs with their team after the expansion draft. Schwartz and his agent would need to agree to lie to the NHL and potentially to an arbitrator in a legal proceeding if they are going to announce an extension in the window between the expansion draft and the start of free agency. If he declines to talk to Seattle when they call and then re-signs with the Blues, it will 100% trigger a hefty investigation by the league. So he will also have to agree to talk to Seattle but not actually negotiate with them in good faith in order to avoid the league finding that there was cap circumvention.

And there is absolutely injury risk. Every game he has played without a contract and will play without a contract in the playoffs is an injury risk. Any handshake deal would almost certainly have already been agreed upon. There is a reason that you almost never see the top-level pending UFAs sign contracts between the playoffs and start of UFA unless the team offers market value.

When I mentioned injury risk, I meant after the season is over/when negotiations would start again. Any injury he could suffer in the playoffs changes everything, obviously. But the minute the Blues' season is over, he's probably putting himself in bubble wrap either way. What's the problem with a few extra days in bubble wrap?

But I have to trust your knowledge of the repercussions of handshake deals here, so this is pretty much moot.

 

[joe galiba]

Unless something drastic happens, Seattle will have Dunn, Sunny, Barbs and Sanford to realistically chose from
I think they will almost certainly chose Dunn, who would be hardest to replace out of those 4
Dunn's offense from the D is overlooked, and he is the only dman besides Krug that moves in space and effectively distributes the puck while on the PP
Parayko and Faulk are more shooters, if Krug goes down and Dunn is gone we really have no one to take over that role at the moment

maybe Walman or Mikkola can take the next step 5v5, maybe Walman can become more than a shooter and run a second unit PP - but those are ifs right now

at this point Barbs and Sunny are almost redundant in what they can do up and down the lineup, so along with Sanford, one of those 3 would be best scenario for Seattle to take for the Blues

 

[Frenzy31]

Unless something drastic happens, Seattle will have Dunn, Sunny, Barbs and Sanford to realistically chose from
I think they will almost certainly chose Dunn, who would be hardest to replace out of those 4
Dunn's offense from the D is overlooked, and he is the only dman besides Krug that moves in space and effectively distributes the puck while on the PP
Parayko and Faulk are more shooters, if Krug goes down and Dunn is gone we really have no one to take over that role at the moment

maybe Walman or Mikkola can take the next step 5v5, maybe Walman can become more than a shooter and run a second unit PP - but those are ifs right now

at this point Barbs and Sunny are almost redundant in what they can do up and down the lineup, so along with Sanford, one of those 3 would be best scenario for Seattle to take for the Blues

Looking at what other teams will be making available both forwards and defensively, I think they will go after a Blues forward. They may feel they could step into a bigger role due to our depth. Number 8 forwards on a lot of team will not be better then any of the three forwards we make available.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

I think they go after Sanford.

Just a hunch.

 

[Xerloris]

Unless something drastic happens, Seattle will have Dunn, Sunny, Barbs and Sanford to realistically chose from
I think they will almost certainly chose Dunn, who would be hardest to replace out of those 4
Dunn's offense from the D is overlooked, and he is the only dman besides Krug that moves in space and effectively distributes the puck while on the PP
Parayko and Faulk are more shooters, if Krug goes down and Dunn is gone we really have no one to take over that role at the moment

maybe Walman or Mikkola can take the next step 5v5, maybe Walman can become more than a shooter and run a second unit PP - but those are ifs right now

at this point Barbs and Sunny are almost redundant in what they can do up and down the lineup, so along with Sanford, one of those 3 would be best scenario for Seattle to take for the Blues

I would absolutely wish to get rid of Sanford and let Barby and Sunny be the guy Berube gifts top line minutes to. f***ing hate Sanford so much.

 

[Brian39]

It was reported that he talked to many other teams, it was expected for a long time he would be in St.Louis and then it was announced. He never signed a deal with us until we were able to put players on LTIR to have the cap. He had a handshake deal with f***ing Armstrong to sit and wait for us.

Here let me be more specific.

Players had to quarantine
he signed a PTO so he could participate in camp
Means clearly he was here and quarantined
Then he signed his contract once we could LTIR players for cap
This was a handshake deal between him and Armstrong

Your understanding of the Hoffman situation is incorrect. He signed his contract before we placed any player on LTIR. He signed on 1/11/21, Steen was placed on off-season LTIR 1/12/21 and Tarasenko was placed on LTIR on the first calendar day of the season (1/13/21). Despite JR's speculation that the PTO was for cap purposes, the Blues received absolutely zero cap benefit from the PTO.

No one has commented about the reason behind the PTO before the 1 year deal, but it was demonstrably not related to cap maneuvers. The Blues received zero cap benefit from the PTO. There was zero cap advantage gained that we would not have gained had we signed him to the 1 year deal from the beginning.

 

[Xerloris]

Your understanding of the Hoffman situation is incorrect. He signed his contract before we placed any player on LTIR. He signed on 1/11/21, Steen was placed on off-season LTIR 1/12/21 and Tarasenko was placed on LTIR on the first calendar day of the season (1/13/21). Despite JR's speculation that the PTO was for cap purposes, the Blues received absolutely zero cap benefit from the PTO.

No one has commented about the reason behind the PTO before the 1 year deal, but it was demonstrably not related to cap maneuvers. The Blues received zero cap benefit from the PTO. There was zero cap advantage gained that we would not have gained had we signed him to the 1 year deal from the beginning.

You're right but the point still stands that he signed a PTO with a handshake agreement to sign here once we knew what we could afford. Remember, Dunn was still not signed when Hoffman signed his PTO with us and what we could pay Hoffman directly related to how much Dunn signed for.

 

[Blueston]

Your understanding of the Hoffman situation is incorrect. He signed his contract before we placed any player on LTIR. He signed on 1/11/21, Steen was placed on off-season LTIR 1/12/21 and Tarasenko was placed on LTIR on the first calendar day of the season (1/13/21). Despite JR's speculation that the PTO was for cap purposes, the Blues received absolutely zero cap benefit from the PTO.

No one has commented about the reason behind the PTO before the 1 year deal, but it was demonstrably not related to cap maneuvers. The Blues received zero cap benefit from the PTO. There was zero cap advantage gained that we would not have gained had we signed him to the 1 year deal from the beginning.

Is JR's speculation ever accurate?

 

[joe galiba]

Is JR's speculation ever accurate?

hopefully he speculates that we will lose to the Avs, then we can start looking at second round matchups

 

[kimzey59]

Unless something drastic happens, Seattle will have Dunn, Sunny, Barbs and Sanford to realistically chose from
I think they will almost certainly chose Dunn, who would be hardest to replace out of those 4
Dunn's offense from the D is overlooked, and he is the only dman besides Krug that moves in space and effectively distributes the puck while on the PP
Parayko and Faulk are more shooters, if Krug goes down and Dunn is gone we really have no one to take over that role at the moment

maybe Walman or Mikkola can take the next step 5v5, maybe Walman can become more than a shooter and run a second unit PP - but those are ifs right now

at this point Barbs and Sunny are almost redundant in what they can do up and down the lineup, so along with Sanford, one of those 3 would be best scenario for Seattle to take for the Blues

I get that he wasn't a factor this year because of an injury; but you seem to be forgetting Perunovich.

 

[Celtic Note]

If you want to be in St.Louis then you do what you can to help the team. You agree to your contract and then you wait to sign it so we can protect more players on the team you're going to be a part of. It makes perfect sense and I think anyone would do the same that's not piece of shit.

If you make it to FA, why not see what’s out there as a player? What happens if you find a better offer? What happens if you are hoping to letter and the team courting you wants you to be a captain? Or what if you always wanted to play in a certain area? There are plenty of reasons to at least see what is out there. If the team isn’t willing to commit before the draft, what guarantee do you have they won’t back out? What happens if the market softens and the Blues say we want to change the offer? There are so many what-ifs for both sides but the risk is probably higher for the player.

Schwartz is one of those guys that I never felt had a significant tie to the community. Maybe he isn’t public about it like others and actually has a lot of ties. But, if I am not mistaken, he doesn’t live here in the summers. Not that it’s the end all be all to wanting to stay or not. I have not seen evidence about a commitment to the city. So, I am a bit hesitant to make an assumption that staying is a top of the list item for him.

 

[Louie the Blue]

I can’t see Krug being left unprotected solely because of the precedent it would set for FAs coming here.

Imagine signing a 7 year deal and you’re gone after 1 season? Armstrong isn’t afraid to make moves, but I’d worry about FAs wanting to deal with him if something like that happened.

Same reason why I don’t see Faulk getting exposed.

Realistically I think Dunn will be selected or someone like Sunny or Barbie.

 

[Robb_K]

I think they go after Sanford.

Just a hunch.

Oh, if this could only happen. But, do you really think Seattle would choose Sanford over Dunn? I can't see them making that decision. A 2-way, puck-moving defenceman, with a good shot and several years of experience, but who is still young and still developing, would be too rare of an opportunity to pass up. - And certainly too good a fit for their needs to pass up for a flawed forward, who is very streaky, has long periods of not showing up, can score some, but doesn't set up his linemates at all, and is a little below par on defence (which in his blackouts, isn't there at all. Either Sundqvist or Barbashev would go before Sanford, in my estimation (and certainly Dunn). Well, at least we know they won't take a goalie from us.

 

[Robb_K]

I can’t see Krug being left unprotected solely because of the precedent it would set for FAs coming here.

Imagine signing a 7 year deal and you’re gone after 1 season? Armstrong isn’t afraid to make moves, but I’d worry about FAs wanting to deal with him if something like that happened.

Same reason why I don’t see Faulk getting exposed.

Realistically I think Dunn will be selected or someone like Sunny or Barbie.

Faulk shouldn't be exposed because he's The Blues best all-around defenceman with Parayko playing at less than 100%, and who knows if he'll ever get back to his pre-injury state. And Faulk certainly earned his salary this season.

 

[Brian39]

I can’t see Krug being left unprotected solely because of the precedent it would set for FAs coming here.

Imagine signing a 7 year deal and you’re gone after 1 season? Armstrong isn’t afraid to make moves, but I’d worry about FAs wanting to deal with him if something like that happened.

Same reason why I don’t see Faulk getting exposed.

Realistically I think Dunn will be selected or someone like Sunny or Barbie.

That precedent has already been set. It is quite literally the exact basis behind Army's philosophical opposition to NMCs. If a UFA would be put off from dealing with us based on our expansion draft, then that same UFA would be someone who requires a NMC. Army is opposed to giving NMCs specifically because he believes that the team should always have the ability to do things like exposing/waiving recently acquired guys who aren't meeting expectations. He said as much on the opening day of free agency. Krug and his agent knew damn well that expansion draft exposure was a possibility when they got a NTC instead of a NMC and every agent knows damn well that loyalty from a team only goes as far as the written guarantees in the contract.

 

[jbron]

Looking at Seattle choices at D, there are quite a few LD that could be available. Yet, Dunn would be there right at the top. Vegas selected 13 D in their expansion draft. The below list is just possible and for sure there will be trades and offers etc as teams try to protect more than there lists allow. If the Blues don't protect Dunn, they should trade him to get something in return. Seattle has less options at Forward and Center and that might play well into the Blues making an offer to have Sanford or Blais selected. Would hate to offer any future draft picks though.

Right D

Dumba
Gudas
Cernak
Fabbro
Miller

Left D

Dunn
Graves
Fleury
Kukan
Lauzon
Kylington
Bean or Skjei
De Hann or Zadorov

 

[Xerloris]

Looking at Seattle choices at D, there are quite a few LD that could be available. Yet, Dunn would be there right at the top. Vegas selected 13 D in their expansion draft. The below list is just possible and for sure there will be trades and offers etc as teams try to protect more than there lists allow. If the Blues don't protect Dunn, they should trade him to get something in return. Seattle has less options at Forward and Center and that might play well into the Blues making an offer to have Sanford or Blais selected. Would hate to offer any future draft picks though.

Right D

Dumba
Gudas
Cernak
Fabbro
Miller

Left D

Dunn
Graves
Fleury
Kukan
Lauzon
Kylington
Bean or Skjei
De Hann or Zadorov

Did you get this list from the anti norris votes or something?

 

[Prosaic]

Considering how ever many games the Blues play in the post season, the expansion draft decisions probably shouldn't change much.

Assuming the Blues follow the 7F - 3D - 1G Format, I think the forwards that are locks to be protected are:
90, 57, 18, 25

I'm betting good money 10, 70 and 91 are protected.

I genuinely don't care if 12, 9, or any other Blues forward available are selected. But I'm assuming they won't be regardless.

I'd assume 55 and 72 are locks to be protected.

But as an outsider with an interest in the teams decisions, I'd hate to see 29 plucked for nothing.

I know he didn't have the greatest season but from a logical standpoint there's really no reason to not protect 29 over 47. Since 2018-19:
xGF is 53.75 (highest among all Blues D with 500 Min)
xGA/60 is 2.03 (lowest among all Blues D with 500 Min, except 41)
xGF/60 2.36 (2nd only to 27)
5v5 Points/60 is 1 (2nd only to 27)

Goes without saying that he's statistically much better than Krug at 5 on 5 play.

From a league-wide perspective he ranks as follows:
xGF ranks 29th
xGA/60 ranks 35th
xGF/60 ranks 74th
5v5 Points/60 ranks Tied for 44th

So if you define a top 4 defenseman as a top 128 defenseman (4 x 32) then statistically speaking he is absolutely a top 4 defenseman.

The Blues do need to give him an expanded role. If they lose him for nothing before ever seeing what he could do playing over 20 a game then they might really regret. Especially when it comes down to keeping a 30 year old defenseman who's 5 on 5 game is suspect at best, here's Krugs league ranks since 2018-19:
xGF 79th (51.42)
xGA/60 88th (2.16)
xGF/60 103rd (2.29)
5v5 Points/60 (0.97)

This season only:
xGF 162nd (47.6), Dunn ranks 199th (45.04)
xGA/60 196th (2.43), Dunn ranks 102nd (2.1)
xGF/60 97th (2.21), Dunn ranks 240th (1.72)
5v5 Points/60 79th (0.91), Dunn ranks 102nd (0.83)

And if we're being completely objective here, statistically Dunn is also a better player thank Faulk, who many seem to think is a reinvigorated player but really is just playing way more than he should be and has basically been getting caved in all season but I don't think there is any chance the Blues don't protect him despite that.

But while we're at it, here are Faulks ranks this season:
xGF 172nd (46.64)
xGA/60 144th (2.23)
xGF/60 202nd (1.95)
5v5 Points/60 125th (0.77)

Since 2018-19:
xGF 125th (50.08)
xGA/60 153rd (2.3)
xGF/60 99th (2.31)
5v5 Points/60 160th (0.72)

The entire point of this is a way of illustrating that I think the Blues should keep Dunn both based on statistical performance also you know, he's 24 whereas Krug and Faulk are 30 and 29, and also have 6 more seasons at 6.5. I genuinely don't think either of them are worth that contract so keeping both at the expense of Dunn would not be ideal. Despite a disappointing 2021 campaign, I still take Dunn over both of them.

 

[simon IC]

Looking at Seattle choices at D, there are quite a few LD that could be available. Yet, Dunn would be there right at the top. Vegas selected 13 D in their expansion draft. The below list is just possible and for sure there will be trades and offers etc as teams try to protect more than there lists allow. If the Blues don't protect Dunn, they should trade him to get something in return. Seattle has less options at Forward and Center and that might play well into the Blues making an offer to have Sanford or Blais selected. Would hate to offer any future draft picks though.

Right D

Dumba
Gudas
Cernak
Fabbro
Miller

Left D

Dunn
Graves
Fleury
Kukan
Lauzon
Kylington
Bean or Skjei
De Hann or Zadorov

Wow, there are a few names on that list I would take on the Blues in a heartbeat! Cernak and Fleury in particular.

 

[Blueston]

With flat cap think you're gonna see lots of good but highly paid players (like Tarasenko? Krug?) left unprotected. Teams may not want to lose them but lower priced options are more valuable with cap space so scarce. Will be interesting to see whether Kraken take the bait.