Proposal: Adding a 1st

[16thOverallSaveUs]

I’ve been talking to fans of a few teams about adding a pick and here is what I’ve come up with.

Philadelphia (10th) would cost Spurgeon

Florida (14th) would cost brodin

A first in the 20s would cost a Zucker

Wondering if wild fans would be interested in any of these trades.

The one I’m most interested in is Florida’s first for Brodin. We can add a guy like York potentially at that spot.

Click to read more...

 

[2Pair]

I’ve been talking to fans of a few teams about adding a pick and here is what I’ve come up with.

Philadelphia (10th) would cost Spurgeon

Florida (14th) would cost brodin

A first in the 20s would cost a Zucker

Wondering if wild fans would be interested in any of these trades.

The one I’m most interested in is Florida’s first for Brodin. We can add a guy like York potentially at that spot.

No interest in trading Spurgeon for a pick. Don't really care either way about the Brodin deal, but wouldn't want York. Zucker is gone

 

[Bazeek]

I'm not all that interested personally, but I also don't really follow undrafted prospects. Ultimately it comes down to whether you'd rather have Spurgeon/Brodin/Zucker more than whoever you think will be available at that pick; there might be good arguments for any one of them, but I have no idea what they are.

I'm left to play the averages, and going by that it seems like the guys we'd give up are better than the players we're likely to draft in those places.

 

[57special]

Trade Brodin for a guy that we hope turns out to be Brodin in 3-5 years? Keep in mind that Brodin himself is a #10 pick who has worked out very well. If you don't believe me, check out the list of #10oa picks.

If he is traded, it needs to be for a top 10 pick, where we can get a player that has a strong possibility of being an impact player. The Wild D has plenty of offensive firepower, but needs a defender like Brodin to balance it out, IMO. His athleticism cannot be overlooked.

Spurgeon is a better player, but is older. He is certainly a top pairing Dman, if not a top 25 Dman. I keep hearing about how valuable they are- seems to me that he's worth more than a #10 pick. Trading him would be a lot easier if FJo had showed a pulse this year. Spurge being traded would be a sign that we are rebuilding

I would only consider trading Zucker because I think he is done here anyway. I do think that he is still our second best LW after Parise, but can see the argument that Greenway, Fiala, and Donato have a realistic chance of surpassing him in a year or two, and at a lesser cap hit. If we trade him it would be to address positional weaknesses on our team.

 

[keppel146]

I thought we weren’t rebuilding? Lol.

 

[Spurgeon]

Brodin or Spurgeon are gone at the expansion draft next year. Trade one of them now for picks, prospects, or in a package deal with Zucker. I really don't want to repeat our previous mistakes in dealing with an expansion team and would rather secure this team beforehand. The problem is that Fenton has made it clear that he's absolutely incompetent when it comes to gauging our players' value. He's the inverse of Fletcher, in that he doesn't trade picks away, but he doesn't get them back when he should have.

 

[2Pair]

Brodin or Spurgeon are gone at the expansion draft next year. Trade one of them now for picks, prospects, or in a package deal with Zucker. I really don't want to repeat our previous mistakes in dealing with an expansion team and would rather secure this team beforehand. The problem is that Fenton has made it clear that he's absolutely incompetent when it comes to gauging our players' value. He's the inverse of Fletcher, in that he doesn't trade picks away, but he doesn't get them back when he should have.

Brodin will be a UFA for the expansion draft. Not hard to work out a deal and wait 3 weeks to sign it.

 

[nickschultzfan]

If we are trading Spurgeon, then we better be getting a Nylander or LD back in the deal.

 

[nickschultzfan]

Package our 1st with Zucker to move up as much as possible and draft a center.

 

[2Pair]

Package our 1st with Zucker to move up as much as possible and draft a center.

Which teams in the top 5 do you see wanting to move back in the draft?

 

[Spurgeon]

Brodin will be a UFA for the expansion draft. Not hard to work out a deal and wait 3 weeks to sign it.

For some reason, I thought the expansion draft was in June of 2020 (which f***s with my post in the other thread). I could see them doing something like that, but I'm very weary of letting anyone get to UFA talks.

 

[2Pair]

For some reason, I thought the expansion draft was in June of 2020 (which ****s with my post in the other thread). I could see them doing something like that, but I'm very weary of letting anyone get to UFA talks.

If you can't work out a deal, you trade Brodin. Or you just accept losing a #4 defenseman.

 

[Spurgeon]

If you can't work out a deal, you trade Brodin. Or you just accept losing a #4 defenseman.

I feel like you could work out a "handshake" deal, but Brodin would still be within his rights to go sign with another team. That's the situation that would scare me. Also, I don't fully remember how the 2017 expansion draft went, but I figured they'd have something in place to prevent something like this. Could definitely be wrong though, it'd be a nice loophole to use when the situation arises.

 

[2Pair]

I feel like you could work out a "handshake" deal, but Brodin would still be within his rights to go sign with another team. That's the situation that would scare me. Also, I don't fully remember how the 2017 expansion draft went, but I figured they'd have something in place to prevent something like this. Could definitely be wrong though, it'd be a nice loophole to use when the situation arises.

Letting him go to UFA and then trying to sign him is still a better scenario than signing him and then having to expose him in the draft.

 

[AKL]

You still have to expose Brodin in the ED even if he is a UFA. You just have to expose a certain number of players that are under contract. Him being a UFA doesn't mean we get to keep him for free without using a protection spot.

I'd do Brodin for the 14th. Then you could either get a center at 11 and a defenseman at 14. Or you could package them and try to move into the top 7ish.

Zucker for 20ish I would also do.

The only way I even consider Spurgeon for a 1st is if it's a top 5 pick and he's told Fenton he has no interest in re-signing here. That said, IF that happened, and we had 5 and 11, do you think either of the top 2 picks would trade down for 5 and 11? Should we even consider that?

 

[SupremeNachos]

I thought we weren’t rebuilding? Lol.

We aren't. We are just buying new tools for the same box

 

[TaLoN]

You still have to expose Brodin in the ED even if he is a UFA. You just have to expose a certain number of players that are under contract. Him being a UFA doesn't mean we get to keep him for free without using a protection spot.

I'd do Brodin for the 14th. Then you could either get a center at 11 and a defenseman at 14. Or you could package them and try to move into the top 7ish.

Zucker for 20ish I would also do.

The only way I even consider Spurgeon for a 1st is if it's a top 5 pick and he's told Fenton he has no interest in re-signing here. That said, IF that happened, and we had 5 and 11, do you think either of the top 2 picks would trade down for 5 and 11? Should we even consider that?

The Curious Role Of UFAs In The Expansion Draft - SinBin.vegas

During a normal season, NHL teams are strictly prohibited from speaking to pending UFAs until the league year begins on July 1st. However, if a UFA is left unprotected in the Expansion Draft, Las Vegas will be granted exclusive rights to negotiate a contract with the player during the three day draft period on June 17-20. If Las Vegas comes to an agreement with a player, and a deal is signed, that player is considered Vegas’ selection in the draft from the UFAs current team.
For example, San Jose elects to leave Joe Thornton exposed in the Expansion Draft. Las Vegas will have the opportunity to speak to Thornton from the 17th to the 20th to discuss a contract. If an agreement is reach, and an official deal is signed, Thornton becomes the one player Las Vegas has selected from the Sharks. His 2017-18 contract will be used toward the 60% cap rule, and no other team ever had an opportunity to negotiate with him.
Still making sense? Ok, let’s muddy up the waters with a little gamesmanship that will happen next year.
Let’s keep using Joe Thornton as the example. Since he is under contract with the Sharks until June 30th, 2017, San Jose may negotiate a future contract with him any time between now and the Expansion Draft deadline. Say they come to an agreement, but don’t sign an official deal. The Sharks can leave Thornton unprotected, Vegas will have the chance to offer him a deal, but he may already be unofficially signed in San Jose, allowing the Sharks to protect a different player without the chance of losing Thornton. It’s a risk, but one likely worth taking on a player who can be trusted.

Bottom line, Seattle isn't selecting a UFA in the draft if they don't sign in that 72 hour period. If we have a deal in place with a UFA already, just waiting to be signed, the player has little incentive to deal with Seattle, thus you don't need to protect said player and can protect someone else.

 

[16thOverallSaveUs]

You still have to expose Brodin in the ED even if he is a UFA. You just have to expose a certain number of players that are under contract. Him being a UFA doesn't mean we get to keep him for free without using a protection spot.

I'd do Brodin for the 14th. Then you could either get a center at 11 and a defenseman at 14. Or you could package them and try to move into the top 7ish.

Zucker for 20ish I would also do.

The only way I even consider Spurgeon for a 1st is if it's a top 5 pick and he's told Fenton he has no interest in re-signing here. That said, IF that happened, and we had 5 and 11, do you think either of the top 2 picks would trade down for 5 and 11? Should we even consider that?

I don’t think 5 and 11 would allow us to move to the top 2, but if somebody went for that, we would have to do it.

 

[BigT2002]

No interest in trading Spurgeon for a pick. Don't really care either way about the Brodin deal, but wouldn't want York. Zucker is gone

Agreed. I'm still on the fence if Zucker would truly get a 1st though. Early 2nd round? Maybe.

 

[57special]

Having a " handshake deal" with a UFA to circumvent the ED sounds uncomfortably like the Joe Smith situation.

 

[ThatGuy22]

Having a " handshake deal" with a UFA to circumvent the ED sounds uncomfortably like the Joe Smith situation.

It was done last time with little fanfare. Oshie, Russel and Eaves just happened to come to terms with the Capitals, Oilers and Ducks basically the minute the expansion draft was over.

 

[roon]

Brodin = Suter insurance.

Why on earth would you trade our only other top pair capable LD?

 

[dBoon]

Trade Zucker, and you lose the one guy on the team that can bring fans out of their seats.

I know he underwhelmed this year, but so did pretty much everybody else except Dumba, Spurgeon, and Parise.

I'd prefer keeping Zucker around. This would be an even duller team to watch without him.

 

[TaLoN]

Having a " handshake deal" with a UFA to circumvent the ED sounds uncomfortably like the Joe Smith situation.

You are free to negotiate with your own players right up to July 1st. Nothing illegal about it. It's already been done and documented as a tool last time around.

 

[Goose312]

Concerning Spurgeon and a handshake deal around expansion time, remember Spurgeon has the same agents as Zucker who were apparently very pissed when they found out Zucker was set to be traded without even talking to them. I would imagine Zucker is strongly opposed to being moved so if he ends up gone without at least getting consulted I think Fenton burned the bridge to Spurgeon's agents doing him any favors.