News: Botterill-Cal Petersen will probably not sign with Buffalo

[Stive Morgan]

Montreal should sign him, just pile on the goalie prospects

 

[Bronson]

Like others are saying, I assume it is Chicago, with Vegas have a outside shot.

Vegas should have a pretty good shot considering the Chicago Wolves is their AHL team.

 

[Bubba88]

Hawks are in Need of a G prospect

 

[Cirris]

their GM just resigned a prospect and made a trade with vegas to ensure he didn't lose him to the expansion draft...if that's not a sign of belief then I don't know what is...

The reason Buffalo did all that is because they probably offered Peterson max ELC money and bonuses last month, and he still turned them down.

If that isn't a sure sign Peterson didn't want to sign with Buffalo, I'm not sure what is.

Everything you mentioned with Buffalo happened well AFTER their initial contract meeting after he opted to turn pro.

I.E. Peterson potentially leaving left a huge possible hole in their G depth chart and they needed to shore it up. They even drafted one of the top goaltender prospects in the entry draft.

 

[Djp]

He'll come to Chicago in August.

He will sign with someone else before then....

since he left college after his junior year and played his first post draft year in the USHL the rule revers to the latter of 1 June draft year+ 4 or 30 days from declaration of turning pro--thus I believe it june 30/July 1

Teams don't get anything back if they refuse to sign a prospect. If a Team on the other side wants to sign a prospect but the Player refuses due to this loophole (yes it is for me) the Team should get compensation. Ideally, the Team that signs said Player has to give the Team that drafted him a Pick back (1 round lower than he was drafted)

It makes no sense to see a 1st round NCAA Player refusing and entering the Free Agency to get compensated with a 2nd round pick while you get nothing if a 2nd round NCAA Player does the same. It's stupid.

Then why should college players get this but not CHL or Europeans? You have to have an equivalent formula.

If you change it to 1 yr post college then you may need to change CHL and Europe players.

They have talked about changing the draft to 19 yr olds. If they do this then they could change the system to:

1. CHL players drafted to 1 june draft year + 3
2.European players to 1 june draft year + 3
3. For committed NCAA players they do not enter the draft until after their sophomore season then rights are till 1 june draft year + 3

That was not the plan at all because if they signed him...they would have lost Ullmark. The plan was to keep ullmark and not sign him.

If they signed him before their protection list.....

they would not have made the deal with Vegas and protected Carrier. Ullmark may have been taken---but who knows. Vegas may not have been high on him but played bluff with buffalo to get them to get something from them to not take Ullmark.

 

[Persona5]

The rule needs to be changed. Players have to realize the more this happens the lower a players value will be at draft time that chooses to go this route. Teams that draft and lose these players for nothing deserve some sort of compensation from the team that is singing them. It is a broken system and needs to be fixed.

 

[Cane mutiny]

The rule needs to be changed. Players have to realize the more this happens the lower a players value will be at draft time that chooses to go this route. Teams that draft and lose these players for nothing deserve some sort of compensation from the team that is singing them. It is a broken system and needs to be fixed.

This! Pay your dues like everyother young player, or you should have to go play in Europe, or play as a FA in some ML system until your normal RFA year before you're eligible to sign an NHL contract. They should at least have to go through a re-entry draft, so they can't have total control of where they go. That would curtail some of this nonsense.