Expansion Draft Discussion

[JohnnyJacket13]

Darren DregerVerified account
‏@DarrenDreger
Expansion draft potential. Each team has option of protecting 3d, 7F and I goalie or 8 skaters +1 goalie. Expansion determined before draft

Pierre LeBrunVerified account
‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Daly says prospects plus first- and second-year NHL players will be exempt from a potential expansion draft.
...
Should clarify: first- and second-year "pros" exempt from potential expansion draft, not necessarily NHL players. Pro includes AHL
...
Daly says most simple thing to know on expansion draft: teams can only lose one player max if it's expansion by one team; 2 player max if 2
...
Bottom line on expansion draft as a few GMs said: each team has potential to lose either a No. 4 or No. 5 D, or a No. 6 or No. 7 F or a G

Who do we protect? I', fine if we lose a 4/5 DMan (i.e. Tyutin) or a bottom-6 forward...maybe Clarkson :wink:. If the expansion draft were to happen NEXT offseason, we would be forced to include Wennberg, and potentially Karlsson, in our protected list of players since they will be past their first 2 professional years.

This is who I would protect knowing the info above...

Forwards: Saad, Jenner, Atkinson, Dubinsky, Foligno, Wennberg, Karlsson/Rychel (not sure which one would be more valuable to protect)

Defense: Jones, Murray, Savard

Goalie: Bob

This could get interesting...notice how I left Hartnell off that list. Maybe we try and swing a trade with the expansion team for Hartnell so that we don't have to protect him and lose him for nothing. The goalie situation could also make this interesting, if Korpisalo has a good year next year, do you risk losing him for nothing?

Click to read more...

 

[We Want Ten]

The expansion draft and who to protect would make an interesting topic for its own thread.

 

[GoJackets1]

If "first and second year pros" includes AHL players, won't we also need to protect guys like Bjork, Milano, Hearherington, and even Korpisalo?

This is pretty frightening to me if it is the case.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

The expansion draft and who to protect would make an interesting topic for its own thread.

Done.

 

[JacketsDavid]

So not likely on Clarkson being available


Elliotte Friedman
✔ ‎‎@FriedgeHNIC

NHL hasn't decided on players with NMCs being eligible for expansion draft. But expectation is they will not be available for selection

11:26 AM - 16 Mar 2016



66 66 Retweets

48 48 likes

 

[JacketsDavid]

So let me ask this:

-Does it mean guys with NHM would have to be protected or that they just couldn't be picked?

It would screw the CBJ on Clarkson if we had to use one of our spots to protect him - but if I had a talented team and you knew that NMC could not be picked and you didn't have to waste a spot, then why not (over this off-season and next) sign your core guys to new contracts with NMC?

I'm betting they will not allow the loop hole and force teams to protect guys with NMC which will further endeavor Clarkson to the CBJ

 

[EspenK]

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/30-thoughts-getting-closer-expansion-answers/

Some stuff on expansion from Elliotte Friedman here.

No answers but nice discussion of the NMC & NTC questions.

Timing of expansion will be critical regarding young players. Some reports say two year guys exempt I think Friedman said 3.

Obvious protectees for Jackets ignoring the nmc & ntc are:

Jones, Murray, Saad,

Most likely to be protected:

Savard, Dubi, Foligno, Wennberg

Goalie: Bob or Korpi

Or do you take a chance someone claims Bob to free up salary and not protect either goalie. I am assuming you can't lose 2 g's.

Would you protect Cam instead of Foligno?

Hopefully this happens after next season before our young guys hit 3 years with the exception of Rychel.

Very interesting.

 

[We Want Ten]

Done.

I had a 'Woah' moment there for a second haha.

 

[Nanabijou]

If you have to protect players with NMC, it is going to get really dicey for the Jackets. Depends on whether it has to be a full NMC - what about the modified NTCs where players give a list of 10 teams or so that they will accept a trade to?

Dubi, Foligno, Clarkson, Hartnell and Tyutin all have at least some form of NMC/NTC right now and are signed for the 2017/2018 season. If they all have to be protected, that leaves spots for 2 D (Jones, Murray) and 3 other F (Saad, Boone, Wennberg). That leaves Cam, Savard, Johnson, Rychel and some of our other prospects unprotected (assuming the team doesn't change much next year, which is admittedly a highly unlikely assumption).

Korpi will have just finished his second pro year so I assume he wouldn't be eligible - they'd protect Bob then and likely leave Forsberg exposed. I think Milano would also be considered a second year but that would have to be clarified.

On the plus side, the Jackets can only lose one player max.

EDIT: One player max if it is only one expansion team, which I think is likely if there is any at all.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

Obvious protectees for Jackets ignoring the nmc & ntc are:

Jones, Murray, Saad,

Most likely to be protected:

Savard, Dubi, Foligno, Wennberg

Goalie: Bob or Korpi

Jenner?

I had a 'Woah' moment there for a second haha.

 

[EspenK]

Jenner?

After much deliberation I have decided to ignore my very clever edgy response and will go with this instead:

What was I thinking? Guess nothing.

I guess he is in the have to protect group and I'd have to leave Foligno or Savard unprotected. Maybe Wennberg.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

After much deliberation I have decided to ignore my very clever edgy response and will go with this instead:

What was I thinking? Guess nothing.

They're not booing...

I guess he is in the have to protect group and I'd have to leave Foligno or Savard unprotected. Maybe Wennberg.

I'd probably go Savard in that instance.

 

[JohnnyJacket13]

Looking at CapFriendly.com, here are players on the CBJ roster with some sort of a NMC that extend past this season: Dubinsky, Foligno, Clarkson, Hartnell, and Tyutin. If the expansion draft were to occur next summer and players with NMC were ineligible to be protected/picked, this would make everything more interesting as we could protect some more young players/prospects while keeping the core intact. This may also give incentive to the front office to lock up Jones LONG TERM with a NMC in his contract so that they would be able to protect another defenseman in his place.

With the news coming out about the NMC issue, here is how I see things...
Protected forwards: Saad, Jenner, Atkinson, Wennberg, Calvert, Karlsson, Rychel/Bjorkstrand
Protected Defense: Jones, Murray, Savard. If Jones gets locked up with a NMC on his next contract, protect Johnson in his place.
Goalie: Bob

I don't think that not protecting Korpisalo will be an issue (at least at this very moment) because there are plenty of teams out there that have 2 capable goalies that are much more established that could be picked ahead of Korps, such as in Anaheim, Calgary, Colorado, Pittsburgh with their young guy behind Fleury, etc.

 

[Mayor Bee]

I'm interpreting the NMC issue the second way, which is that players with NMCs will be required to be protected.

If that's the case, it means that of the seven forward spots, four would be taken up by Dubinsky, Foligno, Hartnell, and Clarkson. It also means leaving unprotected two of Saad, Jenner, Wennberg, Atkinson, and Rychel.

I fully expect this interpretation to be the one that holds up, because GMs that have done a more shrewd approach toward NMCs will absolutely blow up if they're only able to protect seven forwards while ones that gave out NMCs like Halloween candy get to protect seven plus additional.

 

[EspenK]

I'm interpreting the NMC issue the second way, which is that players with NMCs will be required to be protected.

If that's the case, it means that of the seven forward spots, four would be taken up by Dubinsky, Foligno, Hartnell, and Clarkson. It also means leaving unprotected two of Saad, Jenner, Wennberg, Atkinson, and Rychel.

I fully expect this interpretation to be the one that holds up, because GMs that have done a more shrewd approach toward NMCs will absolutely blow up if they're only able to protect seven forwards while ones that gave out NMCs like Halloween candy get to protect seven plus additional.

If it comes down to it I think I leave Rychel unprotected and I reserve judgement to see how the next two seasons play out. As of today with our dearth of C's I guess Cam is unprotected out of the group you mention.

Maybe some goofy compromise is reached that says you get 2 or three freebies on the NMC's or you lose one protection for every two nmc's that are protected.

 

[JacketsDavid]

I'm interpreting the NMC issue the second way, which is that players with NMCs will be required to be protected.

If that's the case, it means that of the seven forward spots, four would be taken up by Dubinsky, Foligno, Hartnell, and Clarkson. It also means leaving unprotected two of Saad, Jenner, Wennberg, Atkinson, and Rychel.

I fully expect this interpretation to be the one that holds up, because GMs that have done a more shrewd approach toward NMCs will absolutely blow up if they're only able to protect seven forwards while ones that gave out NMCs like Halloween candy get to protect seven plus additional.

That's the way I think too.
If that is the case it will make it even harder to trade a guy like Hartnell next season.

For the goalies I would expose Bob just to see if someone bites.

 

[JacketsDavid]

I don't think that not protecting Korpisalo will be an issue (at least at this very moment) because there are plenty of teams out there that have 2 capable goalies that are much more established that could be picked ahead of Korps, such as in Anaheim, Calgary, Colorado, Pittsburgh with their young guy behind Fleury, etc.

Keep in mind like when the CBJ came on board that there is a lot of bartering going on too. Some of that had to do with 2 teams and trying to get one team to take a goalie to protect the rest of the d-men unprotected for example.
But until you see everyone's roster you never know.
Traditionally most expansion team take cheaper players knowing they really couldn't compete immediately. But sounds like the NHL may give them a bigger opportunity to compete early on. So could be some very interesting players available. if nothing else if some big names are exposed would someone pick them up and try to flip them for more assets down the road? Especially with a salary floor you may be more inclined to take on a 30 year old 2nd line forward for $6M if you though you could turn him into a top pick at the deadline?

 

[CBJWerenski8]

I'd leave Cam and Kerby unprotected but I'd try to cut a deal with the expansion team so that they would agree not to take Cam. I believe there is a rule for that

 

[Cowumbus]

By that time Milano Bjorkstrand and Werenski will be 2+ year pros right? So they could be lost for nothing

 

[major major]

One clarifying question: If the expansion draft is summer 2017, does that mean players with 2 years of pro experience at that time will be eligible? Korpi, Milano, Bjorkstrand, etc...?

I am not going to bother gaming it out if we don't know what the rules are.

 

[Viqsi]

One clarifying question: If the expansion draft is summer 2017, does that mean players with 2 years of pro experience at that time will be eligible? Korpi, Milano, Bjorkstrand, etc...?

I am not going to bother gaming it out if we don't know what the rules are.

LeBrun's article on the rules suggests that those guys would have to be protected. (See: "entering their third year").


And my presumption for NTC/NMCs has always been that one ought to be able to ask a player to waive it for the draft. If it's a "they automatically are on the protected list" deal...

 

[Mayor Bee]

One clarifying question: If the expansion draft is summer 2017, does that mean players with 2 years of pro experience at that time will be eligible? Korpi, Milano, Bjorkstrand, etc...?

I am not going to bother gaming it out if we don't know what the rules are.

LeBrun's article on the rules suggests that those guys would have to be protected. (See: "entering their third year").


And my presumption for NTC/NMCs has always been that one ought to be able to ask a player to waive it for the draft. If it's a "they automatically are on the protected list" deal...

I think LeBrun is confounding the two things. The way it's been done previously, a player who is finishing up his second pro year would be exempt; that's the same as a player entering his third year.

Now, the bigger question is going to be how "pro year" is defined. For example, Dylan Larkin played six games in the AHL in 2014-15 after his college season ended; does that count as a pro year? If so, he would need protected (2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17). If not, he's exempt. And there are quite a few players in this exact scenario, so the language will need to be cleared up and clarified a bit.

 

[Mayor Bee]

I'd leave Cam and Kerby unprotected but I'd try to cut a deal with the expansion team so that they would agree not to take Cam. I believe there is a rule for that

And if I'm an expansion GM, I'm not taking any calls from the 614 area code once the unprotected list is made available if those two are available.

The ideal scenario would be to dump Clarkson onto the expansion team, force them to take another heavy contract in the expansion draft, and cough up the assets necessary to convince them that this is the deal to take instead of the one Philly would offer to take MacDonald, or Los Angeles would offer to take Dustin Brown. Otherwise this team will lack the cap space to be able to retain the young talent that should be reaching its peak by that time.

 

[Nanabijou]

I think LeBrun is confounding the two things. The way it's been done previously, a player who is finishing up his second pro year would be exempt; that's the same as a player entering his third year.

Now, the bigger question is going to be how "pro year" is defined. For example, Dylan Larkin played six games in the AHL in 2014-15 after his college season ended; does that count as a pro year? If so, he would need protected (2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17). If not, he's exempt. And there are quite a few players in this exact scenario, so the language will need to be cleared up and clarified a bit.

For CBJ purposes, Milano would be in this boat. He played 10 games for Springfield last year when Plymouth was done.

The draft would have to happen in June before the entry draft. The contracts switch over to the next year on July 1. So, I would have to think Bjork and Korpi would be considered '2nd year' players and would be exempt from the draft.

 

[Mayor Bee]

For CBJ purposes, Milano would be in this boat. He played 10 games for Springfield last year when Plymouth was done.

The draft would have to happen in June before the entry draft. The contracts switch over to the next year on July 1. So, I would have to think Bjork and Korpi would be considered '2nd year' players and would be exempt from the draft.

Of course, there's also the possibility of Korpisalo being regarded as a third-year pro because of his 2014-15 season spent in the highest Finnish league.

If that doesn't count as a pro season, it would also mean that Chicago would have Panarin exempt on the same basis, which is absurd.