Expansion Draft Discussion
- Thread starter JohnnyJacket13
- Start date
- Status
JacketsFanWest
Registered User
It depends on the exact language in the contract and exactly how much the team is willing to force a player who doesn't want to play for them to play for them.
If a goalie wants to leave and put in zero effort to stop the puck, then sure enforce the contract. I'm sure that will work out really well for the team.
With Kukan and the AHL situation, that's what it essentially came down to. Luleå would have to haul his butt back to Sweden and force him to play for them. It specifically said in his contract, he had to play in the NHL or be sent back to Sweden not the AHL. The CBJ were able to argue that once he signed the NHL contract, his SHL contract was no longer valid so the language in his SHL contract didn't matter.
With Elvis, it sounds like he doesn't want to play in the AHL. If Korpi was selected in the expansion draft and Forsberg isn't resigned, maybe Elvis could be given the opportunity to try to win the backup job in training camp or go back to Switzerland. But teams in Europe don't like uncertainty with their starting goalie. However, lawyers might be able to find some loophole to get him to the NHL if the Jackets need a goalie.
If a goalie wants to leave and put in zero effort to stop the puck, then sure enforce the contract. I'm sure that will work out really well for the team.
With Kukan and the AHL situation, that's what it essentially came down to. Luleå would have to haul his butt back to Sweden and force him to play for them. It specifically said in his contract, he had to play in the NHL or be sent back to Sweden not the AHL. The CBJ were able to argue that once he signed the NHL contract, his SHL contract was no longer valid so the language in his SHL contract didn't matter.
With Elvis, it sounds like he doesn't want to play in the AHL. If Korpi was selected in the expansion draft and Forsberg isn't resigned, maybe Elvis could be given the opportunity to try to win the backup job in training camp or go back to Switzerland. But teams in Europe don't like uncertainty with their starting goalie. However, lawyers might be able to find some loophole to get him to the NHL if the Jackets need a goalie.
Last edited:
Come on, Porty. You're better than that. (If I have to explain the math, I will. But what a terrible response on the chat today)
Am I missing something? That looks like a question, not an answer.
EDIT: Oh, I do see he ****ed it up. Nevermind. But still, I'm ok with him ****ing stuff up stuff like that in a chat format like that.
Yeah, sorry. It was part of an answer to a question. Someone asking about Johnson and protecting him over Savard. Opting for 8-1 to protect an extra forward as he states leaves you with no defensemen protected. Not happening.
I hope he understands that the 8+1 option is 8 skaters and 1 goalie, not 8 forwards and 1 defenseman (he didn't list Jones as one of the people they would have to expose to protect an extra forward). The answer to whether the Blue Jackets would consider it is only as long as it takes them to remember they have defensemen worth protecting.
As far as I'm concerned, the only big question right now is what they do about Hartnell.
As far as I'm concerned, the only big question right now is what they do about Hartnell.
Last edited:
JacketsFanWest
Registered User
Vegas taking Hartnell would be a decent idea. Hartnell has worked well as a line mate for younger players. A lot of Wennberg and Dano's rookie success was playing with Hartnell. He's also helped Sedlak. Proper development of young centermen is critical for expansion teams.
I doubt Vegas is going the direction of drafting older, has-been type players, but he would be a solid player to help develop rookies on Vegas' 4th line.
I doubt Vegas is going the direction of drafting older, has-been type players, but he would be a solid player to help develop rookies on Vegas' 4th line.
Last edited:
Doesn't anybody think Vegas might take Calvert? I don't think he will be protected he has experience in the league he can score and he plays all out. He's not that old and I think he brings something Vegas needs. Not that I want to loose him, he is important to this team in what he does and that is why I think we could see him taken.
Nanabijou
Booooooooooone
I'm a fan of Calvert but I can't see a way it would make sense for Vegas to take him over other players that will be exposed like Wild Bill. Bill is younger, cheaper and a center.
I think it's a possibility. Calvert would be good material for your first captain in franchise history - not a great player, but plays hard and plays the way most expansion teams have to (all heart, lots of hustle, a little bit of an edge). He also has real benefit in terms of his PK ability (which is not a small thing for a team that will be outgunned many nights - they'll have a lot of penalties to kill, in all likelihood).
He's also the type of player fans will love out of the gate because he'll play balls-to-the-wall every night even though they're going to be fighting uphill battles.
If Anderson and Boone are both protected I think Calvert might be pretty enticing for Las Vegas.
I don't think the contract will matter Calvy doesn't make that much. Yes Bill is a 3rd line center that has had his moments as well as a lot of invisibility on the ice. Are there better centers to chose from we will see, but you know what you are going to get with Calvert.
CBJWerenski8
Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
- Jun 13, 2009
- 42,344
- 24,269
It's not too hard to find Matt Calvert's, finding Josh Anderson's is much harder. Andy will be their pick if he's available IMO. If he's not, its either Karlsson, Korpisalo, or JJ (in that order).
Iron Balls McGinty
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2005
- 8,643
- 6,518
CBJWerenski8
Formerly CBJWennberg10 (RIP Kivi)
- Jun 13, 2009
- 42,344
- 24,269
Iron Balls McGinty
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2005
- 8,643
- 6,518
I think he's almost certainly going to waive his clause, because the likelihood he gets picked is so low and they most likely will tell him if he won't that he'll be bought out.
Personally, I hope it doesn't come to that and that he willingly waives and plays out his last year with us as a 4th liner who platoons with another player. He's been a good player for us and I think has had a lot to do with the success of some of the younger guys.
Iron Balls McGinty
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2005
- 8,643
- 6,518
He has 2 more years left on his deal. i'm a bit concerned about a buyout too as we still have a good chunk of Fedor Tyutin still on the books for another 3 years too plus a small amount for Jared Boll next season. Buying out Hartnell eats up over 3 million in cap space for the next 3 years between him and Tyutin.
Wait, what?...
Holy crap - I spent this entire season thinking he had one more year left after this one.
Aw man. Now I'm (more) depressed.
When he waived his clause I would have ate some salary and took what I could in return. My goal would have been to move him no matter the return when the chance presented itself. He was never really in our long term plans and we really weren't (or are) ready for a deep playoff run. Torts was really wanting to give ice time to our youth.
I tend to take a different view than most GM's (and most people for that matter). To me the cap space was more valuable than his production.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
Game 4 Winnipeg Jets @ Colorado Avalanche - Colorado Avalanche leads series 2-1Wagers: 12Staked: $33,322.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
