Speculation: Expansion Draft Discussion

PredsV82

Rest easy, 303, and thank you.
Sponsor
Aug 13, 2007
35,234
15,223
Schroedingers box

Porter Stoutheart

We Got Wood
Jun 14, 2017
14,876
11,256
I keep wondering what Tampa is looking at for Expansion... hence this post... which is for my own benefit if nobody else's.... lesseee....

Kucherov ($9.5M) - Point ($6.75M) - Stamkos ($8.5M)
Palat ($5.3M) - Cirelli ($4.8M) - Killorn ($4.45M)
Goodrow (UFA) - Gourde ($5.167M) - Coleman (UFA)
Maroon ($0.9M) - Johnson ($5M) - Joseph ($0.7375M)
Colton (RFA) / Stephens ($0.7375M)

Hedman ($7.875M) - Cernak ($2.95M)
McDonagh ($6.75M) - Rutta ($1.3M)
Sergachev ($4.8M) - Foote (RFA)
???

Vasilevskiy ($9.5M)
???

CAP TOTAL: $85.017M

So that's already over the cap with another D and backup to sign, Colton and Foote to get new contracts, and of course the more significant UFAs Goodrow and Coleman.

Seems to me the Bolts probably ought to consider being the old Panthers Reilly/Marchessault suppliers to Seattle. Like give them 1 significant contract (Killorn?) to get them to take Johnson. Tampa of course may still have tricks and trades up their sleeves to get out of this conundrum, or may actually have to let Goodrow and Coleman go (they are looking like $3M+ players now). But it's definitely one example of a case where Seattle could be able to pick up some extra assets/cap.
:dunno:
 

Byrddog

Lifer
Nov 23, 2007
7,471
823
I keep wondering what Tampa is looking at for Expansion... hence this post... which is for my own benefit if nobody else's.... lesseee....

Kucherov ($9.5M) - Point ($6.75M) - Stamkos ($8.5M)
Palat ($5.3M) - Cirelli ($4.8M) - Killorn ($4.45M)
Goodrow (UFA) - Gourde ($5.167M) - Coleman (UFA)
Maroon ($0.9M) - Johnson ($5M) - Joseph ($0.7375M)
Colton (RFA) / Stephens ($0.7375M)

Hedman ($7.875M) - Cernak ($2.95M)
McDonagh ($6.75M) - Rutta ($1.3M)
Sergachev ($4.8M) - Foote (RFA)
???

Vasilevskiy ($9.5M)
???

CAP TOTAL: $85.017M

So that's already over the cap with another D and backup to sign, Colton and Foote to get new contracts, and of course the more significant UFAs Goodrow and Coleman.

Seems to me the Bolts probably ought to consider being the old Panthers Reilly/Marchessault suppliers to Seattle. Like give them 1 significant contract (Killorn?) to get them to take Johnson. Tampa of course may still have tricks and trades up their sleeves to get out of this conundrum, or may actually have to let Goodrow and Coleman go (they are looking like $3M+ players now). But it's definitely one example of a case where Seattle could be able to pick up some extra assets/cap.
:dunno:
 

Byrddog

Lifer
Nov 23, 2007
7,471
823
They have a number of options this off season but the real Cup window closes this year. The whole thing hinges around Stamkos right now. If he does in fact have that core injury(hernia) it could well be he has played his last game. This would be the third surgery on that weakened area and likely would force him to retire, But do not feel too bad for him he has collected 85 million dollars thru this last contract. If Stamkos does come back Johnson will be moved and maybe Killorn. There is another rumor that they would expose McDoungh since Foot has had a pretty good rookie year I could see him going to Seattle and Seattle trading for Johnson who is from the Seattle area. A combination of these will probably happen but the next two years will be what they are setting up for Cap wise. Point will need a contract then the next summer Sergichev, Cernak, Cirelli and all four are going to need significant raises. Like the Preds Tampa can not really afford to lose the young Dmen and will fill with slugs like the Preds have for the 3rd pair heck there already putting Schenn out there. Right now the top 6 are just devastated missing Kuch all year and now Stamkos out it has hurt Point, Palat and Killorn. But it looks like Ross Colton is the real deal and will be able to step up to top 6 next year if they must move Killorn, Mitchell Stevens can move up to center the 3rd line and they can move Gourde to wing. The D will take a hit again but they should have some flexability at the trade deadline if they are close.
 
Jul 12, 2007
1,330
222
For all the dad jokes you bother to type out that ring flat I wouldn't expect you to recognize something actually funny.
What does this even mean ?
I see one guy saying something halfways funny, then another guy saying “huh huh huh dass funny funny boss” sniffle snort snivel.
You seem to be # 4 in a little crew of 3.
 

Porter Stoutheart

We Got Wood
Jun 14, 2017
14,876
11,256
Trading Ellis for a 1st and a strong prospect, thus allowing us to go 7-3-1 is the best outcome. We protect 95, 92, 9, 33, 11,10, and 13. We expose 19 unless we decide to extend him.

If we go 4-4-1 and we protect 9, 33, 11, and 92, we’ll lose either 95, 10, 13, or 19.

Trading Ellis free’s up 6.25m and gives us 2 future , potential stars. Carrier steps into Ellis spot.
The main catch with that is finding a team that is willing to do that pre-Expansion draft. There may be a few who aren't hoarding their own protection slots, but it would reduce the number of potential trading partners.

And even if we went 7-3-1, we might just as well still expose Duchene and protect an extra kid like Trenin or Pitlick or somebody. There'd still be no harm in exposing him.
 

Porter Stoutheart

We Got Wood
Jun 14, 2017
14,876
11,256
Playing GM, I play 95 and sit 21. No team would claim 95 right now cuz nobody has cap room. Seattle could take him cuz they need to hit the salary minimum.

The real question is, do we have a big enough sample size to want to rid ourselves of 95? If we do 7-3-1 for expansion, it’s between him and 19 cuz of 19 only has to be more year. Either extend 19 or expose him.

This stretch run + playoffs gives 95 additional time to warrant him staying on the team.
Playing GM, I don't care one bit who plays. The coach can play Duchene or Cousins as he sees fit.

Playing coach, I play Duchene.

Back to playing GM, I just don't see Duchene having enough runway left to change Seattle's perception of him. There's 7 games and probably a short series against Carolina in the playoffs. What is Duchene really going to do to dispel the overall disappointment of his first 2 seasons on this $8M contract? If he gets 10 pts in those 7 games and 4 or 5 more in the playoffs, what opinions will be changed? It's not like he is renowned for intangibles. They won't overpay to have his leadership around. Short of going on a miraculous Conn Smythe run, there isn't any realistic path to Duchene turning himself into a positive asset for the Kraken. If he goes on that kind of run, heck, I'll build a shrine to Duchene and cheerfully change my position on protecting him in the Expansion Draft. But it's not something I feel any need to factor into my planning today.
 

Porter Stoutheart

We Got Wood
Jun 14, 2017
14,876
11,256
Both the lineup and the Cap do seem to be getting a bit snug for next year...

I'm going to make the following contract offers:
Granlund - 4x$4M
Saros - 4x$4M
Rinne - 1x$2M (last one)
Tolvanen - 2x$3M (bridge)
Fabbro - 2x$2.5M (bridge)
Olivier - 2x$0.725M (1-way)
Jeannot - 2x$0.725M (1-way)
Harpur - 2x$0.725M (1-way)
Gudbranson - 1x$1.75M (so far so good but not incl. yet)

Green = protected in Expansion Draft
Blue = exempt from Expansion Draft
Red = use UFA Status to dodge the Expansion Draft
Black = available in Expansion Draft
italics = not included in Cap total

Forsberg ($6M) - Johansen ($8M) - Arvidsson ($4.25M)
Jarnkrok ($2M) - Granlund (UFA - $4M) - Kunin ($2.3M)
Tolvanen (RFA - $3M) - Duchene ($8M) - Tomasino ($0.925M)
Trenin ($0.725M) - Sissons ($2.857M) - Jeannot (RFA - $0.725M)
Olivier (RFA - $0.725M)/Cousins ($1.5M)/Grimaldi ($2M)

Josi ($9.059M) - Fabbro (RFA - $2.5M)
Ekholm ($3.75M)
- Carrier ($0.733M)
Harpur (RFA - $0.725M) - Ellis ($6.25M)
Borowiecki ($2M) - Benning($1M)
Gudbranson (UFA - $1.75M)

Saros (RFA - $4M)
Rinne (UFA - $2M)
Ingram ($0.733M)

Cap Subtotal: $78.3M for 24 players; one more to lose to Seattle
Buyouts (Turris + Santini) = $2.275M

CAP TOTAL: $80.57M

We should have a little bit of breathing room on the Cap anyway. Assuming we lose Jarnkrok or Sissons to Seattle, and we could also maybe think about trading away Borowiecki or Grimaldi, there's a fair bit of overhead remaining in case we needed to pay Granlund or Saros or any of the bridge guys slightly more than I've offered them. Or conversely even more room if they'll take less than I've offered.

So I think we're ok next season pretty much no matter what. We've got the bodies, we've got the Cap room to keep all the players we want. We have the depth to ride out whoever Seattle takes. So there's no desperation required with anything we do.

And then even the year after, when people worry about extensions to Ekholm and Forsberg, I would submit that it's not going to be all that difficult. I tend to think of something like a 5x$5M deal for Ekholm and 8x$8.5M for Forsberg. Those sound like big contracts, but really they are only $1.25M+$2.5M = $3.75M more than we're already paying them. And guys like Borowiecki, Grimaldi, Cousins, and Rinne will be gone, easily accounting for the space needed for those raises.

There's no pressure to do something drastic, anyway. If you want to trade Ellis to change up the mix on D, or can find a way to get something for Duchene, ok, those moves could be considered. But they aren't something we have to be desperately seeking, so we only do those things if the hockey return is good enough. We should be fine on the Cap either way.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TrivialCheese

ILikeItILoveIt

Registered User
Apr 2, 2010
822
608
Both the lineup and the Cap do seem to be getting a bit snug for next year...

I'm going to make the following contract offers:
Granlund - 4x$4M
Saros - 4x$4M
Rinne - 1x$2M (last one)
Tolvanen - 2x$3M (bridge)
Fabbro - 2x$2.5M (bridge)
Olivier - 2x$0.725M (1-way)
Jeannot - 2x$0.725M (1-way)
Harpur - 2x$0.725M (1-way)
Gudbranson - 1x$1.75M (so far so good but not incl. yet)

Green = protected in Expansion Draft
Blue = exempt from Expansion Draft
Red = use UFA Status to dodge the Expansion Draft
Black = available in Expansion Draft
italics = not included in Cap total

Forsberg ($6M) - Johansen ($8M) - Arvidsson ($4.25M)
Jarnkrok ($2M) - Granlund (UFA - $4M) - Kunin ($2.3M)
Tolvanen (RFA - $3M) - Duchene ($8M) - Tomasino ($0.925M)
Trenin ($0.725M) - Sissons ($2.857M) - Jeannot (RFA - $0.725M)
Olivier (RFA - $0.725M)/Cousins ($1.5M)/Grimaldi ($2M)

Josi ($9.059M) - Fabbro (RFA - $2.5M)
Ekholm ($3.75M)
- Carrier ($0.733M)
Harpur (RFA - $0.725M) - Ellis ($6.25M)
Borowiecki ($2M) - Benning($1M)
Gudbranson (UFA - $1.75M)

Saros (RFA - $4M)
Rinne (UFA - $2M)
Ingram ($0.733M)

Cap Subtotal: $78.3M for 24 players; one more to lose to Seattle
Buyouts (Turris + Santini) = $2.275M

CAP TOTAL: $80.57M

We should have a little bit of breathing room on the Cap anyway. Assuming we lose Jarnkrok or Sissons to Seattle, and we could also maybe think about trading away Borowiecki or Grimaldi, there's a fair bit of overhead remaining in case we needed to pay Granlund or Saros or any of the bridge guys slightly more than I've offered them. Or conversely even more room if they'll take less than I've offered.

So I think we're ok next season pretty much no matter what. We've got the bodies, we've got the Cap room to keep all the players we want. We have the depth to ride out whoever Seattle takes. So there's no desperation required with anything we do.

And then even the year after, when people worry about extensions to Ekholm and Forsberg, I would submit that it's not going to be all that difficult. I tend to think of something like a 5x$5M deal for Ekholm and 8x$8.5M for Forsberg. Those sound like big contracts, but really they are only $1.25M+$2.5M = $3.75M more than we're already paying them. And guys like Borowiecki, Grimaldi, Cousins, and Rinne will be gone, easily accounting for the space needed for those raises.

There's no pressure to do something drastic, anyway. If you want to trade Ellis to change up the mix on D, or can find a way to get something for Duchene, ok, those moves could be considered. But they aren't something we have to be desperately seeking, so we only do those things if the hockey return is good enough. We should be fine on the Cap either way.


Tomasino isn’t eligible for the draft. Trade Ellis, use his money for raises, and protect Trenin, Sissons, and another forward of choice.

Is Carrier eligible?
 
  • Like
Reactions: weeze

TrivialCheese

Registered User
Mar 22, 2021
7
6
Both the lineup and the Cap do seem to be getting a bit snug for next year...

I'm going to make the following contract offers:
Granlund - 4x$4M
Saros - 4x$4M
Rinne - 1x$2M (last one)
Tolvanen - 2x$3M (bridge)
Fabbro - 2x$2.5M (bridge)
Olivier - 2x$0.725M (1-way)
Jeannot - 2x$0.725M (1-way)
Harpur - 2x$0.725M (1-way)
Gudbranson - 1x$1.75M (so far so good but not incl. yet)

Green = protected in Expansion Draft
Blue = exempt from Expansion Draft
Red = use UFA Status to dodge the Expansion Draft
Black = available in Expansion Draft
italics = not included in Cap total

Forsberg ($6M) - Johansen ($8M) - Arvidsson ($4.25M)
Jarnkrok ($2M) - Granlund (UFA - $4M) - Kunin ($2.3M)
Tolvanen (RFA - $3M) - Duchene ($8M) - Tomasino ($0.925M)
Trenin ($0.725M) - Sissons ($2.857M) - Jeannot (RFA - $0.725M)
Olivier (RFA - $0.725M)/Cousins ($1.5M)/Grimaldi ($2M)

Josi ($9.059M) - Fabbro (RFA - $2.5M)
Ekholm ($3.75M)
- Carrier ($0.733M)
Harpur (RFA - $0.725M) - Ellis ($6.25M)
Borowiecki ($2M) - Benning($1M)
Gudbranson (UFA - $1.75M)

Saros (RFA - $4M)
Rinne (UFA - $2M)
Ingram ($0.733M)

Cap Subtotal: $78.3M for 24 players; one more to lose to Seattle
Buyouts (Turris + Santini) = $2.275M

CAP TOTAL: $80.57M

We should have a little bit of breathing room on the Cap anyway. Assuming we lose Jarnkrok or Sissons to Seattle, and we could also maybe think about trading away Borowiecki or Grimaldi, there's a fair bit of overhead remaining in case we needed to pay Granlund or Saros or any of the bridge guys slightly more than I've offered them. Or conversely even more room if they'll take less than I've offered.

So I think we're ok next season pretty much no matter what. We've got the bodies, we've got the Cap room to keep all the players we want. We have the depth to ride out whoever Seattle takes. So there's no desperation required with anything we do.

And then even the year after, when people worry about extensions to Ekholm and Forsberg, I would submit that it's not going to be all that difficult. I tend to think of something like a 5x$5M deal for Ekholm and 8x$8.5M for Forsberg. Those sound like big contracts, but really they are only $1.25M+$2.5M = $3.75M more than we're already paying them. And guys like Borowiecki, Grimaldi, Cousins, and Rinne will be gone, easily accounting for the space needed for those raises.

There's no pressure to do something drastic, anyway. If you want to trade Ellis to change up the mix on D, or can find a way to get something for Duchene, ok, those moves could be considered. But they aren't something we have to be desperately seeking, so we only do those things if the hockey return is good enough. We should be fine on the Cap either way.
I agree with most of the contracts here. I could see Tolvanen signing for a bit less. Gurianov went for a 2 x 2.5 after a fairly similar pace last year (and big playoffs). And maybe a little more for Ekholm, but he also stated money isn't a huge deal for him.

I gotta think Jarnkrok is going to be taken by Seattle at this point too. Even if he doesn't resign in Seattle, they could flip him for picks at the deadline next year and it'd probably be worth more than anybody else they could take from us. While it would suck not having next year, keeping Granlund and Tomasino coming up fills that void. Resigning him in Nash would be hard too considering the Forsberg and Ekholm raises. I think a 4 x 4 would be fair value for him but I'd rather have Granlund at that price.

I also wonder if Farrance makes enough of an impression to make the roster next year. Biggest thing blocking him is he isn't ideal for third pairing/PK minutes like we're accustomed to from guys on that pair. But even if he is in the AHL, Harpur/Benning are fine as 6/7 D. That leaves Boro on the outside so I wonder if we try to trade him or just buy him out.

Either way this year has shown us that there are plenty of options at both forward and defense. And once the bridge deals are up for most of these guys, hopefully the cap will start going up again.
 

BigFatCat999

First Fubu and now Pred303. !@#$! you cancer
Apr 23, 2007
18,812
3,001
Campbell, NY
Anyone ever use the expansion draft mock draft tool on capfriendly? Centers are going to be in high demand for Seattle. I could see Seattle drafting a C from Nashville.
 

OldFan

Registered User
Jul 3, 2019
990
704
I agree with most of the contracts here. I could see Tolvanen signing for a bit less. Gurianov went for a 2 x 2.5 after a fairly similar pace last year (and big playoffs). And maybe a little more for Ekholm, but he also stated money isn't a huge deal for him.

I gotta think Jarnkrok is going to be taken by Seattle at this point too. Even if he doesn't resign in Seattle, they could flip him for picks at the deadline next year and it'd probably be worth more than anybody else they could take from us. While it would suck not having next year, keeping Granlund and Tomasino coming up fills that void. Resigning him in Nash would be hard too considering the Forsberg and Ekholm raises. I think a 4 x 4 would be fair value for him but I'd rather have Granlund at that price.

I also wonder if Farrance makes enough of an impression to make the roster next year. Biggest thing blocking him is he isn't ideal for third pairing/PK minutes like we're accustomed to from guys on that pair. But even if he is in the AHL, Harpur/Benning are fine as 6/7 D. That leaves Boro on the outside so I wonder if we try to trade him or just buy him out.

Either way this year has shown us that there are plenty of options at both forward and defense. And once the bridge deals are up for most of these guys, hopefully the cap will start going up again.
But Poile shouldn’t insult Ekholm. Giving a slight discount for being in Nashville is Ekholm’s to give. Poile should be fair and I’m sure he will.
 

TrivialCheese

Registered User
Mar 22, 2021
7
6
But Poile shouldn’t insult Ekholm. Giving a slight discount for being in Nashville is Ekholm’s to give. Poile should be fair and I’m sure he will.
For sure. I don't think 5 x 5 would be an insult, just maybe on the low end. Personally I would go as high as 6.25 to keep him. Realistically I could see them settling in the 5.75 range.
 

Porter Stoutheart

We Got Wood
Jun 14, 2017
14,876
11,256
For sure. I don't think 5 x 5 would be an insult, just maybe on the low end. Personally I would go as high as 6.25 to keep him. Realistically I could see them settling in the 5.75 range.
Yes, Ekholm is better than Ellis and I would not begrudge Ekholm wishing to at least match that salary. But that term Ellis got is totally off the table. I only said 5x5 because I have the sense from all that has gone on already that Ekholm isn't going to push for as much as he's worth.

That said, if he wants $6.25M, I only give him 4 years. It's the same money, though. 4x$6.25M with no fringe benefits, or 5x5 possibly with some beneficial loading or money stacked in the bonus, etc. Doesn't materially affect our cap situation either way, really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TrivialCheese

Porter Stoutheart

We Got Wood
Jun 14, 2017
14,876
11,256
Anyone ever use the expansion draft mock draft tool on capfriendly? Centers are going to be in high demand for Seattle. I could see Seattle drafting a C from Nashville.
I've done it a couple times now. Probably got a couple more iterations to go. And I'll still be surprised if I get even 1/3rd of the roster Seattle ends up with.

I could definitely see them taking Sissons.
 

Scoresberg

In Trotz We Trust?
May 28, 2015
9,946
4,777
Earth
I've done it a couple times now. Probably got a couple more iterations to go. And I'll still be surprised if I get even 1/3rd of the roster Seattle ends up with.

I could definitely see them taking Sissons.

If they're truly having slim picking on centers, then I suppose I could see them going with Sissons. I still don't think they'd be desperate enough to bite on Duchene.
 

Porter Stoutheart

We Got Wood
Jun 14, 2017
14,876
11,256
If they're truly having slim picking on centers, then I suppose I could see them going with Sissons. I still don't think they'd be desperate enough to bite on Duchene.
I like that Cap Friendly seems to remember the last one I did... this is the lineup I got last time, it meets the various contractual requirements (20 players signed, $50.8M already)... although I can see a few players I'd revise on my protection lists today (e.g. Bean).

It's not so much that it's hard to get centers, it's just hard to get any top-6 caliber forwards at all, really. I consciously took Kerfoot and Backlund over some options on D since I figured the D was already full, and I assume Tampa will make some kind of trade that sees Seattle take Johnson. Maybe Seattle also gets Killorn or somebody that way, but I'm not going to try to predict trades, there will undoubtedly be many.

17 forwards:
Jared McCann - Tyler Johnson - Richard Panik
Scott Laughton - Alexander Kerfoot - Colin Blackwell
Jason Dickinson - Mikael Backlund - Mason Appleton
Ivan Barbashev - Colton Sissons - Kevin Stenlund
Rasmus Asplund - Logan Brown - Rudolf Balcers
Zack MacEwen - Nathan Bastian

10 D:
Ryan Graves - Matt Dumba
Nikita Zadorov - Scott Mayfield
Jacob Larsson - Jake Bean
Olli Maata - Radko Gudas
Caleb Jones - Jeremy Lauzon

3 G:
Vitek Vanecek
Jake Allen
Adin Hill

Practically speaking, though, they can't have that many players since waiving 7 of them would be a sheer waste. Maybe there would be a few they could trade, esp. on D, like how we got Emelin after the Vegas draft, but it would be silly to take guys only to lose them on waivers a couple months later. So obviously that's not like a final team, and they'll do other things to mix it up, those are just one sample of potential picks from each team, but it won't be even 25% right in the end, most of those players have multiple equivalents on their current teams and the trades will mix and match everything unrecognizably.

They would have the Cap space to chase a few UFAs, though, so if I'm them maybe I look at short term deals to guys like Stastny, Krejci, Palmieiri, Tatar, Schwartz, Saad, etc. It really feels to me like they need to factor in Free Agency to a greater extent than Vegas did. To me it still doesn't say they would want Matt Duchene, though. Signing some guys like that for 2 or 3 years at $3-5M is a lot more palatable than having a guy at $8M for 5 years who doesn't produce any more than they do. Although I would for sure consider taking Jarnkrok instead, since they have lots of grinders already, and Jarnkrok can play up in the lineup.
 

Tysonson3

Registered User
Feb 20, 2017
724
510
I mean think back to the Vegas ED. What was the longest contract they picked up? Reilly smith at 4 years? Plus that was a cap dump that they took to acquire marchessault. I would be shocked if duchene got picked, big name or not 5 years at 8 million for the kind of production we’ve seen over the past 2 years is not going to be worth it to them
 

Porter Stoutheart

We Got Wood
Jun 14, 2017
14,876
11,256
I mean think back to the Vegas ED. What was the longest contract they picked up? Reilly smith at 4 years? Plus that was a cap dump that they took to acquire marchessault. I would be shocked if duchene got picked, big name or not 5 years at 8 million for the kind of production we’ve seen over the past 2 years is not going to be worth it to them
Ron Francis would really have to get in some kind of time machine if he thinks that he'd get something more out of Duchene than what we see now in his 12th season in the NHL. Ron Francis was almost the anti-Duchene... such a heads-up player with incredible hockey IQ and vision.

Jarnkrok is a better asset for an expansion team. You can play him in the top-6 to tide you over, and cash him in for a draft pick at the trade deadline.

I don't think there is even any salary cap floor hole that you could dig yourself into that would justify taking Duchene's contract... there are still many players with decently large cap hits for just 1 or 2 years that you could take. And plenty of teams trying to dump things on you and paying you to take their garbage.

I mean, I look at the lack of scoring in that team I picked, and I STILL can't come up with any way to justify taking Duchene. Even when you lay it out that they are lacking top-6 skill, it's just too doubtful that Duchene and his contract would be a smart way to address that given their other options.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tysonson3

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->