Speculation: Expansion Talk

[Ingvar]

As far as I'm aware, unprotected drafted players and their contracts become the property of the expansion team. If Zetterberg we drafted and were to retire, that cap penalty would have no effect on us as the contract was moved when he was drafted.

I'm aware it's unlikely Z and Kronner don't get protected, I just hope loyalty doesn't cost us a solid prospect

While CBA doesn't specify this exactly, every time transfer via expansion draft is mentioned, it is treated exactly as in any other case. So cap recapture would still apply to Red Wings since they took advantage of paying more money than AAV to Z (or Kronner). That means if he retires before his contract ends, DRW will face cap penalty equal to net benefit divided by number of years left on his deal. Total recapture pool at the end of 16-17 will be 12m$ for Zetterberg and 4m$ for Kronwall. So that would be even more harsh than I said: 4m$ cap recapture penalty after retirement 3 years early, 6m$ for 2 years, 12m$ for the last year.

 

[FissionFire]

If players with NMCs are required to be protected it will be a VERY interesting expansion draft.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

If players with NMCs are required to be protected it will be a VERY interesting expansion draft.

The key to this is what they do with NTC and LTC. The NMC don't really impact us, the others are pretty significant.

Also the idea that we would or should leave Zetterberg exposed in the expansion draft is completely preposterous.

 

[Henkka]

Larkin doesn't need to be protected. He is counted as 2nd year pro, if the draft is held before 2017 entry draft.

Datsyuk is UFA, no need to be protected and then re-sign him. Same with Glendening. Smith is UFA and let him walk.

Zetterberg, Nyquist, Abdelkader, Tatar, Athanasiou and Mantha should be locks. IF Helm is resigned, also him. Other ways the 7th protected would be Sheahan.

Green, Kronwall and DeKeyser as well are locks. And I think Red Wings should push for 4 protected defencemen in negotiations, to get also Marchenko there.

Unprotected and availaible for expansion teams:

(Sheahan)
Jurco
Pulkkinen
Ericsson
Ouellet
Howard

+ AHL material.

 

[Tatar]

While CBA doesn't specify this exactly, every time transfer via expansion draft is mentioned, it is treated exactly as in any other case. So cap recapture would still apply to Red Wings since they took advantage of paying more money than AAV to Z (or Kronner). That means if he retires before his contract ends, DRW will face cap penalty equal to net benefit divided by number of years left on his deal. Total recapture pool at the end of 16-17 will be 12m$ for Zetterberg and 4m$ for Kronwall. So that would be even more harsh than I said: 4m$ cap recapture penalty after retirement 3 years early, 6m$ for 2 years, 12m$ for the last year.

Interesting. Thanks for the insight, we'll have to see the final verbiage on the matter in a few months. This would make things complicated

 

[InjuredChoker]

If players with NMCs are required to be protected it will be a VERY interesting expansion draft.

i'm 99% sure that they won't be.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

i'm 99% sure that they won't be.

I think NMC will be protected. My guess is the NHLPA will agree to NTC not offering protection.

Easy argument can be made why NMC should be honored.

Have a tough time seeing why a NTC would preclude you from this, especially since you can be put on waivers and claimed by anyone.

 

[Henkka]

I think NMC will be protected. My guess is the NHLPA will agree to NTC not offering protection.

Easy argument can be made why NMC should be honored.

Have a tough time seeing why a NTC would preclude you from this, especially since you can be put on waivers and claimed by anyone.

Pretty much this. I see expansion draft as same kind of procedure as waiver-claim.

NMC will protect you from waivers but NTC won't. Same thinking modelworks equally at expansion draft.

 

[InjuredChoker]

I think NMC will be protected. My guess is the NHLPA will agree to NTC not offering protection.

Easy argument can be made why NMC should be honored.

Have a tough time seeing why a NTC would preclude you from this, especially since you can be put on waivers and claimed by anyone.

hawks would have to protect these guys if NMCs have to be protected: keith, seabrook, hammer, crawford, anisimov, hossa, toews and keith.

they have about 15 mil in salary for the rest of the roster, and that's including guys like ladd. and exposing both TT and panarin. they wouldn't be even able to expose enough salary as teams would need to expose 25% of their cap. they are about 3 million short. depending on what happens with the cap, it might not be possible for them to expose 25% of their salary if NMCs have to be protected. you can't make rules that teams can't possibly follow.



so it's highly unlikely to happen.

minnesota would also get really bent over but at least they would be able to follow the rules.


daley has said this about NMCs

“What I will make clear is that regardless of where we go with ‘no-moves,’ they would never ‘be exempt from the process.’ â€

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Interesting. Thanks for the insight, we'll have to see the final verbiage on the matter in a few months. This would make things complicated

There isn't any final verbiage to see.

Unless they change the recapture rule as a result of expansion, the recapture will always stay with the original team. It is designed to make teams recognize the salary on their cap that they should have. The Wings have gotten ~12M in cap benefit by Zetterberg making more money than was being reflected on the cap. If he goes unprotected and gets claimed... the Red Wings would retain most of that overage. I don't think he's still making more actual cash than AAV, so the team that picked him up will not get hit with any recapture, cause they'll be paying more AAV than actual salary.

Expansion draft stuff wouldn't make it any more complex than trades or any other player movement.

 

[obey86]

Larkin doesn't need to be protected. He is counted as 2nd year pro, if the draft is held before 2017 entry draft.

Datsyuk is UFA, no need to be protected and then re-sign him. Same with Glendening. Smith is UFA and let him walk.

Zetterberg, Nyquist, Abdelkader, Tatar, Athanasiou and Mantha should be locks. IF Helm is resigned, also him. Other ways the 7th protected would be Sheahan.

Green, Kronwall and DeKeyser as well are locks. And I think Red Wings should push for 4 protected defencemen in negotiations, to get also Marchenko there.

Unprotected and availaible for expansion teams:

(Sheahan)
Jurco
Pulkkinen
Ericsson
Ouellet
Howard

+ AHL material.

What's the point in protecting Zetterberg and Kronwall? If someone takes those contracts, great. Don't care about cap recapture when it comes to Zetterberg either....as the same exact thing applies if he stays with the Red Wings and retires early.

 

[Frk It]

What's the point in protecting Zetterberg and Kronwall? If someone takes those contracts, great. Don't care about cap recapture when it comes to Zetterberg either....as the same exact thing applies if he stays with the Red Wings and retires early.

Well, most of the fan base does not view Zetterberg like you do.

He is the captain of this team, has had a great career here, and I think the vast majority of fans want to see him finish his career here.

 

[obey86]

Well, most of the fan base does not view Zetterberg like you do.

He is the captain of this team, has had a great career here, and I think the vast majority of fans want to see him finish his career here.

I'm not in any way opposed to Zetterberg finishing his career here.....but not if it means keeping Zetterberg for a few more seasons at the expense of a young player who can contribute in a positive way to the team over the next 10 seasons.

You don't build teams based on nostalgia.

 

[Frk It]

I'm not in any way opposed to Zetterberg finishing his career here.....but not if it means keeping Zetterberg for a few more seasons at the expense of a young player who can contribute in a positive way to the team over the next 10 seasons.

You don't build teams based on nostalgia.

You also don't piss off the fans by shipping out a fan favorite whose number will go in the rafters one day.

 

[obey86]

You also don't piss off the fans by shipping out a fan favorite whose number will go in the rafters one day.

Uh, you don't make roster decisions based on keeping the fans happy.

You make roster decisions based on what's best for the team when it comes to winning. And anyways, if you win, the fans will be happy no matter who you traded away or got rid of.

 

[Flowah]

With certain players it's a very delicate balance. Trading Yzerman or Lidstrom would have been a mistake in my opinion. They meant more to the franchise than what their immediate value was on the ice. Not sure if Z is at that level but it's close.

 

[Frk It]

With certain players it's a very delicate balance. Trading Yzerman or Lidstrom would have been a mistake in my opinion. They meant more to the franchise than what their immediate value was on the ice. Not sure if Z is at that level but it's close.

I agree. I think getting rid of Z and Kronwall are two entirely different things, for example. I think the casual fans (which are the majority of fans) would be pretty pissed about losing Z to another team.

Not like it matters anyways, we are talking about the GM that preaches loyalty, and can't even say no to Dan ****ing Cleary. So this is all VERY MUCH a moot point.

 

[jaster]

Larkin doesn't need to be protected. He is counted as 2nd year pro, if the draft is held before 2017 entry draft.

By the time the expansion draft happens, Larkin will have 2 years pro under his belt, which means, according to reports, he'll be eligible for the draft.

Datsyuk is UFA, no need to be protected and then re-sign him. Same with Glendening.

We'll see if that's how that works. The league may see that as a type of circumvention and will put something in place, or time the draft, to prevent it.

 

[jaster]

Zetterberg's and, to a lesser extent, Kronwall's value to this team is underrated by many on this forum. Their leadership, experience, and the cultural continuity they offer to the organization and, specifically, to the young players on this team is very significant. It is something you don't see on TV, you can't quantify, and, unless you've been in an arena such as high level team sports, or the military, or something comparable, you probably don't even think about.

They will not be exposed in the expansion draft, nor should they. You can replace Darren Helm in short order. You cannot do the same with guys like Zetterberg.

 

[obey86]

Zetterberg's and, to a lesser extent, Kronwall's value to this team is underrated by many on this forum. Their leadership, experience, and the cultural continuity they offer to the organization and, specifically, to the young players on this team is very significant. It is something you don't see on TV, you can't quantify, and, unless you've been in an arena such as high level team sports, or the military, or something comparable, you probably don't even think about.

They will not be exposed in the expansion draft, nor should they. You can replace Darren Helm in short order. You cannot do the same with guys like Zetterberg.

This is hogwash. Old, fast declining players, with "leadership ability" are replaced all the time in every single sport and the teams survive just fine. Typically, the teams that find themselves in the most trouble are the ones who pay for past performance and "leadership abilities" instead of paying for what that player actually brings to the team on the ice/court/field/etc at the present time.

Using your same logic, maybe the, Abdelkader, Ericsson and Howard contracts are actually excellent contracts for the Wings if the young guys are looking up to them and they are considered "leaders" with "experience" by their teammates as they continue the "cultural continuity". On ice performance and salary cap hit be damned. We should stop complaining about those contracts then. Unless you're in the locker room and can read the minds of players...you don't know whether that's true or not. I mean, Brad Richards brings experience and leadership....let's sign him to a 4 year extension!

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Uh, you don't make roster decisions based on keeping the fans happy.

You make roster decisions based on what's best for the team when it comes to winning. And anyways, if you win, the fans will be happy no matter who you traded away or got rid of.

1). Zetterberg will do more good for the Wings on the roster, or at least less bad, due to his recapture, than any young player who would lose a roster spot for him being here.

We have already turned over the roster like crazy and still lost/will lose a couple players to waivers for nothing. We aren't going to lose a Larkin or even a Pulkkinen cause of 40 year old Z. It would be Jeff Hoggan or Mitch Callahan. Definition of replaceable.

2) Zetterberg is likely to be better in his last year than several AHL farmhands have the capability of being.

It's not a fan base happiness thing. It's a utility thing in that old ass Henrik Zetterberg provides more than a guy like Eric Tangradi.

 

[obey86]

1). Zetterberg will do more good for the Wings on the roster, or at least less bad, due to his recapture, than any young player who would lose a roster spot for him being here.

We have already turned over the roster like crazy and still lost/will lose a couple players to waivers for nothing. We aren't going to lose a Larkin or even a Pulkkinen cause of 40 year old Z. It would be Jeff Hoggan or Mitch Callahan. Definition of replaceable.

2) Zetterberg is likely to be better in his last year than several AHL farmhands have the capability of being.

It's not a fan base happiness thing. It's a utility thing in that old ass Henrik Zetterberg provides more than a guy like Eric Tangradi.

I don't think you understand the proposed expansion draft rules. They can only protect 7 forwards. Plenty of NHL forwards on the team would be potentially chosen before they choose AHL players like Hoggan or Mitch Callahan.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

This is hogwash. Old, fast declining players, with "leadership ability" are replaced all the time in every single sport and the teams survive just fine. Typically, the teams that find themselves in the most trouble are the ones who pay for past performance and "leadership abilities" instead of paying for what that player actually brings to the team on the ice/court/field/etc at the present time.

Using your same logic, maybe the, Abdelkader, Ericsson and Howard contracts are actually excellent contracts for the Wings if the young guys are looking up to them and they are considered "leaders" with "experience" by their teammates as they continue the "cultural continuity". On ice performance and salary cap hit be damned. We should stop complaining about those contracts then. Unless you're in the locker room and can read the minds of players...you don't know whether that's true or not. I mean, Brad Richards brings experience and leadership....let's sign him to a 4 year extension!

To expand on my post,.. Henrik Zetterberg has enough hockey IQ that even completely broken down, he's more productive offensively and defensively than fourth line plugs. And letting him go in the expansion draft is actually MORE likely than less to cost the Wings a young player, as they'd have all of the Z cap hit and none of the ability to LTIR it.

 

[ap3x]

Using your same logic, maybe the, Abdelkader, Ericsson and Howard contracts are actually excellent contracts for the Wings if the young guys are looking up to them and they are considered "leaders" with "experience" by their teammates as they continue the "cultural continuity". On ice performance and salary cap hit be damned. We should stop complaining about those contracts then. Unless you're in the locker room and can read the minds of players...you don't know whether that's true or not. I mean, Brad Richards brings experience and leadership....let's sign him to a 4 year extension!

Where did he say that you had to use the same logic for those players?

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I don't think you understand the proposed expansion draft rules.

Oh. You were talking about protecting him vs not protecting him. I thought you were talking about we should leave him unprotected so he gets taken and the money is off our books. That's what I meant with the Pulkkinen, Hoggan, Callahan thing.
I understand the rules, I just misunderstood your exact point because I was thinking one way and you were another.