So, there's fans elsewhere talking about this: Urho Vaakanainen not exempt because he will have completed his third professional season - meaning he will require protecting.
However, I am of the belief that his first year does not count because of the injury he sustained while up in Boston and thus does not meet the AHL games played to count as a season - which is also why the Bruins were able to slide his contract his first year.
As is always the case when I am not 100% certain, I email someone who would know. Answer to come - hopefully today. Or, throw another monkey in the wrench.
You make some good points but with how much money Vegas has helped to generate, they’re not going to change the rules. It’s all about money.
Hopefully you're right on this because that's frightening if he's not exempt.
Yup - what’s the value in having all that nhl level depth on defense if it’s not to have a few guys who can step right in.I think the decision is really pretty easy. Similar to Colin Miller. Leave Gryz unprotected. If they take him we slide someone up to fill the slot like Gryz did for Miller.
Why would they pay anything for them to take Backes when he's a free agent?Why would you pay them to take someone of value? Pay them to take Backes or Moore or Wagner. Not to take a valuable piece.
Certainly to me anyways makes the expansion decision pretty clear for Boston.
Go 7-3. Protect Carlo, McAvoy, Krug. Lose one of Gryz/Clifton (likely Gryz). Meaning you still have 4 out of 5, and Urho.
McAvoy
Krug
Carlo
Gryz/Clifton
Urho
If that's your Top 5 D-men heading into 2021-22 your in pretty good shape IMO.
I agree 100%. It's what I would do.
However, you play Don Sweeney here. Chara wants to play another year. He wants a NMC. What do you do?
Remember though, the draft takes place in June, the contract is in effect until July 1 so he would require protection. If Krug re-signs, he's going to want a NMC so he'll require protection. That leaves one spot.
I know what I would do. Want to see if we are on the same page.
I think the decision is really pretty easy. Similar to Colin Miller. Leave Gryz unprotected. If they take him we slide someone up to fill the slot like Gryz did for Miller.
unfortunately NHL expansion is a business-first proposition. They want these teams to be better-set up than a lot of the existing teams because they know they aren't expanding into traditional top-tier hockey markets and these organizations need every advantage to be successful. We're not in an era where an expansion team can survive with a Scott Melanby type as their best player.Something about the expansion process that does bug me a bit is how teams MUST expose one of their two goaltenders. The league now is so tight, it's not even debatable in my mind anyways that if you want playoff success, you need two quality netminders to get you to the dance and still have enough gas left for a big run.
So your looking at 3-4 teams who will lose quality netminders. So an expansion team will be better set-up in goal than 3-4 existing teams. Seems unfair to me.
At the very least I think they should be limited to only being able to select two goaltenders, and not be able to raid the ranks of back-up goaltenders.
maybe I'm naive, but I've got to think Chara is smart enough to understand all this and that he'd be willing to accept a handshake agreement with Sweeney that they aren't going to move him anywhere when he's 43 and on a 1 year deal. Even without a NMC, it seems really far-fetched to imagine the Bruins moving him when he's going year-to-year until he retires. It would be a massive black eye to the organization if they didn't let him finish his career here on his terms. The NMC seems largely unnecessary.Pains me to say it but if Chara is demanding a NMC on a 1-year deal to play the 2020-21 season as a Bruin, and that's the hill he's willing to die on, knowing that he would require protection for the Seattle draft, I have to let the big man walk. Cold but it's a business after all.
EDIT: I assumed Krug is extended in this scenario (although it might not change my decision on Chara).
The Bruins will do right by Chara they wouldn’t move him if he didn’t have a NTC and if they tried he could retire if he wanted. They would ask him what team would he be interested in going, He would tell them and they move him out of respect even if it meant getting pennies on the dollar. It’s not happening anyway because the bruins will be in the running for the cup the next three years anyway. I don’t care about the other players age they may be getting old but the still have game and are in great shape. It will be the players that are drafted and how they develop which will be more important when the other players they have now retire or leave.maybe I'm naive, but I've got to think Chara is smart enough to understand all this and that he'd be willing to accept a handshake agreement with Sweeney that they aren't going to move him anywhere when he's 43 and on a 1 year deal. Even without a NMC, it seems really far-fetched to imagine the Bruins moving him when he's going year-to-year until he retires. It would be a massive black eye to the organization if they didn't let him finish his career here on his terms. The NMC seems largely unnecessary.
I agree 100%. It's what I would do.
However, you play Don Sweeney here. Chara wants to play another year. He wants a NMC. What do you do?
Remember though, the draft takes place in June, the contract is in effect until July 1 so he would require protection. If Krug re-signs, he's going to want a NMC so he'll require protection. That leaves one spot.
I know what I would do. Want to see if we are on the same page.
At this rate they'll consider not even protecting McAvoy