Speculation: Impact of potential expansion draft

[Ola]

An expansion draft seem to be on the horizon.

The rules of the latest expansion draft are summerized by wiki as follows:

26 of the 28 teams existing in the league at the time of the draft were each allowed to protect either

one goaltender,
five defensemen, and
nine forwards

or

two goaltenders,
three defensemen, and
seven forwards. ...

For teams protecting only one goaltender, there was no experience requirement for those left unprotected. For teams protecting two goaltenders, each goaltender left unprotected must have appeared in either 10 NHL games in the 1999–2000 season or 25 games in the 1998–99 season and 1999–2000 seasons combined. A goaltender had to be in net for at least 31 minutes in each game for the game to be counted against these totals.

At least one defenceman left unprotected by each team had to have appeared in at least 40 games in the 1999–2000 season or 70 games in the 1998–99 season and 1999–2000 seasons combined. At least two forwards left unprotected by each team had to have met the same requirements.

On top of this, its obvious that its the low dollar teams that are in the majority in the BoG and that aren't afraid to execute their power, this might entail a bit diffrent rules this time.

I haven't really analysed this, but it don't seem like it would impact us a ton if the same rules applies in the next expansion draft. Depth on the 4th line and among D's will be exposed for sure though...

The thing that is kind of tricky is that we "have" to protect signed kids, right? Like Miller, Hayes, Fast, McIlrath and co, or? Or did the general waiver exemption rules apply in the last expansion draft? Anyone remember this? Was there some rule about a kid being forced to have played 2 years in the league to be claimed? I don't remember the details anymore... But if there is a 2-year rule, it can get a little tricky. McIlrath would have to be protected if the draft was held this summer for example, and down the road, Skjei, Hayes, Duclair, Buch and co could face the same thing. Ie not being among our top 9F or 5D, but we would have to push someone else out of our top 9/5 to have them protected.

Its early for sure, but it would be interesting to have a bit of a track of this foing forward... In the last expansion draft we lost Mathieu Schneider, and he scored a heck of a lot of pts in the following 8 years after being claimed. And had like 4-5 50+ pts seasons from the blueline...

Click to read more...

 

[Ola]

This would also be the first expansion draft with a Cap, I wonder how that might affect the expansion draft. What if a team can't reach the celling with the players picked? There could be exemptions, but you never know how complicated they make this thing.

 

[pld459666]

there would be a lot of overpaid guys available for teams to select.

The bigger problem as I see it is that they are not adding 4 teams at once which means we run the risk of losing a few players from the 2 expansion drafts if it's true that they are going to 4 new teams.

Personally, I think that Nash is going to be left unprotected.

 

[Swept In Seven]

I want no part of any expansion, it waters the talent level of the best League in the World down considerably. 30 is already too many imo, with multiple teams hemorrhaging cash already perhaps you can move them to better markets instead if they really want those places occupied

 

[Steve Kournianos]

As long as Lundqvist, McDonagh, Kreider, Hagelin, Stepan and MZA are protected, I could care less.

 

[Steve Kournianos]

Kelly Kisio was a big loss in 1991 but he was replaced by Nemchinov or Weight. Mark Laforest was a backup scrub. Jeff Bloemberg was famous for the ass whipping he took from Vukota or Baumgartner in the 1990 brawl. Joe Cirella sucked. Steven King was a supplemental draft pick who had a hat trick against the Kings in 1993 but sucked also. Smith made a brilliant move by essentially flipping Beezer into Lidster and Healy. Vancouver wanted to protect Whitmore lol.

Chris Tamer was hot garbage. Richter was exposed for like a day and the Preds knew they would get a draft pick if he resigned, so they took him anyway.

Schneider and Subbotin were taken in the BJ/MIN draft. Scheider never played for the BJ's.

Expansion draft won't hurt. Rangers always play like crap against them anyway.

 

[Championship*]

This isn't anything we need to worry about at the moment. By the time this comes around the team won't necessarily look like it does today.

 

[HatTrick Swayze]

I want no part of any expansion, it waters the talent level of the best League in the World down considerably. 30 is already too many imo, with multiple teams hemorrhaging cash already perhaps you can move them to better markets instead if they really want those places occupied

I absolutely agree from a hockey standpoint. I think it's inevitable from a $ perspective though.

As is the next lockout.

 

[Ola]

there would be a lot of overpaid guys available for teams to select.

The bigger problem as I see it is that they are not adding 4 teams at once which means we run the risk of losing a few players from the 2 expansion drafts if it's true that they are going to 4 new teams.

Personally, I think that Nash is going to be left unprotected.

You have never been able to make players with NMCs available before...

 

[Championship*]

BUT playing devils advocate because I'm bored, if it happened today:

Goaltender: Lundqvist
D: McDonagh
D: Girardi
D: Staal
D: Boyle
D: Moore
F: Stepan
F: MSL
F: Kreider
F: Nash
F: Brassard
F: MZA
F: Moore
F: Hagelin
F: Stempniak? (Not sure who else since I'm not including anyone currently on an ELC)

 

[Ola]

BUT playing devils advocate because I'm bored, if it happened today:

Goaltender: Lundqvist
D: McDonagh
D: Girardi
D: Staal
D: Boyle
D: Moore
F: Stepan
F: MSL
F: Kreider
F: Nash
F: Brassard
F: MZA
F: Moore
F: Hagelin
F: Stempniak? (Not sure who else since I'm not including anyone currently on an ELC)

IIRC there was a 2 year pro exmpetion the last time, most links I find are outdated though. Meaning that we would have to protect McIlrath, Miller and co. too.

 

[NYR Viper]

Hank

McDonagh
Girardi
McIlrath
Moore/Klein (pick one)
Skjei

This is assuming Staal leaves for greener pastures

Stepan
Brassard
Kreider
MZA (if he re-signs)
Hayes
Miller
Nash
Hagelin
Prospect? Duclair? Buchnevich? Lindberg? Fast?

 

[Ola]

I absolutely agree from a hockey standpoint. I think it's inevitable from a $ perspective though.

As is the next lockout.

From a general point of view, with a tremendous inbalance between the conferences etc, I could understand a 2 team expansion. But 4 teams? Just sounds like ...... Bettman...

 

[Ola]

This isn't anything we need to worry about at the moment. By the time this comes around the team won't necessarily look like it does today.

Also, from the fact that we all take pride in being die-hard fans of this team, people should be able to wake us up in the middle of the night and ask what we think of a potential expansion draft 4 years down the road. We can of course not out line all details, but to the extent possible we should be able to account for the ifs and buts, what prospects might be in danger, how we should take this issue into consideration as of today, and what not.

 

[eco's bones]

Typically in past expansion drafts young prospects would be exempt to a certain age or to a certain amount of years they've been professionals (two or three). If it's two years (most likely scenario) for this year Miller and McIlrath would be automatically protected--for next year they wouldn't. Fast with one year pro would still be protected next year.

Almost all teams are going to opt for protecting 1 goalie, 5 defensemen, 9 forwards. There would be some chance we would lose Talbot but there would be a number of goalies available.

If there were 4 franchises at one time we would probably lose 5-6 players. If there were two teams it would be around 3. I really don't see 4 teams coming in at once. Apart from 1968 when the NHL doubled it's size from 6 to 12 teams the only other time more than two teams came on board at the same time was after the WHA collapsed. Edmonton, Hartford (Carolina), Winnipeg (Phoenix), Quebec City (Colorado)--former WHA franchises came into the NHL then. I might be missing someone. Those teams if I remember correctly were allowed to keep some of their own players--for instance Wayne Gretzky had signed with the Indianapolis Racers when he was 16 or 17 and had never been drafted by an NHL team. The Racers had shortly thereafter traded him to the WHA version of the Edmonton Oilers where he'd played a couple seasons already. Edmonton was allowed to keep him.

IMO if the NHL decides to expand again--they will expand two teams and the likelihood is stronger that they'll expand out west and even out the conferences to 16 teams apiece. Currently with 8 teams out of 14 making the playoffs out west and 8 out of 16 in the east it would balance things out. Typically the NHL regular season schedule has also expanded with expansion. Anyway there are places out west--Seattle, Las Vegas, Portland Ore., San Diego, Milwaukee that could handle an NHL team. In the east I know Quebec City is very much wanting a team--there have been rumors about Hamilton Ont. or another team in the Toronto metropolitan area.

Which brings us to London, England, Stockholm or Helsinki but if that ever happens it is probably farther down the line than the next few years.

 

[Championship*]

I don't think 4 teams are going to be in an expansion draft. I think it's more likely that two teams move.

 

[Hire Sather]

Really don't want it to happen. Don't need anymore teams and it will feel cheap to get players STOLEN from the team for this garbage.

 

[broadwayblue]

Yeah, don't see 4 teams being added at once. Most likely scenario as has been pointed out above is for the West to get 2 more teams to even out all the divisions.

 

[eco's bones]

I want no part of any expansion, it waters the talent level of the best League in the World down considerably. 30 is already too many imo, with multiple teams hemorrhaging cash already perhaps you can move them to better markets instead if they really want those places occupied

It waters the talent down only for a while. It has helped grow the sport in non-traditional areas though. For instance--there are a lot of players coming out of California these days--unheard of 15-20 years ago. There are players coming out of Texas and Florida--being drafted every year these days. It's also a reason why there are more Europeans playing in the NHL than ever and that will continue to be the case--which has changed the nature of the game somewhat--accentuating finesse over the more physical game it was pre-2005 lockout.

From a Rangers perspective 30 teams mean on average you win a championship every 30 years. If you're lucky you do better than that. If you're not you do worse. Adding more teams means elongating the averages. IMO--the averages are bad enough now.

 

[NYR Viper]

It waters the talent down only for a while. It has helped grow the sport in non-traditional areas though. For instance--there are a lot of players coming out of California these days--unheard of 15-20 years ago. There are players coming out of Texas and Florida--being drafted every year these days. It's also a reason why there are more Europeans playing in the NHL than ever and that will continue to be the case--which has changed the nature of the game somewhat--accentuating finesse over the more physical game it was pre-2005 lockout.

From a Rangers perspective 30 teams mean on average you win a championship every 30 years. If you're lucky you do better than that. If you're not you do worse. Adding more teams means elongating the averages. IMO--the averages are bad enough now.

Yeah, people need to think long term.

 

[Inferno]

i wonder how NMC count. if a player is signed to a NMC do you have to protect him? its in his contract that he cant be traded..youd have to assume that would apply to an expansion draft or it would be a lawsuit waiting to happen. if thats the case then the rangers wouldnt have to protect guys like Girardi, Henrik, etc...

 

[Zil]

Yeah, people need to think long term.

Does that include the fact that expanding to all of these weak markets is a big part of the reason we keep having lockouts? Forget promoting the game and forget the talent pool. This comes down to money. The owners love expansion fees. They love that they don't have to share them with the players. They love that they're an immediate influx of cash requiring no extra work on their part. And they forget that they eventually bleed all that money back out when they have to continuously prop up markets like Florida and Phoenix. And the owners of those franchises wind up as some of the most hardline, pro-lockout hawks around because you can't turn a profit running an NHL team in Phoenix.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

i wonder how NMC count. if a player is signed to a NMC do you have to protect him? its in his contract that he cant be traded..youd have to assume that would apply to an expansion draft or it would be a lawsuit waiting to happen. if thats the case then the rangers wouldnt have to protect guys like Girardi, Henrik, etc...

They would definitely have to be protected in order to keep them. I don't think the team would be forced to protect them. The no movement, legally speaking, only would seem to deal with pro-active team moves (trading, sending down, etc.). A passive action of not protecting shouldn't be covered under a NMC.

 

[Miz]

Keep Klein, expose J. Moore

 

[Doctyl]

By the time this is actually an issues (if it will be) the team will be very different. Rumors say 2017 right? Look at the overhaul from 2012 to now and how many guys that would've been protected are gone.