Las Vegas Expansion in 2017-18 Thread

[Foppa2118]

I don't see that, it says a minimum of 20 guys under contract have to be chosen. And I would interpret under contract as under contract so those young RFAs I do think some teams might fiddle with giving them only 1 year deals or leaving them unsigned if they plan to expose them to make it more difficult for Vegas to take.

That quote was in Dan Rosen's original article.

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expands-to-las-vegas/c-281010682

Still not clear what happens with RFA's without a contract.

 

[AslanRH]

Another concern would be Gelinas not playing enough games. If he doesn't play 30 games this season, the Avs would have to make another defenseman available. I imagine they sign a bottom pairing RHD to a 2 year contract, whom they won't care losing in expansion (Gryba/Scheen).

Even if he plays enough games, they would have to get Gelinas re-signed to a contract they can stomach if he doesn't get chosen for him to count. Gelinas and his agent would see that as well, so there is some leverage from their end as well.

I definitely think a 2 year signing will occur this offseason or a trade will be made at the deadline just to cover that possibility if needed.

 

[tigervixxxen]

That quote was in Dan Rosen's original article.

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expands-to-las-vegas/c-281010682

Still not clear what happens with RFA's without a contract.

That's not in the rules that were released.

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592
This is

The Las Vegas franchise must select a minimum of 20 players who are under contract for the 2017-18 season.

With something this specific the original text is critical.

 

[Cypher]

That's not in the rules that were released.

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592
This is



With something this specific the original text is critical.

I'm sure RFAs will need to be protected, if so chosen by the team...if not, it would be kinda cheap. Just give Mackinnon/Barrie/Grigorenko/Gelinas/Pickard 1 year deals, and don't sign them before the expansion draft, and they'll be protected?

 

[StayAtHomeAv]

Yeah, I don't see how the NHL could allow that loophole. UFA? Sure, they can actually test the market July 1st. There is some risk there for the team.

 

[tigervixxxen]

I'm sure RFAs will need to be protected, if so chosen by the team...if not, it would be kinda cheap. Just give Mackinnon/Barrie/Grigorenko/Gelinas/Pickard 1 year deals, and don't sign them before the expansion draft, and they'll be protected?

Im not saying they won't need to be protected. I'm saying unsigned RFAs are going to be less attractive for Vegas because 2/3 of the players they select have to be under contract. Now obviously if say a MacKinnon is left unprotected and is unsigned that would be worth it for Vegas to use one of their unsigned slots on him but a Grigo that's left unsigned might not be as attractive. This is also why each NHL team must expose 2F and 1D who is under contract for 17-18, the NHL wants Vegas to be comprised of mostly NHL players when they begin.

 

[Cypher]

Im not saying they won't need to be protected. I'm saying unsigned RFAs are going to be less attractive for Vegas because 2/3 of the players they select have to be under contract. Now obviously if say a MacKinnon is left unprotected and is unsigned that would be worth it for Vegas to use one of their unsigned slots on him but a Grigo that's left unsigned might not be as attractive. This is also why each NHL team must expose 2F and 1D who is under contract for 17-18, the NHL wants Vegas to be comprised of mostly NHL players when they begin.

Ah, I see what you're saying. Vegas picks 30 players, 1 from each team, but only a max. 10 of them can be RFA 2017/2018.

Only position of concern for the Avs I would say is goalie. Protect Pickard and expose Varly. Be interesting what other teams do/who Vegas would pick:

CGY (Elliott/Ortio), DET (Howard/Mrazek), CAR (Ward/Lack), TB (Bishop/Vashivlevskiy), OTT (Anderson/Hammond) and PITS (Fleury/Murray). Pitts could be in trouble as Fleury has a NMC and would need to be protected. Unless they find a suiter for him, Murray could be Vegas bound, but I guess PITTs would buy-out MAF before that happens (4 years at about 2m/per year).