Rumor: NHL Expansion --how it changes Bruins roster management

[tburns21]

if there's only 1 team granted into expansion that means we only lose 1 player.... really not that big of deal in the grand scheme of things.... our roster will look significantly different come time for the exp draft.

given the rough #'s I've read so far you can protect less than the previous exp draft.

time for DS to make some trades and move guys out who have these NTC/NMC clauses....

can players w/ NMC & NTC still be left "open" or is it going to be a forced protection? a guy like Seids already said he'd waive his NTC ... so why should we be forced to protect him?

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

So are we going to lose one of Kevin or Collin Miller? Seems that way?

 

[Alberta_OReilly_Fan]

So are we going to lose one of Kevin or Collin Miller? Seems that way?

id say if we had our choice.. we lose one of k miller or mcquaid... vegas might want to make their fans happy with some big fights

I will also expect belesky to be exposed... hes a wild card. expansion teams in non traditional markets have historically wanted to ice a tough vetern lineup

if I'm betting 10 dollars in vegas on this... I'm going to say we lose mcquaid. hes a fun player to watch fight and he protects his teammates.

 

[ChargersRookie]

Vegas does not have to pick from every team. There must be some wording like "A team can not lose more than 2 players".

Must be out there the exact rules.

 

[kutskova]

Vegas does not have to pick from every team. There must be some wording like "A team can not lose more than 2 players".

Must be out there the exact rules.

One player must be selected from every team.

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

On our team the 2 I mentioned have pretty good cap figures, right in the age wheel house Vegas will want, and we can't protect them both barring a trade. I think you can forget about them taking Quader (which would be doing us a favor btw).

One thing Sweeney could do is bundle them in a trade.

 

[Sharp Shooting Neely]

So are we going to lose one of Kevin or Collin Miller? Seems that way?

Wonder of either will still be on the Bruins roster by then?

Believe it was Coach Parker and BruinDust who exchanged some great posts in the "All Bruins trade rumor/proposals" thread (???) on the expansion protection/availability picture for the Bruins.

 

[C77]

Can Sweeney re-sign Liles to a generous one year deal with the understanding that he will be exposed in the expansion draft? Something like $2.5 or 3 million ? Use the savings from Chara's decreasing cap hit. Liles meets the games played criteria.

That way you don't lose one of the more valuable pieces on the defense.

And then Vegas would take a forward from Boston....one of Hayes or Nash who meet the games played requirement and are signed through next season.

I think exposing Beleskey is a bad idea. I think it's bad business to sign someone to a big UFA deal and then look to move him within the first half of it. Plus he should bounce back and be a useful player.

Then the Bruins could trade one of their surplus guys on the right side defense in the offseason. I am torn on which one to move.

 

[Pia8988]

Why. One of Kevan, Colin, and McQuaid will be protected and the other 2 meet the requirements. If they're not protected or exempt, they're exposed. The other requirement is just something that must be met.

 

[C77]

Why. One of Kevan, Colin, and McQuaid will be protected and the other 2 meet the requirements. If they're not protected or exempt, they're exposed. The other requirement is just something that must be met.

Keep Liles around as the #6 for a year.

That way you don't have to expose one of Kevan, Colin, and McQuaid. Instead you trade one of them from a position of strength to fix needs in the organization, or even for a 2nd round pick.

 

[Pia8988]

Keep Liles around as the #6 for a year.

That way you don't have to expose one of Kevan, Colin, and McQuaid. Instead you trade one of them from a position of strength to fix needs in the organization, or even for a 2nd round pick.

They are exposed by default. You can only protect 3 (Chara, Krug, X) if you go the 7+3 route as expected of the Bruins. Signing Liles does nothing to prevent exposure of players. Every player not exempt or protected is exposed. The game requirements are just a minimum. Those aren't the only players exposed.

 

[C77]

They are exposed by default. You can only protect 3 (Chara, Krug, X) if you go the 7+3 route as expected of the Bruins. Signing Liles does nothing to prevent exposure of players. Every player not exempt or protected is exposed. The game requirements are just a minimum. Those aren't the only players exposed.

Okay thank you, I was reading the expansion draft rules and I got a little confused.

You're right it doesn't make sense to sign Liles.

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

like I said, barring a trade, one of the Miller's is going to Vegas for sure.

 

[LouJersey]

like I said, barring a trade, one of the Miller's is going to Vegas for sure.

Won't be Colin he will be protected

 

[BruinDust]

Won't be Colin he will be protected

I think as the roster stands right now, the only real debate about is who will be 7th forward protected between Belesky, Nash, Schaller, and Hayes.

Forwards - 63, 42, 46, 37, 88, 51 + one more

D - 33, 47, Colin

G - Rask

 

[Number8]

I think as the roster stands right now, the only real debate about is who will be 7th forward protected between Belesky, Nash, Schaller, and Hayes.

Forwards - 63, 42, 46, 37, 88, 51 + one more

D - 33, 47, Colin

G - Rask

Out of that list -- I think I'd protect in order:

1) Schaller (I actually like his play, used in right situation)
2) Nash
4) Belesky -- scratch that move him to 4th.
3) Hayes

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

I think as the roster stands right now, the only real debate about is who will be 7th forward protected between Belesky, Nash, Schaller, and Hayes.

Forwards - 63, 42, 46, 37, 88, 51 + one more

D - 33, 47, Colin

G - Rask

wait, what?

I mean I'll take ANY bet that neither of those will be protected. Name the price.

The 7th is going to be a player we're gonna trade for I bet

Literally impossible that it's one of those ones you listed. I actually had to double take that it was you that posted that. I'm sending you a care package in the mail, you must have the flu!


Nice to see the excempt list includes Vatrano, Czarnik, Cehlarik etc...

http://www.stanleycupofchowder.com/...ansion-draft-players-for-vegas-golden-knights

 

[Lobster57]

wait, what?

I mean I'll take ANY bet that neither of those will be protected. Name the price.

The 7th is going to be a player we're gonna trade for I bet

Literally impossible that it's one of those ones you listed. I actually had to double take that it was you that posted that. I'm sending you a care package in the mail, you must have the flu!


Nice to see the excempt list includes Vatrano, Czarnik, Cehlarik etc...

http://www.stanleycupofchowder.com/...ansion-draft-players-for-vegas-golden-knights

yep, the front office should be praying that Vegas takes one of Hayes or Belesky. Protecting either should be an immediate dismissal for Sweeney

 

[Trap Jesus]

This really couldn't be coming at a better time.

 

[VanIsle]

This really couldn't be coming at a better time.

110%.

Why would you protect Beleskey he has the highest worst contract.

You can bury Jimmy in the A or hopefully get someone to take him for future considerations or Radek Bonk.

 

[BruinDust]

wait, what?

I mean I'll take ANY bet that neither of those will be protected. Name the price.

The 7th is going to be a player we're gonna trade for I bet

Literally impossible that it's one of those ones you listed. I actually had to double take that it was you that posted that. I'm sending you a care package in the mail, you must have the flu!


Nice to see the excempt list includes Vatrano, Czarnik, Cehlarik etc...

http://www.stanleycupofchowder.com/...ansion-draft-players-for-vegas-golden-knights

If they trade for someone, then sure, they won't protect any of those names listed above.

But if they don't, it's pretty much pick your poison....for Vegas...if they choose to take a Boston forward.

They have to protect one of them as it stands right now if they go 7 and 3, it's just a question of who.

Me....I think I protect Schaller. He's the youngest, and he's been decent in the right roles.

Still, it's very, very slim pickings for that 7th protected forward.

 

[RedeyeRocketeer]

If they trade for someone, then sure, they won't protect any of those names listed above.

But if they don't, it's pretty much pick your poison....for Vegas...if they choose to take a Boston forward.

They have to protect one of them as it stands right now if they go 7 and 3, it's just a question of who.

Me....I think I protect Schaller. He's the youngest, and he's been decent in the right roles.

Still, it's very, very slim pickings for that 7th protected forward.

But even if you go with the assumption that they don't trade for someone, you literally never protect the 2 guys I bolded. Like gun to your head you don't protect them


Btw it's the very absence of a clear 7th forward that makes it so incredibly likely that they trade for one. Most teams have no idea how to get to 7, we're in the incredible position of being able to take on that 7th. Super spot to be in given our prospect pool and exempt list. If Sweeney ****s this up I'm going postal.

 

[PB37]

Can Sweeney re-sign Liles to a generous one year deal with the understanding that he will be exposed in the expansion draft? Something like $2.5 or 3 million ? Use the savings from Chara's decreasing cap hit. Liles meets the games played criteria.

That way you don't lose one of the more valuable pieces on the defense.

And then Vegas would take a forward from Boston....one of Hayes or Nash who meet the games played requirement and are signed through next season.

I think exposing Beleskey is a bad idea. I think it's bad business to sign someone to a big UFA deal and then look to move him within the first half of it. Plus he should bounce back and be a useful player.

Then the Bruins could trade one of their surplus guys on the right side defense in the offseason. I am torn on which one to move.

I wouldn't. Just because we expose someone doesn't mean they'll be picked up by Vegas. We'd be left with a 3 mill weight on the salary cap.

 

[Altamira]

Does anyone know for protection purposes any rules about players like Spooner and Pastrnak who will be RFA's next year. If they aren't under contract or qualified before final protection list is required then then they wouldn't need to be protected? The final day to qualify RFA last season came after the entry draft.

I read that protection rules for goalies were made so even RFA's like Subban could be taken, but not sure about forewords.

 

[BruinDust]

Does anyone know for protection purposes any rules about players like Spooner and Pastrnak who will be RFA's next year. If they aren't under contract or qualified before final protection list is required then then they wouldn't need to be protected? The final day to qualify RFA last season came after the entry draft.

I read that protection rules for goalies were made so even RFA's like Subban could be taken, but not sure about forewords.

To the best of my knowledge, and I could be wrong, is qualified or not, to keep them from being selected they would have to be among the protected list of Boston's players.

Certainly, in some cases, LV would be hesitent to select an unqualified RFA with their only selection from a team knowing that unqualified RFA could walk away in about a weeks time. It has been suggested by others they could use this strategy to try and give LV little incentive to select Subban.

But I'd wager to guess that if they didn't qualify Pastrnak, LV happily takes him anyways. So it won't happen. Probably the same with Spooner.