NHL expansion in 2021

Foppberg

Registered User
Nov 20, 2016
24,089
26,539
Summerside, PEI
Jesus Christ people need to relax. I’m not saying I want to get rid of those guys. That’s in the scenario that they’re our 4th best defenseman. If one of those are our 4th best defenseman what’s the alternative?

It’s cool for everyone to see the names I tossed out there, overreact and say no. But what’s the alternative? Please don’t say trade one of them to another team first or something like that. Then not only do we lose one of those guys, but we also end up losing another valuable guy to expansion.

It’s completrly hypothetical, and most likely those names will never be exposed. What I’m trying to say is that we need to get ourselves to a point where the team is so deep that losing one of those guys proves just how deep and good we are.

Things would have to go beautifully, or horribly, depending on how you look at it, for those guys (especially Barrie) to be a 4th Dman.

I get your message but I think it's pretty optimistic, unless you're Nashville losing a top 4D will hurt no matter what.
 

Cousin Eddie

You Serious Clark?
Nov 3, 2006
40,142
37,285
Things would have to go beautifully, or horribly, depending on how you look at it, for those guys (especially Barrie) to be a 4th Dman.

I get your message but I think it's pretty optimistic, unless you're Nashville losing a top 4D will hurt no matter what.
I’m not showing any optimism or negativity. I’m simply saying we’re likely going to lose our 4th best defenseman or possibly even our 3rd best if we protect EJ. People just get touchy when they see specific names mentioned.
 

Foppberg

Registered User
Nov 20, 2016
24,089
26,539
Summerside, PEI
I’m not showing any optimism or negativity. I’m simply saying we’re likely going to lose our 4th best defenseman or possibly even our 3rd best if we protect EJ. People just get touchy when they see specific names mentioned.
It's a long way off, hard to say how things will end up.
 

henchman21

Mr. Meeseeks
Sponsor
Feb 24, 2012
61,867
45,172
To me... the current must protects on the roster are MacK, Rants, Landy, Girard, and Barrie. So a 3-2 split currently. Of the forward group you have Jost, Kerfoot, Compher, Kamenev, and Kaut who may end up guys you want to protect. That is at max 8 and I think it is pretty unlikely all 5 end up worthy. So no real issue up front. Out back EJ's NMC will be an issue, but where the trend is heading he either waives or gets bought out (ideally waives). Leaving Timmins, Meloche, Zadorov and potentially Makar as the issues for the final spot. Be semi smart and push Makar a year and you're down to Timmins, Meloche and Zadorov fighting for the last protection spot. This will ruffle feathers, but the Avs would be okay losing any of them in 2021. When you factor in the idea that you're losing the 2nd best one... The Avs would be okay. They'd be looking at a top 4 of Girard, Barrie, Z, and Makar with a 5th/6th of Meloche/EJ instead of Timmins/EJ.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Steerpike

Ceremony

blahem
Jun 8, 2012
113,009
15,069
Hopefully UMass goes deep in the Frozen Four. As long as he doesn't play 9 games this season, it'll give us one more player we won't need to protect, which is always a good thing.

At the moment it looks like Landy, Mack, Rants, Girard, Zadorov, Barrie are the players that are close to a lock. Obviously 3 years is a long time, but it means we'll only have two more protection slots if we want to protect another defenseman.
Oh, you.
 

Selzoons

Registered User
Mar 3, 2018
113
74
Kaut is exempt unless he plays 10 NHL games this year unless I'm mistaken.

Life is much easier if:

1. Makar starts his pro career in 2019-20 season. (Or plays less than 10 AHL/NHL games this season.)
2. Landeskog signs as a UFA in 2021 after the expansion draft.
3. Johnson is willing to waive his NMC.

Choosing 7F/3D, the Avalanche can then protect

Forwards: MacKinnon, Rantanen, Jost, Kerfoot, Compher, Kamenev, 2020 UFA + Landeskog
Defensemen: Girard, Barrie, Zadarov

We can offer a mid pick to Seattle so that they choose someone other than EJ.

The only "complication" is if Timmins is healthy, plays more than 10 games this year (NHL or AHL), and looks like a top-4 defenseman. Which is great.

We lose the third best player of Jost, Kerfoot, Compher, Kamenev, and any 2020 UFAs, which shouldn't be crippling.

If Johnson refuses to waive or Sakic lets Makar play more than 9 pro games this year things get dicier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CobraAcesS

Iceberg

Registered User
May 4, 2002
4,750
1,102
Why can't Makar play more than 9 AHL games this year, but Kaut can play an entire AHL season? I suposse it has to do with their age, right?
 

AllAboutAvs

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 25, 2006
9,239
7,248
Depends on terminology of the AHL deal... can be a tryout and not impact. Basically Makar's ELC just can't start until 19-20.

Kaut needs to have his contract slide to not be eligible in 2021. So.. upto 9 games.

CE is right... you worry about it when the time comes. 2021 gives the group a lot of time to give clarity on many players. Barrie may or may not be here. EJ might be worth buying out. Z may or may not be here. Timmins may not be worth a lick. There are so many variables that you mainly concentrate on building the best team possible in the meantime. IMO you really only focus on one player not being eligible and that is Makar... and you really only focus on that because it is pretty simple to pull off. Just don't have a rookie step in late in the season/in the playoffs.
Thanks for the clarification. I feel better about Kaut. They could still have a look at him at the NHL level and still keep him exempt.

I agree with you on your last paragraph except about Kaut. You deal with the XD when it comes but you still have to manage your assets in a way to not be in a position to unnecessarily have to expose a very good piece. You already mentioned Makar and I agree 100%. They need to keep him exempt so they don't have to expose another very good piece. However I include Kaut in the same plan. Kaut's potential, due to his ceiling and two-way game, is high enough to do what needs to be done to keep him exempt as well. Kaut has the potential to be our Landy on the 2nd line which we all know by now is very important to the top line's success. Kaut is a poor man Landy and could be that to our second line possibly as early as next season who knows. Kaut could allow the Avs to have more offensively minded players on the 2nd line like our top line or if you have a 2C like Ziby you can match that line better against the other team's top line and free Mack's line to play against weaker lines. To me Kaut has the potential to be that important to the 2nd line so he needs to play 9 games or less this season in order to remain exempt. It is just not worth risking to have to expose another very good piece. But like I said, besides Makar and Kaut, I agree that you just need to wait and deal with it when it comes.
 

PAZ

.
Jul 14, 2011
17,357
9,702
BC
The second he touches NHL ice the contract starts with Makar's age.

Are you sure?

From what I read, it was 10 games to count as a professional season in the AHL or NHL:

A Player aged 18 or 19 earns a year of professional experience by playing 10 or more NHL games in a given NHL season
A player aged 20 or older (based on age on December 31 of calendar year in which the season starts) earns a year of professional experience by playing 10 or more Professional Games under a standard player contract in a given League Year. –GeneralFanager.com

Clarification On Definition Of First And Second Year Professionals - SinBin.vegas
 

CobraAcesS

De Opresso Liber
Sponsor
Jul 20, 2011
25,892
9,872
Michigan
To me... the current must protects on the roster are MacK, Rants, Landy, Girard, and Barrie. So a 3-2 split currently. Of the forward group you have Jost, Kerfoot, Compher, Kamenev, and Kaut who may end up guys you want to protect. That is at max 8 and I think it is pretty unlikely all 5 end up worthy. So no real issue up front. Out back EJ's NMC will be an issue, but where the trend is heading he either waives or gets bought out (ideally waives). Leaving Timmins, Meloche, Zadorov and potentially Makar as the issues for the final spot. Be semi smart and push Makar a year and you're down to Timmins, Meloche and Zadorov fighting for the last protection spot. This will ruffle feathers, but the Avs would be okay losing any of them in 2021. When you factor in the idea that you're losing the 2nd best one... The Avs would be okay. They'd be looking at a top 4 of Girard, Barrie, Z, and Makar with a 5th/6th of Meloche/EJ instead of Timmins/EJ.

I really don't think EJ has to be protected. Ryan has the same type of contract with a M-NTC, and a NMC, and he was exposed. It's the guys who have a full NMC that cannot be exposed. I'm not 100% sure, but I'm fairly confident based on what happened with Ryan. I think their NMC only applies to being sent to the minors. EJ's M-NTC is actually pretty weak too with him having to give a 19 team list of places he'd go.
 

sethro109

🏒 🎮🏈🇺🇸🍻
Sponsor
May 3, 2011
25,545
28,786
Centennial, CO
Didn't teams send Vegas draft picks so they wouldn't take certain players? We'll probably have to go that route.
 

Foppberg

Registered User
Nov 20, 2016
24,089
26,539
Summerside, PEI
Didn't teams send Vegas draft picks so they wouldn't take certain players? We'll probably have to go that route.
That's also how they got Karlsson, Marsh, Smith, Tuch, etc..

Probably better to just lose a player than give a bunch of pieces to not take someone.

Unless it was an essential piece.
 

AllAboutAvs

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 25, 2006
9,239
7,248
Kaut is exempt unless he plays 10 NHL games this year unless I'm mistaken.

Life is much easier if:

1. Makar starts his pro career in 2019-20 season. (Or plays less than 10 AHL/NHL games this season.)
2. Landeskog signs as a UFA in 2021 after the expansion draft.
3. Johnson is willing to waive his NMC.

Choosing 7F/3D, the Avalanche can then protect

Forwards: MacKinnon, Rantanen, Jost, Kerfoot, Compher, Kamenev, 2020 UFA + Landeskog
Defensemen: Girard, Barrie, Zadarov

We can offer a mid pick to Seattle so that they choose someone other than EJ.

The only "complication" is if Timmins is healthy, plays more than 10 games this year (NHL or AHL), and looks like a top-4 defenseman. Which is great.

We lose the third best player of Jost, Kerfoot, Compher, Kamenev, and any 2020 UFAs, which shouldn't be crippling.

If Johnson refuses to waive or Sakic lets Makar play more than 9 pro games this year things get dicier.
- It's only one game for Makar.

- I tend to agree with CobraAcesS that EJ's NMC doesn't assure him to be protected. Depending how he plays at the time the Avs might need to make a deal with Seattle to protect him though.

- As for Landy waiting after the XD to sign a new contract in order to be exempt and protect one more valuable piece I'm all for it. However the problem with that is he would be taking a fairly big risk financially as he could have a major injury during his last year and miss out on another big contract. He would need an assurance from Sakic early in that last season but then the Avs would be taken the major risk. Not as easy as it sounds unfortunately. The same thing could be done with Gru and Cole by the way. Much easier to do with Cole obviously.
 

PAZ

.
Jul 14, 2011
17,357
9,702
BC
Pretty sure... Gustav Olofsson was eligible despite not playing 10 games in 13-14 or 14-15. Only had 2 years with 10+ and was exposed.

Yup, you're definitely right.

Thanks for the clarification, was trying to find an example but couldn't find anything.
 

milehigh11

Registered User
Mar 4, 2014
911
547
Mile High State
I stole this from another site for info on the M-NTC, NMC




Unless the M-NTC specifically includes a NMC, a M-NTC on its own (like a NTC) offers no protection from being waived or loaned to the minors.

A modified (or limited) no trade clause that includes a no movement clause would usually be written as M-NTC, NMC.

M-NTC is just a modified no trade clause (and does not include a NMC).

So generally, this is how it's understood:

"NMC" = full no movement clause: cannot be traded, waived, or loaned to minors without consent

"NTC" = full no trade clause: cannot be traded without consent (but can be waived or loaned to minors without consent)

"M-NTC" = modified no trade clause (AKA limited no trade clause): includes specific terms whereby a player can be traded without consent (only applies to trades and the player can still be waived or loaned to the minors without consent)

"M-NTC, NMC" = modified no trade clause with a no movement clause: same trade conditions as M-NTC plus (due to the added NMC) the player cannot be waived or loaned to the minors without consent

When it comes to expansion, all players with NMCs must be protected (unless the player agrees to waive his NMC). This would include players with the "NMC" and "M-NTC, NMC" types of limitations on player movement. Players with just a "NTC" or "M-NTC" (but who don't have an added NMC) would not require protection and can be exposed to the expansion draft.




also they noted this:


Bobby Ryan had a NMC, but it wasn't the kind of NMC that forces a team to protect him in an ED.






Here is the LINK where I got this info from.
 

AllAboutAvs

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Aug 25, 2006
9,239
7,248
^Thanks milehigh11. So according to that info EJ would have to be counted as one of protections unless they make a deal with Seattle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: milehigh11

Cousin Eddie

You Serious Clark?
Nov 3, 2006
40,142
37,285
You know who probably will benefit from this expansion draft? Vegas. Since they don’t have to lose a player they will certainly be active trying to steal a few players or picks from teams looking to save a specific player or two.
 

Piestany88

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
2,510
474
I thought it was more than 2 years pro , therefore Kaut will need to be protected, and more than 9 games so as long as Makar plays less than 9 regular season games he's ok . Playoff games don't count

Edit: Ok did some digging and if - player is under contract and played 40 games the previous season or 70 games combined over the past 2 seasons in the NHL.

Looks like Makar would need protection regardless and Kaut likely as well.
 
Last edited:

Avsrule2022

"No more rats"
Apr 4, 2012
683
247
Longmont, CO
My understanding is since Kaut signed his contract when he was 19, if he plays 9 or less NHL games this year his ELC slides and he doesn't have to be protected. If Makar signs and plays at all this year he burns a year of his ELC and will have to be protected.
I could be wrong so don't hold me to this lol.......... Pretty confusing for sure
 

henchman21

Mr. Meeseeks
Sponsor
Feb 24, 2012
61,867
45,172
Kaut has to play in at least 10 NHL games this season to be exposed in 2021.
 

Foppberg

Registered User
Nov 20, 2016
24,089
26,539
Summerside, PEI
Kaut has to play in at least 10 NHL games this season to be exposed in 2021.
Why is it that Kaut has to play at least 10 NHL games to be exposed in 2021 but if Makar plays even 1 he's exposed?

Er wait. Is it because signing from college and playing this season would burn 1 year off immediately?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->