Sabres Expansion Draft Protection Discussion (Skinner waives NMC for Draft)

[rt]

Almost a perfect match contract wise and both heading into UFA. Sabres are desperate for goaltending help and can protect Kuemper. I keep calling Adams with my idea but he's not returning my calls. LOL

I think if BUF throws in Tokarski so AZ has a G to expose in the draft, it’s a deal that makes a lot of sense.

 

[itwasaforwardpass]

I assume people are done talking about protecting Bjork over Asplund and Thompson? At least, I hope.

I viewed them as equal a month ago but Thompson is playing well and Asplund has been doing what Bjork supposedly does well, but better.

Unfortunately I'd be surprised if they don't protect Bjork because of optics. It'd look bad if they lost him for nothing after trading Taylor Hall for him. Asplund is probably the odd forward out.

 

[Gras]

I think if BUF throws in Tokarski so AZ has a G to expose in the draft, it’s a deal that makes a lot of sense.

Then we wouldn't have a goalie to expose.

 

[rt]

Then we wouldn't have a goalie to expose.

Dang. Well, keep Tokarski. I guess AZ can sign someone else to expose. LOL. Any of Brossoit, Rittich, Reimer, Raanta or Andersen would work for me. Lots of cheap options.

 

[Rastin]

I disagree, I think it's an easy sell that we got the means to protect our other young players by picking up Bjork in the Hall trade. Asplund needs to be protected. He's the most consistent of the "bubble" players and still has upside. I like Bjork and don't want to lose him but we're going to lose someone and losing Bjork doesn't really hurt us. Losing Asplund does.

I viewed them as equal a month ago but Thompson is playing well and Asplund has been doing what Bjork supposedly does well, but better.

Unfortunately I'd be surprised if they don't protect Bjork because of optics. It'd look bad if they lost him for nothing after trading Taylor Hall for him. Asplund is probably the odd forward out.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

I disagree, I think it's an easy sell that we got the means to protect our other young players by picking up Bjork in the Hall trade. Asplund needs to be protected. He's the most consistent of the "bubble" players and still has upside. I like Bjork and don't want to lose him but we're going to lose someone and losing Bjork doesn't really hurt us. Losing Asplund does.

Bjork gets a lot more responsibility and ice time than Asplund does, so I'm not sure management sees things the same way. I like Asplund quite a bit but don't see him getting protection. He's a Carrier-level prospect, his loss won't impact the team noticeably if he gets taken.

 

[itwasaforwardpass]

Bjork gets a lot more responsibility and ice time than Asplund does, so I'm not sure management sees things the same way. I like Asplund quite a bit but don't see him getting protection. He's a Carrier-level prospect, his loss won't impact the team noticeably if he gets taken.

I agree it's not a big impact to lose him Asplund and Bjork gets more difficult deployment. But Asplund being cheaper and better (imo) would make the decision for me. Asplund also has the versatility of playing center in pro leagues.

 

[Doug Prishpreed]

I agree it's not a big impact to lose him Asplund and Bjork gets more difficult deployment. But Asplund being cheaper and better (imo) would make the decision for me. Asplund also has the versatility of playing center in pro leagues.

Yeah good points. Not an easy decision.

 

[Der Jaeger]

I'd trade Ristolainen for Kuemper.

Then expose Bjork, Eakin, Miller, Girgensons, Toharski, and Okposo. May the odds be ever in your favor. No real big loss for anyone they choose.

 

[Jim Bob]

I'd trade Ristolainen for Kuemper.

Then expose Bjork, Eakin, Miller, Girgensons, Toharski, and Okposo. May the odds be ever in your favor. No real big loss for anyone they choose.

Arizona won't make that trade.

They wouldn't have any goalies left if they make that trade and Seattle takes Adin Hill in the ED.

 

[Fjordy]

Wait, according to the rules, a team must have a goalie who needs to be protected? I thought it wasn't necessary.

 

[Fjordy]

Arizona won't make that trade.

They wouldn't have any goalies left if they make that trade and Seattle takes Adin Hill in the ED.

But why? Arizona can then protect Hill.

 

[Jim Bob]

But why? Arizona can then protect Hill.

They don't have another goalie that meets the exposure requirements.

 

[itwasaforwardpass]

They don't have another goalie that meets the exposure requirements.

They can sign someone for that sole purpose like we did with Torkarski.

 

[Fjordy]

They don't have another goalie that meets the exposure requirements.

I'm already completely confused. Arizona can't protect Hill because he fits the protection rule? Does it mean that every team must have a goaltender who must be protected? And the team cannot ignore this option.

 

[Jim Bob]

They can sign someone for that sole purpose like we did with Torkarski.

Good luck since the ED is prior to UFA.

 

[Jim Bob]

I'm already completely confused. Arizona can't protect Hill because he fits the protection rule? Does it mean that every team must have a goaltender who must be protected? And the team cannot ignore this option.

Every team has to expose at least one goaltender that is signed for next season or is an RFA that received a tender.

Hill & Kuemper are the Yotes only goalies that qualify. So, if they trade Kuemper, they still have to expose Hill.

There are other teams in a similar boat that people said "Trade Risto for [fill in a goalie here]" and it is the same problem.

And the Sabres can't throw Tokarski in because then the Sabres don't have a goalie to expose.

 

[Fjordy]

delete

 

[Fjordy]

delete

 

[Ehran]

Every team has to expose at least one goaltender that is signed for next season or is an RFA that received a tender.

Hill & Kuemper are the Yotes only goalies that qualify. So, if they trade Kuemper, they still have to expose Hill.

There are other teams in a similar boat that people said "Trade Risto for [fill in a goalie here]" and it is the same problem.

And the Sabres can't throw Tokarski in because then the Sabres don't have a goalie to expose.

Can the Sabres sign Houser to a 1 year, 2-way, contract for next season and then expose him to the draft? He qualifies now, correct?

 

[My Cozen Dylan]

Can the Sabres sign Houser to a 1 year, 2-way, contract for next season and then expose him to the draft? He qualifies now, correct?

Yes.

 

[Gras]

Can the Sabres sign Houser to a 1 year, 2-way, contract for next season and then expose him to the draft? He qualifies now, correct?

Houser shows exempt according to CapFriendly

 

[Ehran]

Houser shows exempt according to CapFriendly

I don't think they updated their exemption list since he played an NHL game last night. Or honestly, since he was signed to an NHL contract when moving from the taxi squad to the regular roster.

I'm just not sure that CapFriendly is 100% up to date. I also see no minimum games requirement for goaltenders, unlike skaters.

 

[Gras]

I don't think they updated their exemption list since he played an NHL game last night. Or honestly, since he was signed to an NHL contract when moving from the taxi squad to the regular roster.

I'm just not sure that CapFriendly is 100% up to date. I also see no minimum games requirement for goaltenders, unlike skaters.

I'm pretty sure he wasn't on the exempt list earlier in the year on their tool.

 

[1TuchAnd1NoTuch]

Great so Risto + Tokarski for Kuemper and give Houser a contract. Send it in