San Jose Sharks Expansion Draft Game

[Gecklund]

Post who you would want the Sharks to protect in the expansion draft. Each time a player is protected they get a point. I will update the OP with the points. The idea is to make a Sharks forum community protected list.

Logan Couture 8M until 2027
Evander Kane 7M until 2025
Timo Meier 6M until 2023 (RFA)
Tomas Hertl 5.625M until 2022
Kevin Labanc 4.725M until 2024
Ryan Donato (RFA)
Marcus Sorensen (UFA)
Alex True (RFA)
Rudolfs Balcers (RFA)
Jayden Halbgewachs 0.725M until 2022 (RFA)
Patrick Marleau (UFA)
Matt Nieto (UFA)
Maxim Letunov (UFA)
Kurtis Gabriel (UFA)
Dylan Gambrell (RFA)
Jonathan Dahlen (RFA)

Erik Karlsson (NMC)
Brent Burns 8M until 2025
Marc Eduoard Vlasic (NMC)
Radim Simek 2.25M until 2024
Greg Pateryn (UFA)
Christian Jaros (RFA)
Jacob Middleton 0.725M until 2022 (RFA)
Nicolas Meloche (RFA)

Martin Jones 5.75 until 2024
Josef Korenar (RFA)

Everyone listed is eligible for the expansion. Anyone not listed is not eligible (capfriendly)

Points will be updated here:

Logan Couture	6
Evander Kane	10
Timo Meier	9
Tomas Hertl	10
Kevin Labanc	9
Ryan Donato	10
Marcus Soresen
Alex True
Rudolfs Balcers	10
Jayden Halbgewachs
Patrick Marleau
Matt Nieto
Maxim Letunov
Kurtis Gabriel
Dylan Gambrell	3
Jonathan Dahlen
Erik Karlsson	10
Brent Burns	6
Marc-Eduoard Vlasic	4
Radim Simek	7
Greg Pateryn
Christian Jaros
Jacob Middleton	1
Nicolas Meloche	1
Martin Jones
Josef Korenar	8

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Click to read more...

 

[Cas]

Who I want to protect does change things slightly:

Couture
Kane
Meier
Hertl
Labanc
Donato
Balcers

Karlsson
Burns
Simek

Korenar

...

Vlasic must be protected, but I don't want to. In theory Vlasic can waive his NMC but I think that's unlikely.

I also want to trade several of these players - Couture, Burns, maybe Simek - but I'd protect them to avoid simply losing them rather than trading them for something. Of course, were I in charge, and unable to have serious trade discussions regarding these players, I might expose them simply in hopes that Seattle will rid me of a contract (unlikely but whatever).

 

[hohosaregood]

Are we doing 7/3/1 and/or 8/1? Or is this purely who do we want to protect period

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

Kane, Hertl, EK, Balcers, Donato, Simek.

 

[Gecklund]

Who I want to protect does change things slightly:

Couture
Kane
Meier
Hertl
Labanc
Donato
Balcers

Karlsson
Burns
Simek

Korenar

...

Vlasic must be protected, but I don't want to. In theory Vlasic can waive his NMC but I think that's unlikely.

I also want to trade several of these players - Couture, Burns, maybe Simek - but I'd protect them to avoid simply losing them rather than trading them for something. Of course, were I in charge, and unable to have serious trade discussions regarding these players, I might expose them simply in hopes that Seattle will rid me of a contract (unlikely but whatever).

If people want to buy out Vlasic and not protect him that’s fine. It’s entirely up to the poster to make it more interesting.

Are we doing 7/3/1 and/or 8/1? Or is this purely who do we want to protect period

Who you want to protect period

Kane, Hertl, EK, Balcers, Donato, Simek.

You got lots more spots available but o think you about covered it

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

If people want to buy out Vlasic and not protect him that’s fine. It’s entirely up to the poster to make it more interesting.

Who you want to protect period

You got lots more spots available but o think you about covered it

Lol yep

 

[sharks_dynasty]

I agree with the following as posted by Cas:

Couture
Kane
Meier
Hertl
Labanc
Donato
Balcers

Karlsson
Burns
Simek

Korenar

I’d aim to NOT protect Vlasic or Jones. If we have to protect Vlasic, then I may even opt to expose Karlsson. I doubt anyone will be willing to take his salary and term. Not sure if he has an NMC though. I also assume that Barabanov will not need to be protected?

 

[Mafoofoo]

Ignoring the whole pesky "you gotta protect the clause guys" thing here's who I'd protect from OP's list

Kane
Meier
Hertl
Labanc
Donato
Balcers
Gambrell

Karlsson
Burns
Simek

 

[The Nemesis]

I agree with the following as posted by Cas:

Couture
Kane
Meier
Hertl
Labanc
Donato
Balcers

Karlsson
Burns
Simek

Korenar

I’d aim to NOT protect Vlasic or Jones. If we have to protect Vlasic, then I may even opt to expose Karlsson. I doubt anyone will be willing to take his salary and term. Not sure if he has an NMC though. I also assume that Barabanov will not need to be protected?

His contract expires at season's end and leaves him as an UFA, and I believe he counts as a "first year professional" given that he only has NHL games for this season, no AHL games, and I don't think they factor in KHL games.

 

[Kcoyote3]

Want (assuming NMCs don't waive)

Kane
Meier
Hertl
Labanc
Donato
Balcers
Couture

Karlsson
Burns
Vlasic

Korenar

Exposed: Simek, Gambrell, Dahlen, Jones

Exempt: Ferraro, Leonard, Blichfeld, Knyzhov, Chek, Chm, whole bunch of others on the Cuda

I think they'll either taken Simek or Gambrell. Either one, meh.

What I really want is the Sharks to expose Burns and Jones. Hope they take Burns, then buyout Jones, trade Couture for picks and a prospect, and let this rebuild party get started. Burn it to the ground for next year, fire the coaching staff.

 

[Kcoyote3]

Also is it just Gambrell that counts for eligible exposed forwards as of now?

 

[matt trick]

Want (assuming NMCs don't waive)

Kane
Meier
Hertl
Labanc
Donato
Balcers
Couture

Karlsson
Burns
Vlasic

Korenar

Exposed: Simek, Gambrell, Dahlen, Jones

Exempt: Ferraro, Leonard, Blichfeld, Knyzhov, Chek, Chm, whole bunch of others on the Cuda

I think they'll either taken Simek or Gambrell. Either one, meh.

What I really want is the Sharks to expose Burns and Jones. Hope they take Burns, then buyout Jones, trade Couture for picks and a prospect, and let this rebuild party get started. Burn it to the ground for next year, fire the coaching staff.

I'm assuming you think Burns has no trade value? I don't get wanting to lose Burns.
He's expensive, and 4 years at $8M per is a lot, but his salary is only $6M/yr over the next four, and he'll remain a top pairing D for at least the next two. Given his fitness, size, and offensive attributes he'll likely still be a top 4 in the remaining two years when the cap may pick back up. I feel like he should have some trade value. Not what it would have been two years ago, but he's still a good player (on a very bad team).

 

[Cas]

Also is it just Gambrell that counts for eligible exposed forwards as of now?

Gambrell needs to be resigned (he's a pending RFA) to count as an exposed forward (the lack of which would not prevent Seattle from picking him). Same with Nieto/Sorensen/Marleau (who I believe are the only players on the team able to meet the requirements).

 

[Kcoyote3]

I'm assuming you think Burns has no trade value? I don't get wanting to lose Burns.
He's expensive, and 4 years at $8M per is a lot, but his salary is only $6M/yr over the next four, and he'll remain a top pairing D for at least the next two. Given his fitness, size, and offensive attributes he'll likely still be a top 4 in the remaining two years when the cap may pick back up. I feel like he should have some trade value. Not what it would have been two years ago, but he's still a good player (on a very bad team).

I think in a vacuum he has value. But I don't think a team can take his contract. So our options are, ride out his usefulness, then be saddled with 8 million AAV for 3 years where he's likely not great anymore, and we will be trying to rebuild, or rip the bandaid off now and give him to probably the only team that can swing it right now.

 

[CupfortheSharks]

Gambrell needs to be resigned (he's a pending RFA) to count as an exposed forward (the lack of which would not prevent Seattle from picking him). Same with Nieto/Sorensen/Marleau (who I believe are the only players on the team able to meet the requirements).

Are you sure about that? This is true for pending UFAs like Nieto but I don’t think it’s true for pending RFAs like Gambrell.

 

[Cas]

Are you sure about that? This is true for pending UFAs like Nieto but I don’t think it’s true for pending RFAs like Gambrell.

Based on the rules of the last expansion draft:

* All Clubs must meet the following minimum requirements regarding players exposed for selection in the Expansion Draft:
i) One defenseman who is a) under contract in 2017-18 and b) played in 40 or more NHL games the prior season OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the prior two seasons.
ii) Two forwards who are a) under contract in 2017-18 and b) played in 40 or more NHL games the prior season OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the prior two seasons.
iii) One goaltender who is under contract in 2017-18 or will be a restricted free agent at the expiration of his current contract immediately prior to 2017-18. If the club elects to make a restricted free agent goaltender available in order to meet this requirement, that goaltender must have received his qualifying offer prior to the submission of the club's protected list.

The exposed goalie can be an unsigned RFA, but my reading of these rules says that the skaters must be under contract.

 

[landshark]

Logan Couture
Evander Kane
Timo Meier
Tomas Hertl
Kevin Labanc
Ryan Donato
Rudolfs Balcers

Erik Karlsson
Brent Burns
Radim Simek

Josef Korenar

 

[StanleyCup2035]

Can we expose Doug Wilson in the expansion draft?

 

[Hodge]

I know this is a minority opinion but I would protect Gambrell over Donato. Our organizational depth at center is pretty weak especially when it comes to guys who can play that position in the NHL near term. Meanwhile we have a handful of wingers internally who can replace Donato at a much team-friendlier cap hit than Donato is likely to have next season with arbitration rights.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Serious question: Who are our two forwards under contract who played at least 40 NHL games this season or 70 NHL games in the past two seasons who are being exposed?


As for the question... I wonder if there would be any way to force Seattle to take a big contract. Like if we left Couture, Burns, and Jones all exposed, would Seattle bite? Or would they just pick someone even though they know that pick will never be an NHLer?

Hertl, Kane, Donato, Meier, Labanc, Balcers, Gambrell

Karlsson, Vlasic, Simek

Korenar

 

[The Nemesis]

As for the question... I wonder if there would be any way to force Seattle to take a big contract. Like if we left Couture, Burns, and Jones all exposed, would Seattle bite? Or would they just pick someone even though they know that pick will never be an NHLer?

It might depend on what they take elsewhere. They're going to have to hit the cap floor so there would be some value in taking at least one or two big money contracts. I could see a scenario where they might see the value in someone like Couture (playoff history, possible leadership?) or Burns (marquee name value) even with their awful contracts.

Of course the Sharks could also toss some kind of sweetener their way to do so. Just as long as they don't go full Anaheim (trading Vegas Shea Theodore to protect a pair of players of marginal consequence from selection)

 

[Cas]

Serious question: Who are our two forwards under contract who played at least 40 NHL games this season or 70 NHL games in the past two seasons who are being exposed?

Right now, no one - my guess is Gambrell and Nieto get extended (Gambrell is a given). If they stick around, we have one-third of our bottom six (and top PK unit) set for next year (at least the beginning of the year), and both are replaceable internally if they're picked. Both should also be cheap (is either likely to be paid more than $1 million? I doubt it), so if they bomb they can be dumped easily.

 

[CupfortheSharks]

I know this is a minority opinion but I would protect Gambrell over Donato. Our organizational depth at center is pretty weak especially when it comes to guys who can play that position in the NHL near term. Meanwhile we have a handful of wingers internally who can replace Donato at a much team-friendlier cap hit than Donato is likely to have next season with arbitration rights.

I have a feeling the Sharks might go this direction and this board is going to go nuts. We lack centers and right shot forwards. Gambrell ticks both boxes. Meanwhile, we have lots of left shot middle 6 wingers. Gambrell isn’t a good 3C, but he’s the 3rd best center we have.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Right now, no one - my guess is Gambrell and Nieto get extended (Gambrell is a given). If they stick around, we have one-third of our bottom six (and top PK unit) set for next year (at least the beginning of the year), and both are replaceable internally if they're picked. Both should also be cheap (is either likely to be paid more than $1 million? I doubt it), so if they bomb they can be dumped easily.

I feel like Nieto was signed for the expansion draft, but does he even qualify, with his injury?

I’m also in favor of protecting Gambrell, just not over Donato. Leave Logan unprotected.

 

[Hodge]

I have a feeling the Sharks might go this direction and this board is going to go nuts. We lack centers and right shot forwards. Gambrell ticks both boxes. Meanwhile, we have lots of left shot middle 6 wingers. Gambrell isn’t a good 3C, but he’s the 3rd best center we have.

I expect the Sharks to protect Gambrell over Donato too just based on how they have used the two players this season. I'm also not sure Seattle would even claim Donato. If they can't have Gambrell they might be better off rolling the dice on someone like True or even Dahlen.