San Jose Sharks Expansion Draft Game

[themelkman]

Pretty basic

Couture
Labanc
Meier
Kane
Donato
Balcers
Hertl

Karlsson
Vlasic
Middleton

Korenar

 

[one2gamble]

Sacrifice All

 

[Cas]

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.

Nieto played 70 games last year - he'd qualify even had he missed this entire season.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Nieto played 70 games last year - he'd qualify even had he missed this entire season.

Okay cool, thanks for checking.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

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.

Of course the board would go nuts. They'd be protecting an inferior player on the basis of position and handedness over effectiveness. We are weak organizationally at center in part because Gambrell hasn't been good.

 

[magic school bus]

I'm under the understanding that Vlasic HAS to be protected (NMC) and Gambrell doesn't need to be since he's an RFA. Same for Donato.

Is that correct?

 

[Cas]

I'm under the understanding that Vlasic HAS to be protected (NMC) and Gambrell doesn't need to be since he's an RFA.

Is that correct?

Karlsson and Vlasic must be protected (unless they are willing to waive their NMCs). No other Sharks must be protected.

The Sharks must expose two forwards and one defenseman who are under contract and meet the playing time requirements. Right now they have eleven forwards and four defensemen meeting the playing time requirements - four of those forwards are not under contract for next season (Gambrell, Marleau, Nieto, Sorensen). They must also expose a goaltender who is under contract or an RFA who meets the professional seasons requirement (Jones and Korenar are the only options).

Gambrell's contract status doesn't affect whether he needs to be protected - the Kraken may select him if he is unprotected and unsigned, just like they can select Marleau, Nieto, True, Dahlen, or other players who are not under contract for 2021-22 or even under contract right now. However, the Sharks must have two forwards who are under contract for 2021-22 (not pending RFAs, but with ink on paper), who meet the playing time requirement, and who are unprotected. Assuming the Sharks protect the five "core" forwards (Couture, Kane, Meier, Hertl, Labanc) and Donato and Balcers (both are pending RFAs), they must extend two of Gambrell, Marleau, Nieto, and Sorensen and expose them; they can also choose to expose any of the other seven (provided they extend Donato and/or Balcers).

Basically, Gambrell is an ideal exposed forward - he's not very good so he's not a huge loss, he's not very good so he'll be cheap to extend if Seattle doesn't pick him, he's not so bad that extending him would be a mistake, and he's not so bad that Seattle wouldn't even consider him. The same is true with Nieto, though he won't be as cheap and is probably a little better. There's no reason to protect Gambrell save that the Sharks are short of centers (but Gambrell is a really bad 3C and the Sharks have other 4C options) and right-handed shots, but protecting Gambrell over Donato or Balcers seems pretty dumb.

 

[Hodge]

Karlsson and Vlasic must be protected (unless they are willing to waive their NMCs). No other Sharks must be protected.

The Sharks must expose two forwards and one defenseman who are under contract and meet the playing time requirements. Right now they have eleven forwards and four defensemen meeting the playing time requirements - four of those forwards are not under contract for next season (Gambrell, Marleau, Nieto, Sorensen). They must also expose a goaltender who is under contract or an RFA who meets the professional seasons requirement (Jones and Korenar are the only options).

Gambrell's contract status doesn't affect whether he needs to be protected - the Kraken may select him if he is unprotected and unsigned, just like they can select Marleau, Nieto, True, Dahlen, or other players who are not under contract for 2021-22 or even under contract right now. However, the Sharks must have two forwards who are under contract for 2021-22 (not pending RFAs, but with ink on paper), who meet the playing time requirement, and who are unprotected. Assuming the Sharks protect the five "core" forwards (Couture, Kane, Meier, Hertl, Labanc) and Donato and Balcers (both are pending RFAs), they must extend two of Gambrell, Marleau, Nieto, and Sorensen and expose them; they can also choose to expose any of the other seven (provided they extend Donato and/or Balcers).

Basically, Gambrell is an ideal exposed forward - he's not very good so he's not a huge loss, he's not very good so he'll be cheap to extend if Seattle doesn't pick him, he's not so bad that extending him would be a mistake, and he's not so bad that Seattle wouldn't even consider him. The same is true with Nieto, though he won't be as cheap and is probably a little better. There's no reason to protect Gambrell save that the Sharks are short of centers (but Gambrell is a really bad 3C and the Sharks have other 4C options) and right-handed shots, but protecting Gambrell over Donato or Balcers seems pretty dumb.

I didn't realize Couture does not need to be protected. In that case exposing him to protect Gambrell and Donato is the best asset management strategy since there is no chance Seattle claims Couture without a significant sweetener(s). Can't see this front office exposing their captain though.

 

[magic school bus]

I didn't realize Couture does not need to be protected. In that case exposing him to protect Gambrell and Donato is the best asset management strategy since there is no chance Seattle claims Couture without a significant sweetener(s). Can't see this front office exposing their captain though.

The would claim Couture and trade him for two 1sts with salary retention easily. He has a lot of value at a lower number.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

The would claim Couture and trade him for two 1sts with salary retention easily. He has a lot of value at a lower number.

He may have increased value compared to normal but he would still have a three team trade list so getting two 1st rounders even at 4 million is a tough get for Couture.

 

[Hodge]

The would claim Couture and trade him for two 1sts with salary retention easily. He has a lot of value at a lower number.

Is there any precedent for a team retaining salary on a player for six years? I'm assuming Seattle doesn't want millions in dead cap on their books through almost the end of the decade. I also don't think Couture is worth multiple first round picks even at half salary given the term left on the deal. The term is much more prohibitive than the cap hit.

 

[magic school bus]

He may have increased value compared to normal but he would still have a three team trade list so getting two 1st rounders even at 4 million is a tough get for Couture.

He's probably worth a late 1st as is. Retaining salary for years is worth at least another. The Sharks got a 4th for retaining $1.375M on Foligno for one year at the deadline. Couture is a better player and this is a lot longer commitment.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

He's probably worth a late 1st as is. Retaining salary for years is worth at least another. The Sharks got a 4th for retaining $1.375M on Foligno for one year at the deadline. Couture is a better player and this is a lot longer commitment.

Yes but it's also a long commitment to typically bad years. I don't think a team is going to actually pay a second 1st for it that is going to be on his three team list. There's just no leverage for it. I also don't think Seattle would just commit to retaining 4 million for 6 years either.

 

[magic school bus]

Yes but it's also a long commitment to typically bad years. I don't think a team is going to actually pay a second 1st for it that is going to be on his three team list. There's just no leverage for it. I also don't think Seattle would just commit to retaining 4 million for 6 years either.

I'm pretty sure he'd waive it to avoid being on an expansion team. Spend your 30s on a rebuilding team or try to compete for a Cup and give yourself a chance to make an Olympic team. Those won't happen here or in Seattle.

It doesn't have to be the full 4 million either. I think Couture at $5M is enough.

 

[Sharksrule04]

I'm protecting the following:

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)
Rudolfs Balcers (RFA)

Erik Karlsson (NMC)
Brent Burns 8M until 2025
Nicolas Meloche (RFA)

Josef Korenar (RFA)

Don't care about Meloche but I think Simek is overrated and wouldn't mind getting rid of his contract. Losing Simek, Gambrell or Dahlen would do minimal damage to the Sharks. Dream would be Vlasic or Jones getting taken, but I doubt it would happen.

 

[Gecklund]

The only players that have been protected by everyone:

Evander Kane
Tomas Hertl
Ryan Donato
Rudolfs Balcers
Erik Karlsson

HM: Josef Korenar (some people didn't protect a goalie)

For all the complaints about EK and Kane kind of funny that they are protected by everyone so far.

 

[magic school bus]

I'm protecting the following:

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)
Rudolfs Balcers (RFA)

Erik Karlsson (NMC)
Brent Burns 8M until 2025
Nicolas Meloche (RFA)

Josef Korenar (RFA)

Don't care about Meloche but I think Simek is overrated and wouldn't mind getting rid of his contract. Losing Simek, Gambrell or Dahlen would do minimal damage to the Sharks. Dream would be Vlasic or Jones getting taken, but I doubt it would happen.

I'm all for exposing Simek. Let's hope they take him.

 

[themelkman]

The only players that have been protected by everyone:

Evander Kane
Tomas Hertl
Ryan Donato
Rudolfs Balcers
Erik Karlsson

HM: Josef Korenar (some people didn't protect a goalie)

For all the complaints about EK and Kane kind of funny that they are protected by everyone so far.

Have no choice on EK. He cant be exposed unless he wants to and the odds seem very very low

 

[Gecklund]

Have no choice on EK. He cant be exposed unless he wants to and the odds seem very very low

I mean it’s the same with Vlasic but he’s no where close to unanimous.

 

[themelkman]

I mean it’s the same with Vlasic but he’s no where close to unanimous.

Its possible he would waive. Depends on if he knows he sucks or not. EK just wont

 

[thrillermiller89]

Gambrell is a Washington native. He’ll be the pick.

 

[Kat Predator]

Handcuffed with Karlsson and Vlasic, which is an unfortunate waste of two protections.

Go 4x4.

F: Kane, Hertl, Meier, Couture
D: Burns, Simek (see above)
G: Korenar

Meaning Labanc or Balcers is taken. Both are serviceable but replaceable in free agency.

 

[CupfortheSharks]

Handcuffed with Karlsson and Vlasic, which is an unfortunate waste of two protections.

Go 4x4.

F: Kane, Hertl, Meier, Couture
D: Burns, Simek (see above)
G: Korenar

Meaning Labanc or Balcers is taken. Both are serviceable but replaceable in free agency.

By going 8+1, we expose Labanc and Balcers to protect Simek. I don’t think this is a wise choice. Simek is also easily replaceable. Plus, with all the #4 defenseman available there is a good chance that Seattle selects whichever of Gambrell or Donato is left unprotected.

 

[YUPPY]

Must be an NHL player who has signed a contract for 21-22 year or beyond and must played in at least 70 NHL games in the prior two seasons. Korenar has not played enough games but I agreed they must expose Jones, Burns and Gambrell or Donato. I just hope Seattle picks up both Jones or Burns off our hand. Both are terrible this year.

 

[Cas]

Must be an NHL player who has signed a contract for 21-22 year or beyond and must played in at least 70 NHL games in the prior two seasons. Korenar has not played enough games but I agreed they must expose Jones, Burns and Gambrell or Donato. I just hope Seattle picks up both Jones and Burns off our hand. Both are terrible this year.

The exposed goalie does not have to have a signed contract for 21-22 or have met any playing time requirements, but I agree on exposing Jones (not that Seattle will take him - he's the worst starting goalie in the league).