Seattle Expansion Draft

[The Flying Octopus]

Hockey players are usually morons and that can't be helped. They definitely get taken advantage of but I hate the owners way more than the agents or the players. In general these owners are uber-wealthy and they repeatedly shut down the league because of their own ineptitude and greed. Owning a hockey team shouldn't be a business venture that they make any money on. Lower the ticket prices, pay the players, take care of the players, stop hiding concussion evidence and such. If doing that means operating at a loss, even a big one, then that should be the cost of owning a sports team. The greedy buggers can afford it, or they shouldn't own a team.

I grew up in a wealthy white neighborhood of mostly immoral, racist, mysoginist dirt-bags so my views are pretty colored against those types. I have no sympathy for particularly wealthy people under any circumstance regarding money. If you have enough, you have enough and the rest should be gravy.

I have a money tree in my backyard. I am not immoral, racist, and definitely not a misogynist dirt bag, but thanks for generalizing. You must be proud.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Gotcha. Gonna make a huge difference in the expansion draft if it's post lockout. Teams will be buying out players with nmcs.

I mean, who is to say that compliance buyouts will even be offered?

Compliance buyouts were offered in 2005 because the cap got put in place
Compliance buyouts were offered in 2012 because the long term back-diving deals were nixed to give teams a potential out.

If I remember right the biggest things that could drive a wedge inbetween them now are escrow payments, term limits, and RFA leverage. Nothing that would necessitate offering amnesty buyouts.

Basically, the last two lockouts drastically changed the cap landscape on veterans deals. This one would be involving more players on the younger end.

I still think it is beyond ludicrous that ANOTHER lockout is on the horizon, but I guess that's where we are at.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I have a money tree in my backyard. I am not immoral, racist, and definitely not a misogynist dirt bag, but thanks for generalizing. You must be proud.

I am all those things.

Hi, my name is Marc Bergevin. How ya doin?

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I understand that. This was all in response to a comment about the agents being the worst people in hockey-manipulating players greedily and causing these lockouts. I blame the billionaires that only care about using the sport to make more money that they don't need.

But I think I've derailed the thread so I'm going to move on. Let's talk about the Seattle expansion draft.

What has been driving the lockouts is the NHL's insistence in forcing teams into markets. They needed the cost certainty of the cap because of the southern expansion leading to small market teams LOSING THEIR ASSES in dollars and cents and therefore not being able to get any players and improve their standing.

Then, the 2012 lockout happened pretty much because of what big market GMs were doing to circumvent the cap. Offering deals that couldn't/wouldn't be matched. As well as a sudden new influx of TV money that required a re-organization of the money from owners to players.

The agents aren't causing the lockouts. Neither are the contracts being paid to top players or even mediocre players. What is driving it is the league going blunt-force trauma into terrible hockey markets that are crazy hard to keep viable.

Basically, the southern expansion has been good for the league in that it has upped revenues, but they've had a lot more they've had to drag along and muck around with because of it. The league is monetarily better off, but it just has to deal with labor unrest every 7 years or so. The benefits of doing it outweigh the costs, we just get to see the costs in a very public way.

 

[HisNoodliness]

I have a money tree in my backyard. I am not immoral, racist, and definitely not a misogynist dirt bag, but thanks for generalizing. You must be proud.

I apologize to everyone for my comment and am leaving it at that.

 

[HisNoodliness]

What has been driving the lockouts is the NHL's insistence in forcing teams into markets. They needed the cost certainty of the cap because of the southern expansion leading to small market teams LOSING THEIR ASSES in dollars and cents and therefore not being able to get any players and improve their standing.

Then, the 2012 lockout happened pretty much because of what big market GMs were doing to circumvent the cap. Offering deals that couldn't/wouldn't be matched. As well as a sudden new influx of TV money that required a re-organization of the money from owners to players.

The agents aren't causing the lockouts. Neither are the contracts being paid to top players or even mediocre players. What is driving it is the league going blunt-force trauma into terrible hockey markets that are crazy hard to keep viable.

Basically, the southern expansion has been good for the league in that it has upped revenues, but they've had a lot more they've had to drag along and muck around with because of it. The league is monetarily better off, but it just has to deal with labor unrest every 7 years or so. The benefits of doing it outweigh the costs, we just get to see the costs in a very public way.

Yeah, this is probably a pretty accurate take. I just think the owners of those Southern franchises either shouldn't have bought an NHL team or they should have been prepared to lose a lot of money in order to make a competitive team at which point they can hopefully stop losing money. I don't think the extra revenue justifies a lockout at all. These guys can make all the money they want just as long as it doesn't interfere with playing hockey. And that's the big difference: the owners are in it for the money and I wish they were in it for the hockey. Is that unrealistic, sure, but whenever a lockout happens, they're who I will blame.

 

[SCD]

And that's the big difference: the owners are in it for the money and I wish they were in it for the hockey.

You obviously were not around in the Mr Ilitch era. Although he made money on the DRW, his driving force was always to win.

 

[A II R]

yes.

his contract would need to slide next year.

19-20 + 20-21 = two pro years, not exempt.

Per Dreger and the Insiders, Zadina will NOT have to be protected as long as he doesn't play 10 games this year. We can call him up for the last 9 and he will still be exempt in the Seattle expansion draft.

 

[SCD]

Bultman posted an article on the issue today.

It is his belief Nielsen does not have to be protected.

However, any player currently age 20+ playing professional this year in Europe would be eligible. That means Lindstrom would need to be protected.​

 

[lilidk]

Per Dreger and the Insiders, Zadina will NOT have to be protected as long as he doesn't play 10 games this year. We can call him up for the last 9 and he will still be exempt in the Seattle expansion draft.

So I think it will apply to Hronek to, he played 6 games already.

 

[The Zermanator]

So I think it will apply to Hronek to, he played 6 games already.

Doesn't the AHL count, though? He played there all of last season.

 

[WingsMJN2965]

Holland is also gonna trade Veleno for Legwand, Cholowski for Zidlicky and Rasmussen for Cole.

Calm down, this is Holland not McPhee.

... Holland would trade 1sts for those.

Per Dreger and the Insiders, Zadina will NOT have to be protected as long as he doesn't play 10 games this year. We can call him up for the last 9 and he will still be exempt in the Seattle expansion draft.

Where'd you see this? My understanding was the games count whether they're NHL or AHL, unlike ELC contracts.

 

[InjuredChoker]

Where'd you see this? My understanding was the games count whether they're NHL or AHL, unlike ELC contracts.

they don't if player is under 20. that's why a guy like honka was exempt from the previous expansion draft.

it's in the cba.

 

[raymond23]

Bultman posted an article on the issue today.

It is his belief Nielsen does not have to be protected.

However, any player currently age 20+ playing professional this year in Europe would be eligible. That means Lindstrom would need to be protected.​

That seems pretty ridiculous to me.

 

[Henkka]

It is his belief Nielsen does not have to be protected.

However, any player currently age 20+ playing professional this year in Europe would be eligible. That means Lindstrom would need to be protected.​

Lindström is counted as 19-year old because of the late birthday. (after sebtember 15th)

 

[Reddwit]

• Zadina should be exempted, given his age during AHL play, as long as he doesn't play 10 NHL games this year. That's easy to avoid.
• Nielsen signed with the Wings because they gave him that sixth year. I think the organization can tactfully present a "waive or buy-out" ultimatum without losing face.
• Abby doesn't need to be protected. There's a good chance Dekeyser won't be worth protecting then either (if he is now).
• There's a good chance Detroit doesn't have a goalie worth protecting then either.

1. Larkin
2. Athanasiou
3. Bertuzzi
4. Rasmussen
5. Mantha
6. Cholowski
7. Hronek

That's a pretty great situation to be in, relatively speaking. Detroit could have the flexibility to be a trade option for a lot of other teams if they don't sign FAs worth protecting in the interim. If they do sign FAs, they could still have the option of forgoing the 7-3-1 set up and instead go with 5-4. That could be huge if/when targeting Karlsson and Trouba (especially since we'd probably be giving up a protection-worthy player for Trouba if it comes down to a trade).

 

[Reddwit]

Slightly OT: I wonder...does the announcement of the expansion draft decrease trade options for a guy like Trouba? If someone trades for him this off-season, he needs to be signed and therefore protected (he's not signing another short-term deal). If the Jets re-sign him to a 1 year deal (he's got arbitration rights, can't get a 2 year deal out of arbitration, and is a UFA after that), then I can't imagine anyone ponying up a king's ransom for an impending UFA prize. And there is little to suggest he wants to give up any FA years to the Peg.

It may not be the biggest factor, but it is one more thing to think about for any team going forward. It may require an additional move that isn't easily made and eliminating just 1 or 2 other candidates for Trouba may be the difference maker.

 

[InjuredChoker]

Lindström is counted as 19-year old because of the late birthday. (after sebtember 15th)

you sure?

from the CBA

For the purposes of this Section 10.2(a), a Player aged 18 or 19 earns a year of professional experience by playing ten (10) or more NHL Games in a given NHL Season, and a Player aged 20 or older (or who turns 20 between September 16 and December 31 of the year in which he signs his first SPC) earns a year of professional experience by playing ten (10) or more Professional Games under an SPC in a given League Year.

Lindström signed his ELC this year. though technically his SPC signing age should be 19 since he was 19 on sept 15th this year.. but capfiendly has his signing age as 20.

 

[SCD]

His DOB is 10/20/98. (20/10/98 for Europeans )

 

[A II R]

Calm down, this is Holland not McPhee.

... Holland would trade 1sts for those.



Where'd you see this? My understanding was the games count whether they're NHL or AHL, unlike ELC contracts.

Episode of Insider Trading the other day. Ken Daniels also talked about it on the broadcast, either vs TML or NYI, I can't remember. It's pretty settled by those in the know. Zadina will be exempt and we are going to keep him that way with the Seattle draft on the horizon.

EDIT: Insider Trading

 

[Henkka]

I hope some of the Red Wings beat writers or Custance should go and ask this situation from Holland/Wright.

 

[A II R]

Per CapFriendly, Nielsen's NMC ran out last year and he now only has a modified NTC. He won't have to be protected.

Tweet:
Clause Update

Initially we had #RedWings Frans Nielsen with a full No Move clause throughout his contract, coupled with a Modified NTC starting this season

We've now confirmed that the NMC ended last season & that Nielsen only has a M-NTC moving forward.

CapFriendly Tweet

 

[SCD]

Always nice hearing something positive for a change regarding contracts,

 

[Henkka]

Per CapFriendly, Nielsen's NMC ran out last year and he now only has a modified NTC. He won't have to be protected.

Tweet:
Clause Update

Initially we had #RedWings Frans Nielsen with a full No Move clause throughout his contract, coupled with a Modified NTC starting this season

We've now confirmed that the NMC ended last season & that Nielsen only has a M-NTC moving forward.

CapFriendly Tweet

Nice, he can moved on this deadline to make room for Veleno/2019 picked Center.

Nielsen has 10-team no-trade list, which is basicly nothing as "protection". 33% of teams. He can avoid the crap teams and leave all contenders open as an option.

Holland has built this contract pretty smart way.

 

[A II R]

Nice, he can moved on this deadline to make room for Veleno/2019 picked Center.

Nielsen has 10-team no-trade list, which is basicly nothing as "protection". 33% of teams. He can avoid the crap teams and leave all contenders open as an option.

Holland has built this contract pretty smart way.

Eh, he's still a 34 year old on a massive decline with three more seasons after this year at $5.25. He's unlikely to get moved, unless we take back a bad contract or send a draft pick with him. I'm just happy we don't have to use a spot on him in the Seattle draft. I could see a new GM (hi Stevie) doing something creative to get rid of him, but KH hasn't shown a willingness to do those types of deals.