GDT: The Canucks and the Expansion Draft

[LastWordArmy]

Examing what the Canucks may lose next spring.

http://lastwordonsports.com/2016/07/25/vancouver-canucks-way-vegas-next-year/

Click to read more...

 

[momo]

Good asset management by Jim.

 

[bobbyb2009]

Good asset management by Jim.

I am assuming you are serious.

The problem is, the reason the Canucks have little risk is because we have such little depth....

Happy to lose one of Sbisa, Granlund, Gaunce, or Backman... But not happy that we don't have any real assets that we are worried about losing. Would it not be really great to have an additional 4 or 5 guys who we really didn't want to lose. Oh well...

The expansion draft does not scare me at the point. But if Jim goes and makes some moves that lock us in to exposing real assets, I will be less than happy.

 

[Icebreakers]

Tldr; we arent losing anyone important.

 

[ChilliBilly]

What would be nice is if some team going to lose a strong player decides to make friendly trades .... to a team that can afford to add depth.

 

[Street Hawk]

What would be nice is if some team going to lose a strong player decides to make friendly trades .... to a team that can afford to add depth.

Each team still has to lose a player. So, any trade has to make sense for the other team to also benefit the Canucks.

Take the Ducks. Understanding is that KB has a NMC, but the Ducks are permitted to ask KB to ask if he will waive it. If you are LV, do you want to select KB and his 1 year left on his contract or is there someone else on the Ducks you would rather have? More likely to be the latter.

Ducks have 5 good D in Lindholm, Fowler, Vatenan, Depres, Manson. Up front they have to protect Kesler, Perry, Getzlaf, Silverberg. Rackell is another who should be regarded as a protection target.

Either way, the Ducks will lose someone whether they go 7F and 3D or 8 skaters.

Canucks can't pick up a Dman without exposing an Edler/Tanev/Gudbranson. Unless they are going to trade someone like Edler at the TDL, if they fall out of contention.

If there is another expansion in 2019 or something, then that could impact the Canucks. But, by then the twins will be gone.

 

[PetterssonSimp]

Each team still has to lose a player. So, any trade has to make sense for the other team to also benefit the Canucks.

Take the Ducks. Understanding is that KB has a NMC, but the Ducks are permitted to ask KB to ask if he will waive it. If you are LV, do you want to select KB and his 1 year left on his contract or is there someone else on the Ducks you would rather have? More likely to be the latter.

Ducks have 5 good D in Lindholm, Fowler, Vatenan, Depres, Manson. Up front they have to protect Kesler, Perry, Getzlaf, Silverberg. Rackell is another who should be regarded as a protection target.

Either way, the Ducks will lose someone whether they go 7F and 3D or 8 skaters.

Canucks can't pick up a Dman without exposing an Edler/Tanev/Gudbranson. Unless they are going to trade someone like Edler at the TDL, if they fall out of contention.

If there is another expansion in 2019 or something, then that could impact the Canucks. But, by then the twins will be gone.

One way the Canucks could possibly get past this 3D conundrum is having a deal in place for Guddy to sign June 30th, rather than sign him beforehand. Give his agent the deal but it's to be signed on that date, 5 year 20 million dollars.
Canucks acquire another signed defenceman they could. But it very well could create problems the 2nd expansion.

 

[M2Beezy]

I understand Jimbo wont let Goober be taken cause he just traded for him but man o man he has to be exposed before Sbisa and everyone will see why this coming year

 

[BoDacious Horvat]

I understand Jimbo wont let Goober be taken cause he just traded for him but man o man he has to be exposed before Sbisa and everyone will see why this coming year

Are you implying we should protect Sbisa over Guds?

 

[ChilliBilly]

Each team still has to lose a player. So, any trade has to make sense for the other team to also benefit the Canucks.

Take the Ducks. Understanding is that KB has a NMC, but the Ducks are permitted to ask KB to ask if he will waive it. If you are LV, do you want to select KB and his 1 year left on his contract or is there someone else on the Ducks you would rather have? More likely to be the latter.

Ducks have 5 good D in Lindholm, Fowler, Vatenan, Depres, Manson. Up front they have to protect Kesler, Perry, Getzlaf, Silverberg. Rackell is another who should be regarded as a protection target.

Either way, the Ducks will lose someone whether they go 7F and 3D or 8 skaters.

Canucks can't pick up a Dman without exposing an Edler/Tanev/Gudbranson. Unless they are going to trade someone like Edler at the TDL, if they fall out of contention.

If there is another expansion in 2019 or something, then that could impact the Canucks. But, by then the twins will be gone.

Without a doubt the only thing worth acquiring is forwards. We have so much middling depth there its insane. We don't need a goalie, and we sure don't need anything other than a true # 1 Dman.

 

[ChilliBilly]

I understand Jimbo wont let Goober be taken cause he just traded for him but man o man he has to be exposed before Sbisa and everyone will see why this coming year

Please include your sarcasm mark, otherwise people will think you really mean this.

 

[GrogZilla]

It might get interesting if any of Granlund, Rodin, Etem, Gaunce or Larsen take big steps this year.
Really interesting if 2 of them do.
Larsen showing up & looking like the 2nd coming of Ehrhoff would make things real interesting.

 

[Hammman]

Please include your sarcasm mark, otherwise people will think you really mean this.

He does really mean this.

 

[Hammer79]

Uh oh, what if JB decides he needs to protect Sbisa?

Daniel
Henrik
Eriksson
Sutter or Horvat

Sbisa
Gudbranson
Tanev
Edler

Markstrom

Leaving exposed:
Horvat or Sutter
Baertschi
Gaunce
Grandlund

 

[ChilliBilly]

Uh oh, what if JB decides he needs to protect Sbisa?

Daniel
Henrik
Eriksson
Sutter or Horvat

Sbisa
Gudbranson
Tanev
Edler

Markstrom

Leaving exposed:
Horvat or Sutter
Baertschi
Gaunce
Grandlund

i was going to say not even JB could be that stupid .... but

 

[JuniorNelson]

This discussion is premature. There is no current data. By the time this is a concern it will have become obvious who is left unprotected. Lots of time for somebody to bust, yet.

 

[LeftCoast]

I understand Jimbo wont let Goober be taken cause he just traded for him but man o man he has to be exposed before Sbisa and everyone will see why this coming year

The Shinkaruk - Granlund trade doesn't really affect our exposure to the expansion draft - Shinkaruk is also eligible for the expansion draft and would have had to be protected or exposed.

 

[J Canuck]

The Shinkaruk - Granlund trade doesn't really affect our exposure to the expansion draft - Shinkaruk is also eligible for the expansion draft and would have had to be protected or exposed.

Yeah, saw that yesterday.

 

[Hi-wayman]

I am assuming you are serious.

The problem is, the reason the Canucks have little risk is because we have such little depth....

Happy to lose one of Sbisa, Granlund, Gaunce, or Backman... But not happy that we don't have any real assets that we are worried about losing. Would it not be really great to have an additional 4 or 5 guys who we really didn't want to lose. Oh well...

The expansion draft does not scare me at the point. But if Jim goes and makes some moves that lock us in to exposing real assets, I will be less than happy.

I would be okay to see Benning acquire another team's very high quality forward that they are likely to lose if exposed. Canucks would have to give some value back for the level of quality player I'm think of. Preferably for a 2nd to 5th round pick plus maybe Hansen or Cassels. The Canucks then protect the new player instead of Hansen.

There is likely going to be a few teams would may be interested. Must be a forward back to the Canucks in order to work. Preferably top six in the 22 to 28 age group.

 

[Huggy]

kevin bieksa was signed to a nmc.

all criticism of jim benning is invalid

 

[GetFocht]

you have to give credit, where credit is due, Canucks are probably in the most favourable position in terms of expansion draft.

 

[Street Hawk]

One way the Canucks could possibly get past this 3D conundrum is having a deal in place for Guddy to sign June 30th, rather than sign him beforehand. Give his agent the deal but it's to be signed on that date, 5 year 20 million dollars.
Canucks acquire another signed defenceman they could. But it very well could create problems the 2nd expansion.

It would not as the canucks would then be subject to RFA compensation as LV would own his rights. Only for UFAs does that benefit you.

If you are saying to protect another newly acquired dman along with tanev and Edler. Leaving gudbranson exposed.

 

[opendoor]

you have to give credit, where credit is due, Canucks are probably in the most favourable position in terms of expansion draft.

That tends to happen coming off a season where you're the worst team in the league and you have awful depth.

 

[Hit the post]

kevin bieksa was signed to a nmc.

all criticism of jim benning is invalid

Tommy Lee Jones logic....Jim Benning is doing a great job because there's at least one GM dumber than him in the league.

 

[Hi-wayman]

That tends to happen coming off a season where you're the worst team in the league and you have awful depth.

But we were not the worst team in the league. We were the 3rd worst team in the league.

Yet we are better situated for the draft than the Leafs and the Oilers and in fantastic shape compared to the Flames who were right behind us.