• Have something to say? Register Now! and be posting in minutes!

expansion draft

sjrules99

Active Member
2,315
6
38
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Thought with the Expansion draft coming in 10 months, it's worth a little conversation given the strategy that goes into it. I am sure the sharks will go with the 7, 3, 1 protected option. Here is my expectation:

Protected:
7 forwards: pavs, cooch, boedker, Hertl, Karlsson, Donkey, tierney
3 D; Martin, Vlasic, Braun
1G: Jones

Exposed in this scenario:
meaningful forwards: joel Ward (one year left at 3.3M), Goldobin, nieto, several prospects but not the big ones (note 2 forwards with 40+game experience are required= nieto and ward)
Meaningful D: Dillon, Schlemko, Demelo, Mueller, secondary prospects (1 D required, easily met)
No meaningful ZG (dell?)

I suppose there are a few decisions:

1. if dougie wants to keep ward's last year, he'll have to expose another forward, and likely one of karlsson, tierney, or donkey. Doesnt make much sense to me. Of course, much can happen in a season, but ward seems most likely to me.

2. On D, they could protect dillon or schlemko, but I dont see that happening even though martin is older. I also dont see them risking losing braun as he has taken leaps into become a reasonably price legit shut down guy.

3. I assumed none of the big three UFA's (jumbo, patty, burns) are resigned before the expansion draft day. Can the sharks make gentleman's agreements with them and then sign them late after the draft? is that illegal?

What are your thoughts board, as this is a pretty big consideration for dougie and someone is gunna be gone after next year.
 

Cmon_WTF

Is that...cabbage?
3,664
9
38
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
If Burns doesn't have a NMC in his new contract they will protect him over Martin. I think they would protect Schlemko over Martin as well.
 

sjrules99

Active Member
2,315
6
38
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
If Burns doesn't have a NMC in his new contract they will protect him over Martin. I think they would protect Schlemko over Martin as well.

Burns is a UFA after next year, so he doesnt have to be protected as far as I know. If they give him an extension, then of course they would protect him, but the gentleman's extension makes more sense (agree on terms now but sign the deal after the draft).

I think the shlemko decision, like dillon, an some potential others depends on how the season goes. If dillon or shlemko really emerge nicely or Martin starts looking very injury prone and broken down, then I owuld say you are right. However, if dillon or shlemko dont look too good, then it might be different.

I think much depends on next year for those decisions.
 

Cmon_WTF

Is that...cabbage?
3,664
9
38
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
If Burns isn't signed before the expansion draft then he will hit the UFA market and the Sharks will loose him anyway. He will in all likelihood be re-signed before the start of this season.
 

Likewall32

Active Member
1,239
0
36
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
You dont think burns would be loyal to SJ waiting to sign to help the team protect more in the expansion draft?? He seems pretty damn happy to here
 

Cmon_WTF

Is that...cabbage?
3,664
9
38
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
You dont think burns would be loyal to SJ waiting to sign to help the team protect more in the expansion draft?? He seems pretty damn happy to here

first off re-signed or not he will still be under contract at the time of the expansion draft and is eligible to be selected if not protected. It's just a gamble to select someone who will be up for UFA 10 days after the draft. Not the smartest move to pick someone in that situation but for a player of Burn's ability they might take a chance.

Secondly I don't think Burns is going to risk loosing an extension to the possibility of injury.

Players with NMC's are not eligible to be picked in the expansion draft. If Burns is interested in helping the team protect more assets he could just let Wilson put a full NMC for the first 2 years of Burn's extension making him ineligible for draft and allow him to protect another player.
 

sjrules99

Active Member
2,315
6
38
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
first off re-signed or not he will still be under contract at the time of the expansion draft and is eligible to be selected if not protected. It's just a gamble to select someone who will be up for UFA 10 days after the draft. Not the smartest move to pick someone in that situation but for a player of Burn's ability they might take a chance.

Secondly I don't think Burns is going to risk loosing an extension to the possibility of injury.

Players with NMC's are not eligible to be picked in the expansion draft. If Burns is interested in helping the team protect more assets he could just let Wilson put a full NMC for the first 2 years of Burn's extension making him ineligible for draft and allow him to protect another player.

Players with NMC's have to be protected and count as one of the 8 (or 11 if the 7F, 3D, 1G option). So resigning burns with or without the NMC means having to spend a spot protecting him.

I understand about the extension piece, but ultimately, only a career ending injury next year would be the difference. perhaps dougie could give him a little boost for waiting to sign and foregoing the security. I would rather pay burns 1/2 Mil more per year for 5 years than lose a tierney, braun, martin, donkey, or karlsson for nothing.

Also, no chance that vegas takes a UFA in the draft. Doing so, and then not signing burns (which he wouldnt sign there and they know it) would be really dumb.
 

Cmon_WTF

Is that...cabbage?
3,664
9
38
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Karlsson and Martin are not much of a loss for the team after this season. As far as Martin is concerned, after this season his cap space would be more valuable to the team than he is.

Donskoi might fall under the 2nd year pro rule and not need to be protected. I'm not sure if they count Euro league time.

Keep in mind they can select up to 60 players. Two from each team. Only 30 of those players they select have to be signed for the 17/18 season. They will pick a limited number of pending UFA's just for the negotiating rights.
 

sjrules99

Active Member
2,315
6
38
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Karlsson and Martin are not much of a loss for the team after this season. As far as Martin is concerned, after this season his cap space would be more valuable to the team than he is.

Donskoi might fall under the 2nd year pro rule and not need to be protected. I'm not sure if they count Euro league time.

Keep in mind they can select up to 60 players. Two from each team. Only 30 of those players they select have to be signed for the 17/18 season. They will pick a limited number of pending UFA's just for the negotiating rights.

You may well be right about martin at his age, and losing dillon, demelo, or schlemko isnt a great loss either so burns, braun, and vlasic protected still works well.

Donkey will have 2 full pro years, so he is eligible to be drafted. Losing karlsson would suck as he could be a solid top 9 in time, and is young and cheap.

I think they only select one per team with 30 total players with 20 that must be signed for next year.

I would be surprised to see them go after UFA's in the selection draft. RFA's for sure, but drafting a UFA for 10 days of negotiating rights makes little sense given that few UFA's are going to want to play for a stinky expansion team, and they lose the ability to add a real NHLer or young RFA.

Rules for 2017 Expansion Draft
 

Cmon_WTF

Is that...cabbage?
3,664
9
38
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
They cannot select more than 2 from any team but have to select at least one from each and 30 must me signed for 17/18. They also must meet the cap floor requirements. 30 is the minimum they can select in the draft.

Any player with two or less pro years experience is ineligible. Next year will be Donskoi's 2nd year pro in NA which would make exempt him from the draft. To put it simply any player playing their 3rd pro year in the 16/17 season qualifies to be drafted. The gray area for Donskoi is I don't know if they are counting pro years in the the Euro leagues. If they do than he and Goldobin can be chosen if not protected.
 

sjrules99

Active Member
2,315
6
38
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
They cannot select more than 2 from any team but have to select at least one from each and 30 must me signed for 17/18. They also must meet the cap floor requirements. 30 is the minimum they can select in the draft.

Any player with two or less pro years experience is ineligible. Next year will be Donskoi's 2nd year pro in NA which would make exempt him from the draft. To put it simply any player playing their 3rd pro year in the 16/17 season qualifies to be drafted. The gray area for Donskoi is I don't know if they are counting pro years in the the Euro leagues. If they do than he and Goldobin can be chosen if not protected.

Im pretty sure they can only select one player per team:

NHL teams receiving information on potential expansion draft - Sportsnet.ca

see the last sentence...

However, upon further close reading, it appreas that you are right that 2 years or less is not needed to be protected as you mentioned. I goofed that one. I guess that may affect donkey and goldobin as you mentioned. I saw nothing about the Euro leagues in the explanation. My guess is that Euro doesnt count.

If donkey is not needed to protect but the sharks have to expose two forwards with 40 games of playing time next year and 70 total over two years, it's gunna be interesting to see how the sharks play it. Nieto seems likely to fit the bill as RFA in 2017 counts (another reason he might have been signed to that deal so cheap and simple), but they will have to expose another one. Seems like karlsson, ward, or boedker or tierney might have to be exposed depending on how they play it next year.

the exposed D is simple (demelo, dillon, Schlemko or martin all would fit, and none would be devastating to lose). of course the G is simple as dell (assuming he's the backup) would fit the bill.

At this point, it looks like the only major strategy question is what to do with the second mandatory forward. Maybe trade wingels, and bring up Goodrow and play him at least 56 games on purpose to be able to expose him along with nieto and avoid losing the guys with value?

Seems like trading wingels isn't just about cap space, as it could be essential to playing nieto and goodrow the necessary number of games?

Fascinating maneuvering needed as the sharks lack crappy contracts to expose(at least at the forward ranks).
 

Cmon_WTF

Is that...cabbage?
3,664
9
38
Joined
Nov 19, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Wingels, Karlsson, Nieto can all be made available and it wouldn't have much impact on the team.
 

sjrules99

Active Member
2,315
6
38
Joined
Oct 27, 2010
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Wingels, Karlsson, Nieto can all be made available and it wouldn't have much impact on the team.

wingels is a to-be-ufa, so he doesnt count. karlsson and nieto could be the two, but I would be sad to lose karlsson. I like his game alot. I mean it's not devastating, but I'd rather keep him if possible by playing goodrow or someone who is an rfa or singed through next year enough games to qualify. if Goodrow plays 56 games, he would qualify along with nieto as the mandatory 2. Then the protect 7 forwards would be pavelski, cooch, ward, hertl, boedker, tierney, and karlsson (with donkey, meier, and goldobin getting exemptions). This assumes jumbo and patty are extended after the draft if they are at all... Doing that leaves the forward ranks virtually untouched by the draft.

They would then lose one of the bottom D. Dillon or Schlemko most likely. I will see wht schlemko offers soon, but right now I have no problem with either getting plucked.
 
Top