Confirmed with Link: Canes acquire Dylan Wells from Edm for Future Considerations

Jul 18, 2010
26,716
57,525
Atlanta, GA
I assume this means we're not qualifying Ned and this is our way of exposing a goalie? Or we're about to get Ned signed and using our protection slot on him?

I don't think this is about Ned, because if we qualify him we will protect him, and if we don't he doesn't qualify for the exposed goalie.

I think this means we won't qualify Helvig, and need another eligible goalie to expose.
 

WreckingCrew

Registered User
Feb 4, 2015
13,483
41,174
I don't think this is about Ned, because if we qualify him we will protect him, and if we don't he doesn't qualify for the exposed goalie.

I think this means we won't qualify Helvig, and need another eligible goalie to expose.
Gotcha, all these rules make my head spin a bit. Though I don't know why you wouldn't just qualify Helvig, he's at least a capable goalie, this Wells dude sucked even in the ECHL
 
Jul 18, 2010
26,716
57,525
Atlanta, GA
Gotcha, all these rules make my head spin a bit. Though I don't know why you wouldn't just qualify Helvig, he's at least a capable goalie, this Wells dude sucked even in the ECHL

Helvig goes to arbitration when we try to pay him league minimum, and Dundon clearly has a bone to pick with arbitration this offseason.

Given Helvig has a 0% chance to make any impact on the roster whatsoever, I think Dundon not wanting to pay more than league minimum for a back-up AHL goalie/ECHL starter is reasonable.

We may just qualify the guy, offer him a 1-year league minimum deal, and if he balks we say "thanks for being our expansion draft guy" and part ways.
 

WreckingCrew

Registered User
Feb 4, 2015
13,483
41,174
Helvig goes to arbitration when we try to pay him league minimum, and Dundon clearly has a bone to pick with arbitration this offseason.

Given Helvig has a 0% chance to make any impact on the roster whatsoever, I think Dundon not wanting to pay more than league minimum for a back-up AHL goalie/ECHL starter is reasonable.

We may just qualify the guy, offer him a 1-year league minimum deal, and if he balks we say "thanks for being our expansion draft guy" and part ways.
So I assume then Wells isn't arbitration eligible? That would make more sense then. Does the QO affect the ability to give a two-way contract? I'd hate to "accidentally" waste a roster spot on this guy, but if he's making AHL salary and stuffed in the minors, it's a "who cares"...if he's even making $500k that seems like a waste. Though I guess it's better than stupid arbitration going "Yea Helvig gets $1M" for some asinine reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tryamw
Jul 18, 2010
26,716
57,525
Atlanta, GA
So I assume then Wells isn't arbitration eligible? That would make more sense then. Does the QO affect the ability to give a two-way contract? I'd hate to "accidentally" waste a roster spot on this guy, but if he's making AHL salary and stuffed in the minors, it's a "who cares"...if he's even making $500k that seems like a waste. Though I guess it's better than stupid arbitration going "Yea Helvig gets $1M" for some asinine reason.

Not only would we risk paying more in the 2-way contract (the AHL salary), Helvig also had some legal troubles this year and we may just not want him around.
 

Chrispy

Salakuljettaja's Blues
Feb 25, 2009
8,760
28,522
Cary, NC
So I assume then Wells isn't arbitration eligible? That would make more sense then. Does the QO affect the ability to give a two-way contract? I'd hate to "accidentally" waste a roster spot on this guy, but if he's making AHL salary and stuffed in the minors, it's a "who cares"...if he's even making $500k that seems like a waste. Though I guess it's better than stupid arbitration going "Yea Helvig gets $1M" for some asinine reason.

CapFriendly says Wells needs 2 more seasons to be arbitration eligible; he signed his ELC at 19 (4 years pro required) and has only 2 pro seasons.

This definitely says Helvig won't be qualified. Protect Ned, Mrazek or Reimer will be dealt with after the expansion draft (or after UFA day) and Wells is exposed to meet the goalie requirement.

Beck Warm is exempt as a newly signed ELC.
 

Svechhammer

THIS is hockey?
Jun 8, 2017
25,483
92,926
JsumTrhJp8G35dMtfO3IJNBxuOWrlCjfbWrm9LEmIuc.jpg


About sums up what I think of the new guy
 

DaveG

Noted Jerk
Apr 7, 2003
52,240
52,248
Winston-Salem NC
I don't think this is about Ned, because if we qualify him we will protect him, and if we don't he doesn't qualify for the exposed goalie.

I think this means we won't qualify Helvig, and need another eligible goalie to expose.
Yep, exactly this

Warm is exempt as a first year pro, and the only other option was re-signing Mrazek or Reimer to expose them, which the players aren't about to do, or to qualify Helvig, who we flat out have no interest in having around any more.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad