Expansion Draft Possibilities....

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/
Status
Not open for further replies.

budzz

History is just that.
Jan 26, 2015
995
1,305
Expansion is now into Phase 3 and it's looking alot like Quebec and Las Vegas will have expansion teams within the next 2 years. This means an expansion draft is coming, and that opens up some interesting possibilities for The Leafs.

Hoping I can quote the article here, (from a Hockeybuzz blogger hope that is ok here).
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Jason-Lewis/NHL-Expansion-Who-Would-the-Kings-Protect/179/70600
This is from an LA Kings blogger speculating on "who to protect from our team", but if it's accurate, it's basically this, to quote the article...
>>>
So how are expansion teams formed?

Back in 2000 the rules were simple. Every NHL team was allowed to protect one goaltender, five defensemen, and nine forwards or two goaltenders, three defensemen, and seven forwards. (The only exemption in 2000 were the Nashville Predators and the Atlanta Thrashers given that they entered the league in the last two years.)

The rest of the players that are not protected go into a pool and each new expansion team is allowed to select from them. As you would expect, not a lot of competitive teams are formed out of the expansion draft due to many teams trying to shed highly paid, yet, below production level players and/or players deemed replaceable.

That does, however, leave some interesting names up for debate on the protected/unprotected status.
<<<<

So for us Leafs, we of course have to go through the debates of who to protect from our Roster. But beyond that, with a progressive and aggressive new Management braintrust, it got me thinking about possibilities.

So my question, without knowledge of the small print in previous expansion drafts. Can deals be pre-made with expansion teams where they select certain players from certain teams and flip them immediately for other assets?? I'm thinking within say 2 years when expansion comes in, we may be a bit closer, and have a unique opportunity to wheel and deal a bit and get some pretty good players if we're creative.

Am I thinking too much about this or is this maybe a case of the stars lining up at the right time in a few years for us to maybe exploit this expansion with a young talent pool and financial flexibility?
 

Bullseye

Registered User
Jun 14, 2012
6,931
370
Niagara
Would be a good way to shed some salary like Lupul or Robadias....hell even Phaneuf if he can't be traded

lots of teams expressed interest in Phaneuf but Dion wasn't the team's problem - he is a decent defenseman and a decent leader. They needed to surround him with good young and veteran players and they didn't do that. They can trade Phaneuf without any trouble. Babcock wanted him in Detroit and he wants him in Toronto - watch Dion have a career changing year.
 

hotpaws

Registered User
Nov 21, 2009
22,031
6,640
lots of teams expressed interest in Phaneuf but Dion wasn't the team's problem - he is a decent defenseman and a decent leader. They needed to surround him with good young and veteran players and they didn't do that. They can trade Phaneuf without any trouble. Babcock wanted him in Detroit and he wants him in Toronto - watch Dion have a career changing year.

very few teams were interested in Dion at the t/d and if Det/Babcock wanted him so badly they would have made a decent offer

yea Phaneufs a decent d-man but no one wants to pay just a "decent" d-man 7mil per season and that's the reason he's still here

we had an opportunity to move him at the t/d for scraps and cut our losses , unfortunately Nonis didn't want to look like an idiot for trading a guy he just gave 50 m too for the trash pkg that was offered
 

TheCLAM

Registered User
Oct 11, 2012
3,945
150
Niagara Falls
lots of teams expressed interest in Phaneuf but Dion wasn't the team's problem - he is a decent defenseman and a decent leader. They needed to surround him with good young and veteran players and they didn't do that. They can trade Phaneuf without any trouble. Babcock wanted him in Detroit and he wants him in Toronto - watch Dion have a career changing year.

Very good possibility he could be unprotected in an expansion draft. He doesn't have the market at this current stage of his contract and uneasy player. I feel that in 3 more seasons this could change with stability and a developing team.

On one hand he may be good to keep around and on the other I'm tempted for us to cut our losses.
 

Bullseye

Registered User
Jun 14, 2012
6,931
370
Niagara
very few teams were interested in Dion at the t/d and if Det/Babcock wanted him so badly they would have made a decent offer

yea Phaneufs a decent d-man but no one wants to pay just a "decent" d-man 7mil per season and that's the reason he's still here

we had an opportunity to move him at the t/d for scraps and cut our losses , unfortunately Nonis didn't want to look like an idiot for trading a guy he just gave 50 m too for the trash pkg that was offered

The Leafs were holding out for Mantha and Pulk instead of Cap dump and Pulk...
 

Christ

Registered User
Mar 10, 2004
12,143
495
Canada
Do teams have to protect players with no movement clauses? If not that might be an interesting way for a team to get out of keeping a player who has value but they no longer want to keep but is stuck on one of these contracts...
 

New Liskeard

Registered User
Jul 7, 2007
10,487
337
Do teams have to protect players with no movement clauses? If not that might be an interesting way for a team to get out of keeping a player who has value but they no longer want to keep but is stuck on one of these contracts...

Was wondering that very same thing. Would be interested in seeing what that is with anyone who has knowledge of the CBA.
 

Ovate

Registered User
Dec 17, 2014
4,105
56
Toronto
Do teams have to protect players with no movement clauses? If not that might be an interesting way for a team to get out of keeping a player who has value but they no longer want to keep but is stuck on one of these contracts...

Yes they do, but that rule may be revisited. Some teams like Boston are so heavy on them, that it's possible they'd have more NTCs than slots available at a position.
 

New Liskeard

Registered User
Jul 7, 2007
10,487
337
Yes they do, but that rule may be revisited. Some teams like Boston are so heavy on them, that it's possible they'd have more NTCs than slots available at a position.

What ever "rule" is in place it cannot be revisited until the current CBA expires. I'm sure there is something in it, that talks to players with NMC being exposed to an NHL expansion draft.
 

Daisy Jane

everything is gonna be okay!
Jul 2, 2009
70,377
9,634
Too bad the rest of the league doesn't share your opinion .

this made me laugh, really, really hard.
hopefully someone in the league figures it out and we can move on from him.

but in this, i think we'd have to protect Lupul (limited NTC) Bozak (Limited), Dion (repeat after me), and Robidas.
 

hotpaws

Registered User
Nov 21, 2009
22,031
6,640
A lot of teams in this league think he is. They just don't think he's worth $7Mil AND the picks/prospects that the Leafs are asking for.

if they thought he was a 1st pairing D teams would believe he was worth his salary and our more than reasonable asking price
 

hotpaws

Registered User
Nov 21, 2009
22,031
6,640
He is not a top pairing guy on a Stanley Cup contender. Yes, some other team would have given him the exact contract. There are lots of stupid GMs out there.

too bad there doesn't seem to be anyone stupid enough to trade for him
 

Banic

Registered User
Jun 23, 2010
2,522
0
Toronto
Phaneuf is worth 7 mil right now. I'm sure if his contract was 7 mil on the short term someone would have bit. But its the fact he will not be worth that amount in 2 years (when the Expansion would likely occur) let alone the years after that. Seems like it's much more about # of years than it is $. Which I can happily say I spoke out against the months before that contract was signed. It was ridiculous then, and it is even more ridiculous now.
 

Suntouchable13

Registered User
Dec 20, 2003
44,263
20,312
Toronto, ON
Phaneuf is worth 7 mil right now. I'm sure if his contract was 7 mil on the short term someone would have bit. But its the fact he will not be worth that amount in 2 years (when the Expansion would likely occur) let alone the years after that. Seems like it's much more about # of years than it is $. Which I can happily say I spoke out against the months before that contract was signed. It was ridiculous then, and it is even more ridiculous now.

Worth 7 mil for what? His stellar defensive play? His outstanding offensive numbers? His amazing skating ability?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad