Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Roster Building Thread DCLXXV: Marc Staal... Come on Down!!!

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.
  • We are currently aware of "log in/security error" issues that are affecting some users. We apologize and ask for your patience as we try to get these issues fixed.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thirty One said:
The Montoya pick obviously didn't produce, but what realistic alternatives were there at that spot? I guess Stafford, but meh.
Click to expand...

I remember having my fingers crossed that Ladd would still be available at 6. Even so. And like I said, the Montoya pick was dictated by the Blackburn injury.
 
jas said:
Maloney fell in love with Korpikoski's workout. The Devils take Zajac and the Caps take Green.

The Montoya pick always pissed me off, since I hate taking goalies that high.

And, I loved David Booth in that draft, and the Rangers pass on him for Olver and Byers. Well done, scouting staff. Maloney was a part of the problem, too.
Click to expand...

Montoya at 6 in hindsight was fine. There was nothing within a handful of slots worth a damn anyway. If it wasn't Montoya, what would of Rostislav Olesz done for the Rangers.

And of the 3 Finns that year, the Rangers actually got the one that carved out a career in the NHL. So we picked the right Finn if you want some upside.
 
Thirty One said:
The Montoya pick obviously didn't produce, but what realistic alternatives were there at that spot? I guess Stafford, but meh.
Click to expand...

I wanted them to trade up to the Canes spot to take Ladd.

But also, Stafford would have been worth more than Montoya a few years later in a trade. Stafford had value as an asset, Montoya did not.
 
Amazing Kreiderman said:
Well, technically, Vegas can pick Smith since we can't protect him. Sure, he only has days left on his contract but it's within the rules of the expansion draft.
Click to expand...

They can't pick him. They can negotiate a contract with him and if he decides to sign with them, he becomes their pick from the Rangers. If he decides to not sign with them, they have to pick someone else.
 
Bluenote13 said:
I wanted them to trade up to the Canes spot to take Ladd.

But also, Stafford would have been worth more than Montoya a few years later in a trade. Stafford had value as an asset, Montoya did not.
Click to expand...

Wasn't that draft in Raleigh? The Canes moved up to make a splash at their hometown draft, and I don't think they would of been outbid.
 
Capt McDonut said:
are there any teams that would trade for girardi? maybe we could retain some and still save vs a buyout
Click to expand...

Girardi might not be an elite defenseman, but with at least 9 teams losing a defenseman in the expansion draft, there will be a market for D-men. We have Holden, Klein, Girardi and Staal to sell (pending some clauses on the latter of course). It will be interesting.

Last summer, we didn't see moves because the expansion was holding GMs back. It was difficult, because the protection list-aspect added another dimension to putting together a team. After the expansion draft, you will see a lot more moves, because teams will have holes to fill.

The Rangers managed to sign Pionk and Bereglazov, and while Pionk is still very young, Bereglazov should be able to step in if he has a good training camp. 2nd pairing D-man on a team that won the Cup in 2016 and reached the final this year, and for a team that plays on a North American sized rink. There's not much holding him back from grabbing a spot out of camp, honestly. We have Smith we can re-sign and Skjei + McDonagh already contracted.

Other teams will need to add D-men
 
GAGLine said:
They can't pick him. They can negotiate a contract with him and if he decides to sign with them, he becomes their pick from the Rangers. If he decides to not sign with them, they have to pick someone else.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure that's just for RFAs...
Vegas do get to start negotiating with UFAs before other teams though, but they won't count as the pick made from a team i don't think.
 
I have yet to find anywhere that says failure to come to an agreement with a player they negotiate with on a contract before the expansion draft means Vegas can't select that player.
 
Tawnos said:
I have yet to find anywhere that says failure to come to an agreement with a player you negotiate with on a contract before the expansion draft means Vegas can't select that player.
Click to expand...
Why would it mean that? I think I'm confused.
 
Thirty One said:
Why would it mean that? I think I'm confused.
Click to expand...

That's what GAGLine just claimed. Then a couple of other people chimed in saying it's only for RFAs. I haven't read that anywhere.

Vegas is allowed to take anyone not on the protected or exempt list, regardless of contract status. They are required to take a certain number of players who are under contract next year though.
 
Really no reason for NYR to ask G/Staal to waive for expansion. Who do they want to protect, Holden?

June 15th is the first day we can expect news on NYR in terms of potential buyouts, but I don't really see that happening, either.

There's quite the schism between how the coaching staff and how the fans view these two guys. Girardi averaged 22 minutes a game in the playoffs; Staal - 19:15. Have we seen anything from the coaching staff that provides optimism that they see these guys as much of a detriment as we [some of us] do?

Was it when they kept benching Brady Skjei to double-shift Staal?

Further, obviously the coaching staff and the FO are intertwined on player management. How much of a case for G/Staal is AV making to GMJG?

I'm confident that we'll at least start the season without G on the team, but I'd be damn shocked if #18 wasn't a starting LD come October.
 
Last edited:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2712559-2017-nhl-expansion-draft-rules-and-how-it-works

The league is also giving Vegas a chance to sign any free agents, both restricted and unrestricted, who are left unprotected during that same time frame. A signing would equal a "pick" from the player's previous team. Otherwise, those players will follow standard protocol and enter the free-agent market July 1.
Click to expand...

Regardless, Smith has to agree to a contract. If he refuses to sign with Vegas, he remains a UFA and can sign anywhere he wants on July 1st.
 
Tawnos said:
That's what GAGLine just claimed. Then a couple of other people chimed in saying it's only for RFAs. I haven't read that anywhere.

Vegas is allowed to take anyone not on the protected or exempt list, regardless of contract status. They are required to take a certain number of players who are under contract next year though.
Click to expand...

Yes, they CAN take a UFA, but why would they? If they've negotiated with said UFA and have a deal in place then they can just take another player from that team and sign that UFA later.

When it comes to RFAs though they can sign an RFA prior to the ED and that player will count as the player taken from the team who had his rights before.
Pretty much offer sheet without the penalties i think?
 
ManUtdTobbe said:
Yes, they CAN take a UFA, but why would they? If they've negotiated with said UFA and have a deal in place then they can just take another player from that team and sign that UFA later.
Click to expand...

I don't know why they would sign a UFA prior to the ED. It could be that the UFA is the only player from that team they really want. That wasn't really the point though. The point was that Vegas can't just pick Smith and get his rights. He has complete control over his situation. AFAIK, if an RFA is selected, their rights are then owned by Vegas, whether they agree to a contract or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom