Speculation: Will Teams Be Able to Make Expansion Protection Deals?

[RandV]

In addition to draft picks Las Vegas would probably want to get at some 20-22 year old two-way contracts. By the time they get to Vancouver for example their roster may be full, so rather than picking a guy that they have no room for and would need to be waived like Gaunce, Granlund, or Etem, it may be in both teams interest for Vegas to get an ineligible guy like Cole Cassels or Jordan Subban that they can stash on the farm.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Simple question: In past expansion drafts, teams have been able to trade picks/players to the new team in exchange for a guarantee of not drafting a particular player on their team. My Isles will have a conundrum at defense, and likely don't want to lose Ryan Pulock. Can they offer Las Vegas a draft pick in exchange for a promise to not draft CdH or Pulock? Or will this not be allowed per the rules of this draft?

Ya but why would Vegas take that deal unless the pick is a first rounder.

 

[Yog S'loth]

wikipedia:
Shortly after the Olympics, the Kings traded Timonen, along with Jan Vopat, to the Nashville Predators organization (the team not yet having begun play) in agreement that Nashville would not select Garry Galley in the 1998 NHL Expansion Draft.

Wikipedia is totally incorrect on this one.

The Kings traded those two players and Vitali Yachmenev (recorded as two separate trades, both technically for "future considerations") to the Preds so that the Preds would specifically take Freddie Chabot.

Losing a goalie in the 98 draft meant the team would be exempt from losing a goalie in the 99 expansion draft, which enabled the Kings to keep both Fiset and Storr, which was the goal from the beginning.

At let me tell you just how important that was for the Kings' success.

 

[Mr Misty]

In addition to draft picks Las Vegas would probably want to get at some 20-22 year old two-way contracts. By the time they get to Vancouver for example their roster may be full, so rather than picking a guy that they have no room for and would need to be waived like Gaunce, Granlund, or Etem, it may be in both teams interest for Vegas to get an ineligible guy like Cole Cassels or Jordan Subban that they can stash on the farm.

They shouldn't need worry about that because they can trade the players they draft. Guys like de Haan have value and plenty of teams will have openings for good defensemen. If they load up on NHL defensemen, they can get enough picks and prospects by trading the spares to make a decent AHL team.

Plus Granlund is a decent piece. Even if there isn't room for him on their roster, they can still trade him for somebody's Cassels or Subban plus a pick. Maybe even trade him back to you. They have enough time before the season to make all the transactions they need to, and once they meet the NHL's position requirements it is always the right move to take the highest value player in the draft.

 

[tim212]

Ya but why would Vegas take that deal unless the pick is a first rounder.

Because the Isles could trade one of them --or another D -- to another team and LV gets none of the above. So it depends how big the dropoff in value is for the next best available NYI player.

Scenario A: LV demands a first....NYI trade to de Haan to another team. LV selects Josh Bailey.

Scenario B: LV receives a 3rd and 4th in exchange for not selecting de Haan. LV selects Josh Bailey.

 

[Mike Jones]

Ya but why would Vegas take that deal unless the pick is a first rounder.

Because lower round picks have value too. If you have decent scouts, coaches and development people that is.

If I was the Vegas GM I'd load up on whatever picks I could grab at expansion and the 2018 trade deadline and shove a pile of prospects into the pipeline.

 

[Gil Gunderson]

Ya but why would Vegas take that deal unless the pick is a first rounder.

What if they are shopping a certain player days before the draft in case ge gets picked up by Vegas? Doesn't Vegas make that deal even if it's low pick?

 

[me2]

What if they are shopping a certain player days before the draft in case ge gets picked up by Vegas? Doesn't Vegas make that deal even if it's low pick?

Chances are that just frees up a better player on some other team then.

 

[Djp]

Plus unlike teams already in the NHL and near the cap floor, LV actually needs to get to the cap floor. So while they won't pay for the privilege to take your cap dump, their price might be softer to the point where cap teams would do it. Contender cap teams are able to lure and sign UFAs while LV might not have that clout.

So they can sign a 3rd liner for 1st liner money to get to the floor and get a 3rd liner, or they can get Dustin Brown and a 1st from LA. LA not only dumps a huge cap hit but they can buy protection for any #4 defenseman and the rest of their roster in the draft.

Since LV is at the very very beginning of their rebuild, the term won't matter and most of the $$ was already paid by LA in the front of the deal.

I thought part of the rules are Vegas needs to come out of the d aft cap compliant even with trades with thei top 23 man roster.

My understanding of the rules are the players the team are drafting will need to clear waivers....that's 7 guys ( 4th yr goalies can clear waivers).


There is incentive for Vegas to trade 7 of the players they pick or with 7 teams in lieu of drafting NHL players they instead get prospects for their AHL team.

Getting to the cap floor won't be too hard...

4 players making $5M=$20M
5 players making $4M=$20M
1 players making $3M=$3M

10 players=$43M

The other 12 make on avg $1M

Total= $55M for 22.. Thus above the floor.

Still have 8 other players to select.

 

[Jumptheshark]

In addition to draft picks Las Vegas would probably want to get at some 20-22 year old two-way contracts. By the time they get to Vancouver for example their roster may be full, so rather than picking a guy that they have no room for and would need to be waived like Gaunce, Granlund, or Etem, it may be in both teams interest for Vegas to get an ineligible guy like Cole Cassels or Jordan Subban that they can stash on the farm.

what do you mean by the time they get to Vancouver

they get the list of all teams--go through all the lists and then decide who to take

they don't say get the Ducks available--take a guy and then move on to Arizona--they look at all lists at the same time

 

[Halla]

LV doesnt really gain anything from trying to hardball the teams trying to "bribe" them tho. Take pittsburgh for example.

We will give you a 3rd round pick not to take Murray. Sure seems low, but, if LV doesnt bite, the pens will buy out or give away MAF and LV cant take Murray anyway. And while pens ends up with some dead cap space, that doesnt help LV the slightest. And opposite what HF seems to think, this aint the school yard where the "why should we help them when we can watch them suffer" approach is the way. If a team can upgrade, they will do that rather than the satisfaction of watching other teams suffer.

So LV will know that theres no way they will be able to pick Murray anyway, and they would rather take the asset they get.

so the las vegas chooses between a 3rd or derrick pouliot?

tough call

 

[Halla]

Because the Isles could trade one of them --or another D -- to another team and LV gets none of the above. So it depends how big the dropoff in value is for the next best available NYI player.

Scenario A: LV demands a first....NYI trade to de Haan to another team. LV selects Josh Bailey.

Scenario B: LV receives a 3rd and 4th in exchange for not selecting de Haan. LV selects Josh Bailey.

Scenario C: isles trade away a dman like de hann for way below market value, and then lose hickey as well when vegas takes him .

does anyone think teams are gonna offer fair value for guys they have to protect (then expose one of their own players).
not a chance

 

[Halla]

In addition to draft picks Las Vegas would probably want to get at some 20-22 year old two-way contracts. By the time they get to Vancouver for example their roster may be full, so rather than picking a guy that they have no room for and would need to be waived like Gaunce, Granlund, or Etem, it may be in both teams interest for Vegas to get an ineligible guy like Cole Cassels or Jordan Subban that they can stash on the farm.

it doesnt go alphabetically lol.
they just pick the best option from each team and release the roster

 

[uncleben]

What's the incentive for Las Vegas to do that though? The NHL made the rules so that good players wind up on their roster and the league is going to "advise" management on who they should hire as GM. They aren't going to suggest a GM who would rather have magic beans than de Haan, it's everyone's interest that Vegas be competitive right away.

Theyd be getting a piece of value (pick, prospect, player) and then still have to draft a player from that team, so they are getting, now, two pieces to build around.
If they feel Player B + pick is better than Player A, they do it.

Also, that last sentence in the first paragraph...
The way this expansion is setup, i'm not too concerned with the team not being competitive. They are being gifted, compared to past expansion teams.
They'll be at least a middling team for the first bit (unless they choose to expansion draft a lower-tier team, so they can tank and pick high-end talent in the entry drafts)

 

[uncleben]

Wikipedia is totally incorrect on this one.

The Kings traded those two players and Vitali Yachmenev (recorded as two separate trades, both technically for "future considerations") to the Preds so that the Preds would specifically take Freddie Chabot.

Losing a goalie in the 98 draft meant the team would be exempt from losing a goalie in the 99 expansion draft, which enabled the Kings to keep both Fiset and Storr, which was the goal from the beginning.

At let me tell you just how important that was for the Kings' success.

By the sounds of it, neither the Kings or Nashville ever announced what the future considerations.
Third part resources sound mixed at best, with more leaning toward what the person before you said... (Specifically, "Predators agreed to not select certain unspecified player(s) in upcoming expansion draft", without naming Galley). I don't think we can say Wiki is completely wrong on this one, haha.

It was probably more an issue of "don't take Galley; here's Timo. If you to Chabot specifically, will give you even more later" if I had to guess, considering Yachmenev wasn't traded to Nashville until after the draft (July 7 vs June 26).

 

[Srsly]

What's the incentive for Las Vegas to do that though? The NHL made the rules so that good players wind up on their roster and the league is going to "advise" management on who they should hire as GM. They aren't going to suggest a GM who would rather have magic beans than de Haan, it's everyone's interest that Vegas be competitive right away.

What kind of package would you give up from the Islanders roster in exchange for de Haan or Pulock? I doubt we'll see many trades of the "please don't take good player x" variety because a quality NHL player is generally preferable to whatever quantity offer you put together. We might see a team bribe Vegas if they only have scrubs and negative value contracts exposed to take cap off their books, but it's naive to think a team can wiggle out of losing a good player they can't protect.

If I'm a GM deciding between two similar players and am offered a decent draft pick to not take one of those players, I'd prefer the similar player coupled with a draft pick.

 

[topnotch]

Theyd be getting a piece of value (pick, prospect, player) and then still have to draft a player from that team, so they are getting, now, two pieces to build around.
If they feel Player B + pick is better than Player A, they do it.

True, player B plus a pick could be more valuable to Vegas than player A. However the scenarios suggested here by some posters are way off base. Adding a 3rd round pick to a cap dump (Grabovksi) and suggesting Vegas won't select Pulock or De Haan is foolish.

 

[Mr Misty]

Theyd be getting a piece of value (pick, prospect, player) and then still have to draft a player from that team, so they are getting, now, two pieces to build around.
If they feel Player B + pick is better than Player A, they do it.

Also, that last sentence in the first paragraph...
The way this expansion is setup, i'm not too concerned with the team not being competitive. They are being gifted, compared to past expansion teams.
They'll be at least a middling team for the first bit (unless they choose to expansion draft a lower-tier team, so they can tank and pick high-end talent in the entry drafts)

If I'm a GM deciding between two similar players and am offered a decent draft pick to not take one of those players, I'd prefer the similar player coupled with a draft pick.

You both fail the HF test by offering quantity for quality. This is essentially a trade where Vegas can get player A or player B + a pick. If we go by the cliche, the team that gets the best player wins the trade so it is always in your interest to take player A instead of the package.

Remember the second part of this is the team whose roster is being considered. In order to convince Vegas to not take de Haan, the Islanders have to offer a package worth more than de Haan. Even if we ignore what I wrote above and Vegas would take those assets instead of the player, it isn't in the Islanders interest to offer enough value to dissuade Vegas from de Haan, they'd be better off with player B and a pick.

Their need to be good immediately gives them essentially the same value preferences as the teams that are set to lose the best players like Tampa, Nashville, Minnesota, the Islanders etc. Given the blank slate they have, the practical mechanics of making a trade are going to be very difficult as we can see by the rarity of two teams with the same needs making a trade.

 

[PatrikOverAuston]

Make no mistake- Vegas will leverage any opportunity possible to acquire extra picks. Those assets will be the foundation of their franchise moving forward, not cast-offs from other teams.

You severely underrate the feasibility of player protection deals and completely disregard the rich history of expansion teams engaging in them.

 

[Mr Misty]

Make no mistake- Vegas will leverage any opportunity possible to acquire extra picks. Those assets will be the foundation of their franchise moving forward, not cast-offs from other teams.

You severely underrate the feasibility of player protection deals and completely disregard the rich history of expansion teams engaging in them.

You're right, HF is full of people having kittens about losing "cast-offs" like de Haan, Brodin, Killorn, Eakin, Klein, and Silfverberg. Why don't those silly billies wake up and realize those players are terrible and worthless?

It isn't like the NHL learned its lesson about expansion teams being terrible creating weak markets and changed the rules of the draft so that good players would be exposed. Las Vegas' success is going to be built on the back of the 3rd round pick they get for taking Grabovski instead of de Haan or Pulock because they will trust in their currently non-existent scouting staff to build Columbus level success in only 10 or more years from now.

 

[PatrikOverAuston]

A team isn't finding an 18-year-old in the expansion draft that will be a franchise cornerstone for ten years. They may find one in the draft and, regardless, will need young players of all stripes to help them remain cap-compliant in the future. One of the drawbacks of having better talent available in the expansion draft is an abundance of high-dollar contracts, and they'll need to balance those with as many ELCs as possible. Accruing draft choices is the best way to do that.

You can continue to ignore established history at your peril, but rest assured there will be at least one protection-style deal, if not several. It's ignorant to believe otherwise.

 

[Mr Misty]

A team isn't finding an 18-year-old in the expansion draft that will be a franchise cornerstone for ten years. They may find one in the draft and, regardless, will need young players of all stripes to help them remain cap-compliant in the future. One of the drawbacks of having better talent available in the expansion draft is an abundance of high-dollar contracts, and they'll need to balance those with as many ELCs as possible. Accruing draft choices is the best way to do that.

You can continue to ignore established history at your peril, but rest assured there will be at least one protection-style deal, if not several. It's ignorant to believe otherwise.

This has to be a joke right? It's too crazy a coincidence for you to be serious. They won't draft an 18 year old cornerstone because 18 year olds don't have 2 pro seasons of experience and are exempt. And everybody worth drafting on year 3 of their ELC will be protected. This has to be just a really really subtle joke right? It's so dry it isn't coming through all the way in just text.

 

[PatrikOverAuston]

You are absolutely correct, and I'm glad you grasped the expansion rules if not the nuances of my post. My point is exactly that- Vegas can't take 18-year-olds in the expansion draft, but can in the Entry Draft. They get to select more of them the more picks they have. Does that make sense?

Once again, I can't help you accept the lessons of history; I can only point you to them. If you want to be obtuse and deny the role of protection deals in every expansion draft ever dating back to 1967, that's your prerogative.

 

[topnotch]

You are absolutely correct, and I'm glad you grasped the expansion rules if not the nuances of my post. My point is exactly that- Vegas can't take 18-year-olds in the expansion draft, but can in the Entry Draft. They get to select more of them the more picks they have. Does that make sense?

Once again, I can't help you accept the lessons of history; I can only point you to them. If you want to be obtuse and deny the role of protection deals in every expansion draft ever dating back to 1967, that's your prerogative.

I'm not arguing that their won't be protection deals in the upcoming expansion draft. I'm arguing over what the cost of that protection will be.

This expansion draft will have better available talent than past drafts. Better talent means worth more in trade, worth more in trade means higher protection cost.

 

[Mr Misty]

You are absolutely correct, and I'm glad you grasped the expansion rules if not the nuances of my post. My point is exactly that- Vegas can't take 18-year-olds in the expansion draft, but can in the Entry Draft. They get to select more of them the more picks they have. Does that make sense?

Once again, I can't help you accept the lessons of history; I can only point you to them. If you want to be obtuse and deny the role of protection deals in every expansion draft ever dating back to 1967, that's your prerogative.

Now I see. It wasn't a joke. You are being serious when you say a team with no scouts is going to draft a franchise cornerstone with a 3rd round (or later!) pick. So it makes sense for that team to ignore players like Brodin, who will be under contract for 4 more years, or de Haan, who will be an RFA they can extend for up to 8 years, in favor of magic beans. My goodness. Fewer good players, more magic beans.

I continue to ignore the role of history because this is the first time an expansion team is not set up to fail. The NHL has realized that Atlanta and Columbus and Miami were markets that struggled because the teams were lousy for years. It is in the Islanders interest for Vegas to succeed and build a decent market even if it costs them de Haan. Expansion won't be a choice between two scrubs this time, Dallas won't offer Vegas a pick to take Curtis McKenzie instead of Cody Eakin because Vegas would laugh in our face if we did.

If only terrible players are exposed league-wide, it might make sense to offer a 5th or 6th to protect some project prospect, but this draft isn't going to be a dumpster dive.