HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Philadelphia Flyers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Who do the Flyers protect in an expansion draft?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-01-2012, 12:55 PM
  #1
SeanCWombBroom
DownieFaceSoftener
 
SeanCWombBroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,776
vCash: 500
Who do the Flyers protect in an expansion draft?

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nhl-exp...0232--nhl.html

"Back then, the league’s 28 teams were presented with a choice: protect one goalie, five defensemen and nine forwards or protect two goalies, three defensemen and seven forwards."

(taken from the Islanders board)

Who would the Flyers protect in an expansion draft? I think it would be obvious they would protect 1 goaltender and not two.

Long off-season. :|

SeanCWombBroom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 01:06 PM
  #2
Jray42
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,211
vCash: 91
Giroux
B. Schenn
Couturier
Voracek
Hartnell
Simmonds
Read
Briere
Talbot
------------------------
Coburn
Grossmann
L. Schenn
Meszaros
Timonen
------------------------
Bryzgalov


Edit: Looks like my view is spot on with yahoo's

Jray42 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 01:14 PM
  #3
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,050
vCash: 50
Jray's post looks about correct

though, i'd probably think about Gustafsson over Timonen depending on when the draft would be

Krishna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 01:15 PM
  #4
Vikke
FHM 13 researcher
 
Vikke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bustoville
Country: Sweden
Posts: 12,942
vCash: 500
Gus wouldn't get picked anyway, so it'd be pointless to protect him over Kimmo, unless the team is insanely desperate to shed salary and couldn't trade him for a 5th.

Vikke is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 01:41 PM
  #5
dingbathero
No Jam? How about PB
 
dingbathero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. John's, NL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,722
vCash: 500
"Back then, the league’s 28 teams were presented with a choice: protect one goalie, five defensemen and nine forwards or protect two goalies, three defensemen and seven forwards."

Bryz
---------
Coburn
Kimmo
Mez
L. Schenn
Grossie
---------
B. Schenn
Coots
Roo
Simmonds
Vora
Hartnell
Read
le Hobbit
Talbot

Edit: didn't read past 1st post (or the link), and is the same as Jray and Yahoo!

dingbathero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 01:49 PM
  #6
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Jray's post looks about correct

though, i'd probably think about Gustafsson over Timonen depending on when the draft would be
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vikke View Post
Gus wouldn't get picked anyway, so it'd be pointless to protect him over Kimmo, unless the team is insanely desperate to shed salary and couldn't trade him for a 5th.
Depending on how UFAs are handled... Kimmo would be one after this season and not the Flyers to protect as I see it... Unsigned agreements with FAs would come into play I believe, so Kimmo could decide to go another season and the Flyers agree to pay him $X.xM which would be hammered out subsequent to the draft. Fedotenko would also be a UFO... Lilas and Leighton also, but why even bother discussing players who are both easily replaceable and most likely won't be selected by a sane GM?

This leaves the Flyers with an extra D-man and Forward on the current roster that would be available to them without using a slot... as well as any other NHL UFAs who would reach verbal agreements with the Flyers -- I suppose they would have to tread lightly and work with their attorneys dealing with any possible potential collusion claims -- In any case, IMO the choice would be which young D-men in the system would not be at risk and which would the Flyers dare not even take a risk on losing.

The young forwards that spent time on the roster such as Wellwood, Rinaldo (who would both be RFAs BTW), etc. would be the players at risk... and I would think that, depending on the number of expansion teams in the mix, the Flyers would lose all their top Farm Forwards... unless the new Organizations are dead set on the present and go for all the veteran NHL dregs available.

That said, IMO, it is hard to argue with the suggested roster with the Kimmo spot addressed.


Last edited by Sawdalite: 12-01-2012 at 01:56 PM.
Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 02:50 PM
  #7
ApeZilla
Registered User
 
ApeZilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Mt. Pocono, Pa
Country: United States
Posts: 641
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ApeZilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by dingbathero View Post
"Back then, the league’s 28 teams were presented with a choice: protect one goalie, five defensemen and nine forwards or protect two goalies, three defensemen and seven forwards."

Bryz
---------
Coburn
Kimmo
Mez
L. Schenn
Grossie
---------
B. Schenn
Coots
Roo
Simmonds
Vora
Hartnell
Read
le Hobbit
Talbot

Edit: didn't read past 1st post (or the link), and is the same as Jray and Yahoo!
Yes (it's cool we're kinda skipping his possible sophomore slump)

ApeZilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 03:33 PM
  #8
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApeZilla View Post
Yes (it's cool we're kinda skipping his possible sophomore slump)
So you are suggesting people would think that Homer could assume Read will backtrack and leave him off assuming other GMs do likewise?... I disagree that anybody would.

How is he doing in Europe? I believe he is doing okay... Bill Meltzer would be the guy on that... IMO, being an older rookie should possibly help avoid what some players are said to have... the dreaded Sophomore Jinx. How real that is is in question as I see it.

In any event, IMO Homer would have to have his head examined to not protect Read... and other GMs should have theirs examined not to consider Read as a selection... especially as the more established players are picked off... Which brings up the question; wouldn't the chance of a Sophomore Jinx be a good thing for the owning club if they do decide to leave a second year player off such lists?

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 03:58 PM
  #9
Clown Baby
Registered User
 
Clown Baby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,545
vCash: 500
Leighton - To get away from Bryz
-----
Timonen
Coburn
Grossmann
Meszaros
Schenn
-----
Giroux
Couturier
Schenn
Voracek
Hartnell
Simmonds
Read
Talbot
Briere

Clown Baby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 03:59 PM
  #10
SeanCWombBroom
DownieFaceSoftener
 
SeanCWombBroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,776
vCash: 500
Read is doing fantastic in Europe.

In addition, surprised people no one thinks this could be a sneaky way to eliminate Bryz (okay, 9th post) or Briere.

SeanCWombBroom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 04:10 PM
  #11
dingbathero
No Jam? How about PB
 
dingbathero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. John's, NL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownieFaceSoftener View Post
Read is doing fantastic in Europe.

In addition, surprised people no one thinks this could be a sneaky way to eliminate Bryz (okay, 9th post) or Briere.
With his contract the only thing, PO performer... I was thinking when making my list of keeping wellwood and leaving off Briere... which doesn't compute in my head.... having said that, I love Wellwood's game and the style he plays.

As yes to hanging onto Read - he plays BOTH sides of the puck VERY well.

dingbathero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 04:25 PM
  #12
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,753
vCash: 156
Haha, I think Jray nailed this in the first reply.

I thought about using it to get rid of Bryz, but then we're stuck with Leighton; a fate worse than death.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 04:39 PM
  #13
SeanCWombBroom
DownieFaceSoftener
 
SeanCWombBroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,776
vCash: 500
I'd like to keep both Briere and Bryz, but I figured someone would be on board with dangling them with the theoretical expansion, especially with some interesting RFAs that will need resigning.

If the CBA pushes down the cap, those contracts become even more strangling.

SeanCWombBroom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 04:45 PM
  #14
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownieFaceSoftener View Post
Read is doing fantastic in Europe.

In addition, surprised people no one thinks this could be a sneaky way to eliminate Bryz (okay, 9th post) or Briere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
Haha, I think Jray nailed this in the first reply.

I thought about using it to get rid of Bryz, but then we're stuck with Leighton; a fate worse than death.

IMO, The thing about leaving off Bryz is that it is doubtful that an expansion team grabs that huge contract for that many years... especially after coming off such an uneven season filled with all that drama. If Bryz is not selected he may really be a problem going forward, knowing he was not on the Flyers list, in hopes of being claimed... Hurt feelings... and who could blame him for being hurt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dingbathero View Post
With his contract the only thing, PO performer... I was thinking when making my list of keeping wellwood and leaving off Briere... which doesn't compute in my head.... having said that, I love Wellwood's game and the style he plays.

As yes to hanging onto Read - he plays BOTH sides of the puck VERY well.
Remember that Briere's contract was front loaded and a claiming team would get a high Cap hit but a bargain salary... They would get a name player and a franchise face. They more than likely would not be in a position to worry about Cap Space... but would be concerned with spending. A bargain on a star player would be inticing IMO -- although the PostSeason wouldn't be a consideration at the onset haha -- Personally I wouldn't risk losing Briere.

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 05:25 PM
  #15
tuckrr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 2,556
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jray42 View Post
Giroux
B. Schenn
Couturier
Voracek
Hartnell
Simmonds
Read
Briere
Talbot
------------------------
Coburn
Grossmann
L. Schenn
Meszaros
Timonen
------------------------
Stolarz


Edit: Looks like my view is spot on with yahoo's
fixed for you

tuckrr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 07:16 PM
  #16
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,050
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdalite View Post
Depending on how UFAs are handled... Kimmo would be one after this season and not the Flyers to protect as I see it... Unsigned agreements with FAs would come into play I believe, so Kimmo could decide to go another season and the Flyers agree to pay him $X.xM which would be hammered out subsequent to the draft. Fedotenko would also be a UFO... Lilas and Leighton also, but why even bother discussing players who are both easily replaceable and most likely won't be selected by a sane GM?

This leaves the Flyers with an extra D-man and Forward on the current roster that would be available to them without using a slot... as well as any other NHL UFAs who would reach verbal agreements with the Flyers -- I suppose they would have to tread lightly and work with their attorneys dealing with any possible potential collusion claims -- In any case, IMO the choice would be which young D-men in the system would not be at risk and which would the Flyers dare not even take a risk on losing.

The young forwards that spent time on the roster such as Wellwood, Rinaldo (who would both be RFAs BTW), etc. would be the players at risk... and I would think that, depending on the number of expansion teams in the mix, the Flyers would lose all their top Farm Forwards... unless the new Organizations are dead set on the present and go for all the veteran NHL dregs available.

That said, IMO, it is hard to argue with the suggested roster with the Kimmo spot addressed.
The part about timonen was mostly about if the draft is now or around the entry draft.

If it's the first, you definitely keep him.

If it's at the entry draft time, you of course don't protect him. You could just wait until after the entry draft to re-sign him.

Krishna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 11:11 PM
  #17
Stizzle
Registered User
 
Stizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,052
vCash: 500
So we would not have to protect Laughton because he is in Juniors? If we do, he clearly gets kept over Briere.

Stizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 12:42 AM
  #18
achdumeingute
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownieFaceSoftener View Post
In addition, surprised people no one thinks this could be a sneaky way to eliminate Bryz (okay, 9th post) or Briere.
I'm late to the party, but I read your op, and that was the first thing I thought.

Both unprotected without a doubt.

achdumeingute is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 02:29 AM
  #19
dats81
Registered User
 
dats81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Carinthia
Country: Austria
Posts: 2,082
vCash: 500
I know it may sound tempting to get rid of Bryz but anybody posting this kind of proposal better come up with a solution past Bryz.

Flyers have nobody in the pipeline. If you don't like Couts or Schenn gone in a trade for a goalie you can't be for ditching Bryz imho.

dats81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 08:15 AM
  #20
Clown Baby
Registered User
 
Clown Baby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,545
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dats81 View Post
I know it may sound tempting to get rid of Bryz but anybody posting this kind of proposal better come up with a solution past Bryz.

Flyers have nobody in the pipeline. If you don't like Couts or Schenn gone in a trade for a goalie you can't be for ditching Bryz imho.
There are plenty of back-ups that would go left unprotected which one could easily consider as an upgrade, given Bryz's play last season.

Clown Baby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 11:14 AM
  #21
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dats81 View Post
I know it may sound tempting to get rid of Bryz but anybody posting this kind of proposal better come up with a solution past Bryz.

Flyers have nobody in the pipeline. If you don't like Couts or Schenn gone in a trade for a goalie you can't be for ditching Bryz imho.
I think you are equating this moving Carter (along with Richards) to gain enough Cap for the big ticket Goalie (Bryz) last time... The difference I see, if Bryz were to be removed without return, is that the Flyers would have the big Cap room for a replacement goalie by losing the Bryz contract.

As for a replacement... If they decide to again go for that long-term, high-profile goalie once again they'd of course have to decide on their target out of the available UFAs or decide which key player or players they would be willing to give up for their targeted guy in a trade -- which would then free up more Cap for a replacement skater -- The problem being, do they desire one of the UFAs enough or is there a goalie on another team's roster that they not only covet but can pry away.

To me the problem is not as much replacing Bryz as it is moving him... IMO there are always goalies to be had if a resourceful Organization, such as the Flyers, sets their sights on one and decides to go after them... but moving an overpaid goalie once signed, who has had an uneven season and has had trouble with the Media and fans is a challenge... That's where an amnesty program such as the NBA had last season, and the NHL had after the last Lock Out, becomes a savior... As I stated in an earlier post, IMO leaving him hanging in a dispersal draft would only irritate him and make matters worse, if not claimed... and the odds of his being claimed by another team, especially one in a starting-up situation are very slim.

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 12:15 PM
  #22
Flukeshot
Holmgren activate!
 
Flukeshot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Milton, Ont
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 1,777
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stizzle View Post
So we would not have to protect Laughton because he is in Juniors? If we do, he clearly gets kept over Briere.
Prospects and players that would not need to clear waivers would not need to be protected as their ineligible (historically) for expansion drafts.

As pointed out, because of the pending UFAs the Flyers could protect virtually their entire roster.

Wellwood, Rinaldo, Gervais and AHL players would be the only players exposed.

As Timonen really wouldn't be part of the equation, I think the only question is whether you protect Gustafsson as the 5th D over Pronger.

Would Pronger get selected?

Flukeshot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 12:55 PM
  #23
Sawdalite
AbleWasIEreISawLupul
 
Sawdalite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Girouxsalem
Posts: 5,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flukeshot View Post
Prospects and players that would not need to clear waivers would not need to be protected as their ineligible (historically) for expansion drafts.

As pointed out, because of the pending UFAs the Flyers could protect virtually their entire roster.

Wellwood, Rinaldo, Gervais and AHL players would be the only players exposed.

As Timonen really wouldn't be part of the equation, I think the only question is whether you protect Gustafsson as the 5th D over Pronger.

Would Pronger get selected?
As much as I love Pronger and would be the happiest guy around if he would be able to resume his HHoF Career, I believe you have to go with the odds here, and assume other GMs would also -- hefty Cap and salary for them to carry on the slight chance he plays again -- Leaving a player with virtually 100% chance of playing exposed for such a slim chance Pronger would play at all... let alone at such a high status... is a potential big mistake.

In fact, if a team would select Pronger it would be to the Flyers' benefit as it relieves them of having to LTI Pronger -- banking -- or the off chance the NHL forces his retirement and causes a Cap catastrophe... Also IIRC losing a player lessens the chance of losing more since I believe they are limited to the number of players they can lose in such a draft... losing Pronger would allow them to add a Gus or MAF etc. to the protected list.

No way the Flyers protect Pronger... and he should understand 100% without ruffled feathers.

Sawdalite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 01:39 PM
  #24
Ryker
Registered User
 
Ryker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Triangle, NC, USA
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 2,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdalite View Post
As much as I love Pronger and would be the happiest guy around if he would be able to resume his HHoF Career, I believe you have to go with the odds here, and assume other GMs would also -- hefty Cap and salary for them to carry on the slight chance he plays again -- Leaving a player with virtually 100% chance of playing exposed for such a slim chance Pronger would play at all... let alone at such a high status... is a potential big mistake.

In fact, if a team would select Pronger it would be to the Flyers' benefit as it relieves them of having to LTI Pronger -- banking -- or the off chance the NHL forces his retirement and causes a Cap catastrophe... Also IIRC losing a player lessens the chance of losing more since I believe they are limited to the number of players they can lose in such a draft... losing Pronger would allow them to add a Gus or MAF etc. to the protected list.

No way the Flyers protect Pronger... and he should understand 100% without ruffled feathers.
Yeah, I agree. I think he's done anyway. And on the off chance he does come back, who's to say how good he's going to be. I can't see him getting back to his glory days level, unfortunately.

Ryker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-02-2012, 04:36 PM
  #25
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 110,422
vCash: 5602
For the guidelines given, I wouldn't deviate from the example.

It doesn't really specify what would force a player to be protected. I might be wrong, but I think past expansion drafts had players on ELC's exempt. That takes Couturier, Schenn, Rinaldo, and Read (who might otherwise depend on age). The Flyers would actually run out of forwards to protect, so there's a possibility of a trade there.

Flyers wouldn't leave Bryzgalov open unless they trade for Enroth or Bernier. Plain and simple. They lose far more leverage in a trade afterward. It's unlikely Bryz would get picked, but it's not a chance you can take. If the unthinkable happened, you lose someone you protected having to trade for a goaltender, because Michael Leighton is not an NHL goaltender.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:27 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.