HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Notices

If there's an expansion draft (before 2013-2014 season)....

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-30-2012, 11:25 AM
  #1
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 53,517
vCash: 500
If there's an expansion draft (before 2013-2014 season)....

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

THN looks at who teams might put in their "protected" lists for a potential expansion draft (based on the rules in place for the 2000 expansion draft).

Regarding the Sharks' potential strategy:
Quote:
SAN JOSE: The Sharks have one of the league’s deepest defense corps, so there was never much doubt they’d protect just one goalie (Antti Niemi) and five d-men. However, we presumed the presence of solid veterans Brent Burns, Dan Boyle, Marc-Edouard Vlasic, Brad Stuart and Douglas Murray on the blueline would leave GM Doug Wilson no choice but to leave youngsters Jason Demers and Justin Braun unprotected. This is another instance in which Wilson very likely would make a transaction or two that allowed him to retain the services of one or both Demers and Braun or landed him a prospect or draft pick. Absent that taking place, this is the way we see things shaking out.
Protected lists do not include any prospects still exempt from waivers (e.g., Stalock, Stalberg, Doherty).

And the proposed protected list:
Quote:
San Jose Sharks (one goalie)
Forwards: Burish, Clowe, Couture, Handzus, Havlat, Marleau, Pavelski, Thornton, Wingels
Defensemen: Boyle, Burns, Murray, Stuart, Vlasic,
Goalies: Niemi
First, Murray and Handzus would be UFAs, IIRC. And I don't know that the Sharks would protect either.


So, if there are a couple of expansion teams (so the league can go to four conferences of 8 teams), who do you think the Sharks would protect? Who might they trade (from exempt prospects) to protect guys?

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 11:29 AM
  #2
WTFetus
Moderator
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 11,578
vCash: 500
Why would the Sharks protect Murray or even Stuart for that matter? Replace them with Braun and Demers. Replace Burish and Handzus with Desjardins and Galiardi.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 11:38 AM
  #3
TheJuxtaposer
#healBurish
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 23,648
vCash: 567
Typical Yahoo.

F: Thornton. Marleau, Pavelski, Clowe, Havlat, Couture, Wingels, Burish, Desjardins. (Maybe Galiardi instead of Burish/Desy)
D: Burns, Vlasic, Boyles, Demers, Braun.
G: Niemi

Stupid to think the Sharks would keep Murray over Demers, even if they choose Stuart.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 03:17 PM
  #4
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 53,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Typical Yahoo.
Wrong. It's the Hockey News' Adam Proteau who wrote that article (hosted on Yahoo).

But still very uninformed.


I think the Sharks are somewhat obligated to put Stuart on their protected list (acquired via trade, NTC, and he "won't" play anywhere else).

Galiardi and/or Sheppard might be assets they'll have to "trade a prospect to protect".

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 03:22 PM
  #5
TheJuxtaposer
#healBurish
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 23,648
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Wrong. It's the Hockey News' Adam Proteau who wrote that article (hosted on Yahoo).
Sorry, THN. It was a little early for me. Typical THN

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 10:36 PM
  #6
Spacemania
Murray says: Rawr!
 
Spacemania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Signpost Forest, YT
Country: United Nations
Posts: 28,280
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Spacemania
I'm more curious as to which cities would get the expansions. Personally I hope Seattle gets one, I feel like that the region would be prime for such. Plus the cross-border rivalry would be wicked fun to watch grow between Van and Sea

Spacemania is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 10:41 PM
  #7
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 29,055
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spacemania View Post
I'm more curious as to which cities would get the expansions. Personally I hope Seattle gets one, I feel like that the region would be prime for such. Plus the cross-border rivalry would be wicked fun to watch grow between Van and Sea
It would probably be Quebec City and Seattle if they go that route but I'd like to see Houston get a franchise too for the natural rivalry between Houston and Dallas.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 10:57 PM
  #8
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 53,517
vCash: 500
WRT NHL there are two criteria for expansion, relocation.

First, there has to be an arena ready to go and/or firm plans to break ground on NHL-caliber arena. (Kansas City, Seattle, QC and Markham, ON fit that bill "today". Las Vegas is often mentioned, but there are a lot of hoops politically to jump through to build arena. Portland, OR is mentioned, but NBA owner Allen does not seem to be amenable to sharing his venue with a NHL team.)

Second, you have to an owner. KC is not really interested in adding NHL tenant (they're happy with status quo). There's one who's expressed interest for QC. Haven't seen one for Markham, Seattle. Buckheimer (aka CSI, etc.) has been mentioned as a potential owner for Vegas.

(FTR, there are half a dozen active threads on BOH for the potential locations including "megathreads" for QC, Markham and Seattle.)

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 03:16 PM
  #9
Craig Fischer
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: YYC
Country: Canada
Posts: 335
vCash: 500
The only way I can see expansion being possible is if the core economics of the game vastly changed, and the owners used it as a carrot to get the players to sign a CBA to get them there. It's interesting because you do add more players into the mix, and more player employment has to be a good thing for the Union, but long term you'd have to wonder if it would be cutting too much of the pie away to sustain 32 teams and if it really would be better for the 'greater good'.

Is there actual talk of expansion in lockout talks, or is this just a lockout induced, 'we've got nothing else to talk about' article? It's pretty nifty either way.

Craig Fischer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 04:04 PM
  #10
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 11,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Fischer View Post
The only way I can see expansion being possible is if the core economics of the game vastly changed, and the owners used it as a carrot to get the players to sign a CBA to get them there. It's interesting because you do add more players into the mix, and more player employment has to be a good thing for the Union, but long term you'd have to wonder if it would be cutting too much of the pie away to sustain 32 teams and if it really would be better for the 'greater good'.

Is there actual talk of expansion in lockout talks, or is this just a lockout induced, 'we've got nothing else to talk about' article? It's pretty nifty either way.
The owners won't give away the expansion fees.

It isn't so much the core economics. KevFu has made some very strong points on the BOH forum about there always being havenot teams within the recently expired CBA structure. My wish would be that they would not do as they have in the past. Many talk about watering down playing talent. The real scarcity lies in the hockeyops and business talent in the league. They need GM training and they need to re-evaluate what acceptable arena deals are. And they desperately need to support new owners when they accept their expansion fees.

SJeasy 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 08:23 AM.

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.