HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Winnipeg Jets
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Expansion draft

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-27-2016, 12:16 PM
  #51
DEANYOUNGBLOOD17
Registered User
 
DEANYOUNGBLOOD17's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,997
vCash: 366
Quote:
Originally Posted by csk View Post
Re:Enstrom

I would sooner buy him out than protect him at the expense of a younger player. And Enstrom is my favorite player
TNSE WILL NOT BUY ENSTROM OUT........ If they will not buy Pavlec out, they will not buy Enstrom out. $ 4 mill actual money is not the $ difference btw losing one of Armia/Dano/Lowry instead of losing 1 yr of Enstrom on the team (plus 4 mill buyout) and losing either Burmi or Copp in expansion instead..

DEANYOUNGBLOOD17 is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 12:19 PM
  #52
its a process
Registered User
 
its a process's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 485
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyjets View Post
The expansion draft plan is pretty simple from my point of view:

Protect
Buff, Enstrom, Myers, Trouba, Wheeler, Little, Scheifele, Perrault

We lose one of Dano, Armia, Lowry, Burmi, Copp, Mathias

A single tear rolls down our cheek.

We realize we don't have space for all those guys anyhow and replace them with Lemieux, Roslovic, Petan, (Dano or Copp if someone from the NHL roster is taken).

And we still don't have space for all these guys.

P.S. as was pointed out above, Copp could be taken in the expansion draft due to how old he was when he signed at coming out of college. General Fanager (which was purchased by the Las Vegas _________ instead of cap friendly) had this correct. Cap Friendly is wrong on this.



Thanks for the clarification!

Now in a 7-3 situation I can't imagine us wanting to protect Lowry over Copp... well I can, but for some concerning reasons.

Re: Enstrom: He has no reason to waive his NM for us, I can't see it happening so we're gonna be 4-4 anyway.

its a process is online now  
Old
10-27-2016, 12:48 PM
  #53
Daximus
Aces Charles
 
Daximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Five Hills
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,622
vCash: 50
Fourand4

In that case with Copp unprotected we go 7F-3D route, we deal trouba for a good young protected dman and protect..

Scheif
Wheels
Perreault
Little
Dano
Armia
Copp

Buff
Myers
Enstrom

That way we probably only lose Lowry.


Last edited by Daximus: 10-27-2016 at 12:50 PM. Reason: Daximus
Daximus is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 12:49 PM
  #54
csk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DEANYOUNGBLOOD17 View Post
TNSE WILL NOT BUY ENSTROM OUT........ If they will not buy Pavlec out, they will not buy Enstrom out. $ 4 mill actual money is not the $ difference btw losing one of Armia/Dano/Lowry instead of losing 1 yr of Enstrom on the team (plus 4 mill buyout) and losing either Burmi or Copp in expansion instead..
I didn't say that they would. I said what I would do

csk is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 12:50 PM
  #55
csk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daximus View Post
In that case with Copp unprotected we go 7F-3D route, we deal trouba for a good young protected dman, expose Enstrom only if LV accepts a 3rd/4th to not pick him and protect..

Scheif
Wheels
Perreault
Little
Dano
Armia
Copp

Buff
Myers
Postma

That way we likely lose Lowry but keep a depth defencemen which we sorely need. We lose a 3rd/4th in the process but it's not that hard of a hit to hang onto Postma.
Postma's a UFA though.

csk is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 12:51 PM
  #56
Daximus
Aces Charles
 
Daximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Five Hills
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,622
vCash: 50
Fourand4

Quote:
Originally Posted by csk View Post
Postma's a UFA though.
Yeah plus I doubt they pick him, if we sign him, over Lowry after thinking about it.. edited my post.


Last edited by Daximus: 10-27-2016 at 12:52 PM. Reason: Daximus
Daximus is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 12:54 PM
  #57
Daximus
Aces Charles
 
Daximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Five Hills
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,622
vCash: 50
Think Trouba would play in LV?

Daximus is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 12:56 PM
  #58
its a process
Registered User
 
its a process's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 485
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daximus View Post
In that case with Copp unprotected we go 7F-3D route, we deal trouba for a good young protected dman and protect..

Scheif
Wheels
Perreault
Little
Dano
Armia
Copp

Buff
Myers
Enstrom

That way we probably only lose Lowry.
I guess the question is what do we prefer; keeping Armia/Dano and having a younger Dman instead of Trouba or losing Armia/Dano and protecting Trouba. There are a lot of young exempt D out there, just not sure that we want to downgrade from Trouba in that scenario, unless of course we get a really good second piece coming back.

its a process is online now  
Old
10-27-2016, 12:57 PM
  #59
Daximus
Aces Charles
 
Daximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Five Hills
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,622
vCash: 50
Daximus

Quote:
Originally Posted by jessewjames View Post
I guess the question is what do we prefer; keeping Armia/Dano and having a younger Dman instead of Trouba or losing Armia/Dano and protecting Trouba. There are a lot of young exempt D out there, just not sure that we want to downgrade from Trouba in that scenario, unless of course we get a really good second piece coming back.
We will likely know by then if Trouba has caved and signed or not.

Daximus is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 01:14 PM
  #60
nobody important
Won'tGetFooledAgain
 
nobody important's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: a quiet suburb
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daximus View Post
In that case with Copp unprotected we go 7F-3D route, we deal trouba for a good young protected dman and protect..

Scheif
Wheels
Perreault
Little
Dano
Armia
Copp

Buff
Myers
Enstrom

That way we probably only lose Lowry.
I'm 100% in agreement that this is the way to go to protect as many assets as possible. It would be a shame to lose a forward needlessly to protect a guy who has already stated publicly that he doesn't want to be here, and will likely get moved at some point even if he does sign. Unfortunately, every GM is in the position of wanting to protect their assets from the "poachers". Can't see one giving up an exempt player pre-draft to acquire another player they would have to protect.

nobody important is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 01:15 PM
  #61
JetsHomer
Registered User
 
JetsHomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 8,187
vCash: 500
I'd rather lose 2 years of Myers rather than 1 year of Enstrom

JetsHomer is offline  
Old
10-27-2016, 02:41 PM
  #62
Evil Little
Registered User
 
Evil Little's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,323
vCash: 1837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daximus View Post
I still think dealing Trouba for an exempt D is the best option. We keep everyone with value and present Las Vegas with a big old middle finger when they have a look at the Jets roster.
Depends on how much of a question mark you want in this young, exempt D. Because any of the ones I want--Provorov, Werenski, Parayko--are on teams that are already protecting 3 or even 4 defencemen.

And that's just effecting whether they can make the deal, regardless of whether they want to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daximus View Post
In that case with Copp unprotected we go 7F-3D route, we deal trouba for a good young protected dman and protect..

Scheif
Wheels
Perreault
Little
Dano
Armia
Copp

Buff
Myers
Enstrom

That way we probably only lose Lowry.
Probably only lose Lowry, anyway. GCB, #faceoffz, 'NHL size'--he's got a lot of things that you and I may not care a lot about but NHL GMs seem to.


Last edited by Evil Little: 10-27-2016 at 03:19 PM. Reason: wrong word
Evil Little is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 12:05 AM
  #63
Mortimer Snerd
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,041
vCash: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aavco Cup View Post
https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansi...es/c-281010592

The following rules were approved for the 2017 Expansion Draft:

Protected Lists
* Clubs will have two options for players they wish to protect in the Expansion Draft:

a) Seven forwards, three defensemen and one goaltender

b) Eight skaters (forwards/defensemen) and one goaltender

* All players who have currently effective and continuing "No Movement" clauses at the time of the Expansion Draft (and who to decline to waive such clauses) must be protected (and will be counted toward their club's applicable protection limits).

* All first- and second-year professionals, as well as all unsigned draft choices, will be exempt from selection (and will not be counted toward their club's applicable protection limits).

Player Exposure Requirements
* All Clubs must meet the following minimum requirements regarding players exposed for selection in the Expansion Draft:

i) One defenseman who is a) under contract in 2017-18 and b) played in 40 or more NHL games the prior season OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the prior two seasons.

ii) Two forwards who are a) under contract in 2017-18 and b) played in 40 or more NHL games the prior season OR played in 70 or more NHL games in the prior two seasons.

iii) One goaltender who is under contract in 2017-18 or will be a restricted free agent at the expiration of his current contract immediately prior to 2017-18. If the club elects to make a restricted free agent goaltender available in order to meet this requirement, that goaltender must have received his qualifying offer prior to the submission of the club's protected list.

* Players with potential career-ending injuries who have missed more than the previous 60 consecutive games (or who otherwise have been confirmed to have a career-threatening injury) may not be used to satisfy a club's player exposure requirements, unless approval is received from the NHL. Such players also may be deemed exempt from selection by the League.
Thanks AC. I guess the 8 skaters doesn't need to specify what position they are. No one will go that route and protect less than 4 D and not likely to protect 5 D but if they want that why prohibit it?

Mortimer Snerd is online now  
Old
10-28-2016, 12:23 AM
  #64
Mortimer Snerd
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,041
vCash: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aavco Cup View Post
But why would Toby do it?

It doesn't make sense unless he has some bizarre fascination with the city of Las Vegas.
The reason Toby would do it is because he doesn't expect to be taken. Period. If he believes he would be taken or that the probability of being taken is substantial then he doesn't waive. Its very straightforward.

I'm not experienced enough at watching NHL GM's building teams to be confident in my opinion but I don't know why an expansion team would want to pay that much money to a player that age. He isn't a high scorer who will help entertain the fans through those first few losing years and he will have aged out before they even become a play-off bubble team. And he doesn't come cheaply. Taking him doesn't make sense to me.

Pay them a 5th to not take him if you need some assurance. 5ths are not worth much. LV is not strongly motivated to take him so it should be enough. That effectively gives the Jets 11 protected skaters.

Mortimer Snerd is online now  
Old
10-28-2016, 12:32 AM
  #65
Mortimer Snerd
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,041
vCash: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daximus View Post
It's a smart move if LV takes the pick. A 3rd would likely do it.
A 3rd for that would be a massive overpay. You are only seeking assurance that they won't do something they probably would not do anyway. A 5th is more like it, even a 6th.

Mortimer Snerd is online now  
Old
10-28-2016, 12:39 AM
  #66
Daximus
Aces Charles
 
Daximus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Five Hills
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,622
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mortimer Snerd View Post
A 3rd for that would be a massive overpay. You are only seeking assurance that they won't do something they probably would not do anyway. A 5th is more like it, even a 6th.
4th probably.

Daximus is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 01:03 AM
  #67
Mortimer Snerd
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,041
vCash: 576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Little View Post
Depends on how much of a question mark you want in this young, exempt D. Because any of the ones I want--Provorov, Werenski, Parayko--are on teams that are already protecting 3 or even 4 defencemen.

And that's just effecting whether they can make the deal, regardless of whether they want to.



Probably only lose Lowry, anyway. GCB, #faceoffz, 'NHL size'--he's got a lot of things that you and I may not care a lot about but NHL GMs seem to.
Who are the 3 Philly is protecting?

Mortimer Snerd is online now  
Old
10-28-2016, 01:09 AM
  #68
voyageur
The watchful one
 
voyageur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: North End Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,769
vCash: 500
The best option is to trade Trouba for an entry level contract defenseman and top 6 forward. Take your pick (Skej, Miller; Sanheim, Schenn; or if we want to punish Trouba and his brand, Fleury/Murphy and Skinner)

Protect 7 forwards:

Wheeler
Scheif
Little
Perreault
Armia
Lowry
Acquired forward

3 defenseman
Buff
Enstrom
Myers

voyageur is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 05:58 AM
  #69
gbill2004*
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,550
vCash: 500
Glad to see the consensus now is to protect Armia. Seems to come down to protecting 2 of these 3: Lowry, Dano, Copp.

I'd keep Dano, and it's a tough decision between Lowry and Copp. Lowry has the potential to be a beast, but has underwhelmed since his first season. Maybe we can give Vegas a 3-4th rounder and ask if they will take Thorbs instead?

If I had to choose though, I'd probably let Lowry go, but it's a very tough call.

gbill2004* is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 08:16 AM
  #70
Aavco Cup
Registered User
 
Aavco Cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 25,715
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mortimer Snerd View Post
The reason Toby would do it is because he doesn't expect to be taken. Period. If he believes he would be taken or that the probability of being taken is substantial then he doesn't waive. Its very straightforward.

I'm not experienced enough at watching NHL GM's building teams to be confident in my opinion but I don't know why an expansion team would want to pay that much money to a player that age. He isn't a high scorer who will help entertain the fans through those first few losing years and he will have aged out before they even become a play-off bubble team. And he doesn't come cheaply. Taking him doesn't make sense to me.

Pay them a 5th to not take him if you need some assurance. 5ths are not worth much. LV is not strongly motivated to take him so it should be enough. That effectively gives the Jets 11 protected skaters.
That's not a reason to waive his NMC. That's fan fantasy talk. It's not real life.

Did anyone catch the insider yesterday on TSN?

I believe they said that Vegas would get a 48 hour window (before expansion draft) to woo and sign pending UFA or RFA. If Vegas signs a player this way they do not select a player from that team in expansion draft. Short on details but it was not mentioned whether matching was possible for RFA's

So vegas could sign Stafford or Copp this way for example. It may force GM's to lock up their RFA's earlier than usual.

Aavco Cup is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 08:46 AM
  #71
Jimmyjets
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aavco Cup View Post
That's not a reason to waive his NMC. That's fan fantasy talk. It's not real life.

Did anyone catch the insider yesterday on TSN?

I believe they said that Vegas would get a 48 hour window (before expansion draft) to woo and sign pending UFA or RFA. If Vegas signs a player this way they do not select a player from that team in expansion draft. Short on details but it was not mentioned whether matching was possible for RFA's

So vegas could sign Stafford or Copp this way for example. It may force GM's to lock up their RFA's earlier than usual.
This is a new wrinkle that I find interesting. The thing a lot of people seem to overlook is that Las Vegas needs to draft at least $43.8 million in salaries which means that they are kind of forced to take a few big dollar contracts just to hit the threshold, (which is why Enstrom would probably be considered long and hard if he was exposed). Allowing Vegas to sign UFAs especially and use them as the expansion pick from that team allows them to easily hit this threshold with a couple big ticket signings meaning they can then scoop up all the young, cheap talent left exposed and not have to eat Howards contract just to comply with the rules. Before general fanager was taken away I did a mock expansion draft and I really liked all the young talent I was able to put together, but you had to take some bad contracts to get to the expansion draft floor. The other interesting thing is that while they get 30 picks, they can only keep 23 on the roster and the 7 players they'd be sending to the minors would have a high probability of being claimed on waivers. I don't know how or if the NHL is going to deal with that. Maybe there are some "surprise" picks (cough, Stuart, cough) that they feel they could send through waivers and wouldn't be claimed but would be solid depth injury call ups.

It also makes trading away a player like Stafford an interesting proposition because if we're not getting really good value for him it might be better to hold onto expiring contracts and hope Vegas signs them in their window so we don't lose anyone else. Maybe they sign Pavelec. One can dream...

Jimmyjets is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 11:16 AM
  #72
Coach G
King Props 2016
 
Coach G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: In the corners
Country: Canada
Posts: 403
vCash: 1097
I think all the speculation about convincing Enstrom to waive his NMC and hoping LV doesn't take him (or paying them not to) is unnecessary: if you want to protect 4D (while keeping Lowry/Armia/Dano), just expose Myers or Trouba and pay off LV to not take him.
Either that cost is acceptable, or you lose one of your young forwards.
It's been mentioned before, but it bears repeating that every team will lose one player they'd rather not lose. Whaddyagonnado? Don't sweat it too much.

Coach G is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 11:36 AM
  #73
lanky
Registered User
 
lanky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 3,015
vCash: 500
I would like to protect

Little
Wheeler
Scheif
Armia

Buff
Enstrom
Myers
Trouba

LV would then likely either take Dano or Perreault, probably Perreault. He's one of my favourite Jets but the reality is his contract is priced at a UFA level (no discount for restricted status or home town). He's replaceable because Roslovic is looking like he'll be a capable 3C within the year.

lanky is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 11:50 AM
  #74
CaptainChef
Registered User
 
CaptainChef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Bedroom Jetsville
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,704
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gbill2004 View Post
Glad to see the consensus now is to protect Armia. Seems to come down to protecting 2 of these 3: Lowry, Dano, Copp.

I'd keep Dano, and it's a tough decision between Lowry and Copp. Lowry has the potential to be a beast, but has underwhelmed since his first season. Maybe we can give Vegas a 3-4th rounder and ask if they will take Thorbs instead?

If I had to choose though, I'd probably let Lowry go, but it's a very tough call.
This will no doubt change back & forth several times as the year progresses. Right now Armia is on fire -- can he hold that drive? Right now Lowry is proving worth of protecting -- back to playing his game & also doing a good job on faceoffs. Right now I'd say Dano has to be protected based on promise if nothing else.

So I guess if we had to chose now, its Copp out. But I'm sure it will change as we progress through the year. Maybe we'll even get a trade happening at some point to alleviate our problem (or complicate it -- should they need to do the 4D-4F route!!)

CaptainChef is offline  
Old
10-28-2016, 12:05 PM
  #75
Gm0ney
Unicorns salient
 
Gm0ney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,826
vCash: 500
If Armia keeps playing like he has, I think he will need to be protected. Options are:

1) 4-4 and leave Perreault exposed
2) 4-4 and make a deal with Vegas to not take Armia.
3) 7-3 and move a defenseman for exempt assets (Myers for picks/prospects, Trouba for picks prospects, Enstrom buyout).

Gm0ney is online now  
Closed Thread

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 12:13 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.