GASabresIUFAN Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 We seem to touch on this in every thread in which we discuss the roster. The Big Z contract thread is no different. There is a really good tool on Generalfanager.com to play with the roster. http://www.generalfanager.com/teams/expansion According to the site most of our key kids are exempt including Nelson, Jack, Guhle, Bailey anc Reinhart. However the two prospects that aren't exempt are Ullmark and Carrier. We also have only 2 must protects in Okposo and Bogosian. Using the tool it looks like the best avenue for GMTM is the 7/3/1 list. In Goal: we can protect either Lehner or Ullmark but not both. Both are Rfa's at season's end. With Petersen coming and Kasdorf it will be interesting to see what happens Ullmark. One note, we must make a goalie (signed or RFA) available. Defense: Obvious protect McCabe, Risto and Bogosian. Georges made available Forwards: Obvious protect ROR and Okposo. The pick 5 from Ennis, Larsson, Foligno, Girgensons, Kane, Carrier and Moulson. Right now i think Moulson and Kane would be made available, but Kane could play his way back into GMTM's good graces. Moulson is much less likely. It will be interesting as the year progresses to see how we all feel about this list as the season progresses. I can almost guarantee that my list above won't be the final list by season's end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 (edited) If he resigns Kulikov its another story though. then I'd go with 4-4-1. O'Reilly, Okposo, Larsson and Ennis. Larsson can be replaced with whoever plays better than he did last year. Kulikov , Risto , McCabe, Bogo. If Lehner completely fails I'd protect Ullmark. But I don't see any of our goalies being snatched, there will be better targets out there for las vegas. Edited September 2, 2016 by Huckleberry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
French Collection Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 But I don't see any of our goalies being snatched, there will be better targets out there for las vegas. Agreed, the only way we have a problem is if Lehner gets hurt and Ullmark shines for an extended period of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 Agreed, the only way we have a problem is if Lehner gets hurt and Ullmark shines for an extended period of time. Then protect Ullmark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 Remember that 29 other teams will also have players available and that Vegas has to hit the cap floor. If we expose Kane or Moulson or Gorges, the Las Vegas dumbnames might take them over someone slightly more promising because they need the salary and there are better players at that other position. It will be really cool if we see the list of available players prior to the draft from all teams so we can speculate. I think if Buffalo puts Kane on the block though he's the guy that goes. Unless Ullmark turns his game around (he wasn't great in ROch at the end) than no team is going to take him away even if he doesn't get protected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 I though Vegas was going to be excluded from the cap floor initially but I could be wrong. Plus don't rule out free agency. I highly doubt they pass on a better cheaper player exposed to the expansion draft just to take someone more pricey to get to the floor. They can always pass out big money one year deals to the Matt Ellis's, Patrick Kaletas, and John Scotts of the hockey world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 I though Vegas was going to be excluded from the cap floor initially but I could be wrong. Plus don't rule out free agency. I highly doubt they pass on a better cheaper player exposed to the expansion draft just to take someone more pricey to get to the floor. They can always pass out big money one year deals to the Matt Ellis's, Patrick Kaletas, and John Scotts of the hockey world. "* The Las Vegas franchise must select players with an aggregate Expansion Draft value that is between 60-100% of the prior season's upper limit for the salary cap." https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592 Also according to that article every team will lose a player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 Remember that 29 other teams will also have players available and that Vegas has to hit the cap floor. If we expose Kane or Moulson or Gorges, the Las Vegas dumbnames might take them over someone slightly more promising because they need the salary and there are better players at that other position. It will be really cool if we see the list of available players prior to the draft from all teams so we can speculate. I think if Buffalo puts Kane on the block though he's the guy that goes. Unless Ullmark turns his game around (he wasn't great in ROch at the end) than no team is going to take him away even if he doesn't get protected. I just want to take this time to nominate the Las Vegas Dumbnames as the official Sabrespace slang for that team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 "* The Las Vegas franchise must select players with an aggregate Expansion Draft value that is between 60-100% of the prior season's upper limit for the salary cap." https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592 Also according to that article every team will lose a player. Ok, so they are exempted to a degree because the normal floor is closer to 75% of the upper limit (floor of $54 million vs a upper limit of $73 million) and it looks like they'll only have to get up to $43.8 million to hit 60%. They shouldn't have much trouble reaching that figure. It's nice to imagine them taking somebody like Moulson but I don't see it happening. If we leave Kane exposed though, I think he's gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 (edited) Ok, so they are exempted to a degree because the normal floor is closer to 75% of the upper limit (floor of $54 million vs a upper limit of $73 million) and it looks like they'll only have to get up to $43.8 million to hit 60%. They shouldn't have much trouble reaching that figure. It's nice to imagine them taking somebody like Moulson but I don't see it happening. If we leave Kane exposed though, I think he's gone. LGR's quote is the value they must take in the expansion draft. When the season starts they will still have to get to the cap floor (by signing picks and free agents). The draft floor is in place to force them to take real players so they don't have this enormous gap under the cap that they can use to pillage their way through free agency. As far as Kane goes, he is Buffalo's fifth most valuable forward, and two of the guys ahead of him don't have to be protected. Unless he completely implodes this year, he will be traded before he is taken in the expansion draft. Edited September 2, 2016 by dudacek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi2000 Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 It's an interesting topic, but way to early IMO to forecast who may be on the outside looking in come the expansion draft. Much is riding on this season for Moulson, Kane, Ennis and Girgensons.... even Lehner to a degree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 I just want to take this time to nominate the Las Vegas Dumbnames as the official Sabrespace slang for that team.It is decided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted September 2, 2016 Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 I just want to take this time to nominate the Las Vegas Dumbnames as the official Sabrespace slang for that team. How about Las Vegas Nom Muet for their eventual move to Quebec. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted September 2, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 2, 2016 (edited) If he resigns Kulikov its another story though. then I'd go with 4-4-1. O'Reilly, Okposo, Larsson and Ennis. Larsson can be replaced with whoever plays better than he did last year. Kulikov , Risto , McCabe, Bogo. If Lehner completely fails I'd protect Ullmark. But I don't see any of our goalies being snatched, there will be better targets out there for las vegas. GMTM won't be re-signing Kulikov before the draft even if he has a great year. The draft will be June 17&18, while free agency starts 7/1. GMTM likely re-sign him within of the draft however (assuming a good year). As to the goaltenders, what if both Ullmark and Lehner have good seasons? What then? LV must draft 3 goaltenders and one player from every team. Grabbing a good prospect like Ullmark with NHL experience is distinctly possible. Lets say GMTM leaves Moulson, Georges, Ullmark, Deslauriers and Carrier exposed, who would you take? I'm taking either Georges or Ullmark. Someone else said this thread may be premature. While I obviously disagree as we (as a group) continue to raise the issue in other threads, I think expansion will somewhat color what GM's do this season from the timing of signing UFAs (such as Kulikov as discussed above) to deals at the trade deadline and deals this off-season. Expansion issues is one of the reasons GMTM didn't acquire Fowler or Shattenkirk (and no one else has either) and one of the reasons Pysyk was traded. Also pinning this thread and watching as opinions evolve over the course of the season should be fascinating. Edited September 2, 2016 by GASabresIUFAN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted September 3, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 3, 2016 Here is a question. What if GMTM acquires a Fowler, Shattenkirk or Lindhom or another puck mover? Would going to 4/4/1 really be so terrible given the depth in our organization at forward vs defense? Lets say we acquire Fowler from Anaheim and for a package including Girgensons with a pick and prospect. That puts our D keepers at 4; Bogo, Risto, McCabe and Fowler. Under that scenario we'd protect ROR and Okposo with 2 of Ennis, Kane, Larsson, Moulson, Foligno and Carrier. Most likely Ennis and Kane. With prospects like Bailey, Nylander, Fasching, Baptiste and others, would it really be so terrible if we lost Larsson or Foligno to expansion? With Georges and Ullmark available,we might not lose any of the forwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huckleberry Posted September 4, 2016 Report Share Posted September 4, 2016 Don't think murray traded for Kulikov to let him hit Free agency, He will try to resign him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted September 4, 2016 Report Share Posted September 4, 2016 Don't think murray traded for Kulikov to let him hit Free agency, He will try to resign him. I disagree, kinda, I think he intends to resign him but after the expansion draft. He's not going to expose assets if his hand isn't forced. So barring Kulikov becoming Risto's Defensive soulmate; I'd guess he'd leave signing him for the week between the expansion draft and FA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted September 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 4, 2016 I think he is 50/50 on re-signing him. i think the deal was made because GMTM wanted to balance the D, move up in the draft and felt he was likely to lose Pysyk in the expansion draft as McCabe had moved past him on the depth chart. Basically the Sabres were only getting one more year out of Pysyk so worst case we only get one year out of Kulikov. From GMTM's perspective if Kulikov plays well and fits in, he can re-sign him in the two weeks between expansion draft and free agency, if he doesn't, then that is 4 mill to use on someone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GASabresIUFAN Posted October 18, 2016 Author Report Share Posted October 18, 2016 (edited) TrueBlue, I've search here and the net and can't find any discussion of the status of Bogo's NMC, except an article on a credible fan site saying that the clause actually doesn't kick in until the end of this season other then the TBN article referenced below. TBN says he has a NMC and must be protected. http://buffalonews.com/2016/06/14/nhl-reportedly-expanding-las-vegas-sabres-plan-expansion-draft/ Lets assume for arguments sake that Bogo's NMC is void or not yet active. Does this make him trade bait at the deadline if the Sabres are out of contention? Will it depend on how he plays up til that point? Moulson's hot start has already begun the question of whether or not to protect him. Right now his age and large contract are working against him, but a 30 goal season could easily change things. Right now there are only 4 non-exempt Sabres who I guarantee will be protected (McCabe, Risto, ROR and Okposo) plus Bogo if he has a NMC. The Sabres must leave a NHL D unprotected and that will be Gorges. After that it's a complete guess and will be based on performance and need. Here is how I currently rank the players to protect not mentioned above. I'm going to assume we go the 3D, 7F, 1G route and that Bogo has a NMC. This leaves 1G to protect and 5 forwards, since all 3 D slots are taken. Protect: 1) Lehner - Ullmark has been shaky so far and Nilsson is a UFA. 2) Larsson - shutdown 3rd line centers are hard to find 3) Foligno - If the re-united Larsson lines continues to play well Foligno, an RFA is staying. 4) Ennis - Age, skill and contract would make him the first draftee if availabld. No way GMTM lets him go for nothing. 5) Girgensons - will want to get something for him or keep him as a cheap utility player. 6) Moulson - good start gets him above the line? Unprotected: 7) Deslauriers - 4th line physical players are replaceable, but DD loves the guy 8) Kane - Injuries, attitude and contract make him expendable even for nothing in return except cap savings. 9) Ullmark - RFA goalie not exactly showing well in Roch and we need to expose a goalie. 10) Carrier - will need a good year in Roch to get protected. 11) Grant - will need to start scoring to get higher on this list. Edited October 18, 2016 by GASabresIUFAN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 18, 2016 Report Share Posted October 18, 2016 Why is everyone protecting Marcus Foligno at $2.25M? Is there some sort of insanity Zika spreading across this board? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted October 18, 2016 Report Share Posted October 18, 2016 Why is everyone protecting Marcus Foligno at $2.25M? Is there some sort of insanity Zika spreading across this board? Since the halfway mark of last season, Marcus has been playing at that value. I have no problem with his contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 18, 2016 Report Share Posted October 18, 2016 I am not protecting Marcus Foligno if he costs a penny. He is not worth protecting. If he is what you lose at the expansion draft then you're happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted October 18, 2016 Report Share Posted October 18, 2016 I'm with Flagg on Foligno, but then I've always preached patience when everyone jumped off the train during the tank, If Kane gets through the season with his hands clean, there is no way he is not protected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted October 18, 2016 Report Share Posted October 18, 2016 I am not protecting Marcus Foligno if he costs a penny. He is not worth protecting. If he is what you lose at the expansion draft then you're happy. O'Reilly, Okposo, Kane, Ennis, Larsson, Girgensons gives you six. Who do you take then over Foligno? Des? Moulson? Grant? Carrier? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted October 18, 2016 Report Share Posted October 18, 2016 Moulson's hot start has already begun the question of whether or not to protect him. Right now his age and large contract are working against him, but a 30 goal season could easily change things. 6) Moulson - good start gets him above the line? Unprotected: Nobody on this board is protecting Moulson even if he gets 30 this year imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.