Jump to content

Seattle Expansion Protection List


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Thorny said:

I do know that Skinner's production dropped off that year in a real way right at the time he rolled his ankle, and that's when he got shifted, as well. Could be a factor

Oh ya. 4 goals after his "miraculous return". 36 before. 

https://subscribe.buffalonews.com/e/limit-reached-bn?returnURL=https://buffalonews.com/sports/sabres/sabres-jeff-skinner-returns-after-injury-scare-against-capitals/article_da70ddfb-1448-5488-9f4f-c59e2406bba3.html

Edit - if one can't read the link, injury scare was Feb 23

He has literally been a different player since then.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

He has literally been a different player since then.

Maybe it cost him a step

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Taro T said:

But he has to realize that Ron Francis isn't going to take him and the team he is wedded to for the next 6 seasons will (might) be better in the 1st of those seasons by him temporarily waiving his NMC to allow the Sabres to protect an additional forward that Seattle MIGHT want to take.

It's his prerogative to be petulant if he wants.  But he should want to play on as good a team as possible now that he knows he's getting paid to be an NHLer for at least 6 more years.  Temporarily waiving the clause helps that cause. 

Can a player temporarily waive a NMC?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Curt said:

Can a player temporarily waive a NMC?

Under the old CBA it appeared they could, but it was then up to their team (presumably the new one) whether to reinstate it or to permanently waive it.

Per the MOU (they'll actually rewrite the CBA rather than just run off the MOU until it expires again, right?), a NTC/NMC travels with the player (the team has no say in whether it gets reinstated) so it appears that they can in fact be temporarily waived and then automatically be reinstated.

(So, had the B's gotten an offer for Hall they just couldn't resist, they'd've needed his blessing to complete the trade.  Under the old CBA, they could've sent him wherever they wanted to send him and he'd've had no say in the matter unless they wanted to give him a say.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, French Collection said:

Would be interesting if non playoff teams would be able to protect one extra player.

Interesting, but I'd hate to be a playoff cusp team and sell off at the deadline to keep one more player on the roster for next year. Give every team the same setup.

Oddly, with Seattle delaying a year, Vegas technically now has players they drafted that they would have to protect (I think only Cody Glass qualifies). But that one-year delay helped out Vegas even further. It would be nice if Vegas also had to go through the draft, but such are contracts when they're made.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, French Collection said:

Would be interesting if non playoff teams would be able to protect one extra player.

If you are a non playoff team the difference between your 7th best and 8th best player is probably negligible anyway.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2021 at 1:04 PM, Weave said:

If you are a non playoff team the difference between your 7th best and 8th best player is probably negligible anyway.

Seriously,  

Who are we exposing exactly?

G) Tokarski - anyone really worried about losing him?

D) Likely Borgen (only14 games of NHL experience at 24) and Miller

F) Girgensons, Eakin, Bjork and Okposo

Not exactly a list of all-stars or players we’ll actually miss if they are taken. Except maybe Borgen, I think we’d all like to move on from all these guys.

Edited by GASabresIUFAN
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/6/2021 at 5:56 AM, bob_sauve28 said:

Last place team has to expose its players to expansion draft. That's just stupid 

Oh come on. Being a last place team means you have a roster of rubbish nobody wants anyway. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sabre fan said:

That ends up being a very bad roster. If that's the best they can do, no way will they be another Vegas. Not even close. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sabre fan said:

Oh yeah? So trade Miller for something before that happens. 🤷‍♂️

  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

That ends up being a very bad roster. If that's the best they can do, no way will they be another Vegas. Not even close. 

 If that  Roster makes it before buffalo 

The hockey gods truly hate us.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Andrew Amerk said:

Oh yeah? So trade Miller for something before that happens. 🤷‍♂️

Why, then you lose two players.  All you'll get back for Miller is a 3rd or 4th rd pick.  I'd rather keep one of the kids and save the $4 mill in cap.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, GASabresIUFAN said:

Why, then you lose two players.  All you'll get back for Miller is a 3rd or 4th rd pick.  I'd rather keep one of the kids and save the $4 mill in cap.

Who else would the Sabres be exposing that is worth anything in a trade, besides Miller?

Miller doesn’t appear to be in the future plans, so I’d rather get a 2nd or 3rd for him and let Seattle take someone with no trade value. Zemgus? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

Trade Seattle Miller and a 2nd for a 7th if they promise to take Risto.

THIS would be an incredibly dumb move. It’s not quite Florida trading Marchessault and Smith to Vegas but it’s similarly bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hoss said:

THIS would be an incredibly dumb move. It’s not quite Florida trading Marchessault and Smith to Vegas but it’s similarly bad.

That’s why he is The Jokeman. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
On 5/5/2021 at 6:36 PM, PerreaultForever said:

That would be very selfish of him not agreeing to be on the list, what does he have to lose? They won’t take him. And in the remote event they did, he still makes all his money 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2021 at 12:40 AM, GASabresIUFAN said:

Seriously,  

Who are we exposing exactly?

G) Tokarski - anyone really worried about losing him?

D) Likely Borgen (only14 games of NHL experience at 24) and Miller

F) Girgensons, Eakin, Bjork and Okposo

Not exactly a list of all-stars or players we’ll actually miss if they are taken. Except maybe Borgen, I think we’d all like to move on from all these guys.

So would Bryson not be eligible for the draft? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, bob_sauve28 said:

That would be very selfish of him not agreeing to be on the list, what does he have to lose? They won’t take him. And in the remote event they did, he still makes all his money 

Its also very selfish of us to expect him to waive a right he justly negotiated.

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys you don't trade with the expansion team, you just suck up and let them take a player.   

We are a last place team with 10 draft picks this year and maybe more coming after risto, reinhart and eichel trades.   

Basically we can become the expansion team torn in the side and come out good by making trades with other teams.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bob_sauve28 said:

So would Bryson not be eligible for the draft? 

I think it goes on pro games player e.g  AHL.

 

Edit: ignore me I read the nane as Borgen.

Edited by steveoath
Stupidity
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...