Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Expansion Draft


campabee82
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

We'll find out soon, but based on MB's comments today, he doesn't seem to be putting a lot of stock in Drouin being here in the future. If that's the case, the question becomes who MB values more: Chiarot or the best of Lehkonen, Evans, and UFA Danault? And the more I think about how MB operates, the more I'm thinking he will protect 4 D men. He loves his top 4. We all know it's a deranged school of thought and that he'd have little to lose by exposing Weber, but I think he's going to protect Price, Weber, Petry, Chiarot, Edmundson, Gallagher, Toffoli, Kotkaniemi, and Anderson. I think he'll leave Lehkonen, Byron, Drouin, Evans, Kulak, Fleury, Allen etc exposed. And I think if it comes down to this, the odds we'll see will be roughly:

- Allen 40%

- Lehkonen 30%

- Evans 25%

- Drouin 5%

 

They might be tempted by Drouin, but it's a risky gamble for Seattle to end up with nothing. Allen is the safe choice, but it depends on their strategy in goal and if they see another guy as being their go-to #1, they may want a cheaper back-up. They've also made it clear they want cheaper, cost-controlled contracts with leverage to move on quickly and free up cap space. So Evans could be a great fit for them there, while Lehkonen should be cheap enough and impressed in the playoffs.

As you mentioned in the other thread, if Tatar is left to test the market, there's a legit chance they talk to him and (hopefully) use their pick on him... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really curious to see what we do in the coming 5 days.

On the 17th we need to submit our list of protected players.  The big question is whether we will go 4-4-1 or 7-3-1

In net we know we will protect Price & expose Allen.

On D, I think its all but guaranteed Petry (NMC) and Weber are protected. If we go 7-3-1 that leaves one of Edmundson or Chiarot exposed. Edmundson is younger, has the longer contract & is, imho the better player, but who knows what MB will think/do.  If we go 4-4-1 then obviously all 4 are protected.  Romanov is exempt.   We have other guys (Kulak, Fleury etc) who meet the requirements for contracts to expose.

At forward, regardless of what happens you have to assume Gallagher (NMC), Toffoli, Anderson and Kotkaniemi are protected.    That leaves Danault (UFA), Tatar (UFA), Lehkonen (RFA), Armia (UFA), Byron, Drouin (LTIR) and Evans..   if we go 7-3-1 we can protect 2 of them (free agents can be picked but obviously its a potential gamble for Seattle, although they can talk to them ahead of time)  but the problem is we may not have the required number of exposed players under contract.    Byron is one, as are Evans and Drouin but im not sure the team wants to expose any of them.   For example, we could protect Gallagher, Toffoli, Anderson, JK, Evans, Drouin & Byron - thats everyone we have under contract - but then we dont meet the requirements for 2 players under contract.  You could technically sign a guy like Frolik or Staal but if they dont get claimed (they wont) then you are stuck with them next year - and you end up making Allen or Chiarot much more desirable if you offer up nothing of value up front..


I could see MB going 4-4-1 and protecting Price,  Petry, Edmundson, Weber, Chiarot, Toffoli, Gallagher, Anderson & Kotkaneimi.   We would then expose Allen, Fleury, Kulak, Evans, Byron & Drouin

The question is Drouin, who obviously is a guy you protect under normal circumstances but if there's question about him ever playing again... would the Kraken risk it?    I think in that scenario we lose Allen or Evans.  In the 7-3-1 scenario we lose Allen, Chiarot or Evans.  


Im very curious to see if we try to make any side deals. Like getting the Kraken to pick Nick Leddy and then flipping him to us for a pick... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Why does Evans have to be protected ?

Its pro seasons - so not just NHL.  He's only played 60 games in the NHL (over 2 seasons) But he played 2 pro seasons in Laval too - so essentially the same pro experience as Kotkaniemi.      Suzuki came along 1 year later, so is exempt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I thought UFAs didn't met the criteria for exposure because you need to be signed for 2021-22 to qualify for exposure.

EDIT: Or is it that UFAs can be exposed but we NEED to expose two forwards signed for next season as well?

 

Correct (your edit).

UFAs can be protected, or exposed - and the expansion team can sign them (I believe they get a window to talk to UFAs before they pick but after the protection lists are announced this friday). 

But the team does have to have 2F, 2D and 1G that is under contract for next year and left exposed.

So technically we could expose Danault, Tatar and Armia & Seattle could talk to them & if they can agree on a deal, they could pick one, using our pick.  Of course they could also agree on a deal, pick a guy like Evans and then sign that UFA in a couple of weeks for nothing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Correct (your edit).

UFAs can be protected, or exposed - and the expansion team can sign them (I believe they get a window to talk to UFAs before they pick but after the protection lists are announced this friday). 

But the team does have to have 2F, 2D and 1G that is under contract for next year and left exposed.

So technically we could expose Danault, Tatar and Armia & Seattle could talk to them & if they can agree on a deal, they could pick one, using our pick.  Of course they could also agree on a deal, pick a guy like Evans and then sign that UFA in a couple of weeks for nothing. 

So. Byron will obviously be one of our two forwards exposed who are under contract for next season. The question really is, who will be the second? I suppose it could be Drouin, but that would be some pretty bad player management on our part. To trade a prospect like Sergachev and then lose Drouin in an expansion draft... That's terrible management, IMO. Then again, there's no one else to expose except for Evans... and I don't want to lose Evans.

EDIT: Or I suppose it would be possible to re-sign someone like Lukas Vejdemo and then we would meet the requirement of two signed forwards exposed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

So. Byron will obviously be one of our two forwards exposed who are under contract for next season. The question really is, who will be the second? I suppose it could be Drouin, but that would be some pretty bad player management on our part. To trade a prospect like Sergachev and then lose Drouin in an expansion draft... That's terrible management, IMO. Then again, there's no one else to expose except for Evans... and I don't want to lose Evans.

bad luck. Who knew he JD was going to opt out for personal reasons

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

So. Byron will obviously be one of our two forwards exposed who are under contract for next season. The question really is, who will be the second? I suppose it could be Drouin, but that would be some pretty bad player management on our part. To trade a prospect like Sergachev and then lose Drouin in an expansion draft... That's terrible management, IMO. Then again, there's no one else to expose except for Evans... and I don't want to lose Evans.

EDIT: Or I suppose it would be possible to re-sign someone like Lukas Vejdemo and then we would meet the requirement of two signed forwards exposed.

Yup. Right now the forwards who are most likely to be exposed (probably not all of them but...):

Byron, Evans, Lehkonen (RFA), Drouin (LTIR) and our UFAs.

I think its highly unlikely they take Byron (rumour has it they are looking for cheap deals so they can take on cap hits from other teams later).  They might be interested in Evans if we expose him. They might also be interested in Lehks  - he's RFA, so you'd still have his rights, but an unsigned player could be a risk.  

Drouin is a real question mark. Undoubtedly they would enquire about him if we do leave him exposed. The real question is how honest would he and his people be (and do they even know a timeline for/if/when he returns).   So it could be a risk, but a calculated one.  On paper, if we expose Drouin, he's probably the most talented player (aside from maybe some over 35 year old vets) that would be available.... but would Seattle take the risk he never plays again.  Tricky.

If we go 7-3-1 I think Drouin maybe gets protected. If we go 4-4-1 I think we definitely leave him exposed.  And yes, you could definitely sign guys to meet the requirements.  They can be 2 way contracts I believe. The only issue is that if that player isnt claimed, you keep him, so lets say you signed Eric Staal for that purpose... not ideal if he doesnt get claimed.   I dont think they will have to  resort to that.  

7 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

bad luck. Who knew he JD was going to opt out for personal reasons

For sure. There was was no way to know this would have happened.  It sucks but it is what it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, ramcharger440 said:

Yep we may or may not have liked the trade but who knew it would come to this? it is what it is.

I mean, it's possible he comes back and plays again for Montreal. We don't know for certain what the personal reasons were. However, it does seem less likely... I don't know. I imagine he starts the 2021-22 season with another team, I would just rather trade him for an asset than lose him to Seattle for nothing. My protected list would be:

FORWARDS:
Jonathan Drouin
Josh Anderson
Tyler Toffoli
Brendan Gallagher
Jesperi Kotkaniemi
Phillip Danault
Artturi Lehkonen

DEFENCE:
Shea Weber
Jeff Petry
Joel Edmundson

GOALTENDING:
Carey Price

EXPOSURE OBLIGATIONS (at least 2F, 1D, and 1G under contract for 2021-22)
Paul Byron
Jake Evans
Ben Chiarot
Brett Kulak
Jake Allen
Michael McNiven

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I mean, it's possible he comes back and plays again for Montreal. We don't know for certain what the personal reasons were. However, it does seem less likely... I don't know. I imagine he starts the 2021-22 season with another team, I would just rather trade him for an asset than lose him to Seattle for nothing. My protected list would be:

FORWARDS:
Jonathan Drouin
Josh Anderson
Tyler Toffoli
Brendan Gallagher
Jesperi Kotkaniemi
Phillip Danault
Artturi Lehkonen

DEFENCE:
Shea Weber
Jeff Petry
Joel Edmundson

GOALTENDING:
Carey Price

EXPOSURE OBLIGATIONS (at least 2F, 1D, and 1G under contract for 2021-22)
Paul Byron
Jake Evans
Ben Chiarot
Brett Kulak
Jake Allen
Michael McNiven

 

This is my guess:

Option 1 (what I actually think MB will do):
 

FORWARDS:
Josh Anderson
Tyler Toffoli
Brendan Gallagher
Jesperi Kotkaniemi


DEFENCE:
Shea Weber
Jeff Petry
Joel Edmundson
Ben Chiarot

GOALTENDING:
Carey Price

EXPOSED:
Phillip Danault (UFA)
Jonathan Drouin
Artturi Lehkonen (RFA)
Joel Armia (UFA)
Corey Perry (UFA)
Paul Byron
Jake Evans
Brett Kulak
Jake Allen
Michael McNiven

 

Option 2 (what I actually think MB might do):
 

FORWARDS:
Josh Anderson
Tyler Toffoli
Brendan Gallagher
Jesperi Kotkaniemi
Jonathan Drouin
Jake Evans
Phillip Danault (UFA or signed)


DEFENCE:
Shea Weber
Jeff Petry
Joel Edmundson


GOALTENDING:
Carey Price

EXPOSED:
Joel Armia (UFA)
Artturi Lehkonen (RFA)
Corey Perry (UFA)
Paul Byron
Ben Chiarot
Brett Kulak
Jake Allen
Michael McNiven
A player like Vejdemo signed two a 2 way contract. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Regis22 said:

Should not protect Drouin. IMO but what do I know , I wouldn't protect someone I had no idea if he's coming back and if he does will he leave again 

Its tough to say without knowing why he's out & what his plans are. 

If he's not likely to come back then yes, no reason to protect him.  If he's able to play but maybe not for Montreal again then you still have a tradable asset (albeit one you probably wont get much for) so maybe its worth protecting him.  Its still possible you could flip him for a risk player like Tarasenko.  Each guy needing a fresh start somewhere but thats pure speculation because we really have NO idea why he's out.  


At the end of the day, we're losing one player & its entirely possible that Jake Allen is that guy no matter what else we do (and we cant protect him anyway) so its all moot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No player on this team is "untouchable" for me, but the reason I would protect Drouin is because I think he still has trade value. 23 points in 44 games is nothing to scoff at. We won't get a blue chip prospect back (like we gave away for him), but he might be useful in a trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Montreal just seems like a potential landing spot for Suter on a short-term deal. Why?

 

- He is a LHD.

- He has played with Weber before.

- We just made the SCF and have aspirations of being a contender (debatable if we are) so could give a chance to play for a Cup at end of his career

- In the image of what MB considers a perfect defender.

 

Nothing will happen before the ED, but if MB gets the chance to talk to him and knows he can sign him, maybe this sways him to protect 7 forwards and leave Chiarot unprotected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Montreal just seems like a potential landing spot for Suter on a short-term deal. Why?

 

- He is a LHD.

- He has played with Weber before.

- We just made the SCF and have aspirations of being a contender (debatable if we are) so could give a chance to play for a Cup at end of his career

- In the image of what MB considers a perfect defender.

 

Nothing will happen before the ED, but if MB gets the chance to talk to him and knows he can sign him, maybe this sways him to protect 7 forwards and leave Chiarot unprotected.

I doubt Seattle would take Chiarot even if we did leave him unprotected. But maybe they would value him given our playoff run. I imagine Seattle is coming for Jake Allen. But I guess it's all moot until we see what our protection list actually is. I'm hoping for the 7-3-1 format, personally. MAYBE THEY'LL TAKE MCNIVEN!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Montreal just seems like a potential landing spot for Suter on a short-term deal. Why?

 

- He is a LHD.

- He has played with Weber before.

- We just made the SCF and have aspirations of being a contender (debatable if we are) so could give a chance to play for a Cup at end of his career

- In the image of what MB considers a perfect defender.

 

Nothing will happen before the ED, but if MB gets the chance to talk to him and knows he can sign him, maybe this sways him to protect 7 forwards and leave Chiarot unprotected.

I actually like the idea & have floated the suggestion of suter for a while because i think he and Weber would form a solid, short term 2nd pairing. I think he's also one of the only guys they would bump Chiarot to the 3rd pairing for - and i think he'd actually be excellent there - if he's not claimed.  1-2 year deal... id be down for that experiment, knowing full well its unlikely MB goes out & gets an impact LHD it may be as good as it gets. 

 

35 minutes ago, jennifer_rocket said:

I doubt Seattle would take Chiarot even if we did leave him unprotected. But maybe they would value him given our playoff run. I imagine Seattle is coming for Jake Allen. But I guess it's all moot until we see what our protection list actually is. I'm hoping for the 7-3-1 format, personally. MAYBE THEY'LL TAKE MCNIVEN!

Its tough to say.  Seattle apparently wants to keep their cap low so they can take on some expensive contracts for compensation - the way we got Armia for basically nothing.  Chiarot isnt super cheap but he's UFA in a year so thats a positive.   

The other thing is that while Seattle may not be interested in Chiarot, another team (Winnipeg?) might.  They could easily ask Seattle to take him so they can trade _______ to the Kraken to get BC back.  We shall see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I actually like the idea & have floated the suggestion of suter for a while because i think he and Weber would form a solid, short term 2nd pairing. I think he's also one of the only guys they would bump Chiarot to the 3rd pairing for - and i think he'd actually be excellent there - if he's not claimed.  1-2 year deal... id be down for that experiment, knowing full well its unlikely MB goes out & gets an impact LHD it may be as good as it gets. 

 

Its tough to say.  Seattle apparently wants to keep their cap low so they can take on some expensive contracts for compensation - the way we got Armia for basically nothing.  Chiarot isnt super cheap but he's UFA in a year so thats a positive.   

The other thing is that while Seattle may not be interested in Chiarot, another team (Winnipeg?) might.  They could easily ask Seattle to take him so they can trade _______ to the Kraken to get BC back.  We shall see. 

Let's keep in mind that if we leave Chiarot unprotected, it means we've likely protected Drouin/Evans/Lehkonen, so their best leftover choices would be Byron, Allen, Fleury, Kulak, or Chiarot. Again, Allen is a good option, but they only need one starter and Allen really thrived as a back-up this year. He's been an average starter for his career and he's already 30, so he may not be what Seattle is looking for. Chiarot on an expiring contract could still be attractive and let's not forget that once the lists come out, another team could call up Seattle and say, draft Chiarot and we'll flip you "X" for him after the ED. I think after these playoffs, there will be someone coveting him more than Seattle might covet anyone we have left over for them to choose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally believe MB is favoring a 4-4-1 protection plan to keep Chiarot, but let's remember he's a 30+ UFA next off-season. Now let's say Danault isn't re-signed this week. Can you really risk losing Evans (who could be your next Danault and on a cost-controlled contract short-term)? If Danault isn't back and Evans is lost, you're looking at Suzuki-Kotkaniemi-Poehling-??? down the middle and that is a disaster. You suddenly become very desperate to add down the middle and could potentially end up overpaying in a trade or free agency as someone takes advantage of you.

If we lose Chiarot, we're running Edmundson-Kulak-Romanov down the left and it's not a huge drop-off, even though it needs help. If we lose Lehkonen, you can move Ylonen or Byron or Harvey-Pinard or Perry or Armia around the line-up (assuming the latter two are re-signed) and it's not as bad to fill in a bottom 6 winger spot. But how do you replace two centers in the same year (three if you include Staal) when it's one of your areas of poorest organizational depth? If Danault re-signs now, then fine. If he doesn't, I'd suggest that Evans becomes the guy we cannot afford to lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evans is a big question mark for me, and could be for Seattle also with his concussion history. He could be one hit away from the end of his career. If we lose Dano IMO we will be in a very shaky situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

Montreal just seems like a potential landing spot for Suter on a short-term deal. Why?

 

- He is a LHD.

- He has played with Weber before.

- We just made the SCF and have aspirations of being a contender (debatable if we are) so could give a chance to play for a Cup at end of his career

- In the image of what MB considers a perfect defender.

Suter - not bad - sort of like a Corey Perry revival cheap deal project - with the Wild buying out he and Parise, any trade deals for Dumba have been squashed. The Wild have really mortgaged their future with the dead cap space associated with those two, which kicks in years after next. I expect that the Wild are going all in for this coming year and believe they are strong contenders. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, claremont said:

 I expect that the Wild are going all in for this coming year and believe they are strong contenders. 

They need to sign Kevin Fiala and Kirill Kaprizov. plues maybe they go after Eichel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This ED is a prime opportunity for us to acquire the D we so desperately need.  First off as this draft is a total crap shoot I would do the following....

 

First off move a 2nd round pick so that Seattle takes Byron, then in a corresponding move move a first so Seattle on the condition that Seattle takes Leddy out of Long Island and moves him to us. 

 

Leddy is younger than the majority of D men available with 2yrs remain g on his current contract.  The draft is a total crap shoot so use the picks to control what Seattle takes

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • H_T_L locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...