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

Expansion Draft


campabee82
 Share

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, 26NCounting said:

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

 

There's definitely some opportunities there. Once we see what players are not protected, there's 2 chances:
 

1) you do as you said - offer Seattle a trade if they agree to take that player

2) you talk to the rival GM (assuming Seattle doesnt take that guy). If he was willing to lose him for nothing in the ED, presumably he may be persuaded to trade that player for something after the fact.

Unfortunately I believe Marc Bergevin thinks he has an elite top 4 and will not touch that group. I think there's a good chance we go 4-4-1 for the ED just so he can protect all of them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, 26NCounting said:

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

 

Seems a little steep to me to trade them our two highest draft picks for that... essentially, if we assumed they would take say Allen without a trade, the deal we're making is

- Byron, a 1st, and a 2nd

for

- Allen and Leddy

In itself, it's not a bad trade, but

1. I think we can get a better defenceman for a better price. For example, could we get Jake Bean for our 1st rounder and a prospect? Could we get Vince Dunn for a 3rd rounder?

2. The draft is a crap shoot in some ways, but that can also work to our advantage picking #30. On the one hand, you have less idea of how your prospect will turn out. Bu ton the other hand, if it's more random, then the 30th pick may have similar value to the 15th pick than it does in most years. Maybe there's a guy like Caufield who slides all the way down to use because no one knows much about him. So I'd actually flip your comment on its head and say that this year, a 30th pick or high 2nd actually has more value whereas a mid-1st might have less value when you start to get out of the consensus top 10.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there it is... Weber with a long-term injury announced just before the ED. Ren Lavoie says we won't protect him and he could be out a year or retire. So Habs plan becomes clear: they will protect 7 forwards and 3 D (Petry, Chiarot, Ed). Only question now is if they protect Danault and expose one of Drouin, Lehkonen, or Evans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

And there it is... Weber with a long-term injury announced just before the ED. Ren Lavoie says we won't protect him and he could be out a year or retire. So Habs plan becomes clear: they will protect 7 forwards and 3 D (Petry, Chiarot, Ed). Only question now is if they protect Danault and expose one of Drouin, Lehkonen, or Evans.

Unless someone gets signed in next few days (entirely possible) I think they have to expose one of Evans and Drouin to meet the 2 exposed player threshold (in addition to Byron) , regardless of what happens with Danault. The team knows more about Drouin's situation than we do and they also may be able to play some gamesmanship on the basis that Seattle doesn't know either (although if Drouin wants to play there, I'm sure he'd find a way to leak that to them). Given Drouin's trade value is likely low, even if he announces he wants to play again, it honestly may be worth losing him (and his contract) over Allen or Evans.

I also wouldn't be shocked if we signed a veteran to a 1-2 year deal to protect both Evans and Drouin (and righs to Lehkonen).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Graeme-1 said:

Unless someone gets signed in next few days (entirely possible) I think they have to expose one of Evans and Drouin to meet the 2 exposed player threshold (in addition to Byron) , regardless of what happens with Danault. The team knows more about Drouin's situation than we do and they also may be able to play some gamesmanship on the basis that Seattle doesn't know either (although if Drouin wants to play there, I'm sure he'd find a way to leak that to them). Given Drouin's trade value is likely low, even if he announces he wants to play again, it honestly may be worth losing him (and his contract) over Allen or Evans.

I also wouldn't be shocked if we signed a veteran to a 1-2 year deal to protect both Evans and Drouin (and righs to Lehkonen).

I've detailed why they can't expose Evans if Danault isn't signed. IMO it's between Drouin and Lehkonen if they choose to protect Danault. But frankly, if they're choosing to protect Danault, they really should just sign him beforehand. If he refuses to sign before the ED, then just expose him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I've detailed why they can't expose Evans if Danault isn't signed. IMO it's between Drouin and Lehkonen if they choose to protect Danault. But frankly, if they're choosing to protect Danault, they really should just sign him beforehand. If he refuses to sign before the ED, then just expose him.

But the question is who do you expose instead of Evans? Regardless of our protected list, the rules say we need to expose 2 eligible forwards under contract for next year, so Lehkonen (unless he signs) and Danault don't help us.  Byron will obviously be 1 of the 2, but as of today our only options for the second are: Toffolli, Gally, Anderson, JK, Drouin, or Evans.  Drouin is the wild-card here, but if you don't want to expose him, that basically leaves Evans as the only real choice.

I wouldn't be shocked if Canadiens sign someone over the next few days to expose them instead though. It's the only real way to protect both Drouin & Evans.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Graeme-1 said:

But the question is who do you expose instead of Evans? Regardless of our protected list, the rules say we need to expose 2 eligible forwards under contract for next year, so Lehkonen (unless he signs) and Danault don't help us.  Byron will obviously be 1 of the 2, but as of today our only options for the second are: Toffolli, Gally, Anderson, JK, Drouin, or Evans.  Drouin is the wild-card here, but if you don't want to expose him, that basically leaves Evans as the only real choice.

I wouldn't be shocked if Canadiens sign someone over the next few days to expose them instead though. It's the only real way to protect both Drouin & Evans.

 

Lehkonen would count. For an RFA, they don't have to be signed, they only have to be offered their qualifying offer (ie you assure Seattle that they're not headed to possible UFA status). He'd be my choice over Evans if it came to it, unless the Habs are so lacking confidence in Drouin that they think he may not play again. I also think the Habs will re-sign Perry in the next week to allow him to count too (he won't get picked), so I'm not so worried about that requirement. It's an easy thing to take care of.

As I noted, Evans is a center and without Danault and Staal, all you have is Suzuki-JK-Poehling, which is really suboptimal. Evans is also on a sub-1M cap hit, which we need to benefit from given how tight to the cap we may end up being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

Lehkonen would count. For an RFA, they don't have to be signed, they only have to be offered their qualifying offer (ie you assure Seattle that they're not headed to possible UFA status). He'd be my choice over Evans if it came to it, unless the Habs are so lacking confidence in Drouin that they think he may not play again. I also think the Habs will re-sign Perry in the next week to allow him to count too (he won't get picked), so I'm not so worried about that requirement. It's an easy thing to take care of.

As I noted, Evans is a center and without Danault and Staal, all you have is Suzuki-JK-Poehling, which is really suboptimal. Evans is also on a sub-1M cap hit, which we need to benefit from given how tight to the cap we may end up being.

Oh you're right, didn't know about that RFA exemption. Ya in that case Lehkonen seems like the obvious choice if they don't want to expose Drouin or sign someone else. I wouldn't want to lose Lehkonen, he's a solid bottom-six player as long as he's willing to re-sign for a reasonable amount, but it wouldn't be the end of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the new information regarding Weber's health, I suppose my new protection list looks like:

FORWARDS:
Jonathan Drouin
Josh Anderson
Tyler Toffoli
Brendan Gallagher (NMC)
Joel Armia
Jesperi Kotkaniemi
Jake Evans

DEFENCE:
Jeff Petry
Joel Edmundson
Cale Fleury

GOALTENDING:
Carey Price

NOTABLE EXPOSURES:
Paul Byron
Artturi Lehkonen
Shea Weber
Ben Chiarot
Brett Kulak
Jake Allen
Michael McNiven

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jennifer_rocket said:

With the new information regarding Weber's health, I suppose my new protection list looks like:

FORWARDS:
Jonathan Drouin
Josh Anderson
Tyler Toffoli
Brendan Gallagher (NMC)
Joel Armia
Jesperi Kotkaniemi
Jake Evans

DEFENCE:
Jeff Petry
Joel Edmundson
Cale Fleury

GOALTENDING:
Carey Price

NOTABLE EXPOSURES:
Paul Byron
Artturi Lehkonen
Shea Weber
Ben Chiarot
Brett Kulak
Jake Allen
Michael McNiven

Agree that with Weber probably being exposed, its a given we wont go 4-4-1.  I dont think there's any chance they protect Fleury over Chiarot though. 

I notice you have Armia (UFA) on your protected list but not Danault - was that an oversight or do you think they will actually sign/protect JA but not PD ? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maas_art said:

Agree that with Weber probably being exposed, its a given we wont go 4-4-1.  I dont think there's any chance they protect Fleury over Chiarot though. 

I notice you have Armia (UFA) on your protected list but not Danault - was that an oversight or do you think they will actually sign/protect JA but not PD ? 

 

I mean, honestly... It was just me picking a player to protect with very little consideration for that last spot. I doubt Seattle would take Danault or Armia since they are both UFAs. I didn't really see any other players worth protecting. My preference is to hang onto Drouin, so I had to expose Byron and Evans to meet the exposure criteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if Nashville considers asking Seattle to pick Weber so they can trade him back there.  

Not with the intention of ever playing him again, but it puts them in the driver seat if there's a dispute over retirements vs. LTIR and how that will play out. On the flipside, this could anger Weber so he might be more inclined to just retire to spite them...

Its definitely an interesting situation.  I really feel for Shea though. I know this is not how he wanted to go out. Lets hope its not the last we've seen of him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

Canadiens sign forward Alex Belzile to one-year, two-way deal (msn.com)

With this signing,,, does this meet the requirement for being exposed in the draft??

Nope.

They could pick him (he'll be exposed as he's played more than 3 pro seasons) but he's only played 2 NHL games ever - and the requirements are that you have 2 F and 1 D who is under contract and has played at least 40 NHL games last year or 70 over the last 2 combined.   So Byron, Evans, Lehkonen (RFA but we still own his rights), Drouin all meet the requirements, but not Belzille. I would assume we'll expose 2 of those guys or maybe we resign one of our UFAs like Perry & expose him.   Interestingly, Frolik woudl be ineligible because he has only played a total of 65 nhl  games over the past 2 seasons. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Regis22 said:

Per Darren dreger if Habs do not want Seattle to take Allen the price would be 1) top prospect and a good draft pick  or 2 ) a 1 st round pick and a later pick 

The word around the league is that Ron Francis has told teams anyone wanting to protect an extra player will cost a 1st and a 3rd or thereabouts. Not even a discussion for me. When we traded for Allen, we gave up a 3rd rounder. So it means that if we wanted to make a similar trade for another goalie like him, that's what we'd pay. So why would we give up a 1st or a top prospect just to keep him? That would be nonsensical. Let them take Allen. Then go and trade a 3rd for another back-up if that's what it takes. Basically, if we say they would have taken someone like Lehkonen instead, then we'd be "acquiring Lehkonen and a new back-up for Allen and a 3rd"... if I'm MB, I'm not swinging any kind of deal to retain a player. Let them take Allen. Let them take Chiarot, Kulak, Fleury, Byron, Danault's rights, or whatever else. Not one of those guys is worth a 1st round pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

The word around the league is that Ron Francis has told teams anyone wanting to protect an extra player will cost a 1st and a 3rd or thereabouts. Not even a discussion for me. When we traded for Allen, we gave up a 3rd rounder. So it means that if we wanted to make a similar trade for another goalie like him, that's what we'd pay. So why would we give up a 1st or a top prospect just to keep him? That would be nonsensical. Let them take Allen. Then go and trade a 3rd for another back-up if that's what it takes. Basically, if we say they would have taken someone like Lehkonen instead, then we'd be "acquiring Lehkonen and a new back-up for Allen and a 3rd"... if I'm MB, I'm not swinging any kind of deal to retain a player. Let them take Allen. Let them take Chiarot, Kulak, Fleury, Byron, Danault's rights, or whatever else. Not one of those guys is worth a 1st round pick.

I definitely wouldn't give up a first just for Allen. I would consider giving up a first only if we're making some signings and the first is to MAKE them taky Byron of our books. But that's only worth it if we're spending money elsewhere

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My list: 

FORWARDS:
Jonathan Drouin* (unless his issue might be career ending)
Josh Anderson
Tyler Toffoli
Brendan Gallagher (NMC)
Jesperi Kotkaniemi (RFA)
Jake Evans
Arturri Lehkonen (RFA)

DEFENCE:
Jeff Petry
Joel Edmundson
Ben Chiarot 

GOALTENDING:
Carey Price

The obvious choice is Allen. I'd give up a mid-round pick, or maybe offer up lehkonen's rights and a mid-round pick so that they take Byron specifically. Allen is going to be hard to replace and I can't think of anyone who is available to replace him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what the plan is but if Habs don't re-sign one of Perry/Armia/Danault/Tatar today, then we're forced to add another veteran forward to the exposed list. My guess would be Drouin or else slight chance of Lehkonen. If they don't re-sign anyone, I'd guess they're exposing one of those guys because they're protecting Danault. So my guess at present if they don't re-sign Perry today is that they'll protect

- Gallagher, Toffoli, Anderson, Kotkaniemi, Evans, Lehkonen, Danault

- Petry, Edmundson, Chiarot

- Price

 

What I would do if I were in charge:

- Gallagher, Toffoli, Anderson, Kotkaniemi, Evans, Lehkonen, Danault

- Petry, Edmundson, Fleury

- Price

 

I'd like to protect Drouin over Danault but we'd need to sign someone else like Perry first to be allowed to do that. And I'd protect my low-cost RFA who is likely going to be making minimum wage next year. It gives you 1. A D man who naturally plays the right side, where we only have one left (Petry) otherwise and 2. It gives you a guy with NHL experience that you can squeeze under the cap so you can go and spend big on a Hamilton or Eichel or Landeskog or Seth Jones or whoever else. I'd rather have Hamilton + Petry + Fleury down my right side than Petry + Chiarot playing the wrong side + a mid-level signing. And if they choose Chiarot, that's 3.5M in cap savings and we retain our back-up goalie. Exposing Chiarot and having them pick up a 30 year-old #4-5 D man impending UFA making 3.5M would be best-case scenario for us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, HabsRuleForever said:

Not shocking but Domi left unprotected.

This is just speculation right now though isnt it? The lists dont have to be in until later today & probably wont be leaked for a bit after that... 

Would be shocked, if he's exposed, if Seattle doesnt take him.  26 years old with a 72 point season under his belt?  

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...