Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens

Expansion Draft


H_T_L

Recommended Posts

There seems to be a lot of discussion and confusion regarding the upcoming expansion draft. You can post any relevant details in this thread and put forth YOUR protected list for our Habs.

What we do know, is that we can protect 7 forwards, 3 D-men, and a goaltender. Whom should we protect and whom do we expose? The Vegas group must chose one player from every team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl-on-expansion-draft-exempt-players-are-exempt-1.616726

The interesting part of that article pertaining to us,,,,

Multiple teams inquired with the league about the potential of voluntarily exposing exempt first and second year professional players as a means of perhaps protecting another player who might otherwise have to be exposed.

For example, both Canadiens minor league netminders Zach Fucale and Charlie Lindgren are on Montreal's exempt list. The Canadiens still need to find a goaltender to expose that meets the contractual requirements. Rather than re-sign Al Montoya to a new contract for 2017-18 just to meet the exposure requirements, the Canadiens could have explored possibly choosing to expose one of Fucale or Lindgren instead. Unlike skaters, who have a games played requirement of 40 games this season or 70 over the last two, goaltenders don't have the same requirements and both goalies have the required contract - but they are on the exempt list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, H_T_L said:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl-on-expansion-draft-exempt-players-are-exempt-1.616726

The interesting part of that article pertaining to us,,,,

Multiple teams inquired with the league about the potential of voluntarily exposing exempt first and second year professional players as a means of perhaps protecting another player who might otherwise have to be exposed.

For example, both Canadiens minor league netminders Zach Fucale and Charlie Lindgren are on Montreal's exempt list. The Canadiens still need to find a goaltender to expose that meets the contractual requirements. Rather than re-sign Al Montoya to a new contract for 2017-18 just to meet the exposure requirements, the Canadiens could have explored possibly choosing to expose one of Fucale or Lindgren instead. Unlike skaters, who have a games played requirement of 40 games this season or 70 over the last two, goaltenders don't have the same requirements and both goalies have the required contract - but they are on the exempt list.

The NHL stated players on the exempt list must remain on the exempt list.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl-on-expansion-draft-exempt-players-are-exempt-1.616726

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we don't protect Pleks, he could be a good candidate to get picked up by Vegas. He doesn't have a NMC, so he is eligible to leave off the list. Still a good quality veteran guy with only a couple years of term left. I know it's 6 mill a season but Vegas still needs to hit a minimum Cap total.

Just a question of whether Hab management feels he's expendable.

Someone else i would seriously think of leaving off that list is Shaw. Not sure if he has a NMC though. I doubt Vegas would jump on that contract but at least it allows us to protect another player. Still waiting for him to deliver on that potential we've been led to believe he has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys who are virtual locks to be protected:

- Galchenyuk, Pacioretty, Gallagher, Danault

- Weber, Petry (who has to be on the list because of his NMC)

- Price

***

Radulov, DD, and Markov are all impending UFA's and would not be on the list unless signed before the end of the year.

Personally, I prefer Beaulieu as the 3rd protected D man, although I worry management will opt for Emelin.

I also don't see much of a need to protect Byron or Shaw or Plekanec. The latter two are currently in our top 7 forwards requiring protection, but neither one is living up to their contracts, so if we lose them, we lose them and you take the cap space. I'd much rather protect Hudon to be honest.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Guys who are virtual locks to be protected:

- Galchenyuk, Pacioretty, Gallagher, Danault

- Weber, Petry (who has to be on the list because of his NMC)

- Price

***

Radulov, DD, and Markov are all impending UFA's and would not be on the list unless signed before the end of the year.

Personally, I prefer Beaulieu as the 3rd protected D man, although I worry management will opt for Emelin.

I also don't see much of a need to protect Byron or Shaw or Plekanec. The latter two are currently in our top 7 forwards requiring protection, but neither one is living up to their contracts, so if we lose them, we lose them and you take the cap space. I'd much rather protect Hudon to be honest.

 

Do we have a choice with Emelin? Doesn't he have a NMC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

I also don't see much of a need to protect Byron or Shaw or Plekanec.

I agree with you here.

I'm not sure who all I'd have on my protected list, but after Desharnais gets resigned for 4 years with a full NMC he'll obviously have to be on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, H_T_L said:

Do we have a choice with Emelin? Doesn't he have a NMC?

As of this season, it is a limited NTC, but he is still allowed to be exposed in the ED. The only players on the Habs that must be protected by rule are Petry and Price, and we would have chosen to keep them anyways...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎26‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 3:09 PM, BigTed3 said:

 

I also don't see much of a need to protect Byron or Shaw or Plekanec. The latter two are currently in our top 7 forwards requiring protection, but neither one is living up to their contracts, so if we lose them, we lose them and you take the cap space. I'd much rather protect Hudon to be honest.

 

I thought each team can  only lose one player. 

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592

Regulations Relating to Expansion Franchise
* The Las Vegas franchise must select one player from each presently existing club for a total of 30 players (not including additional players who may be acquired as the result of violations of the Expansion Draft rules).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Regis22 said:

I thought each team can  only lose one player. 

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592

Regulations Relating to Expansion Franchise
* The Las Vegas franchise must select one player from each presently existing club for a total of 30 players (not including additional players who may be acquired as the result of violations of the Expansion Draft rules).

Aware. Wasn't implying both would go in the expansion draft, just saying that I'm not particularly scared to lose either guy because it gives us a lot more cap flexibility in each case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO:: Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Danault, Hudon, Plekanec, Radulov (assuming he gets extended)

Defense and goalie is a no brainer.

I assumed that Hudon will play another 37 games which would make him eligible. I think one of Shaw or Plekanec should be exposed, I chose Shaw because I think the contract is worse but I'd be fine with either one being taken. I just lean towards getting rid of the Shaw contract, 3.9M until 2022 is just nuts for a 3rd liner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Noob616 said:

IMO:: Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Danault, Hudon, Plekanec, Radulov (assuming he gets extended)

Defense and goalie is a no brainer.

I assumed that Hudon will play another 37 games which would make him eligible. I think one of Shaw or Plekanec should be exposed, I chose Shaw because I think the contract is worse but I'd be fine with either one being taken. I just lean towards getting rid of the Shaw contract, 3.9M until 2022 is just nuts for a 3rd liner.

As far as Shaw is concerned I tend to agree with Chris Nilan, who said that he (Shaw) will prove his true mettle in the playoffs should we make it there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Habs=stanleycup said:

As far as Shaw is concerned I tend to agree with Chris Nilan, who said that he (Shaw) will prove his true mettle in the playoffs should we make it there.

That remains to be seen. However,,,,,, from what I've seen so far,,,, he's not worth what we're paying him, or his term ( although, he "does" have 5G, and 4A.) . Is he worth the bucks (3.9 cap hit) for a max. of 28 games or a min. 16 games in the POs? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we leave Plekanec or Shaw open I believe they (obviously only one of the two) will get picked up. I wonder what the rules are for trades in order to retain a player lost to the ED. This may be a way for teams to circumvent the loss of a player and could quite possibly be negotiated before the draft itself. In this way Vegas could potentially get a couple of prospects from a team that loses a player that they were unable to protect. Are there any stipulations to the draft regarding trades after it has taken place? ie. Vegas having to freeze its roster for any length of time. I think we will protect Petry, Weber and Emelin as a player like Markov might be able to play the retirement card if selected.  I think the moves that transpire after the draft may turn out to be more exciting than the draft itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Habberwacky said:

If we leave Plekanec or Shaw open I believe they (obviously only one of the two) will get picked up. I wonder what the rules are for trades in order to retain a player lost to the ED. This may be a way for teams to circumvent the loss of a player and could quite possibly be negotiated before the draft itself. In this way Vegas could potentially get a couple of prospects from a team that loses a player that they were unable to protect. Are there any stipulations to the draft regarding trades after it has taken place? ie. Vegas having to freeze its roster for any length of time. I think we will protect Petry, Weber and Emelin as a player like Markov might be able to play the retirement card if selected.  I think the moves that transpire after the draft may turn out to be more exciting than the draft itself.

If Vegas wants to eat one of those contracts, all the better. Plekanec and Shaw are still useful players, but Plekanec is not worth 6M and Shaw is a 3rd/4th liner on too long a contract. Shaw at 3 years, 2.5M a year would and should be protected, but if he's chosen with his current contract, then I'd take the cap space.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

If Vegas wants to eat one of those contracts, all the better. Plekanec and Shaw are still useful players, but Plekanec is not worth 6M and Shaw is a 3rd/4th liner on too long a contract. Shaw at 3 years, 2.5M a year would and should be protected, but if he's chosen with his current contract, then I'd take the cap space.

+1 on both Plekanec and Shaw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

If Vegas wants to eat one of those contracts, all the better. Plekanec and Shaw are still useful players, but Plekanec is not worth 6M and Shaw is a 3rd/4th liner on too long a contract. Shaw at 3 years, 2.5M a year would and should be protected, but if he's chosen with his current contract, then I'd take the cap space.

There's no way that Shaw doesn't get protected, though.  I'm not disagreeing with anything that you're saying, but this isn't a contract that Bergevin picked up in a trade or inherited from his predecessor.  He signed this contract himself only months ago, and in fact essentially had to trade away Eller to make the deal happen.  I can't see him changing his mind now and giving up Shaw for nothing, long contract or no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Manatee-X said:

There's no way that Shaw doesn't get protected, though.  I'm not disagreeing with anything that you're saying, but this isn't a contract that Bergevin picked up in a trade or inherited from his predecessor.  He signed this contract himself only months ago, and in fact essentially had to trade away Eller to make the deal happen.  I can't see him changing his mind now and giving up Shaw for nothing, long contract or no.

I agree with this completely. I don't see MB leaving Shaw exposed, he and Therrien love the guy too much... the guy runs his mouth off on the ice, makes dirty hits, takes bad penalties, and MB/MT say nothing about it, so they obviously want him in the foxhole. To boot, the Habs don't really have a ton of must-protect players. Many of their guys (Lehkonen, McCarron, Scherbak, etc.) don't need protection or are UFA's (Radulov, DD) or just aren't worth protecting. So the Habs can easily afford to protect a young guy like Hudon and still have room to make decisions on guys like Shaw, Byron, and Plekanec. They could protect these players or they could leave any of them available to be chosen if they were hoping to dump the contracts.

There's also room for us to add a contract or two and frankly, I think this is the route MB should go. There will be plenty of teams looking to protect more guys than they have spots, so rather than lose one for nothing, they might be more than willing to deal an established player for a prospect that doesn't require protection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plekanec will be 35 next yr

Could be a lot younger C's out there for the taking , Id leave him available and take my chances . If he gets picked up then you just freed up $ 5m and a young guy in the minor has a sport to work for .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason Vegas takes Plekanec is his contract, the same reason we put him out there. Vegas needs to get to floor via the draft, which means they'll have to take guys who are a bit more expensive, not just rookies and prospects. The thought is that Vegas will want a handful of guys on big contracts, but big ones that expire within a year (e.g. Plekanec). That way, they can meet floor requirements, dump them after a year, and have the flexibility to peruse the UFA market or make trades for players they actually do want. There's a very real chance Vegas would be interested in Plekanec, especially if we don't leave them too many other options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Based on the past few months, I really have no issue making any of the following available in the ED:

- Plekanec and his 6M cap hit next year

- Emelin and his 4+M cap hit

- Shaw and his 6 year term

- Byron, who is decent but is showing now he's not going to shoot 20+% forever

 

At this point, the players I think need to be protected include Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Danault, Hudon, and Carr. On D, it's easy to single out Weber, Petry, and Beaulieu as the three guys. Mac, Lehkonen, Radulov (if still FA), and Markov (if still FA) don't need protection at this point, but we clearly have enough room to still protect Radulov if we did sign him. And if we trade for someone else ahead of the deadline, we can leave Carr unprotected and that's fine too. In fact, MB has to use that free protected spot to his advantage to take someone off another team's hands that they can't protect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...