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

Poll: Expansion Loss


BigTed3

Which player do you think the Habs will lose in the expansion draft?  

23 members have voted

  1. 1. Which player do you think the Habs will lose in the expansion draft?



Recommended Posts

The Ottawa analytics conference polled experts on who they thought each team would lose in the ED, and apparently the front-runner for who they thought we lose is Paul Byron. Most people thought we would end up protecting the following:

- Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Radulov (even if he's a UFA), Plekanec, Danault, Shaw

- Weber, Petry, Beaulieu

- Price

I'm not so sure this is what we will do, but that was the consensus. So that being said, which player do you think will be left unprotected and chosen? If you vote other, be sure to write in who you think that will be (Montoya, Emelin, Davidson, Plekanec, Shaw, Radulov, Markov, DLR, Carr, etc.)...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

23 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

 Most people thought we would end up protecting the following:

- Pacioretty, Galchenyuk, Gallagher, Radulov (even if he's a UFA), Plekanec, Danault, Shaw

Protecting Plekanec ? Why ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im split 3 ways on who we lose.  I think its either going to be Radulov,  Hudon or Beaulieu.

1. Radulov.  With an UFA Vegas has the ability to talk with him (the only team other than montreal) for a 3 day window.  At that time they could conceivably offer him a contract.  Considering his agent was aloof about him resigning, and there has been speculation that he and shipachyov have been linked, its certainly a possibility. On the positive side, if he is left unprotected, we can use his space for another player... on the downside its another forward & we really dont need to protect many of our "top" forwards.  If they pick Rad & he doesnt want to sign their contract, they could pick another player from our unprotected list but I suspect if they picked him, its because they are pretty sure he will sign with them. 

2. Hudon. Despite his fantastic numbers we seem unwilling to give the kid a chance.  I think guys like Byron and Benn will be protected (over the media list you quoted above) but I do think Hudon will be exposed. I hope he's passed over but im not certain he will be.

3. Beaulieu.  Seems clear to me that Bergevin will protect Weber, Petry and Benn.  Maybe he trades someone but more likely Beau is the odd man out.  

 

If all 3 of them are left unprotected i think Beau is the guy they pick, unless they are confident Radu will sign with them although even then, if he doesnt, they can turn around & take Beau after trying on Rad. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My feeling is that they will protect: Pac, AG, BG, Danault, Shaw, Byron, and Hudon and try to sign Radulov after the expansion draft. On D, I think they'll protect Petry, Weber, and Benn. If that's the case, the guy they'll likely lose is Beaulieu.

Now the smart play might be leaving Byron exposed. Lots of pundits seem to think LV will opt for him, and frankly, losing a 3rd line winger with one good offensive season is preferable to losing a defenceman, because it's IMO harder to replace Beaulieu than Byron. Hudon, for example, could replace Byron and Hudon also has the upside of potentially becoming a top 6 guy IF he is ever given that chance. LV has already indicated they're scouting Hudon (albeit among others) and Gallant knows our organization well, so I don't think we'll slip someone by under the radar.

So for now, my vote goes to Beaulieu, with some hope that the team will present Vegas with another option such as Byron or offer two guys (claim Emelin and we'll give you DLR or Carr or so on, for example) to prevent that from happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BigTed3 said:

My feeling is that they will protect: Pac, AG, BG, Danault, Shaw, Byron, and Hudon and try to sign Radulov after the expansion draft. On D, I think they'll protect Petry, Weber, and Benn. If that's the case, the guy they'll likely lose is Beaulieu.

Now the smart play might be leaving Byron exposed. Lots of pundits seem to think LV will opt for him, and frankly, losing a 3rd line winger with one good offensive season is preferable to losing a defenceman, because it's IMO harder to replace Beaulieu than Byron. Hudon, for example, could replace Byron and Hudon also has the upside of potentially becoming a top 6 guy IF he is ever given that chance. LV has already indicated they're scouting Hudon (albeit among others) and Gallant knows our organization well, so I don't think we'll slip someone by under the radar.

So for now, my vote goes to Beaulieu, with some hope that the team will present Vegas with another option such as Byron or offer two guys (claim Emelin and we'll give you DLR or Carr or so on, for example) to prevent that from happening.

i like your thinking.  I guess the real question is what other players will be available. A guy like Byron would definitely be a player they could put anywhere up or down the lineup from probably 2nd to 4th lines on that roster.  Which would make him very appealing to LV.  My guess is that we still protect him & leave Hudon exposed, which is a bad call, imho. Mind you, id probably expose shaw just to get out of that contract. 

If there are half a dozen good dmen available its possible a guy like Beau doesnt get picked up - and since most teams will only protect 3 dmen, there will be some quality top 4 guys available.  Beaulieu having a poor end to the season may be a blessing in disguise... providing he bounces back of course.

You're not worried at all about losing Radulov?  I have this sneaking suspicion they will offer him a contract. Whether he takes it or not is another story.   I am sure we will have a handshake deal in place with Markov but Radu is someone I think we might end up losing one way or the other.  Of course at this point its up in the air if we can resign him at all.  His agent sure made it sound like he might wait till July 1st either way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, BigTed3 said:

Now the smart play might be leaving Byron exposed. Lots of pundits seem to think LV will opt for him, and frankly, losing a 3rd line winger with one good offensive season is preferable to losing a defenceman, because it's IMO harder to replace Beaulieu than Byron. Hudon, for example, could replace Byron and Hudon also has the upside of potentially becoming a top 6 guy IF he is ever given that chance. LV has already indicated they're scouting Hudon (albeit among others) and Gallant knows our organization well, so I don't think we'll slip someone by under the radar.

I'm hoping the team exposes Byron for precisely this reason. I like Byron a lot, and he had a fabulous season. But he did it with a 9.72% 5-on-5 shooting percentage, almost exactly one standard deviation above the mean shooting percentage for forwards in the NHL since 2007-08 in 82-game seasons. It's extremely unlikely he'll repeat that, so I'm willing to move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, habs_93 said:

I'm hoping the team exposes Byron for precisely this reason. I like Byron a lot, and he had a fabulous season. But he did it with a 9.72% 5-on-5 shooting percentage, almost exactly one standard deviation above the mean shooting percentage for forwards in the NHL since 2007-08 in 82-game seasons. It's extremely unlikely he'll repeat that, so I'm willing to move on.

hes gonna get protected. i feel theres a high % chance of that...like 75% maybe 80. hes part of our offensive core :4224:

no seriously i think that kool aid is in the cup

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, maas_art said:

i like your thinking.  I guess the real question is what other players will be available. A guy like Byron would definitely be a player they could put anywhere up or down the lineup from probably 2nd to 4th lines on that roster.  Which would make him very appealing to LV.  My guess is that we still protect him & leave Hudon exposed, which is a bad call, imho. Mind you, id probably expose shaw just to get out of that contract. 

If there are half a dozen good dmen available its possible a guy like Beau doesnt get picked up - and since most teams will only protect 3 dmen, there will be some quality top 4 guys available.  Beaulieu having a poor end to the season may be a blessing in disguise... providing he bounces back of course.

You're not worried at all about losing Radulov?  I have this sneaking suspicion they will offer him a contract. Whether he takes it or not is another story.   I am sure we will have a handshake deal in place with Markov but Radu is someone I think we might end up losing one way or the other.  Of course at this point its up in the air if we can resign him at all.  His agent sure made it sound like he might wait till July 1st either way. 

I don't think it's a given that Radulov will be back here, but I think the odds are good. And to be honest, I don't think our exposing or not exposing him is going to settle that. We've likely had preliminary discussions with Radulov about what he wants. Maybe it's 5 years at 6.5M. Maybe it's 4 years at 7.5M. It's probably somewhere in that ballpark. MB should know in his head whether he wants to pay that. If he doesn't, there's nothing lost or gained by leaving Radulov exposed. If Radulov doesn't want to play here, he'll bolt to LV or he'll bolt elsewhere July 1st, so again nothing lost or gained.

If MB does have a verbal agreement with Radulov to sign after the ED, then it's on his word alone. So let's say LV chooses Radulov. Well on the one hand, you could lose him if he goes back on the handshake. But we know Radulov seemed to love playing here. We know there's a large Russian contingent here. We know Radulov didn't do so well playing in Nashville, so not every situation is a good fit for him, and he'd be giving up a known happy situation to take a risk. He's also getting older and by signing with LV, he'd probably be giving up any hope of a Cup in the near future, maybe ever. So yeah, it's a risk to leave him exposed, but if Radulov's smart, LV is not a great place for him to be. The other side to the coin is this: let's say you have the verbal agreement with Radulov and LV takes him. Let's say Radulov doesn't sign with them and then on July 1st, we sign him instead. LV doesn't get any compensation. Now you've made it through the ED without losing anyone at all. So there's actually a very nice upside to dangling Radulov at Vegas as well. Their gamble might leave us sitting pretty in the end, if you trust Radulov enough to make that move.

 

4 hours ago, habs_93 said:

I'm hoping the team exposes Byron for precisely this reason. I like Byron a lot, and he had a fabulous season. But he did it with a 9.72% 5-on-5 shooting percentage, almost exactly one standard deviation above the mean shooting percentage for forwards in the NHL since 2007-08 in 82-game seasons. It's extremely unlikely he'll repeat that, so I'm willing to move on.

I agree with you, hence my comments above. I think he's much easier to replace than some of the other guys we could lose (Beaulieu, Benn, Hudon, etc.). But if you look at his shooting percentages, he posted a 22% last year (all situations) and 22% the year before as well. So he was able to sustain that shooting percentage over almost 150 games. It's unlikely that continues for a third season, but it's still possible he continues to shoot at 15% or so going forward. I think he's a guy who seems to get higher-than-average quality shots on account of his speed, so I do think his shooting percentage will stay above average long-term. I just don't think he's a core player here going forward, so losing him is less of concern for me. If he goes down, we can sign a UFA to replace him, we can play Hudon or Scherbak there, etc. If we lose Beaulieu, the concern is whether it's Redmond or Hanley or Lernout or someone who's stepping in there, and a weak D man (even a 3rd pairing guy) is harder to hide in the line-up than a depth forward.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for players I do or do not want to see claimed,

- Plekanec: would be more than happy to let LV have him in exchange for taking his contract

- Shaw: same as Plekanec, although Shaw seemingly has a little more value going forward and can probably still be traded for another asset

- Emelin: not worth his contract, so no issue losing him

- Mitchell: role player, can be replaced

- DLR: no future here

- Carr: I think he deserves more of a shot here, but he's also replaceable if it came to that

- Beaulieu: don't want to lose him, but it's starting to look like he won't end up being more than a 4th-5th D man. So tough to replace because we don't have guys in the minors with experience or pedigree right now, but could be worse

- Benn: really shined coming over here. On a good contract. A little older than you might like to have to protect a 3rd-pairing guy, but he's so stable... wouldn't want to lose him.

- Davidson: showed some good stuff, but if we lose him, we lose him

- Byron: good contract, good speed, but as I mentioned above, he's replaceable and could be good bait to prevent Beaulieu or Benn or Hudon from being claimed

- Hudon: the guy I'm most worried about losing. Untapped potential here, and not sure the Habs organization realizes it. He's the player I'm most concerned could blossom into a guy we'll regret having lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, BigTed3 said:

The other side to the coin is this: let's say you have the verbal agreement with Radulov and LV takes him. Let's say Radulov doesn't sign with them and then on July 1st, we sign him instead. LV doesn't get any compensation. Now you've made it through the ED without losing anyone at all. So there's actually a very nice upside to dangling Radulov at Vegas as well. Their gamble might leave us sitting pretty in the end, if you trust Radulov enough to make that move.

Well not exactly.  Vegas will pick 1 player from all 30 teams.  If they choose an UFA and they cant come to an agreement they will pick a different player - the wording in the ED paperwork is "each team will lose exactly one player."  

The dates are:
June 17, 5:00 PM ET: Submit protected list
June 18-20: Vegas can negotiate with any unprotected unrestricted or restricted free agent
June 20, 5:00 PM ET: Vegas submits Expansion Draft selections
June 21: Announcement of selections

so my guess is that IF they chose Rad (or Markov or even and RFA if we havent protected him) they will talk to him during that 3 day window & if they cant come to an agreement they will simply toss him aside & pick from the other unprotected players. 

 

I think you're right on the money though: either we sign him or we dont.  LV is an option but ultimately its going to come down to whether he wants to stay here (i think he does) and we want to pay him whatever he is a looking for (tough to say without knowing what that is). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you believe eklund (haha, i know, i know) his 'sources' tell him that LV is going to be looking for veteran defensmen and young forwards.   Eklund thinks they will select Emelin - which, if true, would be amazing beyond belief, but i kind of doubt it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, maas_art said:

If you believe eklund (haha, i know, i know) his 'sources' tell him that LV is going to be looking for veteran defensmen and young forwards.   Eklund thinks they will select Emelin - which, if true, would be amazing beyond belief, but i kind of doubt it. 

Maybe they thinks he's our stud D-man. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kinot-2 said:

Maybe they thinks he's our stud D-man. :P

I have heard other reports say that Davidson is a "McPhee type defensman" so who knows.  If we lose either of those guys it would be great. I mean im sure we'll be fine no matter who we lose but my biggest fear is that it will be a guy like Hudon who i sure hope we are smart enough to protect, but im not sure if we will. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, maas_art said:

I have heard other reports say that Davidson is a "McPhee type defensman" so who knows.  If we lose either of those guys it would be great. I mean im sure we'll be fine no matter who we lose but my biggest fear is that it will be a guy like Hudon who i sure hope we are smart enough to protect, but im not sure if we will. 

Hudon? Obviously he's no good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I think we have enough depth to make a trade to protect Byron, and  do  not think we will use any young players. Beaulieu or Davidson may be the easiest predictions but giving Vegas a draft pick or another fringe player to change their perspective should be  doable. I think there will be a few trades that help teams protect players and help Vegas stock the farm system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Habberwacky said:

I think we have enough depth to make a trade to protect Byron, and  do  not think we will use any young players. Beaulieu or Davidson may be the easiest predictions but giving Vegas a draft pick or another fringe player to change their perspective should be  doable. I think there will be a few trades that help teams protect players and help Vegas stock the farm system.

Vegas has made it very clear they want younger players whom they can develop and that their goal is not to try and win through the expansion draft. It really has to make you think that they'd target Hudon and/or Beaulieu over guys like Byron or Shaw or Plekanec or Emelin. We should under no circumstances give Vegas anything to protect Byron. If they select him, then they select him and we move on. I think it's much more imperative that we protect Hudon from being chosen, as he could be a target for them AND he's a guy with untapped potential. We know Byron. He's fast. He had a good year. But he'll never be a top 6 player, so he's replaceable. Hudon might be a top 6 player if given the chance.

The only trade I'd be interested in making with Vegas is one where we give up an asset to get them to take Plekanec or Emelin. And here, the trade is mostly to have them unload a cap hit from us. You give up a 4th rounder, for example, in exchange for LV taking Plekanec. That type of deal makes more sense.

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...