McPhee and Loathing in Las Vegas: The Expansion Draft

Who should the Bruins protect with their 3rd Defenseman slot?

  • Colin Miller (1M/year, RFA after next season)

    Votes: 59 85.5%
  • Kevan Miller (2.5M/year, 3 seasons left, then UFA)

    Votes: 10 14.5%
  • Adam McQuaid (2.75M/year, 2 seasons left, then UFA)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    69
  • Poll closed .

McDrew

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2006
4,060
Portland, OR
The expansion draft is 5 days away on the 20th and the selections will be revealed on the 21st. Las Vegas will be drafting their inaugural team from the other teams in the league. They will select 1 player from the unprotected list from each team (with some restrictions).

The draft process is documented by the NHL here: https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-expansion-draft-rules/c-281010592

The NHL will be publishing every team's protected list sometime after the 5PM Saturday deadline for submitting them and the announcement on the selections.

If you care about having a tool to "predict" the draft, there's one here: https://www.capfriendly.com/expansion-draft.

The B's biggest question comes on defense. They must protect Chara because of his NMC. They're also going to protect Torey Krug. That leaves 1 spot for 3 defensemen, K. Miller, C. Miller, and McQuaid. In all likelihood, one of the unprotected two will be Vegas' selection.
 

thehitcat

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 25, 2003
2,376
Windham, ME
By protecting Colin Miller you push Las Vegas towards selecting one of two players who are useful but similar and are more or less interchangeable on the B's.
 

TFP

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2007
20,380
Ok - who voted for McQuaid? Care to explain why?

I think they should protect Colin Miller for the above reason. If you protect Kevan Miller, you're almost guaranteed to have him and McQuaid on the team next year. I'd rather force the issue to not have those two very similar players as RD, especially with Carlo and McAvoy in the fold.
 

McDrew

Set Adrift on Memory Bliss
SoSH Member
Apr 11, 2006
4,060
Portland, OR
I think if Colin is exposed, he's gone. His advanced stats were some of the best in the NHL, and he's still on his rookie deal and has RFA years left. He's not a cornerstone player by any means, but in terms of cap hit, talent, and years of control left, he's a prize compared to a lot of the other junk Vegas will be selecting from.
 

Titoschew

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 28, 2006
3,283
Chip Woolley's Trailer
While Kevan played pretty well last season, especially in the second half, this is a no brainer, you protect Colin and live with one of the others departing and really hope it's McQuaid.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,164
Cambridge, MA
I voted to protect Colin, but I believe there's another deal to be had where you can send a bunch of assets to Las Vegas (#18, Fitzgerald, insert-mid-tier-prospects-here, etc) in exchange for an agreement that they draft Hayes.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
I voted to protect Colin, but I believe there's another deal to be had where you can send a bunch of assets to Las Vegas (#18, Fitzgerald, insert-mid-tier-prospects-here, etc) in exchange for an agreement that they draft Hayes.
I'd rather bury Hayes in Providence than send #18 away for Vegas to take him. Burying him is doable.

My preferred route would be to try and use 18 or other future assets to grab a LHD here before the expansion draft. Problem is, it doesn't seem like there's much available at this point other than Brodin and Phaneuf and I have zero interest in the latter.
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
I'd rather bury Hayes in Providence than send #18 away for Vegas to take him. Burying him is doable.

My preferred route would be to try and use 18 or other future assets to grab a LHD here before the expansion draft. Problem is, it doesn't seem like there's much available at this point other than Brodin and Phaneuf and I have zero interest in the latter.
Acquiring a defenseman better than both of them and protecting that guy is an intriguing option. Vegas can't take both Millers if they're both exposed
 

TheRealness

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
11,694
The Dirty Shire
I voted to protect Colin, but I believe there's another deal to be had where you can send a bunch of assets to Las Vegas (#18, Fitzgerald, insert-mid-tier-prospects-here, etc) in exchange for an agreement that they draft Hayes.
I hate the idea of sending them a 1st round pick to pick up Hayes. I'd much rather they play to their recent strengths and keep the pick. They can send Hayes to Providence.

I also voted to keep Colin. I'm assuming the McQuaid one was either a mistake, or a joke, either way it's no longer there.

I fully expect Kevan Miller to be picked. I would be shocked if Vegas took on McQuaid.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,323
Boston
Seems we're unanimous here. Means they'll probably protect Kevan!
Hasn't it been previously discussed that Cassidy really likes Kevan from Providence? I'd protect Colin too, but let me make the pitch for Kevan.

He stepped up in the playoffs as the stay at home dman on the second pairing. Between Krug and McAvoy, the Bruins wont trust Colin to play with either, so he's stuck as a 3rd pairing guy. So, Kevan fills a top 4 role next year versus Colin helping the third pairing unless there's an injury. And in 18-19', they're likely hoping to have help from the draft picks.

Finally, Colin is only slightly cheaper than Kevan. Colin is under control for 2 years, Kevan 3. Giving a significant asset to get Vegas to take McQuaid, Beleskey or Hayes would definitely be best.

Would Vegas take McQuaid with a second? Beleskey?
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,164
Cambridge, MA
To explain my position more clearly - I'm not particularly interested in Hayes' negative value, I'm just interested in satisfying the need for LV to pick someone from Boston in the expansion draft, and making it as low-impact as possible.

To me, the collective value of getting out of the expansion draft with the team intact, with McQuaid (and potentially one of Kevan/Colin) as trade fodder for a pick post-expansion draft, is worth #18.

edit: goes without saying that if it were Beleskey, all the better, but McPhee isn't that dense
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
Hasn't it been previously discussed that Cassidy really likes Kevan from Providence? I'd protect Colin too, but let me make the pitch for Kevan.

He stepped up in the playoffs as the stay at home dman on the second pairing. Between Krug and McAvoy, the Bruins wont trust Colin to play with either, so he's stuck as a 3rd pairing guy. So, Kevan fills a top 4 role next year versus Colin helping the third pairing unless there's an injury. And in 18-19', they're likely hoping to have help from the draft picks.

Finally, Colin is only slightly cheaper than Kevan. Colin is under control for 2 years, Kevan 3. Giving a significant asset to get Vegas to take McQuaid, Beleskey or Hayes would definitely be best.

Would Vegas take McQuaid with a second? Beleskey?
You forget that Carlo was injured in the playoffs last year. The only way Kevan is playing in the top 4 is if Carlo or McAvoy are not. He can play both sides (I guess) but Chara and Krug are on the left side. I think best case scenario (without making any moves) is Kevan is playing the bottom pair with Colin and McQuaid is gone. I'd much prefer to keep Colin for the upside and the fact that he is likely more desirable to move as a trade piece, should they need him.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,323
Boston
You forget that Carlo was injured in the playoffs last year. The only way Kevan is playing in the top 4 is if Carlo or McAvoy are not. He can play both sides (I guess) but Chara and Krug are on the left side. I think best case scenario (without making any moves) is Kevan is playing the bottom pair with Colin and McQuaid is gone. I'd much prefer to keep Colin for the upside and the fact that he is likely more desirable to move as a trade piece, should they need him.
Good point, so a Krug-Carlo second pair is most likely given that a Krug/McAvoy pairing is not ideal. So, Kevan only ends on the second pair VIA injury or poor play from Carlo. (who struggled toward the end of the season) So, similar to Colin's circumstances.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
Good point, so a Krug-Carlo second pair is most likely given that a Krug/McAvoy pairing is not ideal. So, Kevan only ends on the second pair VIA injury or poor play from Carlo. (who struggled toward the end of the season) So, similar to Colin's circumstances.
Ideally in the next 23 hours before the roster freeze, there is another LHD on this roster. If I'm Sweeney, I'm talking to NYI about De Haan, Minny about Brodin and Scandella and Anaheim about Fowler. A good skating partner who can play some D for McAvoy would be huge. Then let the chips fall where they may with whoever is left that can't be protected. Chara-Carlo, Brodin-McAvoy, Krug-Kevan Miller would be a pretty good top 6.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
The Backes NMC is a real bummer. Without that the B's could have protected 4FW and 4D and not had to worry about Kevan vs. Colin.

I have no idea who they protect at FW beyond Krejci, Backes, Bergeron, Marchand and Pastr. Wonder if we can flip Kevan for a FW worth protecting. Force Vegas to choose between McQuaid/Spooner as their pick.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
I think the F's will be:

Bergeron
Marchand
Backes
Krejci
Pastrnak
Nash
Spooner

Spooner should have value on the trade market, so I'd prefer to protect him and trade him next week. Nash is cheap. I don't think Vegas takes a Bruin F, but the ideal scenario is forcing Vegas to have to choose between Beleskey, Hayes, K. Miller and McQuaid.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
Ya I agree with cshea. Keep those 4 exposed because they represent cap relief at positions with contingencies in place. It would be fantastic if they take Beleskey and the Bruins can move one of McQuaid or Miller prior to the freeze.
 

BoSoxFink

Stripes
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
7,646
South Park
I feel like all the beat writers have been saying for a while now that the Bruins will choose Kevan to protect over Colin and it is thr completey wrong decision and it's pissing me of.
 

TheRealness

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2006
11,694
The Dirty Shire
I think the F's will be:

Bergeron
Marchand
Backes
Krejci
Pastrnak
Nash
Spooner

Spooner should have value on the trade market, so I'd prefer to protect him and trade him next week. Nash is cheap. I don't think Vegas takes a Bruin F, but the ideal scenario is forcing Vegas to have to choose between Beleskey, Hayes, K. Miller and McQuaid.
Do you think Spooner has any real trade value? If so, what are you thinking? I really don't like him as a player (you've all heard this before), so I don't perceive him as having any real value. Moreover, I think he has negative value to the Bruins and they need to get his ass out of here. I would love to see him exposed and drafted. I do not want him anywhere near this team next year.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,089
Tuukka's refugee camp
I'm sure they could get a conditional 6th or 7th for him. I would probably rather just leave him exposed in the chance Vegas falls in love with him and they grab him. If he blossoms into something great, oh well, but he sure as hell won't be blossoming in Boston.
 

wnyghost

New Member
Aug 8, 2010
149
Can someone point me to the advance metrics that show Colin Miller is a good player?

I would like to see who else is on that list.

The guy can really skate and shoot the puck. I wondered why his game hasn't elevated until I saw him in person a few times. Terrible positioning, turnovers. Just looked like a guy who hasn't progressed beyond being physically gifted.

Help me understand how he might be a player. Thanks
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Do you think Spooner has any real trade value? If so, what are you thinking? I really don't like him as a player (you've all heard this before), so I don't perceive him as having any real value. Moreover, I think he has negative value to the Bruins and they need to get his ass out of here. I would love to see him exposed and drafted. I do not want him anywhere near this team next year.
His warts are obvious, but at the end of the day he's a speedy, 25 year old playmaker. With the league trending younger and faster, I'd imagine there's a team out there that'll value Spooner. I don't think a Spooner trade would net the B's a huge haul, but I think they should be able to get some sort of tangible asset. Maybe a 3rd or 4th round pick. As far as the Bruins are concerned- in terms of negative value, I think Beleskey, Hayes and McQuaid are ahead of Spooner.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
Can someone point me to the advance metrics that show Colin Miller is a good player?

I would like to see who else is on that list.

The guy can really skate and shoot the puck. I wondered why his game hasn't elevated until I saw him in person a few times. Terrible positioning, turnovers. Just looked like a guy who hasn't progressed beyond being physically gifted.

Help me understand how he might be a player. Thanks
His shot metrics are among the best in the league. Here's his ranking among all NHL D with 750 minutes of 5x5:

CF%- 60% 1st
CF/60- 65.90 2nd (behind Brent Burns)
CA/60- 43.86- 1st

SF%- 61.6% 1st
SF/60- 34.55 2nd (behind Dougie)
SA/60- 21.52 1st

When he's on the ice, the puck is usually in the other teams end. Yes, he's not as stout defensively, but he also doesn't spend a lot of time defending because he's helping to keep the puck up ice and in the offensive end. The Bruins also don't need him to be a defensive standout.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
I don't think Spooner nets you a Kevan and certainly not a Colin Miller in trade thus I would rather he be exposed.

If he is exposed there is a decent chance Vegas picks him. There appears to be a lot more quality D that will be available than young FWs. A 25 YO with 50-60+ pt upside should be intriguing.
 

veritas

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2009
3,151
Somerville, MA
In a vacuum I think Spooner has a lot of value to this team even just as a PP specialist and 4th line winger, with potential for more at 5v5. He has the offensive skills they're a bit short on, even if he isn't any more than what he was last year. If not for the potential logjam they have at F, I'd really want to see him given another year under Cassidy
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
The Backes NMC is a real bummer. Without that the B's could have protected 4FW and 4D and not had to worry about Kevan vs. Colin.

I have no idea who they protect at FW beyond Krejci, Backes, Bergeron, Marchand and Pastr. Wonder if we can flip Kevan for a FW worth protecting. Force Vegas to choose between McQuaid/Spooner as their pick.
I had been banging that drum for a while. If the Bruins have to lose one of Kevan/Colin, make the choice and flip the other for a forward that they can protect rather than just losing them for nothing. It also forces Vegas to pick from a Hayes, Beleskey, McQuaid pool which would be addition by subtraction.

With the deadline starting to loom talks are picking up, I'm hoping the Bruins can get value for one of them, unless the Bruins can do something like the Brodin idea posted above, in which case you accept the loss of a Miller part of the Brodin acquisition cost.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
I don't think it makes sense to expose Spooner at all. They can't do 8 skaters because Krejci, Bergero, Marchand and Backes have NMC which means Pastrnak, Chara, Krug and one of the guys we're talking about already is still exposed. You're essentially exposing Spooner for no real benefit. I think they will certainly move him, but he's gotta be protected.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
I don't think it makes sense to expose Spooner at all. They can't do 8 skaters because Krejci, Bergero, Marchand and Backes have NMC which means Pastrnak, Chara, Krug and one of the guys we're talking about already is still exposed. You're essentially exposing Spooner for no real benefit. I think they will certainly move him, but he's gotta be protected.
If you think Colin Miller and Kevan Miller are more valuable to BOS than Spooner you absolutely expose him. Given the amount of 3rd/4th line prospects they have in the pipe, I personally think it is an easy decision to expose Spooner.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Ok - who voted for McQuaid? Care to explain why?

I think they should protect Colin Miller for the above reason. If you protect Kevan Miller, you're almost guaranteed to have him and McQuaid on the team next year. I'd rather force the issue to not have those two very similar players as RD, especially with Carlo and McAvoy in the fold.
Are they similar? Kevan's playoff series leads me to think otherwise. Not protecting McQuaid is a no-brainer for me, but I'm very much on the fence about which Miller to protect. Normally I favor youth/upside in these things, but Kevan's playoff run gives me pause.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
If you think Colin Miller and Kevan Miller are more valuable to BOS than Spooner you absolutely expose him. Given the amount of 3rd/4th line prospects they have in the pipe, I personally think it is an easy decision to expose Spooner.
The problem is you can't protect both of them either way. You have to protect krejci, backes, Bergeron, Marchand and chara because of nmc. That's five and leaves 3 slots for skaters if you want to do 8 skaters. You need to protect Pasta and Krug, which leaves you with only one slot for Colin or Kevin. So because of the number of forwards they need to protect, they need to choose the 7 forward 3 d option. If you're doing that, why would you protect Beleskey or Hayes over Spooner? Those are your only options.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
8,232
Falmouth
Edit: referring to EJ

I think that's pretty fair

CMiller has some pretty good upside and a game that fits with the modern NHL, but KMiller was actually pretty good last season, as the eye test and some more advanced stats attest to. I disagree with a previous poster about just how bad CMiller was defensively, but he did have a couple of bad stretches and would probably need to be protected a bit, whereas I think KMiller is a pretty safe bet, albeit possibly overpriced (although likely not, and losing Quaider's less effective on ice redundancy would make us all feel better about the contract).
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
The problem is you can't protect both of them either way. You have to protect krejci, backes, Bergeron, Marchand and chara because of nmc. That's five and leaves 3 slots for skaters if you want to do 8 skaters. You need to protect Pasta and Krug, which leaves you with only one slot for Colin or Kevin. So because of the number of forwards they need to protect, they need to choose the 7 forward 3 d option. If you're doing that, why would you protect Beleskey or Hayes over Spooner? Those are your only options.
This ignores that each team can lose only 1 player.

They have to do the 7-3-1, for the reason you mention.

If they would rather lose Spooner (for nothing) than lose Miller or Miller for nothing, then leaving Spooner unprotected is an obvious move.

The reasons not to do this would be:

1. Spooner is still in their plans in some fashion.
2. They are optimistic that they can trade Spooner for better value than whichever Miller they will expose and lose in the draft.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
Who else would you protect then? Spooner clearly isn't in their plans but the setup of the protection rules almost insists that you protect him. They could certainly get something for him so why give him away for nothing?
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
Who else would you protect then? Spooner clearly isn't in their plans but the setup of the protection rules almost insists that you protect him. They could certainly get something for him so why give him away for nothing?
You can protect anyone not named spooner if the goal is to expose him to try to protect both Millers. If Spooner is picked you keep both Millers it is that simple.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Who else would you protect then? Spooner clearly isn't in their plans but the setup of the protection rules almost insists that you protect him. They could certainly get something for him so why give him away for nothing?
Did you even read my post? If losing Spooner for nothing is preferable to losing either Miller for nothing than there is no good reason to protect him. If it isn't preferable (you'd rather lose the Miller), then you obviously protect him.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,089
Tuukka's refugee camp
LeBrun said on Twitter today or yesterday that Vegas has at least 3 firsts banked with more likely to come. Not a horrible way to stock a system.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,047
306, row 14
One of them is CBJ. Deal is apparently CBJ 1st, Clarkson's contract and a prospect for Vegas to take William Karlsson or Ryan Murray.

LeBrun also said teams are going to be calling Vegas when the lists are out. Try to do the "pick this guy and trade him to us" type thing.

The league apparently insists Vegas not announce or leak anything on their end before the Wednesday reveal so that kind of sucks. They are hell bent on having people actually watch their awards ceremony.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
Did you even read my post? If losing Spooner for nothing is preferable to losing either Miller for nothing than there is no good reason to protect him. If it isn't preferable (you'd rather lose the Miller), then you obviously protect him.
I did read your post and I don't think the snark is necessary. Protecting or not protecting Spooner has nothing to do with the Millers. They have three d slots and four d to protect. Whether they decide to protect Spooner has nothing to do with them. Exposing Spooner means you have to choose another forward to protect out of Beleskey and Hayes and I guess you can make an argument that they are less valuable than Spooner, it would be a bad one.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
I did read your post and I don't think the snark is necessary. Protecting or not protecting Spooner has nothing to do with the Millers. They have three d slots and four d to protect. Whether they decide to protect Spooner has nothing to do with them. Exposing Spooner means you have to choose another forward to protect out of Beleskey and Hayes and I guess you can make an argument that they are less valuable than Spooner, it would be a bad one.
He's saying leave Spooner unprotected as bait, so they choose him instead of the Miller you also leave unprotected. In his scenario, it doesn't matter if you protect Beleskey, Hayes, or Zac Rinaldo as your 7th forward.
 

j44thor

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
10,961
He's saying leave Spooner unprotected as bait, so they choose him instead of the Miller you also leave unprotected. In his scenario, it doesn't matter if you protect Beleskey, Hayes, or Zac Rinaldo as your 7th forward.
Yes exactly, Bruins will lose exactly one player to Vegas in the expansion draft. Cannot lose more than one or less than one.
If that one is Spooner they are guaranteed not to lose the Millers. If they protect Spooner they are virtually guaranteed to lose one of the Millers because the rest of the unprotected players are basically replacement players.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
I did read your post and I don't think the snark is necessary. Protecting or not protecting Spooner has nothing to do with the Millers. They have three d slots and four d to protect. Whether they decide to protect Spooner has nothing to do with them.
Protecting or not protecting Spooner has to do with the Millers because each team can only lose 1 player. Were they to lose Spooner, then they would keep both Millers. Were they to lose one of the Millers, then they keep Spooner - whether they protect him or not. Which outcome do they prefer? If they would prefer to keep the Miller they expose than keep Spooner, then they should absolutely leave Spooner unprotected.
 

burstnbloom

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
2,761
Ah ok, I misunderstood your point. I still don't think it makes sense, though. If Spooner is so devoid of value that they can't even trade him for a 5th round pick, I don't see why Vegas would take him over the Millers.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Ah ok, I misunderstood your point. I still don't think it makes sense, though. If Spooner is so devoid of value that they can't even trade him for a 5th round pick, I don't see why Vegas would take him over the Millers.
If that is what happens (Spooner exposed and Bruins lose Miller), then the outcome of not protecting Spooner would have been exactly the same as the outcome of protecting him.

The only scenarios where exposing Spooner is a mistake are 1) if the Bruins would rather keep him than Miller or 2) if he can be dealt after the draft for better value than the exposed Miller. Both of these are possible but not certain.