Vegas Baby!

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
35,969
306, row 14
They are apparently starved enough for goals, that they're changing the goalie equipment again, yet we go through this asinine offside/goalie interference review process to take goals off the board. Good times.

Anyways the GM meetings are ending today. Some other items that have come up.

- They are going to install camera's along the blue line in all 16 playoff rinks to help with the offside reviews. I can only laugh that the NHL can pull this off but the $9 billion NFL can't find the money for BB's "put camera's on the goal line crusade. Guess the NHL had a successful bake sale.

- Cap is probably staying the same next year. It could rise up to $74 million of the PA triggers the escalator, but safe to assume it is staying the same.

- The most interesting thing that they talked about is the potential expansion draft. The league will apparently make the final decision on expansion before June. The outline for a potential expansion draft is- Teams can protect 11 players (3D, 7F, 1G). Teams can only lose a max of 1 player, if they expand by 1 team, which seems to be the likely outcome. 2 players if there are 2 expansion teams. Prospects and 1st and 2nd year pro's are exempt. There may be some sort of salary component where you have to leave X amount of salary available (good idea in theory, won't work in real life). No word on how NMC's will work, that'll surely be a battle between the league and union for down the road.

Hypothetically, for the B's they could protect:

F: Bergeron, Marchand, Krejci, Spooner, Pastrnak, Beleskey and then I guess 1 of Connolly/Hayes if Connolly is still here.
D: Chara, Krug, C. Miller
G: Rask
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,071
Tuukka's refugee camp
Any word on how they would deal with guys in the AHL? Seems like an easy way for teams to protect guys that aren't subject to waivers.
 

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
245
Chara will be turning 41 at the end of the 2017-18 season, so maybe he's not worth protecting by then (and depending how NMCs will play into this).
Instead maybe it's Morrow or, even better, a top pairing D-man we've signed or traded for.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
35,969
306, row 14
Any word on how they would deal with guys in the AHL? Seems like an easy way for teams to protect guys that aren't subject to waivers.
AHL players that have been pro for 2+ seasons will be eligible for selection, so you can't bury guys in the minors. So theoretically if the draft was tomorrow the Bruins would have to expose Koko, Griffith, Subban, and any 3rd year guys down there.

Friedman tweeted that it is likely that players with NMC's will not be available for selection. The question there is if they are extra keepers or if the league forces them to be included in the 11 player protections. Would suck if we are forced to protect Seidenberg and thus have to expose a Colin Miller type.
 
Last edited:

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
245
Assuming that
1) only first- and second-year professional players, including the minors, will be exempt,
2) teams will be forced to protect players with NMCs/NTCs (not determined yet),
3) Marchand and Krug are resigned

I'd think we'd be looking at protecting:
F: Bergeron, Marchand, Krejci, Spooner, Pastrnak, Beleskey and Vatrano
D: Chara, Krug, Siedenberg
G: Rask

Exposed: C Miller, Subban, Hayes, Connolly, Acciari, McQuaid, McIntyre, + many others

I think if these assumptions hold true, and the B's are going to try to add a top pairing D-man (via trade or FA), Krug may end up being our most exposed player in an expansion draft.

I've also read that teams must expose at least 25 per cent of the previous season’s salary cap - could be interesting for many teams if NMCs need to be protected.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,163
Cambridge, MA
There seems to be some question as to whether the NMC is respected by the regulations for an expansion draft (Dom Tiano did some digging here):



Basically comes down to whether or not the league determines that "selection by an Expansion franchise" is "involuntary relocation" - my guess is the NHLPA ultimately wins out there though, unfortunately for the B's (not that any sane GM would sign Seidenberg at this point anyway)
 
Last edited:

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
35,969
306, row 14
The easy solution is to just treat a possible expansion selection team like a trade. Have players willing to go to Vegas waive the NMC's at some point prior to the draft so that the new franchise can plan accordingly. If they waive, leave them unprotected. If they don't wiave, they have to be protected. Problem solved.

The possible expansion draft got me into a rabbit hole going on wiki and checking out the most recent draft in 2000 (Wild and CBJ). The Bruins lost Steve Heinze and Mattias Timmander. CBJ and MIN mostly filled out their rosters with junk, 30-year old retreads. I'm not sure what the rules were on selecting young players and/or AHL players back in 2000 were, but very few were selected. Sean O'Donnell was the first D selected, Geoff Sanderson the top F. I think I would do the opposite and avoid the retreads. If I am Vegas or whoever the new team will be, I think my strategy would be to pluck the best unprotected 3rd year ELC kids off each team. That would fill the roster up with the Koko, Colin Miller and Griffith's of the world. Get a boat load of young, cheap, high-ish ceiling talent. They are essentially lottery tickets, but with enough volume you would probably hit on a few players. Not necessarily stars, but useful players. Then I'd throw a mountain of money at the free agent class next year to supplement the roster.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
35,969
306, row 14
Well, it is Vegas.

In seriousness though, I bet there's a decent amount of guys with an NMC/NTC that are unhappy with their current situations. They may view and going to an expansion team as a way to get a fresh start and a new opportunity. One that may include a significantly higher role on a team with lots more ice time.
 
Last edited:

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,163
Cambridge, MA
Correct - his full NTC becomes a modified NTC on Jan. 1, at which point he can submit a list of 8 teams.

Since the expansion draft won't be until June '17, color me extremely disappointed one way or another if he's still on the roster come October.
 

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
245
The 25% rule may be the one that ends up with the B's having to expose players they had planned to protect.
Even if Seids is still on the roster then, they have to expose $18-19 million in salary and that will be tough.

Hayes, McQuaid and Seids seem like the only >$1 million salaries they'd want exposed.
Of course, the roster won't look the same by the summer of 2017, so who knows.
 

PedroSpecialK

Comes at you like a tornado of hair and the NHL sa
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2004
27,163
Cambridge, MA
Dear god no.

I didn't mind the name mentioned in the top Reddit comment - the Las Vegas Criss Angel Mindfreaks
 

JimBoSox9

will you be my friend?
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2005
16,664
Mid-surburbia
But if they want to play off the color instead, come the eff on, just go whole hog and name them the "Las Vegas Blackjacks". You can't tell me that doesn't roll off the tongue. And if you want to pretend that's not about gambling, you're still left with the best logo potential in the league.

 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
8,227
Falmouth
Best home ice advantage in hockey. Coaches are going to be flying their teams in the morning of.

Going to have tremendous away support at those games for a generation or so. I am most certainly going to schedule a trip to see the B's play there at some point.
 

PC Drunken Friar

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2003
14,528
South Boston
Some new expansion draft rules.


Teams can only protect 1 Goalie.
Players that have NMC that have contracts expiring in 16-17 can be unprotected, but all other NMC players have to be protected unless they give the OK.
Teams can protect 7 forwards, 3 defensemen and one goalie OR 8 skaters total and 1 goalie.
Teams must expose at least 2 forwards and one defensemen who played in 40 games last year or 70 games in the last 2.
First and second year players (AHL and NHL are exempt)
Las Vegas will get third-worst record odds in the lottery
Las Vegas must draft a team that earns between 60-100% of the 17-17 salary cap.
 

SeanBerry

Knows about the CBA.
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2003
3,599
Section 519
Recent Expansion History:

Nashville Predators
1st year:98-99
1st playoff year: 03-04
1st year record: 28-47-7 (63 points)

Atlanta Thrashers
1st year: 99-00
1st playoff year: 06-07
1st year record: 14-57-7-4 (39 points)

Columbus Blue Jackets
1st year: 00-01
1st playoff year: 08-09
1st year record: 28-39-9-6 (71 points)

Minnesota Wild
1st year: 00-01
1st playoff year: 02-03
1st year record: 25-39-13-5 (68 points)

Both Bill Foley and Bettman say they want the expansion teams that come up to not be at such a competitive disadvantage as these 4 teams were but we'll see if the new expansion rules actually let that ring out.
 

Red Right Ankle

Formerly the Story of Your Red Right Ankle
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
11,927
Multivac
Best home ice advantage in hockey. Coaches are going to be flying their teams in the morning of.

Going to have tremendous away support at those games for a generation or so. I am most certainly going to schedule a trip to see the B's play there at some point.
This has the feel of a RMPS bash...
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
35,969
306, row 14
The BoG vote was today and the official announcement is coming from Gary momentarily. C. Montgomery Jacobs will be speaking as well. Welcomd, Vegas.
 

MiracleOfO2704

not AWOL
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
9,494
The Island
Pierre Dion from Quebecor was there as well to address Quebec City's bid. He said they're still committed to an NHL return, while Daly said the weak loonie and intercom fervency imbalance continue to impede QC's reentry. I don't know if that's a veiled reference to Columbus to move back West or QC that an Eastern Conference relocation is their only hope. Coincidentally, no current NHL teams are seeking relocation.

Other than that, it just looks like confirmation of what we knew already: 30-round expansion draft (14 F, 9 D, 3 G minimum), NMC must be protected, etc.
 

The B’s Knees

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Aug 1, 2006
245
Now there are 3 trademarks.
They've also grabbed "Silver Knights" and "Golden Knights"
I guess they're cornering the market on corny nicknames.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,071
Tuukka's refugee camp
They might run into the Knights issue since Calgary owns Hitmen. And because Bret Hart is a cranky old man who wants you to get off his lawn.
 

timlinin8th

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 6, 2009
1,521
Bumping this, since the season is now over for the Bruins this would be next on the radar.

There is a tool I found that helps with the expansion draft eligibility (which is useful for seeing who on other teams is going to be available)

https://planmyteam.com/NHL/ProtectPlayers?teamid=3

Have to imagine the Bruins use the 7-3-1 method as they have NMCs on Bergeron, Backes, and Krejci, and will want to protect Pasta and Marchand. I keep seeing people say they would protect Beleskey and Spooner and I think thats madness. I HOPE Beleskey or Spooner gets selected, probably not happening though. Either way, only can protect three D, Chara has a NMC which means the other two are likely Krug and Colin Miller. Tuukka would be the most likely candidate to be protected unless this team hopes his contract gets selected. (I'm pretty sure his NMC expires before the draft, correct?) Either way, I don't see this team doing something that splashy, so from what I can tell, the most likely to be picked from who is left would be either K Miller, McQuaid, or maybe Subban. If I was picking for Vegas I'd take Miller.

Who do you guys see getting picked?
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
35,969
306, row 14
I think I'd go:

F: Bergeron, Marchand, Pastrnak, Backes, Krejci, Nash and Spooner

D: Chara, Krug, Colin Miller

G: Rask

I have no interest in seeing Spooner play another game for the Bruins, but he probably holds some trade value so I'd protect him. Force Vegas into picking up a less than desirable Bruins contract.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,368
Melrose, MA
Backes and Krejci having NMCs really mucks things up. I would have exposed one (figuring their contracts mean they get through) and gone 8 skaters, 1 goalie, and protected Chara, Krug, both Millers, Bergeron, Marchand, and either Backes or Krejci.

With those 2 both having to be protected, we have to go 7/3/1.

Goalie: Rask
Defense: Chara, Krug, one of the Millers
Forward: Bergeron, Backes, Krejci, Marchand, Pastrnak... are we allowed to protect only 5? I guess Spooner Nash and Schaller, because no one is taking Belesky and Hayes anyway, and while I still think Spooner is worth protecting, I'd rather dangle him on the 0.000005% chance that Vegas prefers him to whichever Miller is exposed.

Whichever Miller is left exposed will be selected.

Before the playoffs I would have said protecting Colin over Kevan was a no brainer. But the way he played in the playoffs has turned it into a difficult decision. Kevan is actually a great value on his current deal. Don't like the idea of exposing either Miller, or Krug, or Chara.

I think they need to try to make a deal in order to better use their available spots. For example, try to deal Colin for a young forward with top 6 potential.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,368
Melrose, MA
I think I'd go:

F: Bergeron, Marchand, Pastrnak, Backes, Krejci, Nash and Spooner

D: Chara, Krug, Colin Miller

G: Rask

I have no interest in seeing Spooner play another game for the Bruins, but he probably holds some trade value so I'd protect him. Force Vegas into picking up a less than desirable Bruins contract.
If I was Vegas, and you left me this, my pick would be Kevan Miller. The other guys I'd consider would be Morrow and Spooner (if you left him open).
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,368
Melrose, MA
Thinking about this more, I would look through the league for teams that are going to have to expose a good forward and try to pick that guy up cheap.