Jump to content
  • Welcome to AngelsWin.com

    AngelsWin.com - THE Internet Home for Angels fans! Unraveling Angels Baseball ... One Thread at a Time.

    Register today to comment and join the most interactive online Angels community on the net!

    Once you're a member you'll see less advertisements. If you become a Premium member and you won't see any ads! 

     

IGNORED

NHL Expansion to Vegas - Official


gotbeer

Recommended Posts

The longer that they screw around with this, the more that interest cools. Foley collected season ticket deposits with the blessing of the league. If those are now held for two years while the NHL procrastinates, there are going to be a lot of pissed off people. The NHL has a lot of good will here, but that is a fragile thing if they play games with the local populace.

Edited by Vegas Halo Fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Gary Bettman visited Las Vegas. He was here when the drive was kicked off for deposits on season tickets, and it was all done with the league's blessing. Screw 'em. The arena is built and it opens next month. He had a chance to be the only pro game in town, and now he wants to jack us around.

Edited by Vegas Halo Fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think Vegas is the problem. I think the lack of a second viable team is. Quebec is DOA.They could go with an odd number of teams but it'd be..unpleasant. I think they really really want Seattle to get their arena situation dealt with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"To give expansion teams a better chance at success, the NHL should allow existing teams to protect six forwards, four defensemen and one goalie. Only one-year pros should be exempt. Once a team loses a player in the draft, it can protect three more players. No team can lose more than two players. General managers won’t love that plan, but it would give expansion teams a good start."

 

if i'm the expansion team, i love this idea. if i'm a team like the kings, ducks, or blackhawks i absolutely loathe the idea of losing someone outside of my top 6 forwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"To give expansion teams a better chance at success, the NHL should allow existing teams to protect six forwards, four defensemen and one goalie. Only one-year pros should be exempt. Once a team loses a player in the draft, it can protect three more players. No team can lose more than two players. General managers won’t love that plan, but it would give expansion teams a good start."

 

if i'm the expansion team, i love this idea. if i'm a team like the kings, ducks, or blackhawks i absolutely loathe the idea of losing someone outside of my top 6 forwards.

 

Ducks get the double wammy.  I'd hate to lose someone outside of the top 4 defensemen also.  Not to mention top 1 goalie.  But I think the goalie situation will be resolved this offseason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would consider moving Florida and Arizona to Las Vegas and Seattle, in whatever order.

Neither has any SC titles history.  

Granted the arenas are both newer than the Honda Center, 1998 for the Panthers (BB&T Arena) and 2003 for the Coyotes (Gila River Arena).

 

Last I heard, Coyotes are near a deal with ASU.

 

Boivin: Coyotes could be closing in on arena deal with ASU
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds more and more like at least one team is going to get approved.  Why would you approve a expansion draft rules if you weren't going to add one? 

 

What was approved:

 

https://news.yahoo.com/nhl-outlines-framework-potential-expansion-draft-024716792--spt.html;_ylt=A86.Jyhk5uxW_VEArNhjmolQ

 

Teams would be allowed to protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goaltender or eight skaters and a goaltender. Players in their first two years in any league and unsigned draft picks are all exempt.

Deputy commissioner Bill Daly stressed that teams "may lose a good player, but it's only one" — under the one-team scenario.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm hearing that because players with no movement clauses might take up a protection spot that teams will buy out over paid players who have no movement clauses before expansion draft so they can protect more worthy players.

For the Ducks that means buying out Bieksa so they can protect Lindholm, Fowler, Vatanen. Theodore should be exempt as he won't have 3 years NHL experience by time of expansion draft. Assuming they trade Vatanen & since theodores exempt, they can just buy out bieska, protect Lindholm/Fowler/Manson & let someone take Despres/Stoner to shed some salary.

Forwards for Ducks to protect: Getz, Perry, Kesler (all 3 have NMC), Rakell, (1 player they re-sign like Mcginn/Perron). If they trade vatanen & Andersen should have enough to keep mcginn & Perron & re-sign lindholm, so then u would have mcginn & Perron protected. Leave Silfverberg unprotected & hope Vegas takes him. Like Theodore, Ritchie will be exempt so the 7th forward they protect could be cogliano ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wording that worries me though.  2 years in any league.  That would make Ritchie and Theodore open.  With a smart GM.  Vegas might be pretty good in that first year. 

 

The big hurdle is the no trade clauses.  If they go the route of the no trade people are added to the list of exemptions, that would hurt a lot of teams.  Because there are lots of people with NTC, that teams would love to jettison.  Then again, adding those people to the open to draft, that would also hurt the player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the proposed expansion draft may cause teams to sign a player for the purpose of leaving them unprotected as teams are forced to leave 25% of previous seasons salary unprotected. Basically offer a player u figure u will lose in the draft anyways a raise or sign a career AHLer to a 1 year 2 to 3 million without a no trade clause & then leave him unprotected in expansion draft to help get to that 25% of previous years salary unprotected.

I figure the Ducks will lose Josh Manson in the expansion draft so they could offer him a new contract so that they leave enough salary unprotected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...