11-01-2016, 09:45 AM
|
#41
|
Franchise Player
|
They way I look at it is that you expose one of Frolik, Brouwer or Jokipakka.
I really like Jokipakka's game, but he's a depth D whereas Frolik and Brouwer are key pieces at the moment and over the next 2 seasons.
I expose Jokipakka and hope for the best.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-01-2016, 09:51 AM
|
#42
|
Owner
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
|
I think it's very possible if Shinkaruk has a big AHL season and the Flames see him in their top six, yes.
Quoting Frolik as the 2nd highest scorer after 10 games is somewhat silly ... he's a 15 goal guy making 4.5M. I like the player and I'm not looking to lose him, but his price tag may be enough to have Vegas look elsewhere
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-01-2016, 10:33 AM
|
#43
|
Franchise Player
|
I think it will take more than a big AHL season from a forward prospect to convince the Flames to expose Frolik. If we a see a terrible season from Frolik, or perhaps an injury plagued one, combined with a replacement forward from Stockton stepping up in a big way on the big club, I could see Frolik being exposed. Otherwise, I'm skeptical. But only time will tell, of course.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Finger Cookin For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-01-2016, 11:59 AM
|
#44
|
I believe in the Jays.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Quoting Frolik as the 2nd highest scorer after 10 games is somewhat silly ... he's a 15 goal guy making 4.5M. I like the player and I'm not looking to lose him, but his price tag may be enough to have Vegas look elsewhere
|
Meh, if that's the argument then we should be exposing Brouwer... makes the same money as Frolik, has the same career PPG rate but is on the wrong side of 30.
Really, the truth most likely is that both get protected.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Parallex For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-01-2016, 02:08 PM
|
#45
|
Backup Goalie
Join Date: Apr 2011
Exp:
|
Will the list of protected/unprotected players be made public? Or only available to the expansion team?
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 02:22 PM
|
#46
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: MTL
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotiou22
Will the list of protected/unprotected players be made public? Or only available to the expansion team?
|
Good question...knowing the NHL it will likely be a hidden list until someone like Friedman leaks it
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 02:59 PM
|
#47
|
Scoring Winger
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotiou22
Will the list of protected/unprotected players be made public? Or only available to the expansion team?
|
There will probably be a four hour "expansion draft protected list" special with Bill Daly and the HNIC panel.
__________________
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 03:04 PM
|
#48
|
Crash and Bang Winger
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Vancouver
|
Don't forget Vegas will be picking 30 players, plus have the ability to sign UFA's. So they will be looking for a mix of vets, roster players and prospects. (Obviously some prospects are not available)
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 03:50 PM
|
#49
|
Franchise Player
|
I wouldn't think that Frolik would get passed over in the expansion draft. He is what I call a 'high end utility player' - the type of player that all coaches really love to have on their teams, and that can play in all situations.
Now, his price tag might be a little rich (debatable really), but it is a team starting with zero cap hits, and who probably will need to sign overpriced mid-level vets in the UFA season to hit the cap floor.
I get the argument that maybe the Flames might view the latter half of Frolik's contract as a bit of a negative, but unless his game drops off a cliff I don't see them exposing him.
Flames would have to be very high on Shinkaruk, or Poirier has to return to his 1st year numbers and then some. I think Vegas takes the easy bet and selects Jokipakka. Decent depth defencemen can help a young team quite a lot (as could Frolik). Brouwer I would say they protect, especially after being given an A.
If Frolik wasn't so damn consistent, game in and game out, I would agree he would be a good player to expose.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 04:02 PM
|
#50
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Quoting Frolik as the 2nd highest scorer after 10 games is somewhat silly ... he's a 15 goal guy making 4.5M. I like the player and I'm not looking to lose him, but his price tag may be enough to have Vegas look elsewhere
|
IIRC that was what we thought about Brian Skrudland.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 04:05 PM
|
#51
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I wouldn't be surprised if the Flames exposed someone like Frolik in this process. A free agent signing with 3/5 of his contract done is essentially at the crossroads in his contract (first 60% benefits the Flames more than the last 40%).
Is he washed up? Of course not, but he makes good coin and should do less in years 4 and 5 then he's done in years 1-3.
He likely wouldn't get taken anyway, and the Flames could add their biggest worry between Poirier and Shinkaruk to the list.
|
I disagree. I'd protect Frolik before Shinkaruk or Poirier 10 times out of 10. I doubt Shinkaruk or Poirier would be claimed.
|
|
|
11-01-2016, 04:14 PM
|
#52
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
|
Would Vegas actually take Gio if he was exposed? With his salary and age? I'd say its 50-50.
Or does he have a NMC that prevents him being exposed?
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
|
|
11-08-2016, 12:10 PM
|
#53
|
Franchise Player
|
Was thinking that if Stajan keeps playing at the level he is currently playing at, that there is a chance they would claim him in expansion draft. Lots of talk that it would be Kulak or Jookki, but some people were telling me that there is going to be a long list of #4-5 d-men available for expansion draft. Vegas still needs forwards, veteran help and to be able to reach cap min. While i agree Stajan is paid far to much , he could help with the above reasons given. He would also be in the last year of his deal and be a good trade chip at the deadline for Vegas. All that said , i might be out of my mind thinking Stajan could be picked in expansion draft.
|
|
|
11-08-2016, 02:32 PM
|
#54
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GioforPM
Would Vegas actually take Gio if he was exposed? With his salary and age? I'd say its 50-50.
Or does he have a NMC that prevents him being exposed?
|
I expect they wouldn't think twice and would snap him up. They are going to have to reach the cap floor and would get a top 15 Dman and an instant captain. Doubt the Flames would consider exposing him, I'm sure there is a trade market for a player of Gio's caliber regardless of his contract.
|
|
|
11-08-2016, 02:37 PM
|
#55
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I wouldn't be surprised if the Flames exposed someone like Frolik in this process. A free agent signing with 3/5 of his contract done is essentially at the crossroads in his contract (first 60% benefits the Flames more than the last 40%).
Is he washed up? Of course not, but he makes good coin and should do less in years 4 and 5 then he's done in years 1-3.
He likely wouldn't get taken anyway, and the Flames could add their biggest worry between Poirier and Shinkaruk to the list.
|
I agree with Bingo. The cap savings alone would allow us to fill an actual hole on the roster and add a top six forward. Middle six guys - Frolik, and Brouwer, can be replaced from farm players like Klimchuk and Poirier or Marchessault type bargain bin signings. I firmly believe your cap needs to be concentrated on the top of your roster, where we are VERY thin and young.
I also am starting to think it would be a good smoke screen to allow Kulak to be firmly in our top four D next year.
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
Last edited by GranteedEV; 11-08-2016 at 02:42 PM.
|
|
|
11-08-2016, 02:54 PM
|
#56
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacks
I expect they wouldn't think twice and would snap him up. They are going to have to reach the cap floor and would get a top 15 Dman and an instant captain. Doubt the Flames would consider exposing him, I'm sure there is a trade market for a player of Gio's caliber regardless of his contract.
|
If Gio's bad season continues and is evidence of a big drop off in play, that might changes things (on both sides of the thought process).
|
|
|
11-09-2016, 09:00 PM
|
#57
|
Voted for Kodos
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotiou22
Will the list of protected/unprotected players be made public? Or only available to the expansion team?
|
I suspect that the public will never have access to the lists, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if the players on the team never even know who is protected.
It could build resentment among players if they think they should have been protected over someone else.
I think all we will see is a list of the players taken, with the team they came from, and that's it.
|
|
|
11-09-2016, 10:56 PM
|
#58
|
Backup Goalie
Join Date: Jun 2011
Exp:
|
Giving up Gio to a division opponent for nothing would come back to harm us
__________________
@paul_rigs
|
|
|
11-09-2016, 11:31 PM
|
#59
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by P-Rugby
Giving up Gio to a division opponent for nothing would come back to harm us
|
It might for a year or two but that contract has the potential to be really bad.
Still a horrible idea to give him up for nothing though.
|
|
|
11-10-2016, 12:23 AM
|
#60
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed
I suspect that the public will never have access to the lists, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if the players on the team never even know who is protected.
It could build resentment among players if they think they should have been protected over someone else.
I think all we will see is a list of the players taken, with the team they came from, and that's it.
|
The protected lists have always been public. There's no reason to think that would change now.
__________________
Turn up the good, turn down the suck!
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:38 AM.
|
|