[Trade] VGK get Marcus Kruger from CHI for future considerations & flips him to CAR for a 5th

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

I don't believe that's the case, he should have already been paid by Chicago prior to being traded. 2M is extremely pricey for a 5th rounder.

I think you need to look at the Chicago-Vegas-Carolina, van Riemsdyk and Kruger deals as a total package and not separate deals.

Chicago agrees to keep van Riemsdyk and expose him in turn for Vegas selecting him and taking on Kruger's contract after the bonus is paid.

Vegas trades van Riemsdyk, a 7th, and soon to be Kruger, to Carolina for a 2nd and 5th.

Exactly.

People aren't looking at the whole picture. In the end, Vegas got a 2nd and a 5th from their Chicago selection. That's pretty damn good, and more than they got from most teams.

And it was Chicago, not Vegas, that paid the bonus to Kruger.

[saillias]

Expansion teams are always a motley crew of odd men out, cast-offs and guys out of jobs. That applies to the management group too.

You want me to believe that their scouts are just that good that they will make all-stars out of the magic beans they keep on taking in exchange for good NHL players.

I'll just judge the deals in terms of value, and they look bad.

[Matt Reeeeead]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

I don't believe that Vegas backed away from any good, young, cost controlled players.

The only players that fit that description would not have been exposed if deals had not been made.

Right - a team like Minnesota could have worked out a trade to move Dumba to a team with no defensemen. Vegas worked out a trade in advance of that to presumably give both Vegas (and Minnesota) a more favourable deal.

The results of the expanstion draft aren't being analyzed at face value.

Not saying that in all cases I would have done what McPhee did, but I think we can logically assume that McPhee doesn't have a learning disorder.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I don't think that Vegas is going to use all those picks they have accumulated at the next few drafts. They have done well to build up a lot of good assets (or great currency). They can move up and down drafts, make trades for decent players, trade them for prospects in other organizations that they like, etc.

A lot of those players that were exposed wouldn't have been exposed if Vegas didn't work with some teams. I think they did alright maximizing value here. Had they retained players, they might have just been good enough to get out of the basement, but not much else.

They will start the season with the highest chance at a franchise player, and have a tonne of bullets for the next couple of drafts. That's important, and it may build a contender faster than retaining a Trevor van Riemsdyk or two.

I can see the plan in place at least. Will be interesting to see how Vegas does in the upcoming seasons. I think they have started off with much more assets than any other expansion team that I remember anyways.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by saillias

You want me to believe that their scouts are just that good that they will make all-stars out of the magic beans they keep on taking in exchange for good NHL players.

The best teams in the NHL tend to be built through the draft.

Vegas had 3 first rounds picks this year.

Those magic beans you allude to brought home 6 recent Stanley Cups for Chicago and Pittsburgh.

Vegas didn't turn their backs on any elite players.

There best chance of getting some elite players is through the draft.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

The best teams in the NHL tend to be built through the draft.

Vegas had 3 first rounds picks this year.

Those magic beans you allude to brought home 6 recent Stanley Cups for Chicago and Pittsburgh.

Vegas didn't turn their backs on any elite players.

There best chance of getting some elite players is through the draft.

I agree that you build a winner via the draft. But the bold is a silly argument: every team has been drafting players, but only Chicago and Pittsburgh have been winning multiple cups. So it doesn't follow that drafting brought them multiple cups.

Drafting elite talent, and having back diving contracts, have helped both teams.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

The difference is the NHL structured expansion this time around so that teams would be forced to expose good, young players.

Vegas would have been far better off selecting those players than making all of these stupid deals for what amounts to lottery tickets for players that may or may not be as good as the players they chose to ignore.

It's poor management, IMO.

Well if you listen to hockey observers and other people around the League they are all pretty much in universal agreement that VGK has done a very good job with the expansion draft. If the goal is to ice a competitive team that will grow into a championship calibre team in the shortest period of time, then Vegas's approach actually appears pretty sound.

These weren't aging veterans they backed away from, they had a chance to ice a really good, young and cost-controlled team. Why they chose to go a different route is mind boggling, really.

That said, it's good for Calgary, because that Vegas team next season is going to suck hard.

It is easy to simply look at the list of exposed players and look at what VGK assembled, and then two conclude that they have done poorly. But this is without being privy to everything taking place behind the scenes. As The Cobra just pointed out—and has been noted many times on this board—players that were available in the expansion draft that Vegas passed over likely would NOT have been made available had Vegas not agreed to terms in side deals beforehand.

It really needs to be stressed that even in spite of how poor VGK's lineup will be heading into this season, they are still miles ahead of any expansion team in NHL history, and that was the whole purpose of this exercise in the end. When Columbus played their inaugural season in 2000–01 they iced a top line of Geoff Sanderson, Espen Knutsen and Steve Heinz. The Blue Jackets drafted 35 times in their first three years, which was +8 picks in a nine-round draft format. Six of those selections were in the top-sixty. By way of comparison, VGK doesn't look much better on paper to open the season, but the Knights have amassed 30 picks for their first three drafts (+9), with ten of these picks in the top-sixty. That is 10:21 picks in the top third (47.6%) vs 6:27 (22.2%) for the Blue Jackets through two rounds. They have also added a couple of really promising young players like Shea Theodore and Alex Tuch.

Sure, it is not quite as fun for fans, but when taking a long view of what VGK is trying to do it looks pretty smart.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I agree that you build a winner via the draft. But the bold is a silly argument: every team has been drafting players, but only Chicago and Pittsburgh have been winning multiple cups. So it doesn't follow that drafting brought them multiple cups.

Drafting elite talent, and having back diving contracts, have helped both teams.

It's not a silly argument.

Every SC winning team (in the cap era) has been build on having some elite talent obtained through the draft.

Without elite talent, you aren't winning any Stanley Cups. Or getting anywhere close.

Vegas needed to do whatever they could to get that elite talent.

And that's what they did.

[Matt Reeeeead]

Technically the plan those teams really followed was being terrible for a number of years to continuously get a chance at the top available talent.

Vegas appears to be prepared to do that. They could be fielding a better team right off the bat, but they did make a priority to pass on current talent to get extra first rounders. A few tank seasons would help position them to start from scratch with some elite talent like Chi and Pitts did.

[StrykerSteve]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Well if you listen to hockey observers and other people around the League they are all pretty much in universal agreement that VGK has done a very good job with the expansion draft. If the goal is to ice a competitive team that will grow into a championship calibre team in the shortest period of time, then Vegas's approach actually appears pretty sound.


It is easy to simply look at the list of exposed players and look at what VGK assembled, and then two conclude that they have done poorly. But this is without being privy to everything taking place behind the scenes. As The Cobra just pointed out—and has been noted many times on this board—players that were available in the expansion draft that Vegas passed over likely would NOT have been made available had Vegas not agreed to terms in side deals beforehand.

It really needs to be stressed that even in spite of how poor VGK's lineup will be heading into this season, they are still miles ahead of any expansion team in NHL history, and that was the whole purpose of this exercise in the end. When Columbus played their inaugural season in 2000–01 they iced a top line of Geoff Sanderson, Espen Knutsen and Steve Heinz. The Blue Jackets drafted 35 times in their first three years, which was +8 picks in a nine-round draft format. Six of those selections were in the top-sixty. By way of comparison, VGK doesn't look much better on paper to open the season, but the Knights have amassed 30 picks for their first three drafts (+9), with ten of these picks in the top-sixty. That is 10:21 picks in the top third (47.6%) vs 6:27 (22.2%) for the Blue Jackets through two rounds. They have also added a couple of really promising young players like Shea Theodore and Alex Tuch.

Sure, it is not quite as fun for fans, but when taking a long view of what VGK is trying to do it looks pretty smart.

Winning a championship in the NHL isn't easy. Every GM in the league will cut your throat if it means making their team better.

That said, if McPhee manipulated his competition into exposing players they wouldn't have otherwise, then in my opinion, he should have selected those players. Would it have pissed off the competition? Sure. Who cares. His team would be better and that's his job, not to make friends.

But hey, if Vegas' owner is content being awful this year, who am I to judge. They had just better hope those draft picks pay off or they're going to face a rough road ahead in a market not known for professional sports. How long can they afford to not be competitive, that's the question.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

The best teams in the NHL tend to be built through the draft.

Vegas had 3 first rounds picks this year.

Those magic beans you allude to brought home 6 recent Stanley Cups for Chicago and Pittsburgh.

Vegas didn't turn their backs on any elite players.

There best chance of getting some elite players is through the draft.

They won Stanley cups on the backs of top 3 picks...Pens won a lottery for the best player in the game that every team had a shot at. Late first round picks are seldom elite players

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dino7c

They won Stanley cups on the backs of top 3 picks...Pens won a lottery for the best player in the game that every team had a shot at. Late first round picks are seldom elite players

Better to have some chance than no chance.

Keith was a 2nd round pick. Seabrook wasn't a high first rounder.

Chicago had a 1st and 3rd pick, but it was other picks and trades that gave them an elite team.

I don't think that trading Marc Methot will cost Vegas any Stanley Cups.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

That said, if McPhee manipulated his competition into exposing players they wouldn't have otherwise, then in my opinion, he should have selected those players.

He couldn't.

He had an agreement in place not to take those players for draft or other consideration.

This wasn't some sort of back handed under the table deal or gentlemen's agreement. These were actual trades and he couldn't simply ignore them.

He didn't "manipulate" them.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

Winning a championship in the NHL isn't easy. Every GM in the league will cut your throat if it means making their team better.

That said, if McPhee manipulated his competition into exposing players they wouldn't have otherwise, then in my opinion, he should have selected those players. Would it have pissed off the competition? Sure. Who cares. His team would be better and that's his job, not to make friends.

This is the same League in which GMs have essentially colluded on a gentleman's agreement to abstain from launching the RFA offer sheet nuclear option. You can't seriously believe that there would not be major consequences had McPhee decided to not play nice. It has already been reported that he has softened the market more for defensemen than he had intended, precisely because League GMs are not thrilled about how he stockpiled at the expansion draft. How much MORE difficult do you think he would find things had he intentionally screwed over every other NHL GM?

Unlike your business and mine, he has ONLY 30 negotiating partners. There is no one outside of this small and intimate bubble for him to turn to in the event that he creates a toxic business climate with his peers. A NHL General Manager's job is to strike a fine balance between good negotiation and good relationships. Do you think Treliving's personal relationships with other teams' GMs has no bearing on how well or poorly he does his job? Do you think it is mere coincidence that he continues to trade for players that his Edmonton counterpart covets, and for a lower acquisition costs? The business of hockey is in large part based on personal relationships.

But hey, if Vegas' owner is content being awful this year, who am I to judge. They had just better hope those draft picks pay off or they're going to face a rough road ahead in a market not known for professional sports. How long can they afford to not be competitive, that's the question.

The Knights will almost certainly be drafting in the top-five in each of the next two drafts. I would be pretty stunned if they didn't end up with at least a couple of terrific high end prospects in their first three years.

I would say they have a two-year window here by simple virtue of their novelty in a new market. With how quickly players are developing in today's day and age, it seems reasonable to me to expect that the team they ice in 2019–20 will feature some really good top-end talent.

[StrykerSteve]

Any "deals" that were made, were gentleman's agreements until they actually happened.

[Matt Reeeeead]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

Any "deals" that were made, were gentleman's agreements until they actually happened.

Even if this is true, the end result is the same. A GM would be blackballed by the other 30 Gm's if they didn't stick to their word. It would be an absolutely laughable way of conducting business.

In any event, I believe that these trades were actually registered with the NHL days in advance (they just weren't released publically). For example, I believe the trade of "Minnesota trading Alex Tuch to Vegas in exchange for Vegas selecting Erik Haula" was registered with the NHL before the protection lists came out. Would be surprised if these trades were based on handshake arrangements.

[StrykerSteve]

Originally Posted by Matt Reeeeead

Even if this is true, the end result is the same. A GM would be blackballed by the other 30 Gm's if they didn't stick to their word. It would be an absolutely laughable way of conducting business.

What's laughable is thinking that other GMs would blackball one team when their pool to work within is already so limited. They'd continue to do business with him if they felt they could make their team better.

It's no different than the RFA process, no one does it, because it's frowned upon but it's honestly an excellent card that GMs never use. You either improve your own team or handcuff your competition with a contract they can't afford. That said, it HAS been done on a few occasions and the GMs that did it weren't ostracized. Business went on as usual, because it's a part of the game.

I just think McPhee missed an opportunity. I could be wrong though, time will tell.

[Lord Carnage]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

Any "deals" that were made, were gentleman's agreements until they actually happened.

So, if I understand, you are advocating that McPhee should have given his word, and then backed out on it... repeatedly.

Being in my 40's may make me from a different generation, but I still do my best to have my word be my bond. If I said it, I do it.

No matter if it was an actual trade, or a "gentleman's agreement", either way he should have stuck to what was agreed to. If he hadn't with me, and I were a GM, I would never have dealt with him again - no matter what team he was GM'ing.

I hope my path never crosses yours in business, as I feel I may not get everything I thought I agreed to.

[Matt Reeeeead]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

What's laughable is thinking that other GMs would blackball one team when their pool to work within is already so limited. They'd continue to do business with him if they felt they could make their team better.

That's not laughable at all. Often teams have competing offers on players. Often the offers are very similar and it comes down to the relationship that was built to consummate a trade.

Often players have medical histories and reliant on other teams to provide accurate medical reports to get a proper understanding of a players' issues. If you don't have a reasonable trust level with another GM, going to be hard to consummate a trade.

Players can have attitude issues and internal organizational conflicts that come with baggage. Do you want to deal with another GM that is not prepared to disclose the honest information about a player and end up getting a dud that paid in value for?

Players have the choice as free agents to go to multiple destinations. Are they more likely to choose a team that has a liar as a team builder, or a team with a strong reputation?

Just a few examples, but having a good reputation and strong relationships with other teams is of the utmost importance. You might be able to trick or fool another GM once, but certainly not twice. They simply wont give you the opportunity to even get to the dance floor a second time.

IMO - you are very, very out to lunch on this topic and are not presenting a logical argument consistent with how dealings in the NHL work, and continue to ignore the alternatives that teams had in building their expansion lists.

[StrykerSteve]

My word is as good as gold... but thankfully I'm not an NHL GM to test that. :P