06-22-2016, 04:04 PM
|
#61
|
I believe in the Jays.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geeoff
Even if he isn't, I wouldn't be that worried, there will be many goalies available to distract Las Vegas. I'm sure we will lose a defenseman, not a goalie. I wouldn't get too attached to Jyrki Jokkipakka.
|
There are many better D-men they could take then Jokipakka. I bet we lose Stajan. Although I'll note that we'll need to sign a D-man for two years (or extend Jokipakka) to meet the requirements as quoted).
Last edited by Parallex; 06-22-2016 at 04:08 PM.
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:11 PM
|
#62
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallex
There are many better D-men they could take then Jokipakka. I bet we lose Stajan. Although I'll note that we'll need to sign a D-man for two years (or extend Jokipakka) to meet the requirements as quoted).
|
or re-sign Wotherspoon to a 2 year deal and give him 40+ games this year
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:16 PM
|
#63
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef
Bouma will be a UFA, Jokipakka a RFA and who knows if even Jooris or Ortio will even be Flames this coming season.
|
Bouma won't be a UFA he has two years left. Expires 2018.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Roof-Daddy For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:19 PM
|
#64
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef
Bouma will be a UFA, Jokipakka a RFA and who knows if even Jooris or Ortio will even be Flames this coming season.
|
I'm saying they will be to meet the exposure requirements.
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:22 PM
|
#65
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy
Bouma won't be a UFA he has two years left. Expires 2018.
|
oops, my bad
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:22 PM
|
#66
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
The Oilers should really leave Nuge and Eberle un-protected...but they really don't have anything better to protect! (McDavid would be exempt - correct?)
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:23 PM
|
#67
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finger Cookin
I'm saying they will be to meet the exposure requirements.
|
they only meet the exposure requirements if they are signed.
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:24 PM
|
#68
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef
they only meet the exposure requirements if they are signed.
|
Again, that is what I am saying will happen.
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:24 PM
|
#69
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallex
There are many better D-men they could take then Jokipakka. I bet we lose Stajan. Although I'll note that we'll need to sign a D-man for two years (or extend Jokipakka) to meet the requirements as quoted).
|
I hope Vegas hires a GM dumb enough to take one of our bad contracts instead of one of our young D.
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:31 PM
|
#70
|
Acerbic Cyberbully
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: back in Chilliwack
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJsChaos
Is there a limit to how many players can be picked from one team?
|
One player must be picked from each team for a total of thirty players.
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:35 PM
|
#71
|
Acerbic Cyberbully
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: back in Chilliwack
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geeoff
I hope Vegas hires a GM dumb enough to take one of our bad contracts instead of one of our young D.
|
Bear in mind that LV will not be able to select just whomever they wish from the unprotected lists. They need to draft a specified number of forwards, defensemen, and goalies, and they will need to draft $43 m of player salaries. By that measure they may be in a position where one of the Flames high priced veterans is the best option for them.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Textcritic For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:39 PM
|
#72
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJsChaos
Is there a limit to how many players can be picked from one team?
|
Yes only one player can be taken
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:43 PM
|
#73
|
Franchise Player
|
If I was a betting man, I'd say that Frolik will be the player claimed from the Flames.
He will be among the better players left exposed, and the Flames will want to move forward without his fair, but unnecessary cap hit.
__________________
Oliver Kylington is the greatest and best player in the world
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to bigrangy For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:45 PM
|
#74
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigrangy
If I was a betting man, I'd say that Frolik will be the player claimed from the Flames.
He will be among the better players left exposed, and the Flames will want to move forward without his fair, but unnecessary cap hit.
|
Why would he be exposed?
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:48 PM
|
#75
|
Farm Team Player
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Calgary
Exp:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigrangy
If I was a betting man, I'd say that Frolik will be the player claimed from the Flames.
He will be among the better players left exposed, and the Flames will want to move forward without his fair, but unnecessary cap hit.
|
I honestly can't see him being unprotected. He's one of the Flames best Wingers, unless something miraculous changes in the next year.
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 04:52 PM
|
#76
|
Powerplay Quarterback
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Holland
|
This nice and all for the coming expansion but aren't we possibly going to get super shafted when the Quebec expansion comes?
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to FiveSeven For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-22-2016, 05:03 PM
|
#77
|
Resident Videologist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary
|
Frolik will get protected, almost because we don't have many other forwards worth protecting.
7 Forwards
1. Gaudreau
2. Monahan
3. Bennett
4. Backlund
5. Frolik
6. Shinkaruk?
7. Ferland / Colborne?
3 Defence
1. Giordano
2. Brodie
3. Hamilton
1 Goalie
1. Whoever we acquire
I would think one of Colborne, Ferland, or Bouma would be prime candidates to be exposed and picked.
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 05:08 PM
|
#78
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Does Kylington's Swedish pro experience mean he'll need to be protected?
|
|
|
06-22-2016, 05:26 PM
|
#79
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick M.
Does Kylington's Swedish pro experience mean he'll need to be protected?
|
The CBA says time in Europe doesn't count as pro experience unless the player was under contract to an NHL club. Since the announced rules don't contain their own definition of pro experience, we must assume the CBA applies.
So no, Kylington's time in Sweden doesn't count.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
|
|
06-22-2016, 05:27 PM
|
#80
|
Farm Team Player
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Calgary
Exp:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick M.
Does Kylington's Swedish pro experience mean he'll need to be protected?
|
I think that's the million dollar question everyone needs clarified. What is classified as a Pro league. The answer could drastically change who gets protected by teams.
|
|
|
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 09:49 PM.
|
|