[Signing] Canucks sign Markstrom to extension starting in 2017 (3yrs, $3.67 mil AAV)

[GranteedEV]

Markstrom was the Canucks' best player other than Tanev and the Sedins. Well-Deserved contract.

[Hockey Fan #751]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

So that leaves Calgary and Philly as the only teams without an actual proven NHL goalie under contract past this season to protect from expansion.

All the Flames goalies that are currently under contract past this season are exempt and the Flyers have goalie of the future Anthony Stolarz under contract and NOT exempt. If they sign extend Neuvirth or Mason they may have to leave Stolarz exposed to Vegas.

Assuming they can find a goaltender to expose, it's not a bad position to be in. There will be plenty of goaltenders available for cheap next June as teams try to avoid losing them for nothing.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751

Assuming they can find a goaltender to expose, it's not a bad position to be in. There will be plenty of goaltenders available for cheap next June as teams try to avoid losing them for nothing.

The Flames don't need to find anyone to expose. Johnson fits that bill, regardless of whether he is signed to an extension or not.

EDIT: My bad, this is not true. I got mixed up thinking Ortio would meet this requirement, before it became clear he wouldn't be re-signed this off-season. As it stands, Rittich can meet this requirement.

[Hockey Fan #751]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

The Flames don't need to find anyone to expose. Johnson fits that bill, regardless of whether he is signed to an extension or not.

EDIT: My bad, this is not true. I got mixed up thinking Ortio would meet this requirement, before it became clear he wouldn't be re-signed this off-season. As it stands, Rittich can meet this requirement.

I forgot about Rittich. So that's perfect, then. The Flames are poised to be in a position to add a quality goaltender for cheap next June.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751

I forgot about Rittich. So that's perfect, then. The Flames are poised to be in a position to add a quality goaltender for cheap next June.

I think Rittich may be exempt from the draft because he'll be classified as a first year player.

[Roof-Daddy]

Unless the Flames are allowed to expose an "exempt" goalie by their own choosing, then they currently don't have a goalie to expose in the expansion draft which I'm sure will cost them a severe penalty if not rectified in time.

They also don't currently have a goalie to protect either.

[Finger Cookin]

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Unless the Flames are allowed to expose an "exempt" goalie by their own choosing, then they currently don't have a goalie to expose in the expansion draft which I'm sure will cost them a severe penalty if not rectified in time.

They also don't currently have a goalie to protect either.

Rittich can be exposed and meets the requirements, with the sole caveat being he needs a qualifying offer prior to the expansion draft in order to be exposed. There is nothing to rectify.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Rittich can be exposed and meets the requirements, with the sole caveat being he needs a qualifying offer prior to the expansion draft in order to be exposed. There is nothing to rectify.

Really? I know he's 23 and played pro in Europe for a few seasons now, but this is first year under contract to an NHL team. I figured he would be exempt.

[Finger Cookin]

Damnit, you're right. I apologize. I keep focusing on the exposure requirement, forgetting about the pro experience exemption. Pro experience in European or other not in North America leagues would only count if they accrued while the player is under a SPC with an NHL club.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

Damnit, you're right. I apologize. I keep focusing on the exposure requirement, forgetting about the pro experience exemption. Pro experience in European or other not in North America leagues would only count if they accrued while the player is under a SPC with an NHL club.

What if the team wanted to expose him? Would they be allowed even if he was exempt? It would make more sense to do that than to sign Johnson to an extension just to expose him. If I'm Johnson, I would just say thanks but no thanks, unless he wants to risk going to Vegas.

[phoenix66]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

What if the team wanted to expose him? Would they be allowed even if he was exempt? It would make more sense to do that than to sign Johnson to an extension just to expose him. If I'm Johnson, I would just say thanks but no thanks, unless he wants to risk going to Vegas.

Teams select who to protect , not expose (sounds like the same thing but its not ) . The eligible players are determined by the league.
While its true right now we have no eligible players in the system (due to pro length and 2 with UFA status) Im sure BT has thought this through. Unlike jay "loophole" Feaster.
What BT has is options. picking up a bargain on a team desperate to unload a minor leaguer at worst is a backup plan . he has a year to figure it out. I have confidence he will

[Calgary4LIfe]

It won't be difficult to expose a goaltender. Just give Johnson a one-year extension.

I actually expect the Flames to re-sign both their NHL goalies after January 1st. Johnson then because he can't be signed until January 1st, and Elliott because I am assuming they want to see how he does first as a bona fide starter.

I just hope that they really clarify Gillies eligibility with respect to the expansion draft. I know that Burke (or was it Treliving? - maybe both?) has come out and stated that they are 99% sure that Gillies will not be eligible for the draft, but who knows? I am sure they will get that straightened out with the league. In that case, I would still expect Johnson to be signed, and Elliott (again, if he is doing well) to have a handshake agreement on a multi-year contract extension to be signed sometime between the expansion draft and the entry draft.

I would anticipate that a number of UFAs that teams wish to re-sign will be re-signing only after the expansion draft is concluded. Vegas can still select those players, but those players wouldn't be under any obligation to sign with Vegas, and would just wait until free agency to return to their respective teams - though that is a big risk for certain players, as Vegas (or another team on the open market) could very well make an offer that a player can't refuse).

[Fire of the Phoenix]

^if you're Johnson, why sign when it might cause you to get claimed by an expansion team. Wouldn't it just be easier to sign with who you want on July 1st? Even with Bishop and Elliott, you would think they would want assurances that they would be protected before they re-sign with their respective teams.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

^if you're Johnson, why sign when it might cause you to get claimed by an expansion team. Wouldn't it just be easier to sign with who you want on July 1st?

Why? Money. If your team needs you under contract so it can fulfil the expansion draft rules, you can probably get a one-year deal with a nice fat signing bonus – more money than you're likely to make after the expansion draft, when free agent goalies may be a dime a dozen.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Why? Money. If your team needs you under contract so it can fulfil the expansion draft rules, you can probably get a one-year deal with a nice fat signing bonus – more money than you're likely to make after the expansion draft, when free agent goalies may be a dime a dozen.

Hmmmm... good point. Hadn't thought of it that way.