Who do the Flames protect in the Expansion Draft?

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Not really related to this thread, but I keep seeing Josh Anderson's name come up as a player we might acquire. Why would CBJ want to move him?

They probably won't, they will likely just offer him his QO and then he goes UFA in one more season.

[Vinny01]

Have to re-evaluate in November

[TheSquatch]

Originally Posted by davidus_49

You can't leave Johnny unprotected, if you don't see a future for him with the team you trade him but you can't give him to Seattle for free.

You're absolutely right. If the team can get value out of it, that would be better.

[Macho0978]

Originally Posted by Five-hole

Not really related to this thread, but I keep seeing Josh Anderson's name come up as a player we might acquire. Why would CBJ want to move him?

The Jackets have 5 mil in cap space and Dubois is an RFA who is about to get paid. Anderson likely gets 6 years 6 million himself.

[Roof-Daddy]

Treliving is in an interesting spot in regards to the ED. The list as I see it right now is:

1. Gaudreau
2. Monahan
3. Lindholm
4. Tkachuk
5. Backlund
6. Mangiapane
7. Dube

1. Gio
2. Andersson
3. Hanifin

1. Rittich (maybe)

Bennett and Kylington are the most notable exposed players.

If Treliving does anything to add to the roster for next season then he's suddenly exposing a much better player because of it, so he has to take that into consideration with every player he looks to add.

Like the example above with Josh Anderson.

If you trade a pick for him you are really trading a pick plus Dube/Mangi/Backlund to get him, or trading a pick for one year of Anderson and then losing him.

I wonder if Treliving just tries to sign a couple of players to one year "show me" contracts that way they help the team for one year, but are then UFA's and don't alter the Flames protection list.

A couple of examples would be Derek Forbort on D who had an injury and COVID really shorten his season, but he's a fringe top 4 guy and would get plenty of ice time in Calgary to prove himself for a better contract the following off season.

On forward I could see a gut like Josh Leivo doing the same thing, and as a right shot fringe top 6 winger he'd likely get a chance to really put up some numbers in Calgary who only have one top 6 forward who shoots right.

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Macho0978

The Jackets have 5 mil in cap space and Dubois is an RFA who is about to get paid. Anderson likely gets 6 years 6 million himself.

Josh Anderson just had an injury riddled season where he scored one goal. He's not getting $6 million AAV or 6 years term.

[N26]

This thread is 3 months too early no?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

Have to re-evaluate in November

Or, more-likely, after the trade deadline next year.

[868904]

If Lucic keeps playing the way he is and puts up a 40 point season next year, he could get taken and he might decide not to waive.

Expansion teams ALWAYS go for toughness and Looch will still be one of the toughest guys around. Cap space shouldn't be that big a problem for Seattle.

It's funny, the better Looch plays, the higher the chance he could get taken, and the lower the chance he will waive.

A rejuvenated Looch could end up hurting this team more.

I'm not saying Seattle would take him, but his willingness to waive could decrease if he really enjoys it here.

[Geeoff]

There will be a lot of roster turnover. My strategy would be to build the best roster possible. For these reasons:

-probably means a good 2020/2021 season
-The more good players we have before Seattle takes one, the more good players we have left after Seattle takes one. (they can only take one, so it doesn't really matter how many we expose.)
-everyone else is losing a player too (except for ####ing Vegas)

Also, you're better off spending a 1st round draft pick to acquire a player with term at the trade deadline, and exposing said player to Seattle, than spending a 1st round draft pick to influence Seattle's pick because you at least get one playoff run out of it.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by 868904

If Lucic keeps playing the way he is and puts up a 40 point season next year, he could get taken and he might decide not to waive.

Expansion teams ALWAYS go for toughness and Looch will still be one of the toughest guys around. Cap space shouldn't be that big a problem for Seattle.

It's funny, the better Looch plays, the higher the chance he could get taken, and the lower the chance he will waive.

A rejuvenated Looch could end up hurting this team more.

I'm not saying Seattle would take him, but his willingness to waive could decrease if he really enjoys it here.

I don't know what transpired prior to the trade with Edmonton, but there was speculation that having Lucic agree to waive his MNC would have been discussed prior to the trade being consummated.

Otherwise, it would have been hard to understand why BT would have agreed to the trade, at that point in time at least, as that Lucic was not a guy that you would agree to take on a MNC

We'll find out, but Milan is a west coast kid, so being in Seattle to finish your career, isn't necessarily a bad thing...

[Enoch Root]

Seattle won't be taking Lucic.

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by 868904

If Lucic keeps playing the way he is and puts up a 40 point season next year, he could get taken and he might decide not to waive.

I think as a Surrey boy, Lucic probably wouldn't mind being close to home to wind down his career. There will be plenty of opportunity in Seattle too, so it's not as if that'd be a concern.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by GranteedEV

I think as a Surrey boy, Lucic probably wouldn't mind being close to home to wind down his career. There will be plenty of opportunity in Seattle too, so it's not as if that'd be a concern.

He signed in Edmonton, so I doubt anywhere is off limits to him.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Seattle won't be taking Lucic.

exactly; so asking him to waive his MNC doesn't seem much to ask for.

[schteve_d]

If we can get out of this losing only Kylington I am all for it. Would sort of suck, but not versus the alternatives.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by schteve_d

If we can get out of this losing only Kylington I am all for it. Would sort of suck, but not versus the alternatives.

At this moment, losing kylington seems better than losing dube, mangipane, or playoff Bennett.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

exactly; so asking him to waive his MNC doesn't seem much to ask for.

exactly, it's a given IMO

[Harry Lime]

I actually think that they expose Backlund, and he is too good for a team to pass on, so that would be the pick the Kraken take. By that time he will be 32 years old with three years left at 5.35M.

In terms of internal replacements, I think that you keep Bennett at 3C, and have either Lindholm or Dube slide into that 2C spot for 2022.

It just opens up too many possibilities in terms of roster construction in order to not be on the table. You might also expose him and Seattle goes off the board and takes Kylington anyway, which means you essentially get to protect all of Bennett, Mangiapane and Dube, without repercussion.

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by Harry Lime

I actually think that they expose Backlund, and he is too good for a team to pass on, so that would be the pick the Kraken take. By that time he will be 32 years old with three years left at 5.35M.

In terms of internal replacements, I think that you keep Bennett at 3C, and have either Lindholm or Dube slide into that 2C spot for 2022.

It just opens up too many possibilities in terms of roster construction in order to not be on the table. You might also expose him and Seattle goes off the board and takes Kylington anyway, which means you essentially get to protect all of Bennett, Mangiapane and Dube, without repercussion.

I love Backlund - he has been fantastic during these playoffs. But I think it would be foolish not to expose him with that contract at that age.