Seattle Expansion Draft Speculation

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It actually bothered me that Vegas was allowed to do this. It’s pretty much just extortion. The expansion teams should have to pick from the assets left unprotected and both teams should have to live with the decision with players not being able to be reacquired for a a full season.

By allowing side deals, it allows the expansion team to threaten other teams to take an asset that they might not really want just to make them give up something else while taking the player or prospect they really wanted anyway.

For example, I could see Kylington being a better pick for the Kraken in the big picture due to cost control and future upside, but threatening to take Giordano because it might entice the Flames to give up something else to not take him. Just a hypothetical example.

Disagree I think it’s fun and interesting to follow in a league arid dry with trade activity now thanks to the salary cap. For once it’s a chance where you get a shakeup and some movement you just have to pray the GM is not an idiot which is tough to know sometimes.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It actually bothered me that Vegas was allowed to do this. It’s pretty much just extortion. The expansion teams should have to pick from the assets left unprotected and both teams should have to live with the decision with players not being able to be reacquired for a a full season.

By allowing side deals, it allows the expansion team to threaten other teams to take an asset that they might not really want just to make them give up something else while taking the player or prospect they really wanted anyway.

For example, I could see Kylington being a better pick for the Kraken in the big picture due to cost control and future upside, but threatening to take Giordano because it might entice the Flames to give up something else to not take him. Just a hypothetical example.

Like any industry, GM’s don’t operate like this. You have to work with the same 31 people for the next few years…

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

A lot of the mock drafts take the existing rosters with NMCs etc and ignore the reality that some will be waived and teams will make moves beforehand.

What choice do they have?

I don’t think they can assume deals will be made, and what those deals are.

Now, suggesting that a guy like Suter will waive could be assumed perhaps.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

It actually bothered me that Vegas was allowed to do this. It’s pretty much just extortion. The expansion teams should have to pick from the assets left unprotected and both teams should have to live with the decision with players not being able to be reacquired for a a full season.

By allowing side deals, it allows the expansion team to threaten other teams to take an asset that they might not really want just to make them give up something else while taking the player or prospect they really wanted anyway.

For example, I could see Kylington being a better pick for the Kraken in the big picture due to cost control and future upside, but threatening to take Giordano because it might entice the Flames to give up something else to not take him. Just a hypothetical example.

It’s not extortion.

Let ‘s say that a team is in serious cap trouble. Is offering to take an expensive player off their hands for pennies Exortion?

No, it’s just good business.

Teams can always call another team’s bluff, if you are certain they are doing that.

In your Calgary example, it’s possible Seattle doesn’t ‘know which one they want. They may want Gio most, but would rather have a 2nd and Kylington instead. Shouldn’t teams have that option?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

It’s not extortion.

Let ‘s say that a team is in serious cap trouble. Is offering to take an expensive player off their hands for pennies Exortion?

No, it’s just good business.

Teams can always call another team’s bluff, if you are certain they are doing that.

In your Calgary example, it’s possible Seattle doesn’t ‘know which one they want. They may want Gio most, but would rather have a 2nd and Kylington instead. Shouldn’t teams have that option?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Then the GM of the team should just say "No, Gio is our guy on the list so it will be a loss".

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

What choice do they have?

I don’t think they can assume deals will be made, and what those deals are.

Now, suggesting that a guy like Suter will waive could be assumed perhaps.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm more assuming the latter. But honestly, they won't be getting Dumba.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Minny will lose someone decent if the NMCs don't waive. If it isn't Dumba, (and they go (4+4), it could be Hartman or Greenway.

[MrMike]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'm more assuming the latter. But honestly, they won't be getting Dumba.

Yeah why wouldn’t they just trade him to a team like Vancouver for something. I just can’t see the Wild losing a big asset like that for nothing.

[sureLoss]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1407105327728836612

[DoubleK]

No Klefbom?

Hahaha FU Oilers.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

https://twitter.com/user/status/1407105327728836612

I assume they'll announce the entirety of the Lightning team will be injured and exempt shortly after they finish their playoffs.

[MegaErtz]

I wonder what kind of draft picks or prospects the Flames will have to give Seattle to get them to take Giordano's contract off our hands.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

I wonder what kind of draft picks or prospects the Flames will have to give Seattle to get them to take Giordano's contract off our hands.

Ummm - none? If anything they will pay to avoid that.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

No Klefbom?

Hahaha FU Oilers.

These are all players who will never play again.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

I wonder what kind of draft picks or prospects the Flames will have to give Seattle to get them to take Giordano's contract off our hands.

None. If anything, the Flames will give them something not to take him. Probably a 2nd.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[cKy]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

https://twitter.com/user/status/1407105327728836612

Sad to see Ferland on that list...

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

I wonder what kind of draft picks or prospects the Flames will have to give Seattle to get them to take Giordano's contract off our hands.

Originally Posted by The Cobra

None. If anything, the Flames will give them something not to take him. Probably a 2nd.

Clearly they will do both. They will pay Seattle to take Giordano, and pay them again not to take him. Because, you see, both of those are very stupid things to do, and Brad Treliving, as we all know, is the most stupid human being in the universe.

It is known.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Clearly they will do both. They will pay Seattle to take Giordano, and pay them again not to take him. Because, you see, both of those are very stupid things to do, and Brad Treliving, as we all know, is the most stupid human being in the universe.

It is known.

This is the way.

[NewFan]

2 weeks until teams submit their protection list. Is it possible the teams can trade players after the submission date? May be some teams wants switch some unprotected player before the extention draft.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

None. If anything, the Flames will give them something not to take him. Probably a 2nd.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

If BT gives them a 2nd to not take Gio he should be fired immediately.