Hypotheticals: Expansion Draft

Jonathan Willis
July 18 2009 11:18AM

jdd

Let’s say for a moment that the NHL has decided to add two more franchises, like they did in 2000 (Minnesota and Columbus). The first thing they do is hold an expansion draft for the two teams, which are to be located in Hamilton and Kansas City.

The rules for the expansion draft are as they were in 2000, and are as follows (courtesy of Wikipedia):

26 of the 28 teams existing in the league at the time of the draft were each allowed to protect either one goaltender, five defensemen, and nine forwards or two goaltenders, three defensemen, and seven forwards. For teams protecting only one goaltender, there was no experience requirement for those left unprotected. For teams protecting two goaltenders, each goaltender left unprotected must have appeared in either 10 NHL games in the 1999–2000 season or 25 games in the 1998–99 season and 1999–2000 seasons combined. A goaltender had to be in net for at least 31 minutes in each game for the game to be counted against these totals. At least one defenceman left unprotected by each team had to have appeared in at least 40 games in the 1999–2000 season or 70 games in the 1998–99 season and 1999–2000 seasons combined. At least two forwards left unprotected by each team had to have met the same requirements. 52 players were chosen in the draft, two from each participating franchise. Only one goaltender or one defensemen could be selected from each franchise.

Additionally, all unsigned draft picks (except picks drafted from Europe in 1996 or earlier who remain with their European clubs) and players with two years or less of professional experience are considered protected.

Here then is the list of Oilers players that would be at risk of getting selected:

Eligible Forwards

  • Gilbert Brule
  • Alexander Bumagin
  • Ales Hemsky
  • Shawn Horcoff
  • Jean-Francois Jacques
  • Steve MacIntyre
  • Alexei Mikhnov
  • Evgeny Muratov
  • Chris Minard
  • Ethan Moreau
  • Robert Nilsson
  • Linus Omark
  • Patrick O’Sullivan
  • Dustin Penner
  • Fernando Pisani
  • Ryan Potulny
  • Marc Pouliot
  • Liam Reddox
  • Rob Schremp
  • Ryan Stone
  • Zack Stortini

Eligible Defensemen

  • Tom Gilbert
  • Denis Grebeshkov
  • Matt Nickerson
  • Ladislav Smid
  • Sheldon Souray
  • Steve Staios
  • Jason Strudwick
  • Lubomir Visnovsky

Eligible Goaltenders

  • Bjorn Bjurling
  • Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers
  • Devan Dubnyk
  • Nikolai Khabibulin

*I’m not 100% sure on Linus Omark and Ryan O’Marra, but for the purpose of this exercise O’Marra will be considered exempt, since I believe O’Marra’s brief AHL playoff stint in 2005-06 doesn’t count as a year of professional hockey, and Omark will be considered eligible because of his professional experience in Europe.

The List

Who should the Oilers protect from this hypothetical expansion draft? I’m curious to see what the consensus is in the comments, but I’ll do up my list now.

First of all, the strength of the Oilers current group is its defensive corps, so I’ve decided to protect nine forwards, five defenseman and one goaltender rather than seven, three and two.

Protected Forwards

I’m going to start with the forwards, since they’re relatively easy:

  • Ales Hemsky
  • Shawn Horcoff
  • Ethan Moreau
  • Patrick O’Sullivan
  • Dustin Penner
  • Fernando Pisani

Those six were obvious, and the next three comes down to a choice between a group of Gilbert Brule, J-F Jacques, Robert Nilsson, Linus Omark, Marc Pouliot, Rob Schremp and Zack Stortini. Jacques’ injury concerns, Nilsson’s salary and redundancy on the roster, and Schremp’s stagnation lead me to eliminate them. I also make the difficult choice to keep Zack Stortini off of the protected list because while I love his work ethic and willingness, I can’t ever see him elevated much higher than the fourth line. My final three protected forwards are:

  • Gilbert Brule
  • Linus Omark
  • Marc Pouliot

Protected Defensemen

This part of the list I found incredibly easy. I would protect the following five defensemen:

  • Tom Gilbert
  • Denis Grebeshkov
  • Ladislav Smid
  • Sheldon Souray
  • Lubomir Visnovsky

Left unprotected were Steve Staios (salary, age), Jason Strudwick (depth defenseman) and Matt Nickerson (obviously).

Protected Goaltender

  • Nikolai Khabibulin

This was easily the hardest part of the list. Bjorn Bjurling was an easy player to leave unprotected, while Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers came next because he is neither ready for an NHL starting role nor does he have Devan Dubnyk’s potential. That left me a choice between Nikolai Khabibulin and Devan Dubnyk.

Nikolai Khabibulin would be an obvious choice if his contract wasn’t so long (four years) and impossible to get out of (over 35) and there weren’t other goaltenders (Biron, Fernandez) still on the market. That said, I would probably opt to protect him and expose Dubnyk unless I could hammer out an agreement in principle with Martin Biron.

Since I can also only lose one goaltender, I’d work hard to try and convince teams to take Deslauriers instead of Dubnyk. At the 2000 Draft, San Jose made trades with both Minnesota and Columbus to keep them from selecting Evgeni Nabokov, and since my team could only lose one goaltender, I’d try and make a deal if a team elected to take Dubnyk over Deslauriers.

The Unprotected

  • Alexander Bumagin
  • J-F Jacques
  • Steve MacIntyre
  • Alexei Mikhnov
  • Evgeny Muratov
  • Chris Minard
  • Robert Nilsson
  • Ryan Potulny
  • Liam Reddox
  • Rob Schremp
  • Ryan Stone
  • Zack Stortini ---
  • Matt Nickerson
  • Steve Staios
  • Jason Strudwick ---
  • Bjorn Bjurling
  • Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers
  • Devan Dubnyk

As the G.M. of both Hamilton and Kansas City, I would make the following selections:

Hamilton acquires Rob Schremp for agreeing not to select a goaltender.

Kansas City acquires Cody Wild for agreeing not to select Devan Dubnyk, and selects Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers.

Hamilton selects Robert Nilsson.

74b7cedc5d8bfbe88cf071309e98d2c3
Jonathan Willis is Managing Editor of the Nation Network. He also currently writes for the Edmonton Journal's Cult of Hockey, Grantland, and Hockey Prospectus. His work has appeared at theScore, ESPN and Puck Daddy. He was previously founder and managing editor of Copper & Blue. Contact him at jonathan (dot) willis (at) live (dot) ca.
Avatar
#1 Archaeologuy
July 18 2009, 11:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

To start, all discussion of possible expansion by NHL executives should be grounds for death by firing squad.

But I have no real issue with your list of protected vs unprotected players. Maybe I'd consider leaving Penner unprotected due to Salary concerns.

That makes me wonder if a possible condition of any expansion drafts to come will include a clause where at least one unprotected player from each team has to have a Cap hit of over X million dollars so that the expansion team is capable of reaching the Cap floor.

Avatar
#2 Sandra
July 18 2009, 11:49AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Khabby can go. No way would I let Desjarlais or Dubnyk exposed, no one would take Khabby's contract, Steve Lowe made it a Horcoff deal, no one will take him.

Avatar
#3 Archaeologuy
July 18 2009, 11:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Sandra: Khabibulin would likely be the best tender unprotected and would undoubtedly be taken by an expansion team who would need a solid tender for the next 3-4 years before their own Goalie prospects become semi-viable options. Not to mention those expansion teams would be filled with fringe guys who wont make lots of coin for the first few years, so they would have Cap space. AND if the team was in Hamilton it would likely be one of the top earning clubs in the league. I'm sure they could afford him.

Avatar
#4 MDGD
July 18 2009, 12:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Haven't looked at your list yet. Mine would be:

-Hemsky -Horcoff -Penner -O'Sullivan -Moreau -Brule -Pisani -Pouliot -Stortini

-Gilbert -Grebs -Souray -Visnovsky -Smid (By far the easiest part of the exercise.)

-Dubnyk (If they grabbed Khabibulin, I'd then sign Biron.) ____________________ Now, having looked at your list, I chose Stortini over Omark, because I see him having a Buchberger-like career. I think he's going to be an important part of this team for a long time.

I chose Dubnyk assuming a deal with Biron is possible. I suppose you're right -- I'd probably need an understanding with Biron to be comfortable losing Khabibulin.

Avatar
#5 Lord Bob
July 18 2009, 12:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I agree with your list except for the fact that I'd drop Moreau and Omark and keep Nilsson and Stortini.

Heck, Stortini is darned near as good a player as Moreau except he's much cheaper and not rapidly turning into the Frankenstein monster. Omark, meanwhile, is the size of a shot glass and would rather play in Russia than the AHL. That may change when the KHL completely collapses, but I'm still not convinced he's anything more than a flash in the pan.

Khabibulin might actually go in an expansion draft if he were exposed, just because expansion teams tend to have lots of cap room and they might consider a big-name, league-average goaltender a good way to put bums in seats regardless of his hit.

Avatar
#6 Soooray
July 18 2009, 12:09PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Why protect Penner in an expansion draft? The Oil seem quite keen to dump his contract anyways. Keep JDD protected, especially since he's had glimpses of being a longer term option for the copper and blue.

Avatar
#7 lowetide
July 18 2009, 12:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

9-5-1

Forwards 1. Hemsky 2. Horcoff 3. Penner 4. O'Sullivan 5. Pisani 6. Pouliot 7. Nilsson 8. Jacques 9. Brule

Defense 1. Visnovsky 2. Souray 3. Gilbert 4. Grebeshkov 5. Smid

Goalie 1. Khabibulin

The goalie's salary is likely tradeable to a team attempting to get to the salary floor, so I'd take him over Dubnyk.

Avatar
#8 Propeller
July 18 2009, 12:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'd have the same list save for swapping Stortini in and MAP out. Nilson and Schremp are the obvious players to pluck off the unprotected list.

Why were only 26 of the 28 teams involved in the draft?

Avatar
#9 Roz
July 18 2009, 12:12PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I think I'm not understanding something. How come Cogs and Gags are omitted from this list?

Avatar
#10 Roz
July 18 2009, 12:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Propeller wrote:

Why were only 26 of the 28 teams involved in the draft?

Nashville and Atlanta were only 2 years old and the league protected their entire roster.

Avatar
#11 Mike from Hardware
July 18 2009, 12:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Roz wrote:

I think I’m not understanding something. How come Cogs and Gags are omitted from this list?

2 years or less.

Avatar
#12 DL
July 18 2009, 12:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I would probably choose the 9 forwards, 5 defencemen, and 1 goalie as well. However, I would protect those players with potential to either step into the NHL right away or have the talent to one day become a regular in the NHL level. This list would be my choice:

Forward: Gilbert Brule: still very young and plenty of potential Ales Hemsky: obvious to keep Shawn Horcoff: veteran, who's not a liability on the ice Robert Nilsson: might be in MacT's doghouse, but may flourish with Quinn and Renney Linus Omark: obvious talent and would be a great fit with the team Patrick O'Sullivan: another great potential player who can conceivably excel in the NHL Fernando Pisani: clutch goal scorer who can bring veteran leadership along with Horcoff and play the checking lines Rob Schremp: loads of offensive potential still, which cannot be ignored Zack Stortini: young and tough.

Defencemen: Tom Gilbert: nice and steady with offensive potential Denis Grebeshkov: maturing into one of the best two d-man Ladislav Smid: has potential to become even better Sheldon Souray: veteran, who has underrated skills in his own end Lubomir Visnovsky: great puck mover and can run PP

Goalie: Jeff Drouin-Deslauriers: sure he's young and doesn't have too much NHL experience yet, but he has to start somewhere. If he doesn't work out, there's always free agent goalies to pursue in the offseason. Or, the team can wait until Olivier Roy is developed. However, I think we're not giving Deslauriers enough credit. I'm not totally sold on Dubnyk -- too inconsistent.

Avatar
#13 mojo
July 18 2009, 12:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

im with you until u protect marc pouliot. hes a waste of space. lets face it hes stunned the growth of some of our younger players and for what? a waste of 3 seasons. thats just stupid to protect him

Avatar
#14 Roz
July 18 2009, 12:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Mike from Hardware wrote:

2 years or less.

Thanks I completely read over that.

Avatar
#15 Andrew W
July 18 2009, 12:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Jonathan Willis:

I'm confused: why isn't Cogliano on any of these lists?

Avatar
#16 Death Metal Nightmare
July 18 2009, 12:52PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

all bad contracts are unprotected. easy enough. "you want crap, take crap. saves us cap space". likely, an expansion team wouldnt want to take on salary so the players probably wouldnt even get picked.

Avatar
#17 Andrew W
July 18 2009, 12:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Roz: @ Jonathan Willis:

Right - and Gagner...

Avatar
#18 Andrew W
July 18 2009, 01:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Roz:

Man, I really need to learn how to read.

Basic stuff like paying better attention to what I'm reading before duplicating questions, overlooking the answers in the article, and missing your clarification? Sure, that'll help, too.

*Quietly goes back to staring blankly at laptop monitor, drule slowly slipping from corner of mouth.*

Avatar
#19 oilitsinyoutogive
July 18 2009, 01:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Andrew W wrote:

@ Roz: @ Jonathan Willis: Right - and Gagner…

again as stated above they are not on the list because it says players with 2 year or less are exempt

Avatar
#20 MrOiler
July 18 2009, 01:08PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I wouldn't be surprised that an expansion is a hot topic right now for the NHL BOG. There are teams that could use a cash injection and there are markets unserved - i.e. GTA, Seattle, KC, Vegas.

The NFL has 32 teams and the NHL television contracts are up in 2 years. I would bet we have two new teams in 2011/12 to cities that have current arenas.

Take a look at this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Las_Vegas_Arena

Avatar
#21 Alex
July 18 2009, 01:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ DL:

dude are you referring to last season as 'inconsistent' on Dubnyk's part? Or just his career in general?

Because if you are looking at last year as a guide to how talented or consistent Dubnyk is, you have to look at it from Dubnyk's position, or any goalie that would be in net for the Falcons 1) the offensive sucked the big one, no goals in favour of the falcons, they'd get maybe half the shots of whatever their opponent was getting. 2) defensive was even worse usually giving up AT LEAST 40 shots an evening

He's not perfect I'll give you that, there's a few that he'd want back. Those 58 losses or something look awful for a record, but you can't hold him to all of them when you look at how bad the team played.

Even with all those losses, he still managed to make the three stars. And when Sabourin played, the Falcons didn't magically start winning and getting shut-outs. They still lost.

I think I'm going to stop myself now... the point is don't write him off as inconsistent. Anyway, he still has at least a year to banish any doubts of his skill from your mind.

Avatar
#22 Mike76
July 18 2009, 01:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

J. W. you must be severly bored. You gotta get yourself a hottie to hang out with by the pool for the summer.

Or if you still want to kill time on Oilers Hypotheticals why don't you hypothesize on what would happen with the contraction of two teams, because that is more likely than an expansion given the state of the teams in Southern USA.

Avatar
#23 DL
July 18 2009, 01:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Alex: I'm not trying to discredit Dubnyk at all. I understand that he played for a poor team, and he was probably one of the lone bright spots, along with Potulny, on the Falcons. On the other hand, I haven't seen him steal any games by himself. Do I think Deslauriers should be the backup for some time in the NHL? Yes, I do. At the same time, I'm thinking about Khabibulin's age, term of contract, and amount we're giving him. I just think we would be better off by throwing Deslauriers in as No. 1 and leaving Khabibulin and Dubnyk unprotected. Besides, I highly doubt both will get snatched anyway.

Avatar
#24 Ogden Brother
July 18 2009, 01:53PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Sandra wrote:

Khabby can go. No way would I let Desjarlais or Dubnyk exposed, no one would take Khabby’s contract, Steve Lowe made it a Horcoff deal, no one will take him.

So Lowe signs bad contracts and now Tambs one contract has been a bad one.... I wonder why that is??? Can anyone figure it out?

Avatar
#25 godot10
July 18 2009, 01:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

1) There would be no need to protect Khabibulin, at his age, and with his contract. You protect Dubnyk.

2) There would also be no reason to protect Pisani or Moreau. Pisani is a year away from being an UFA, and Moreau is two years away. With the reduced age of unrestricted free agency, one protects young guys over older soon to be UFA.

Dubnyk

Gilbert, Grebeshkov, Souray, Smid, Visnovsky

Horcoff, Hemsky, Penner, O'Sullivan, Stortini, Jacques, Brule, Omark, Pouliot

One leaves Nilsson out there, to dissuade people from taking Moreau or Pisani.

Avatar
#26 Jonathan Willis
July 18 2009, 02:07PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Mike76 wrote:

Hypotheticals why don’t you hypothesize on what would happen with the contraction of two teams, because that is more likely than an expansion given the state of the teams in Southern USA.

Contraction doesn't bring in revenue. Expansion does.

Avatar
#27 Archaeologuy
July 18 2009, 02:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Jonathan Willis wrote:

Contraction doesn’t bring in revenue. Expansion does.

Theoretically wouldnt cutting out two underperforming teams bring the average revenues up, increasing the Cap.

And if those two teams were terrible draws for TV (which they likely would be) it would increase the average draw of an NHL team in the ratings. And once those 2 teams were contracted the best players from those teams would be redistributed amongst the league, creating a better product to sell to both TV and the ticket buyings fans.

Maybe contraction would bring in revenue. maybe. There would not be an contraction fee paid to the league like there would be under expansion, but that's just short term stuff.

Avatar
#28 Jonathan Willis
July 18 2009, 02:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Archaeologuy wrote:

There would not be an contraction fee paid to the league like there would be under expansion, but that’s just short term stuff.

These are not men capable of risking millions of dollars on the long term picture.

If you tell most of the owners in the league that they have a choice between 200-million split 30 ways right now (and a Hamilton franchise alone would cost at least that) or possible future revenue years from now, they only make one choice.

Avatar
#29 Archaeologuy
July 18 2009, 03:11PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Jonathan Willis wrote:

These are not men capable of risking millions of dollars on the long term picture.

And yet they risked (and lost) millions of dollars by watering down their talent pool. ESPN walked away from a product they couldnt sell anymore. And how could they with Finals in Tampa Bay, Carolina, and Florida (panthers) where there was no connection to the casual fan? More stars in some key locations makes money for the league.

200 million over 30 teams isnt all that much. Not quite 7 million. 2 less teams mean there's a better chance to make the playoffs for the other teams and a better chance to increase revenues. I think the league has gotten to the point where it might make more money to cut back than to move forward.

Avatar
#30 Ogden Brother
July 18 2009, 03:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Archaeologuy wrote:

Jonathan Willis wrote: These are not men capable of risking millions of dollars on the long term picture. And yet they risked (and lost) millions of dollars by watering down their talent pool. ESPN walked away from a product they couldnt sell anymore. And how could they with Finals in Tampa Bay, Carolina, and Florida (panthers) where there was no connection to the casual fan? More stars in some key locations makes money for the league. 200 million over 30 teams isnt all that much. Not quite 7 million. 2 less teams mean there’s a better chance to make the playoffs for the other teams and a better chance to increase revenues. I think the league has gotten to the point where it might make more money to cut back than to move forward.

Pretty big leap in your assumption there.

Avatar
#31 Archaeologuy
July 18 2009, 03:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Ogden Brother: In my assumption that ESPN dropped the NHL? uh, it already happened.

Avatar
#32 Ogden Brother
July 18 2009, 03:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Archaeologuy wrote:

@ Ogden Brother: In my assumption that ESPN dropped the NHL? uh, it already happened.

That ESPN dropped because of expansion.

"And yet they risked (and lost) millions of dollars by watering down their talent pool"

Avatar
#33 Archaeologuy
July 18 2009, 03:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Ogden Brother: You dont think that the NHL is watered down further than it should be? You dont think that an inferior product led to the loss of interest in the US, and therefore the loss of a quality TV deal?

I dont think that it's that big of a leap.

Avatar
#34 Ogden Brother
July 18 2009, 04:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Archaeologuy wrote:

@ Ogden Brother: You dont think that the NHL is watered down further than it should be? You dont think that an inferior product led to the loss of interest in the US, and therefore the loss of a quality TV deal? I dont think that it’s that big of a leap.

No, I don't think it led to a lack of interest in the US, in fact I'd say their is the same (or more) interest in the US that their has always been. I also think the league expanded to trying to land the big US TV deal... And I'd be willing to bet they did so at the reccomendation of the TV providers.

Avatar
#35 Archaeologuy
July 18 2009, 04:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ Ogden Brother: There was a time when the NBA was below the NHL in terms of popularity, it isnt even close now. Whether or not the league expanded in order to get a better TV deal doesnt matter, what has happened suggests it was a poor decision. They and the TV providers were wrong and it cost the NHL lots of money and accessibility. The fact of the matter remains that the 28 other owners have no reason to support failing franchises in bad markets. They are like a cancer that should be cut out of the league.

Avatar
#36 Ogden Brother
July 18 2009, 04:23PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Archaeologuy wrote:

@ Ogden Brother: There was a time when the NBA was below the NHL in terms of popularity, it isnt even close now. Whether or not the league expanded in order to get a better TV deal doesnt matter, what has happened suggests it was a poor decision. They and the TV providers were wrong and it cost the NHL lots of money and accessibility. The fact of the matter remains that the 28 other owners have no reason to support failing franchises in bad markets. They are like a cancer that should be cut out of the league.

And again, your just assuming that expansion = no TV deal.

Also, remember it wasn't long ago that the Oil were one of those cancers (and could be again in the not to distant future). Careful what you wish for.

Avatar
#37 J.L.
July 18 2009, 04:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I'm amazed how quickly we all are to deem Khabibulin expendable simply because of his contract. We have a proven veteran starter who's won nearly everything there is to win in hockey. He is one of the best goaltenders in the league. He's even better than Roli the Goalie himself (!)

Do you want to know what a bad contract for a goaltender is? Look at what the Flames are paying 'Kipper'. Over 6 million is a bad cap hit for any goaltender, let alone a goaltender who gets outplayed most nights.

Avatar
#38 J.L.
July 18 2009, 04:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Also, JW, what do you see in Marc Pouliot? I couldn't believe that you would rather keep Pouliot than Zach Stortini. What potential do you see in him that you don't see in Stortini?

Avatar
#39 Soooray
July 18 2009, 05:57PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Agreed. At least Zach brings intensity night in and out. Pouliot is way too soft. The Oil need to be grittier and tougher to play against.@ J.L.:

Avatar
#40 Jonathan Willis
July 18 2009, 06:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ J.L.:

I'll do an article on Marc Pouliot some time. He brings a lot to the table offensively that people don't seem to remember, plus he knows where his own zone is and can play any position.

If he can ever get his head bolted on straight he'll have it made.

Avatar
#41 Jason
July 18 2009, 06:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Im not sure id protect Horcoff or Penner. It would be a great opportunity to offload some inflated salaries.

Avatar
#42 Ogden Brother
July 18 2009, 06:44PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

J.L. wrote:

I’m amazed how quickly we all are to deem Khabibulin expendable simply because of his contract. We have a proven veteran starter who’s won nearly everything there is to win in hockey. He is one of the best goaltenders in the league. He’s even better than Roli the Goalie himself (!) Do you want to know what a bad contract for a goaltender is? Look at what the Flames are paying ‘Kipper’. Over 6 million is a bad cap hit for any goaltender, let alone a goaltender who gets outplayed most nights.

That's the name of the game here, free cap space > quality hockey players.

Avatar
#43 Ogden Brother
July 18 2009, 06:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Jason wrote:

Im not sure id protect Horcoff or Penner. It would be a great opportunity to offload some inflated salaries.

See J.L.

Avatar
#44 Heazues
July 18 2009, 07:41PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

expansion is good for one thing. cleaning the books form the other 30 teams. with the cap going down, and alot of teams getting in trouble cap wise, it could potentially help balance out the rest of the league. it wont be by alot. but if there were 2 new teams and they each take on about $40M thats an average $2.4M off each clubs books.

silver lining to every cloud?

Avatar
#45 Jasmine
July 18 2009, 09:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@ oilitsinyoutogive: Then why do they have to protect Omark? He hasn't played 1 game in the NHL. Same with DD and JDD. Why do these players have to be protected.

Avatar
#46 smiliegirl15
July 18 2009, 09:42PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Jonathan Willis wrote:

If he can ever get his head bolted on straight he’ll have it made.

I think he only drafted as high as he did because he played junior on a line with Crosby.

Avatar
#47 esa tikkanen
July 18 2009, 11:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

- pouliot was drafted the year before Crosby played with him

- who here thinks the Oilers should consider signing Sykora as a PP specialist to replace what Kotalik would have brought?

- i think Cogliano for Harntell would be a good trade for both teams. Gives Philly a young cheap player, Oilers get rid of a small center and get a tough winger who can score. Thoughts? Dump Staios salary to pay the difference..

Avatar
#48 esa tikkanen
July 18 2009, 11:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

one other thing, don't those of you like Lowetide who think the Oilers are giving up on the future by trading Cogliano for Heatley (as part of the package) not realizing that it makes no sense for the Oielrs to keep both Gagner and Cogliano long term? You cannot have two small centers as number one and two if you are going to be a good team. If Cogliano cannot play the wing, it makes sense to trade him for a grittier, goal scoring winger who is still young. Heatley is 28. Hartnell is 27. Cogliano will be 23 this season and will be getting a big raise in one year. He will be a UFA in three years after this season, so what is the big deal about keeping him because we drafted him? By the time he is a true star, he will be UFA and may leave anyway....

Avatar
#49 Jonathan Willis
July 18 2009, 11:34PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

smiliegirl15 wrote:

Jonathan Willis wrote: If he can ever get his head bolted on straight he’ll have it made. I think he only drafted as high as he did because he played junior on a line with Crosby.

Tikkanen's got it. Pouliot was drafted prior to playing with Crosby.

Avatar
#50 Garett
July 18 2009, 11:35PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Its Deslauriers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comments are closed for this article.