Ryan Wilson: Who Should My Team Protect In The Expansion Draft: Part 6 Who Should My Team Protect In The Expansion Draft: Part 6

ugh, tampa is gonna lose a good player.

ugh, tampa is gonna lose a good player.
- sensarmy_11

Nah. Filppula buyout and a Johnson trade. Problem solved.

Johnson will go before Killorn.

Johnson will go before Killorn.
- OzBolts

Trust the Yzerplan. Johnson is a product of Palat and Kuch IMO.

100% agreed. He's expendable, and I fully believe Namestnikov has a higher ceiling.

Great work on this series Ryan.

For the Leafs I would protect Bozak of Rychel. Rychel may never even make it into the NHL, while a versatile 2nd line center like Bozak on a bargain basement contract can and will be traded to a contender for a late 1st round pick and random prospect.

But that trade will likely happen at this years deadline so... ya I guess Leafs won't have to protect Bozak.

ugh, tampa is gonna lose a good player.
- sensarmy_11

It almost seems like Tampa and Pittsburgh are the only teams losing something valuable.

It almost seems like Tampa and Pittsburgh are the only teams losing something valuable.
- Njuice

the jackets will also lose a good player simply based on all the NMC/NTC's they have on their roster.

also, according to this blog, Ottawa will protect methot instead of ceci..................which is silly...........but either way the sens are likely going to lose a good top 4 dman.

the jackets will also lose a good player simply based on all the NMC/NTC's they have on their roster.

also, according to this blog, Ottawa will protect methot instead of ceci..................which is silly...........but either way the sens are likely going to lose a good top 4 dman.
- sensarmy_11

The Ducks have the potential to lose a high end middle pairing guy in Despres as well. Vegas will get a handful of actual good, not great players and then a whole bunch of poop. I retract my original opinion that Vegas was gonna have a pretty good squad to start off with.

Glad to see some Sutter bashing resurfacing.

Jim Benning....

#DimJim

The Ducks have the potential to lose a high end middle pairing guy in Despres as well. Vegas will get a handful of actual good, not great players and then a whole bunch of poop. I retract my original opinion that Vegas was gonna have a pretty good squad to start off with.
- Victoro311

I still think they'll have a good, not great, team. I'm sure there will be a couple of UFAs that will sign there, maybe a trade, top 3-4 draft pick.....they'll be okay I think.

Glad to see some Sutter bashing resurfacing.
- jmatchett383

Did you ever think, when it came to Vancouver, he wasn't going to???

Glad to see some Sutter bashing resurfacing.
- jmatchett383

That can't possibly surprise you, I was actually surprised that there wasn't more bashing than there was.

I'm by no means a Sutter fan and couldn't be happier that he's not in Pittsburgh anymore but at what point does he deserve a little credit for the actual production he provides? I honestly don't see LV selecting him as a bad thing for LV, production will be in short supply early on for the franchise so adding a guy that nets them 20 goals really isn't a bad thing for them even if his underlying numbers aren't good. At some point you have to give the edge to the player that actually produces even though the possession isn't good over the guy that continue to drive possession but never produces actual production.

As far as the canucks go they won't be protecting gaunce over Sutter. Gaunce is still green and best case becomes a Sutter like player.

You would have to believe that Luca Sbisa would be las vegas' target.

That can't possibly surprise you, I was actually surprised that there wasn't more bashing than there was.

I'm by no means a Sutter fan and couldn't be happier that he's not in Pittsburgh anymore but at what point does he deserve a little credit for the actual production he provides? I honestly don't see LV selecting him as a bad thing for LV, production will be in short supply early on for the franchise so adding a guy that nets them 20 goals really isn't a bad thing for them even if his underlying numbers aren't good. At some point you have to give the edge to the player that actually produces even though the possession isn't good over the guy that continue to drive possession but never produces actual production.
- jaydogg1974

Agreed. If you take 200 more shots per game than the other team, but you lose 1-0, what good are the shots? You can bang the "playing the right way" drum all you want, but if you can't regularly put the puck in the net, then all the shots in the world don't matter.

Caps would protect Wilson, unfortunately. Losing Grubrauer for nothing would kind of suck.

Caps would protect Wilson, unfortunately. Losing Grubrauer for nothing would kind of suck.
- Blackstrom2

Agreed. Unless he has a huge season, I don't see them protecting Brett Conolly over him.

By the way, this is with regards to the "disguise a goalie as a forward for the expansion draft" idea:

There are certain rules governing how a goalie is used. In order to wear the pads, use the goal stick, and be able to cover the puck without a penalty, you must be designated as a goalie.

However, there's nothing that says you can't list a forward as a defenseman and play them at the forward position, or vice versa. Say, for instance, that you would rather protect Hornqvist than Pouliot, but you have any more forward spots; no problem, just list him as your 7th defenseman, go with 11 forwards, and let him play the actual game at his usual spot.

This way, as far as roster construction goes, he's a defenseman, and could be protected as such. I don't think the league could do anything, especially since the practice of forwards switching to defense (Fedorov, Kapanen, Byfuglien) is not totally unheard of.

By the way, this is with regards to the "disguise a goalie as a forward for the expansion draft" idea:

There are certain rules governing how a goalie is used. In order to wear the pads, use the goal stick, and be able to cover the puck without a penalty, you must be designated as a goalie.

However, there's nothing that says you can't list a forward as a defenseman and play them at the forward position, or vice versa. Say, for instance, that you would rather protect Hornqvist than Pouliot, but you have any more forward spots; no problem, just list him as your 7th defenseman, go with 11 forwards, and let him play the actual game at his usual spot.

This way, as far as roster construction goes, he's a defenseman, and could be protected as such. I don't think the league could do anything, especially since the practice of forwards switching to defense (Fedorov, Kapanen, Byfuglien) is not totally unheard of.
- jmatchett383

Burns was the person I got the idea of maybe you could swap posistions for protection from.

Burns was the person I got the idea of maybe you could swap posistions for protection from.
- martox

Burns is another one.

But, again, it would only work for forwards and defensemen. You can't do it with goalies.

Burns is another one.

But, again, it would only work for forwards and defensemen. You can't do it with goalies.
- jmatchett383

I think it could work and would be legal if they actually played the player at the position, ie dressing Murray in regular player gear and dressing him as your 6th/7th defenseman but that would really defeat the purpose. I'm sure the league would have issue with listing a player at a position he doesn't and hasn't ever played just for protection purposes. If the Pens were willing to dress/player Murray as a defenseman this year they would have a legitimate case for protecting him as a defenseman but that really the only scenario where I see that being possible.

Burns is another one.

But, again, it would only work for forwards and defensemen. You can't do it with goalies.
- jmatchett383

I'd pay good money to see some goalies skate out in regular player positions.

That can't possibly surprise you, I was actually surprised that there wasn't more bashing than there was.

I'm by no means a Sutter fan and couldn't be happier that he's not in Pittsburgh anymore but at what point does he deserve a little credit for the actual production he provides? I honestly don't see LV selecting him as a bad thing for LV, production will be in short supply early on for the franchise so adding a guy that nets them 20 goals really isn't a bad thing for them even if his underlying numbers aren't good. At some point you have to give the edge to the player that actually produces even though the possession isn't good over the guy that continue to drive possession but never produces actual production.
- jaydogg1974

Sutter was bad. He never met a board battle he felt like winning and he was an absolute terrible offensive facilitator. He did nothing for us unless he had a 1 v 1 down the right side and ripped an all things considered good wrister into the net. If he wasn't on a fast break he was worthless. I sat through the Brandon Sutter years so I completely understand if someone wants to rip him constantly.