Ryan Wilson: Drafting Las Vegas: Part Three Drafting Las Vegas: Part Three

In almost all cases I am going to prefer the guy that can generate shot volume and show more tangible offense even if he bleeds shots in his own end.
- Ryan Wilson

I'm not taking Brandon Sutter's contract when I have the better version of him with Bozak at a similar cost.
- Ryan_Wilson

I was curious as how you would justify weaseling out of not taking Sutter after your earlier comment. Can't stray from the Sutter narrative.

I was curious as how you would justify weaseling out of not taking Sutter after your earlier comment. Can't stray from the Sutter narrative.
- jmatchett383

I've been eagerly awaiting the answer to that question as well.

I'm wondering how much longer people will keep talking about players being "cost-controlled" like it's some magical guarantee of a player being cheap/affordable. As we've seen time and time again, the only players that are truly cost-controlled by RFA status are middle of the road players or players who haven't quite broken out yet, if a player performs he is going to get paid regardless of his RFA status so being "cost-controlled" really isn't a good thing because it most likely means the player hasn't played as well as he could/should.

Was Sean Monahan cost-controlled when he just signed for 6.375M/year as an RFA, how about Saad(6M/year), Hamilton(5.75M/yr) or MacKinnon(6.3M/yr)? Were any of those players "cost-controlled" because they were RFAs? A players performance and potential are always going to be what controls a players cost, if the player plays great the are going to get paid, if they don't play great that what does cost-control matter.

Joe Thornton??? I get that this is all speculative and just for fun since we're in the dog days of summer, but it is hard to keep up with reading this charade when you suggest using your pick from a good Sharks team on a 38 year old UFA. Thornton might have a couple years left and he is going to spend them in San Jose trying to get a cup. There is zero chance he chooses to spend his last few years on an expansion team at the bottom of the standings.

I'm wondering how much longer people will keep talking about players being "cost-controlled" like it's some magical guarantee of a player being cheap/affordable. As we've seen time and time again, the only players that are truly cost-controlled by RFA status are middle of the road players or players who haven't quite broken out yet, if a player performs he is going to get paid regardless of his RFA status so being "cost-controlled" really isn't a good thing because it most likely means the player hasn't played as well as he could/should.

Was Sean Monahan cost-controlled when he just signed for 6.375M/year as an RFA, how about Saad(6M/year), Hamilton(5.75M/yr) or MacKinnon(6.3M/yr)? Were any of those players "cost-controlled" because they were RFAs? A players performance and potential are always going to be what controls a players cost, if the player plays great the are going to get paid, if they don't play great that what does cost-control matter.
- jaydogg1974

yes those guys are "cost-controlled" and those deals all buy out UFA years too.

If anyone of those guys were UFA we would be talking 8-9 m/year.

Joe Thornton??? I get that this is all speculative and just for fun since we're in the dog days of summer, but it is hard to keep up with reading this charade when you suggest using your pick from a good Sharks team on a 38 year old UFA. Thornton might have a couple years left and he is going to spend them in San Jose trying to get a cup. There is zero chance he chooses to spend his last few years on an expansion team at the bottom of the standings.
- jrmjames67

I think he designed that appropriately in targeting a guy. Yes he probably won't sign, but vegas isn't that far from San Jose. And he makes the argument rationally by offering him a silly amount of money. When you factor in taxes and offering a 3rd year that might be almost double the money he will get with san jose.

yes those guys are "cost-controlled" and those deals all buy out UFA years too.

If anyone of those guys were UFA we would be talking 8-9 m/year.
- sditulli

There isn't a chance in hell any of those guys are touching 8-9M/year even if they were UFAs, 8-9M is elite franchise cornerstone stone range, there are exactly 12 players in the entire league that make 8M or more per season and none of those players I listed are anywhere close to being among the the elite top 12-15 players in the league.The current rate for top 50 players is exactly 6M/yr and all of those players are borderline top 50 players overall. All of those players are being paid very close to what their open market value is through their RFA years which is not a favorable situation for the franchise.

Well, if Pittsburgh loses Murray in expansion draft, Rutherford did a terrible job of asset and cap management. Pretty simple. Still think they arrange a deal with LV not to take Murray. It probably costs them a first round pick and LV chooses someone else, like DP.

Essentially just a long drawn out exercise with the same amount of thought put in as all the other outlets posting up "expansion dream teams" Thought this might have a chance to be one that was actually well thought out. At least it burned a couple days worth of blog posts off

Joe Thornton??? I get that this is all speculative and just for fun since we're in the dog days of summer, but it is hard to keep up with reading this charade when you suggest using your pick from a good Sharks team on a 38 year old UFA. Thornton might have a couple years left and he is going to spend them in San Jose trying to get a cup. There is zero chance he chooses to spend his last few years on an expansion team at the bottom of the standings.
- jrmjames67

While I would agree that landing any top notch UFA vet may not be realistic, I don't think suggesting someone like Thornton is that far fetched. RW even noted that the chances of signing him are unlikely but it's worth the risk that they can lure him to come to LV with a butt-load of money, especially when the risk only costs missing out on Nieto or Dillion. As sd pointed out, LV isn't far from SJ so he could stay close to his family without moving them and he'll be treated like a king in LV as the face of the franchise. Honestly I would target both Thorton and Shattenkirk as potential worth the risk UFAs in the expansion draft.

Why even put Murray though? At very worst case scenario he's traded at deadline. However I personally will be real disappointed if Fleury is a Penguin after the year... We don't win without Murray period.!!!!

Well, if Pittsburgh loses Murray in expansion draft, Rutherford did a terrible job of asset and cap management. Pretty simple. Still think they arrange a deal with LV not to take Murray. It probably costs them a first round pick and LV chooses someone else, like DP.
- Oneonta Penguin

While I agree that losing Murray in the expansion draft would be an epic failure on GMJR's part I don't see the need to give LV a draft pick to not take Murray. Assuming Murray continues to play like he did last year(if he doesn't the risk of losing him greatly decreases) then 1 of the 2 goalies will be moved for assets before the expansion draft thus negating the need to make a deal and give up assets to LV.

Why even put Murray though? At very worst case scenario he's traded at deadline. However I personally will be real disappointed if Fleury is a Penguin after the year... We don't win without Murray period.!!!!
- lloyd095

There's absolutely no way to substantiate that but regardless without including Murray at this point there is no exercise. If he makes the exception for Murray and doesn't include him then he'll have to do the same for ever team and the entire exercise becomes pointless because there's just no way to predict that much movement.

...the entire exercise becomes pointless because there's just no way to predict that much movement.
- jaydogg1974

Change becomes to IS

No surprise that Sutter isn't on the list...

This was a great blog series Ryan. I know you set out the rule in advance that you wouldn't account for trades, so it won't be completely accurate but it's a great starting point.

For sure Penguins will find a way to keep Murray. I'm going to take a look back and see which Leaf forwards you protected because they will not allow Bozak to walk for free.(I think u had Rychel in there...) But in all honesty he will be traded sometime before the deadline. He'll fetch a late first rounder and a B prospect or a couple of 2nd rounders and a B prospect.

Las Vegas is going to suck because of a lack of high end talent but they won't be getting blown out of games(like my Leafs in the last few seasons) because they have some quality players and decent depth.

Well, if Pittsburgh loses Murray in expansion draft, Rutherford did a terrible job of asset and cap management. Pretty simple. Still think they arrange a deal with LV not to take Murray. It probably costs them a first round pick and LV chooses someone else, like DP.
- Oneonta Penguin

Yes of course, but Ryan said from the onset that he will ignore trades because he can't speculate them all. Pens must find a way to trade Fleury. Which means they won't get a goo return on a great goalie. Thems the breaks. Pens will keep Murray.

Jesus, Las Vegas is going to be a lot better than my team - and for $20 million less...

If Fleury does well in the season and Murray does not.... I wouldnt count out trading Murray by guys like Morehouse and Lemieux. Fleury has a connection and is a huge part of the pens becoming a force in the league. Those two guys have been at the top since hes been goalie. Im not advocating keeping him... just suggesting he may not be out the door as everyone assumes.

If Fleury does well in the season and Murray does not.... I wouldnt count out trading Murray by guys like Morehouse and Lemieux. Fleury has a connection and is a huge part of the pens becoming a force in the league. Those two guys have been at the top since hes been goalie. Im not advocating keeping him... just suggesting he may not be out the door as everyone assumes.
- nelson911

Oh man if Murray is available please call Lou and the Leafs. We got lots of young guns to trade for a Matt Murray

Yes of course, but Ryan said from the onset that he will ignore trades because he can't speculate them all. Pens must find a way to trade Fleury. Which means they won't get a goo return on a great goalie. Thems the breaks. Pens will keep Murray.
- Njuice

It ruins the exercise though. It is to guess who Vegas would take in an expansion draft not to guess which players would get traded to other teams. It doesn't take much more than common sense to know there are just certain players that would aboslutely be traded before they were put up for an expansion draft. In this case, the entire exercise is a predictive model that uses flawed information to get a flawed answer...it's pointless.

Coming up with an actual prediction of what the team will look like while being wrong on a trade or two is much more useful than knowingly picking players that wont be available

There isn't a chance in hell any of those guys are touching 8-9M/year even if they were UFAs, 8-9M is elite franchise cornerstone stone range, there are exactly 12 players in the entire league that make 8M or more per season and none of those players I listed are anywhere close to being among the the elite top 12-15 players in the league.The current rate for top 50 players is exactly 6M/yr and all of those players are borderline top 50 players overall. All of those players are being paid very close to what their open market value is through their RFA years which is not a favorable situation for the franchise.
- jaydogg1974

Agree to disagree. The only guy whose signed a UFA contract lately was stamkos and he clearly took a below market deal. Before that Parise at 7.5 but he got a massive term of 13 years to lower the cap hit. and he was only a 31 goal69 point guy. Monahan had 27 goals and 63 pts last year. And he's still developing so I think the Parise contract is a good indicator that a guy like Monahan would get 9-10 on the open market.

Great blog series, Gunner.

lol at saying it's pointless... but you continue to read and comment on every post.

The 30+ mil over 3 year deal to Thorten... wow. Its not a terrible idea... but just wow.

Why don't they try to trade for the Sedin twins too while we're at it