You have to figure Lameriello would prefer that Seattle take Eberle so what would he pay to have them do so? I’m really hoping we hold onto our first…

Also, if that’s the case why not expose Clutterbuck if the whole idea is to have them select Eberle? Wouldn’t it cost us less to have them select Eberle instead of Clutterbuck rather then Bailey?

I’m sure there’s some deal(s) in place that’ll explain these questions but it is a bit strange…

Yeah that was pretty cool hearing those guys thoughts on the Coli crowd. Re: exposed players, I was saying I think I’d have exposed 15 over 12. I think the reason is 15 has one year left on his deal while 12 has two or three.
- TogaIsles

Let me see if I can get you to look at this another way. None of us know what is going to happen today with the Kraken and side deals & players taken. Here's what we know. Lou traded away Leddy and Ladd's contract thereby freeing up cap space. Which makes it seem like he's going to make a run at Landeskog. Losing either Eberle or Bailey to Seattle frees up another ~$5m. Bailey has 3 years left at $5m, Eberle 3 years left at $5.5m. Clutterbuck has 1 year left at $3.5m and Matty 3 years at $1.5m. So he exposed Ebs & Bails while protecting Matty and Clutterbuck. He's protecting the money, not the players. If he's trying to create cap space to bring in Landy and someone else, he needs to dump a higher salary. Exposing the salary of Clutz or Martin doesn't generate cap space. Exposing Ebs & Bails does.
Then of course the side deals come into play. Like Chief stated yesterday (not saying it'll happen), maybe Lou offers Bellows for Seattle to take Eberle.
We'll see how it all shakes out at the end of the day today. The biggest thing with this expansion draft is you can't look at it from an emotional standpoint. It's a business decision.

You have to figure Lameriello would prefer that Seattle take Eberle so what would he pay to have them do so? I’m really hoping we hold onto our first…

Also, if that’s the case why not expose Clutterbuck if the whole idea is to have them select Eberle? Wouldn’t it cost us less to have them select Eberle instead of Clutterbuck rather then Bailey?

I’m sure there’s some deal(s) in place that’ll explain these questions but it is a bit strange…
- Cptmjl

Like I just stated above, perhaps it's protecting money, not the player. Who knows though.

I could be wrong but I seem to remember a lot of us couldn’t wait for Bailey to not be an islander and now they might actually lose him a lot of us seem upset about it.

POV Bailey is an ok player with some offensive skills and plays a nice two way game but he’s slow and turns the puck over more than I would like. I guess for sentimental reason I would like him to be on the team but I won’t lose any sleep if he isn’t after tomorrow.
- maximumcarnage

I agree and I am one of those that was looking to run Bails out of town on the first train. Apparently it was coaching that he was lacking. Hmmmmm, who would have ever thought that was the case?

Like I just stated above, perhaps it's protecting money, not the player. Who knows though.
- Isleshockeyman

I’m going with the thought that Lameriello wants Seattle to take Eberle and not Bailey which is what most Islander fans believe. If that’s the case why expose Bailey to begin with? Why wouldn’t he expose a “lesser” player who would cost less to protect from being selected. No?

That blows up the lameriello wants to keep Bailey theory imo. I get he wants to shed salary but that doesn’t explain why Bailey is exposed…. Either you value the player enough to keep him or his salary right now doesn’t validate his existence on the team.

I’m going with the thought that Lameriello wants Seattle to take Eberle and not Bailey which is what most Islander fans believe. If that’s the case why expose Bailey to begin with? Why wouldn’t he expose a “lesser” player who would cost less to protect from being selected. No?
- Cptmjl

My thought is that if he left Clutterbuck exposed, let's just say, then there's the risk that Seattle will take him instead of Eberle. Thereby leaving Lou with cap space he still needs to create and Seattle in a position of power. By leaving both Bailey and Ebs exposed, Lou can mitigate the lose and give Seattle the choice of 2 higher priced salaries to take. Now there's always the possibility that Seattle just takes Bellows, but I have a feeling that there's a deal or 2 in place already. Just a thought, of course.

Let me see if I can get you to look at this another way. None of us know what is going to happen today with the Kraken and side deals & players taken. Here's what we know. Lou traded away Leddy and Ladd's contract thereby freeing up cap space. Which makes it seem like he's going to make a run at Landeskog. Losing either Eberle or Bailey to Seattle frees up another ~$5m. Bailey has 3 years left at $5m, Eberle 3 years left at $5.5m. Clutterbuck has 1 year left at $3.5m and Matty 3 years at $1.5m. So he exposed Ebs & Bails while protecting Matty and Clutterbuck. He's protecting the money, not the players. If he's trying to create cap space to bring in Landy and someone else, he needs to dump a higher salary. Exposing the salary of Clutz or Martin doesn't generate cap space. Exposing Ebs & Bails does.
Then of course the side deals come into play. Like Chief stated yesterday (not saying it'll happen), maybe Lou offers Bellows for Seattle to take Eberle.
We'll see how it all shakes out at the end of the day today. The biggest thing with this expansion draft is you can't look at it from an emotional standpoint. It's a business decision.
- Isleshockeyman

You wasted a lot of your time explaining everything I already knew. But I appreciate it 😆. Basically, 12 or 7 are the weak links in the top 6 and Lou would prefer a better player than one of them.

And, you can’t break up the ID line because the universe would fall apart...e=mc2

😆😆😆

My thought is that if he left Clutterbuck exposed, let's just say, then there's the risk that Seattle will take him instead of Eberle. Thereby leaving Lou with cap space he still needs to create and Seattle in a position of power. By leaving both Bailey and Ebs exposed, Lou can mitigate the lose and give Seattle the choice of 2 higher priced salaries to take. Now there's always the possibility that Seattle just takes Bellows, but I have a feeling that there's a deal or 2 in place already. Just a thought, of course.
- Isleshockeyman

I get that but most people’s thoughts on this is he wants to keep Bailey and there’s a deal in place to select Eberle instead. Why pay more to protect Bailey when it would most likely cost less to protect a player like clutterbuck? Just a thought.

I get that but most people’s thoughts on this is he wants to keep Bailey and there’s a deal in place to select Eberle instead. Why pay more to protect Bailey when it would most likely cost less to protect a player like clutterbuck? Just a thought.
- Cptmjl

My head hurts and I didn’t even drink last night, but i see what you are saying. Maybe the answer is Lou doesn’t care which of 7 or 12 get taken (or better yet both?) as long as one of their contracts go to free up salary.

I get that but most people’s thoughts on this is he wants to keep Bailey and there’s a deal in place to select Eberle instead. Why pay more to protect Bailey when it would most likely cost less to protect a player like clutterbuck? Just a thought.
- Cptmjl

Like I said, you take the option of a lowered salary player off the table by protecting them. I don't know, man, I'm just spit-balling and it's the only rational thing I could come up with.
So let's try to play this out. Let's say he protected Bailey and exposed Eberle & Clutterbuck (since he seems to be the one most named in this conversation). If I'm Francis, I had the choice of Ebs or Bails(almost the same salary). Now I can save $1.5m by taking Clutterbuck. If you want me to take Eberle instead, It's going to cost more. Let's just say that Isles were offering Bellows to take Ebs. If you want me to take him with Clutterbuck exposed, I want Bellows and at least a pick, maybe 2. Obviously I have no clue what the hell is going to happen, just throwing sh!t out there.

My head hurts and I didn’t even drink last night, but i see what you are saying. Maybe the answer is Lou doesn’t care which of 7 or 12 get taken (or better yet both?) as long as one of their contracts go to free up salary.
- TogaIsles

I understand that’s what isleshockeyman is saying. What I’m saying is IF there’s a deal in place to protect Bailey of course. I understand your thought process and his and agree but that negates there being a deal in place to begin with which a lot of outlets are speculating about. My point is that theory doesn’t make any sense.

You wasted a lot of your time explaining everything I already knew. But I appreciate it 😆. Basically, 12 or 7 are the weak links in the top 6 and Lou would prefer a better player than one of them.

And, you can’t break up the ID line because the universe would fall apart...e=mc2

😆😆😆
- TogaIsles

Well, I'm here to help & confuse. Or both. We'll see how this all shakes out later today.

Like I said, you take the optional of a lowered salary player off the table by protecting them. I don't know, man, I'm just spit-balling and it's the only rational thing I could come up with.
So let's try to play this out. Let's say he protected Bailey and exposed Eberle & Clutterbuck (since he seems to be the one most named in this conversation). If I'm Francis, I had the choice of Ebs or Bails(almost the same salary). Now I can save $1.5m by taking Clutterbuck. If you want me to take Eberle instead, It's going to cost more. Let's just say that Isles were offering Bellows to take Ebs. If you want me to take him with Clutterbuck exposed, I want Bellows and at least a pick, maybe 2. Obviously I have no clue what the hell is going to happen, just throwing sh!t out there.
- Isleshockeyman

I agree with all of your thoughts on this. My point is that the whole lameriello is paying to protect Bailey and have Seattle select Eberle theory doesn’t make sense when you break it down. Just my two cents.

It’s just a salary thing and Bailey and Eberle have similar salary so have at it Seattle.

I agree with all of your thoughts on this. My point is that the whole lameriello is paying to protect Bailey and have Seattle select Eberle theory doesn’t make sense when you break it down. Just my two cents.
- Cptmjl

I know. And as previously stated, none of us have a clue as to what's happening/going to happen today. We'll see soon enough. It's sort of fun to ponder though.

This upcoming season Is only about winning the Stanley cup. Only team I am following is Tampa. Tampa is the only team that can challenge the Islanders at this point. Islanders must get offense. If we get Landeskog or ovi that will be the final piece to the puzzle.

As mentioned before I see Bolduc getting a long look at training camp

I understand that’s what isleshockeyman is saying. What I’m saying is IF there’s a deal in place to protect Bailey of course. I understand your thought process and his and agree but that negates there being a deal in place to begin with which a lot of outlets are speculating about. My point is that theory doesn’t make any sense.
- Cptmjl

Based on your theory (why expose Bailey if there’s a deal) Im guessing there is no deal in place and Lou wants to move one of Bailey or Eberle and doesn’t care which one. Nobody knows anything 😂😂.

One question, does Seattle have to pick in a specific order or can the bounce around from team to team?

I know. And as previously stated, none of us have a clue as to what's happening/going to happen today. We'll see soon enough. It's sort of fun to ponder though.
- Isleshockeyman

100%. For all we know we’re losing both Bailey and Eberle and replacing them with Landeskog and Tarasenko

Based on your theory (why expose Bailey if there’s a deal) Im guessing there is no deal in place and Lou wants to move one of Bailey or Eberle and doesn’t care which one. Nobody knows anything 😂😂.

One question, does Seattle have to pick in a specific order or can the bounce around from team to team?
- TogaIsles

That’s my point!

Not sure about your question?

That’s my point!

Not sure about your question?
- Cptmjl

Does Kraken have to pick from teams in a specific order, alphabetically by team name for example? Or can they start their picks from any team in any order?

Based on your theory (why expose Bailey if there’s a deal) Im guessing there is no deal in place and Lou wants to move one of Bailey or Eberle and doesn’t care which one. Nobody knows anything 😂😂.

One question, does Seattle have to pick in a specific order or can the bounce around from team to team?
- TogaIsles

First bold - That's what I've been saying.
Second bold - No clue.

As to my "theory", the only thing I can think of is that maybe it would cost more to have Seattle take Eberle if Clutz was exposed opposed to Bailey exposed. But I have absolutely no idea. And I'm officially done with this.

Does Kraken have to pick from teams in a specific order, alphabetically by team name for example? Or can they start their picks from any team in any order?
- TogaIsles

Like I said I’m not sure.

First bold - That's what I've been saying.
Second bold - No clue.

As to my "theory", the only thing I can think of is that maybe it would cost more to have Seattle take Eberle if Clutz was exposed opposed to Bailey exposed. But I have absolutely no idea. And I'm officially done with this.
- Isleshockeyman

Agree agree and agree

Like I said I’m not sure.
- Cptmjl

Haha ok I thought you were trying to clarify my question 😆😆