Jump to content


Photo

Expansion Draft - Potential Players We Could Lose


  • Please log in to reply
559 replies to this topic

#26 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 21 March 2016 - 01:24 PM

 

Talk about false, misleading, or unfounded. We have evidence to the contrary!

 

And keep in mind I'm only talking about one season. And that's only if we don't get a 2nd + prospect for one of them this coming offseason.

 

There have been many tandems of clear #1's co-existing well for the amount of time I'm talking about. Osgood/Vernon went to two finals and a WC final in three seasons together, and won a Cup together. Hasek/Belfour, Fuhr/Moog, Hall/Plante, Bower/Sawchuk, all close to the top of their games shared net duties.

 

Our goalie coach, Duane Roloson shared net duties as coexisting #1's with Manny Fernandez for about three seasons and they did very well together (except for running into the great brick wall of JS Giguere in '03).

 

Sure, it doesn't last forever, but again: we're talking about one season.

 

In fact, it might create a fantastic competition between Andersen and Gibson next season if they knew the lesser would be exposed to the expansion draft.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do we? What evidence do we have to the contrary? You just named off guys who played 10+ years ago. Hell, Plante/Hall? You want to talk about goal tending duos that were 50 years ago? 

 

cmon-man.jpg

 

Hasek/Belfour? Hasek played all of 25 games in 2 years while backing up Belfour. Talent wise, superior to what we have but situation was vastly different.

 

Look, its working right now because its fresh, its new and neither of these guys really have any claim to fame or right to say they deserve it more. They are both young rookie-ish guys who have to plant themselves as the man.

 

 
 

What are you basing your belief of 4-5mil awarded off of?

 

Bernier, a much much higher rated player at the time, went from 1.25mil to 2.9mil on his third contract.

 

I'll say 3-4mil is what Andersen would be awarded in arbitration, if he keeps up his current pace. Less if he falls off and (heaven forbid) craps out in the PO's.

 

If he wins the Cup and Conn-Smythe, then... well, forget it. We're offing Gibby then. 

 

 

 

Bernier was awarded that before guys like Holtby were awarded $6.1mil. I dont think thats a horrible comparison though. That might set the floor at $4.15mil

 

Howard, Nabokov, Smith, Fleury, Lehtonen all make between $5,2 and $5.9 mil.

 

Cam Talbot, who at the time of his signing had done less than Freddy, 3 years at $4.166.

 

I think Freddy has a case for $4.5mil and up.



#27 HockeyHeaven

HockeyHeaven

    Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,606 posts
  • Location:Irvine, CA

Posted 21 March 2016 - 01:39 PM

 

 

 

In fact, it might create a fantastic competition between Andersen and Gibson next season if they knew the lesser would be exposed to the expansion draft.

 

 

 

 

 

Kinda like a hockey Hunger Games.

 

The loser is gonna face a whole lotta frozen rubber......



#28 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 21 March 2016 - 02:39 PM

 

Do we? What evidence do we have to the contrary? You just named off guys who played 10+ years ago. Hell, Plante/Hall? You want to talk about goal tending duos that were 50 years ago? 

 

cmon-man.jpg

 

Hasek/Belfour? Hasek played all of 25 games in 2 years while backing up Belfour. Talent wise, superior to what we have but situation was vastly different.

 

Look, its working right now because its fresh, its new and neither of these guys really have any claim to fame or right to say they deserve it more. They are both young rookie-ish guys who have to plant themselves as the man.

 

 

 

Bernier was awarded that before guys like Holtby were awarded $6.1mil. I dont think thats a horrible comparison though. That might set the floor at $4.15mil

 

Howard, Nabokov, Smith, Fleury, Lehtonen all make between $5,2 and $5.9 mil.

 

Cam Talbot, who at the time of his signing had done less than Freddy, 3 years at $4.166.

 

I think Freddy has a case for $4.5mil and up.

 

 

The evidence to the contrary is two years of these same two guys getting along just perfectly, while sharing the duties.

 

The only evidence you have is between your ears, right?

 

As for the tandems sharing the duties without one being named 1 and the other 2, you said you couldn't think of any, and I gave you a s*load. It doesn't make a hill of beans difference how long ago they were. I just named the best of them. But I did notice you avoided the most productive

 

fac5e966be2c5ca5b58f27d793a8f698.jpg

 

Then you go and use retired guys for your comps for Freddie's pay, and guys that were not on their third contracts. So what if some proven idiot franchise like EDM or TOR overpaid a goalie. It failed. That's like trying to use Justin Schitz as a comp for a high contract for a dman. Those are evidence for my side of the argument, that it's ridiculous overpayment.

 

And FTR, Bernier sand Holtby's contracts weren't awards by the arbitrator. They were settlements between the two sides prior to verdict.

 

The one and only near comp is Holtby, but it's not close enough to our situation to pull up Andersen's salary to Holtby's. It's not apples to apples.

 

Bottom line, without a Cup and Conn-Smythe, Frederick Andersen is not gonna get a 5mil contract. Maybe unless EDM pulls another brainless move and gives him an offer sheet.



#29 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 21 March 2016 - 02:54 PM

 

 

Kinda like a hockey Hunger Games.

 

The loser is gonna face a whole lotta frozen rubber......

 

 

2078e2a9788ccd94a9aa87b2344cdcd6.jpg



#30 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 21 March 2016 - 03:03 PM

My point is, you are showing outdated comparisons to goalie tandems that worked, in some capacity, once upon a time. They were all short lived, as will this situation. We've gone the past 2 years with these guys as the tandem and all your examples show that to be about the max they end up lasting. At some point you come to a split in the road, and I firmly believe that its coming for these 2. If this tandem lasts longer than mid-way through the next season I will be absolutely shocked. I personally dont think these 2 will both be in Ducks sweaters to start the next season but I can see a way in which that happens.

 

And sorry, i used ONE guy who was retired in those comps, all the others are still playing and getting paid. If you dont think he would get more than Talbot, I disagree. I think thats his floor.

 

If the value is there, and it should be, I would trade Freddy this offseason.


 

 

 

And FTR, Bernier sand Holtby's contracts weren't awards by the arbitrator. They were settlements between the two sides prior to verdict.

 

 

Correct, and just imagine what the teams thought the outcome was going to be if they folded and gave these guys those contracts.

 

At the time I think the Rumor was Holtby was going to get half a mil more or something on a 1 year arbitration deal but settled for less with the long-term contract.



#31 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 21 March 2016 - 03:18 PM

My point is, you are showing outdated comparisons to goalie tandems that worked, in some capacity, once upon a time. They were all short lived, as will this situation. We've gone the past 2 years with these guys as the tandem and all your examples show that to be about the max they end up lasting. At some point you come to a split in the road, and I firmly believe that its coming for these 2. If this tandem lasts longer than mid-way through the next season I will be absolutely shocked. I personally dont think these 2 will both be in Ducks sweaters to start the next season but I can see a way in which that happens.

 

And sorry, i used ONE guy who was retired in those comps, all the others are still playing and getting paid. If you dont think he would get more than Talbot, I disagree. I think thats his floor.

 

If the value is there, and it should be, I would trade Freddy this offseason.


 

Correct, and just imagine what the teams thought the outcome was going to be if they folded and gave these guys those contracts.

 

At the time I think the Rumor was Holtby was going to get half a mil more or something on a 1 year arbitration deal but settled for less with the long-term contract.

 

 

Good lord. I've given you SOLID examples, and you give me "I firmly believe". So be it.

 

Bob Murray isn't about to pay a third contract goalie $4-5mil. No way in hell. That's something we can agree on.

 

Did you ever say what your threshold for Andersen's value is? And what do you do if you can't get that for him?



#32 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 22 March 2016 - 07:18 AM

Another sidebar issue is if the league is going to allow teams to horsetrade player/draft picks/"future considerations" to the expansion club(s) so that they will agree not to draft a certain unprotected player(s).

 

For example, SJS did some horsetrading with MIN in order for them to agree not to take Evgeni Nabakov. I think they gave them Andy Sutton and a pick or two.

 

Along with this is if the league will allow trades to be made just after the draft involving players that had been selected.



#33 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 08:40 AM

 

 

Good lord. I've given you SOLID examples, and you give me "I firmly believe". So be it.

 

Bob Murray isn't about to pay a third contract goalie $4-5mil. No way in hell. That's something we can agree on.

 

Did you ever say what your threshold for Andersen's value is? And what do you do if you can't get that for him?

 

You gave me dated examples. Different time, different game, different alot of things. Look, whatever. Even if I concede to your examples, they all lasted about as long as this tandem has, so the time is upon on regardless.

 

When you look at current goalies making what they make, I think Freddy has a case for $4mil+. I think it would be closer to $5mil, but even if it is just $4mil, I think that $$ is better served elsewhere when we already have a guy whose shown to be a #1.

 

And yes, I did say a 2nd rounder, and probably + a prospect, is probably the threshold but I think it can/should be much more. If you cant get that for him, you hope to the high heavens that he isnt awarded $5mil and you hold onto him going into the season until a trade presents itself. You try and make him that extra piece in a trade that brings back a HUGE return. Its a risk to hold onto him going into the expansion draft and hoping hes the guy that gets selected just to save the other guys butts.

 

If he is awarded between $4.25-$5mil, you almost have to trade him regardless of the return just due to cap situations. No?



#34 QuackHead

QuackHead

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,050 posts

Posted 22 March 2016 - 08:42 AM

if NTC or NMC weren't enforced, those two expansion teams would be pretty decent.



#35 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 08:48 AM

if NTC or NMC weren't enforced, those two expansion teams would be pretty decent.

 

You think? I dunno, I think teams would be happy to dump those guys that they cant get rid of because of the stupid agreements. They might get some good players, like Kesler, who just have bad contracts too, which can make things tough on the new squad.

 

I think it would be better for the expansion teams if NMC/NTC players were required to be protected so they arent saddled with bad contracts and dont allow teams to get out of the bad contracts they signed.

 

Granted, expansion teams have the choice to select those contracts or not, so maybe my argument doesnt really apply here.



#36 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 22 March 2016 - 09:37 AM

 

You gave me dated examples. Different time, different game, different alot of things. Look, whatever. Even if I concede to your examples, they all lasted about as long as this tandem has, so the time is upon on regardless.

 

When you look at current goalies making what they make, I think Freddy has a case for $4mil+. I think it would be closer to $5mil, but even if it is just $4mil, I think that $$ is better served elsewhere when we already have a guy whose shown to be a #1.

 

And yes, I did say a 2nd rounder, and probably + a prospect, is probably the threshold but I think it can/should be much more. If you cant get that for him, you hope to the high heavens that he isnt awarded $5mil and you hold onto him going into the season until a trade presents itself. You try and make him that extra piece in a trade that brings back a HUGE return. Its a risk to hold onto him going into the expansion draft and hoping hes the guy that gets selected just to save the other guys butts.

 

If he is awarded between $4.25-$5mil, you almost have to trade him regardless of the return just due to cap situations. No?

 

 

I hope it can be more, too, but I was trying to discuss what to do with Andersen in case we can't get a decent return for him. Both of us took the position that we just don't dump him for whatever return we can get. There has to be a minimum.

 

And if that minimum is not met, then we have no choice but to re-sign him, right?

 

As far as your last question about Cap restrictions, we are way under, so I think there is some extra revenue around to keep him until at least we can get something decent out off him. Like at the TDL, or following next season by using him as a sacrificial lamb to save a player like a Kesler, a Despres, a Silfverberg, etc. One of those three are going to be gone if we can't dangle a more preferable player, like a #1 goalie.



#37 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 09:45 AM


I, I dont know. If hes awarded $5mil, what the hell do you do? He's not worth $5mil to a team that already has their goalie of the future who is also playing like hes the goalie of the present. Having both is a luxury and depending on the price tag of Andersen, I dont know that you can afford the luxury anymore. I dont think you can eat that cap hit all season and hope that hes the sacrificial lamb int he expansion draft. What happens when Vegas takes Despres instead?
 
If the price tag is too high, I think you have to take one on the chin and just dump him. I dont think it will come to that. I think someone will pay for Freddy. Martin Jones got a 1st round pick + prospect and he was a glorified prospect/backup.



#38 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 22 March 2016 - 10:05 AM


 
 
I just don't think Andersen is the live grenade you seem to think he is. I don't think his presence next season is going to cause some goalie controversy because it hasn't for two years, and both the 'tenders know it isn't going to last beyond next season. Probably wouldn't even last through the TDL if a killer offer came in.
 
I don't think his demands or his value in arbitration is going to break the bank.
 
I don't think there will be a better goalie available than Andersen, just like the opening article says. That shields Despres, and the other two.
 
Look, there are a million things that can happen. I'm not sure that you can anticipate more than half of them. But you certainly don't have to give a #1 goalie away as soon as this season ends.
 
We have time.



#39 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 10:17 AM


 
Im not saying hes a grenade and I'm not even saying there will be goalie problems next season. Im saying, at a certain point, there will be, I just dont know when that day will come. Id much rather be out ahead of it because if it does pose problems/drama, then the value goes down. I would like for our GM to be proactive here since he knows he cant keep both of these guys forever anyways.
 
I think that by trading Freddy in the offseason, you give yourself cap room to make trades, RFA and UFA signings. 
 
I think if you can trade him at the draft, you can possibly get a Martin Jones like return and get yourself an extra 1st round draft pick that you can use to grow your forward prospect depth OR even pair together with your other 1st rounder and maybe move downt he draft board. Hell, think about that for a second....
 
Anaheim trades Freddy Andersen to PHX for their 1st round pick. 
 
Anaheim Trades Sami Vatanen and 2 1st round picks to EDM for the 1st overall pick
 
With the first pick of the draft, Anaheim selects Austin Mathews.
 
Far fetched? Maybe. Exactly the values? Probably not. 
 
As for his arbitration value. I think you have to look at Talbot and Holtby as your ceiling and floor. Freddy is better than Talbot and not as good as Holtby. I could be wrong by I would say the likely hood of Freddy getting at least $4.166mil in arbitration is a very real concern. If you ask me, Id rather spend that $4.166mil on Rakell and Lindholm.



#40 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 22 March 2016 - 10:47 AM


I'd like our GM to be proactive, too.
 
But he's going have to be a lot more than that to convince/enable ARZ to spend $10mil on their goalies (while you scoff at the Ducks spending 6.5mil on theirs).
 
Or to convince TOR to concede the #1 pick to EDM out of the goodness of their hearts.
 
What kind of koolaide are you batching up there bro? ;)
 
But in all honesty, if Murray can get a return like BOS did for Jones, he should probably do that.



#41 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 10:54 AM


 
I hope TOR or CBJ gets the 1st overall, I really do. But I have this sinking feeling that those douche bags in EDM are going to get it AGAIN.
 
And yes, pick apart my hypothetical all you want, but it doesnt take away from the possibility that SOMEONE may be willing to give up a 1st and a prospect for Freddy just like SJS did last year for Jones. And a package like that for the 1st overall pick is quite the possibility depending on who the team is that gets the 1st overall and what their needs are. If its EDM, they dont need Mathews, they have 40 of him already.
 
And ok, TOR gets the 1st overall and they decide to hold onto it and select Mathews, good for them. Now we have 2 1st round picks this draft and can use those to bolster or forwards or use them as trade bait or to move down in the draft.
 
THere are so many possibilities if the Ducsk we're able to trade Freddy away for a 1st+. Package that 1st with Sami for Hall or something like that?



#42 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 22 March 2016 - 11:01 AM

 

Im not saying hes a grenade 

 

Oh, sorry about that.

 

You said retaining Andersen with Gibby was a ticking time bomb.

 

My bad!  :P

 

 


 

I hope TOR or CBJ gets the 1st overall, I really do. But I have this sinking feeling that those douche bags in EDM are going to get it AGAIN.

 

And yes, pick apart my hypothetical all you want, but it doesnt take away from the possibility that SOMEONE may be willing to give up a 1st and a prospect for Freddy just like SJS did last year for Jones. And a package like that for the 1st overall pick is quite the possibility depending on who the team is that gets the 1st overall and what their needs are. If its EDM, they dont need Mathews, they have 40 of him already.

 

And ok, TOR gets the 1st overall and they decide to hold onto it and select Mathews, good for them. Now we have 2 1st round picks this draft and can use those to bolster or forwards or use them as trade bait or to move down in the draft.

 

THere are so many possibilities if the Ducsk we're able to trade Freddy away for a 1st+. Package that 1st with Sami for Hall or something like that?

 

Yeah, I added on there while you were posting that if we can get a #1 for Andersen, we should probably go for it.



#43 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 11:04 AM

 

Oh, sorry about that.

 

You said retaining Andersen with Gibby was a ticking time bomb.

 

My bad!  :P

 

 

Weren't my exact words but Ill take it. yes, it is true. At some point, it will go *BOOM*. I hope Bob handles it before it goes BOOM 



#44 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 22 March 2016 - 11:10 AM

 

Weren't my exact words but Ill take it. yes, it is true. At some point, it will go *BOOM*. I hope Bob handles it before it goes BOOM 

 

Huh?

 

 

 

Thats an interesting move. Problem is, we dont know if these goalies are going to be ok with playing the 1a/1b game that long. We also dont know what kind of $$ Freddy will demand this summer. If he accepts a mirrored deal like Gibson, then yeah sure. But if he demands more, you put the club in a tough spot. I think we are extremely lucky that not only are these 2 both playing exceptionally well but that neither of them has thrown fits or demanded more playing time. I think its a ticking time bomb.



#45 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 11:15 AM

Huh?

 

Oh, those we're my exact words. Sweet. Not a phrase I use often so didnt sound right.



#46 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 22 March 2016 - 11:18 AM

Another sidebar issue is if the league is going to allow teams to horsetrade player/draft picks/"future considerations" to the expansion club(s) so that they will agree not to draft a certain unprotected player(s).

 

For example, SJS did some horsetrading with MIN in order for them to agree not to take Evgeni Nabakov. I think they gave them Andy Sutton and a pick or two.

 

Along with this is if the league will allow trades to be made just after the draft involving players that had been selected.

 

 

Another thing that could be an issue is the league might not allow teams the option to protect 7f/3d/g1 or 8 skaters/1 goalie. They might prescribe what determines which way each team will have to do it.



#47 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 11:20 AM

 

 

Another thing that could be an issue is the league might not allow teams the option to protect 7f/3d/g1 or 8 skaters/1 goalie. They might prescribe what determines which way each team will have to do it.

 

You mean they say "OK LA, you have to do the 8/1 and Anaheim, you have to do the 7/3/1" and not give the team the option??

 

I dont think that would fly. No way would the GMs/Ownership agree to the NHL having that kind of power



#48 ladiesandgentlemen

ladiesandgentlemen

    Fan

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 25,902 posts

Posted 22 March 2016 - 11:34 AM

 

You mean they say "OK LA, you have to do the 8/1 and Anaheim, you have to do the 7/3/1" and not give the team the option??

 

I read someplace that it's not necessarily going to be a team option.



#49 DucksScore

DucksScore

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,261 posts
  • Location:Laguna Niguel, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 11:37 AM

I think the notion that somehow the expansion team(s) would be eager to draft players with bad over-priced contracts (contracts that their current team would consider buying them out if they could) is unrealistic.

Sure an expansion team will need to get to the cap floor, but I don't see them solving problem contracts for other teams just to accomplish that. I think that's just wishful thinking.

#50 RGS_Quack93

RGS_Quack93

    Destiny is Heart, Sacrifice and Passion

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,633 posts
  • Location:Mission Viejo, CA

Posted 22 March 2016 - 11:40 AM

 

I read someplace that it's not necessarily going to be a team option.

 

For the management groups to OK the expansion, Id hope that they demanded to have the option. Only way I see there being a mandate is if they determine NMC/NTC are automatic protections and the number of protections forces you to go one way or the other.

 

So maybe it will be "All teams are forced to use the 7/3/1 option UNLESS their NMC/NTC protections require the team to use 8/1" or something to that affect.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users