This is the last day a team is able to ask a player with a NMC to waive that clause to allow the team to expose him to the expansion draft.
Teams must protect seven forwards, three defensemen and one goaltender; or eight skaters (forwards/defensemen) and one goaltender.
Any player with a no-movement clause in his contract at the time of the expansion draft must be protected unless he waives it. All first- and second-year professional players, and unsigned draft choices, are exempt from selection by Vegas and do not have to be protected.
Vegas must select one player from each team to fill a roster of at least 14 forwards, nine defensemen and three goalies, with a minimum of 20 players under contract for the 2017-18 season. Expansion draft rules - (
New Window )
Quote:
.
That he's not that good in his own end
Do you have anything to support your opinion or just regurgitating something you read?
The metrics bare out that Shattenkirk is an excellent shot generator and a solid shot suppressor. Nothing to suggest he's truly a defensive liability. I think he's absolutely a first pair guy. For up to $6-6.5 million, I'm taking him
Bullshit. Erik Karlsson is an offensive defenseman and he's not a liability defensively. Shattenkirk isn't a liability defensively, but he's not that good in his own end. He's not a shutdown guy.
Shattenkirk's not that good in his own end and it's not just based on his playoff run (though he was pretty bad in the playoffs and at reduced minutes too, I believe. I think he was on the third pairing with Brooks Orpik). He'd be excellent as a second-pair guy paired with a stay-at-home defenseman but I wouldn't be extremely comfortable with a McDonagh-Shattenkirk first pair.
Quote:
In comment 13502094 BrettNYG10 said:
Quote:
.
That he's not that good in his own end
Do you have anything to support your opinion or just regurgitating something you read?
Watching games isn't good enough? You want me also to pull up articles about him too?
He is and he'll help revive a PP that is anemic as any in the NHL
Quote:
In comment 13502124 Anakim said:
Quote:
In comment 13502094 BrettNYG10 said:
Quote:
.
That he's not that good in his own end
Do you have anything to support your opinion or just regurgitating something you read?
Watching games isn't good enough? You want me also to pull up articles about him too?
He suppresses shot attempts and scoring chances at an above-average rate. Saying he leaves a lot to be desired defensively isn't really supported by anything.
Quote:
In comment 13502009 feelflows said:
Quote:
In comment 13501982 JayBinQueens said:
Quote:
just said he'd be surprised if Hamonic wasn't traded Link - ( New Window )
at his current deal, it better be for a return a hell of a lot better than Eberle.
Paging Joe Sakic. Customer in (a)Isle two wants a price check on Duchene.
preferably as a Blue Light special... his asking price at the deadline was a bit steep.
From reports, Sakic was asking for a lot at the trade deadline. I am not faulting him for that.
But if sees the offers now aren't that much better than before, he may have to cut his losses and take a lesser deal (at least from what he was expecting).
McDonagh is such a heady player and so responsible in all facets he'd probably thrive in that pairing and I'd put Kevin Hayes line with them as often as possible.
Just don't expect Shattenkirk to come out of the corners winning battles or to be stout in front of the net and you're fine.
It would be a luxury for McDonagh to play with Shattenkirk after the past few years of Girardi and you might even find McDonagh's offensive game improves too.
And the reason I'd do this if the Rangers sign Shattenkirk is because I believe if the playoffs are an indicator, Brady Skjei is on the verge of being a more complete defenseman than McDonagh. I loved what I saw offensively from Skjei in the playoffs and I feel like McDonagh has sort of stagnated offensively.
Him and Shattenkirk were paired together at the 2014 Olympics too, I believe
Quote:
In comment 13502129 BrettNYG10 said:
Quote:
In comment 13502124 Anakim said:
Quote:
In comment 13502094 BrettNYG10 said:
Quote:
.
That he's not that good in his own end
Do you have anything to support your opinion or just regurgitating something you read?
Watching games isn't good enough? You want me also to pull up articles about him too?
He suppresses shot attempts and scoring chances at an above-average rate. Saying he leaves a lot to be desired defensively isn't really supported by anything.
What does it tell you that essentially two teams have used him on the third pair? Because that's what the Blues and Capitals did. They put him on the third pair. He was sheltered in St. Louis and was pretty badly exposed for Washington. He was pretty bad in the playoffs as well, which opened the eyes of many who now thought of him as a product of the Blues system.
"Defensively I think we're sound as ever," Gunnarsson said. "Without Shatty I think we were lacking, especially the first couple games (of the playoffs), some offense. He was huge on the power play for us and that poise with the puck. Some guys stepped up."
McDonagh is such a heady player and so responsible in all facets he'd probably thrive in that pairing and I'd put Kevin Hayes line with them as often as possible.
Just don't expect Shattenkirk to come out of the corners winning battles or to be stout in front of the net and you're fine.
It would be a luxury for McDonagh to play with Shattenkirk after the past few years of Girardi and you might even find McDonagh's offensive game improves too.
And the reason I'd do this if the Rangers sign Shattenkirk is because I believe if the playoffs are an indicator, Brady Skjei is on the verge of being a more complete defenseman than McDonagh. I loved what I saw offensively from Skjei in the playoffs and I feel like McDonagh has sort of stagnated offensively.
I see that reasoning. The thing is of the top-4, Smith is best as the stay-at-home guy. I'd like to see McD, Skjei and Shattenkirk pitch in as much as possible in the offensive end, but I do agree that McD has sort of regressed a bit offensively (at least when watching him). Still, I think AV would like him to pitch in as much as possible. I'm all about balance so if that does indeed happen, I'd like the partner of each to be defensively responsible. If McDonagh is ok with taking a bit of a backseat to Shattenkirk offensively, then I'm more than fine with the pairing.
However, though I do expect that if we sign Shattenkirk that he'll be paired with McDonagh, I don't expect it to be a shutdown pair. Productive, yes, solid defensively, yes, but not a pair that will shut down Ovechkin or Crosby like we've seen in the past. Will the pairing be better than McDonagh-Girardi? No doubt in my mind. I just would like people to temper their expectations a bit.
Other forwards do, and rarely do they do it.
Someone like a Patrice Bergeron is the best way to counter Crosby, not with a defenseman.
Think about it, by the time you're defenseman is in battle with Crosby you're usually already in your defensive zone.
Crosby does the bulk of his damage dishing off in zone entry and cycling. I haven't met the defenseman with skills to stop it - not even someone like Scott Stevens though in his day he was the epitome of the guy who could, now he'd be perpetually suspended b/c he did take away the zone entry like no one else I've seen only now the way he did is almost 100% against the rules.
I understand the inclination to say Shattenkirk is an offensive minded defenseman (assuming people accept that, I won't debate it) so he should be partnered with a more defensive minded defenseman, but coaches don't always think that way.
I wouldn't because the other team doesn't attack the ice that way nor do they defend it that way.
Get used to it, next year we'll be talking about Tavares. Can't wait!
Im a Rangers fan, and I think a year of that talk is out of line. I will quietly reserve my hope that he signs here, but it would be f'ing brutal to constantly discuss.
FWIW, I dont hear any JT to NY chatter. I think the Isles will trade him if they cant sign him.
Seems likely all of the #Isles trade targets will stay put today too, so likely to revisit that after expansion dust settles.
Arthur Staple added,
@DarrenDreger
Doubt anything "big" happens with the Isles today, but Snow is in a number of conversations, hoping to land a top 6 forward. Team to watch.
Arthur Staple
Would #Isles first or second round pick be enough to steer VGK away from the players #Isles want to keep?
Arthur Staple
If #Isles don't make a trade today, raises the likelihood they have a deal with Vegas to avoid picking prime unprotected players.
Right now Canadiens in a conundrum. Can't protect all of Paul Byron, Brendan Gallagher and Shaw.
Right now one of them would be exposed and they don't want to lose any of those three. Byron might seem the obvious choice but he makes next to nothing and way outperformed his contract.
If nothing changes. I suspect they expose Shaw. And I doubt LV takes him.
Staple seems to think that if Isles don't get a deal done today then they might send a 1st or 2nd round pick to Vegas in order to protect prime exposed players.
I'd hate to give up a 1st round pick, but CdH, Nelson and Strome are worth more than #14 overall in a weak draft IMO. I think Weight is the right type of coach for Strome and remember that Strome is still only 23 years old.
Led to believe Cody Ceci has been informed he will be protected. That means either Phaneuf or Methot could be on the move. #Sens
And throw in the fact that aside from Cronin, Weight brought in an entirely new coaching staff. Hoping Richardson, Buchberger, and Gomez can get more out of them.
Because of protection issues, word is FLA's Jonathan Marchessault is potentially available. 30 goals, great contract.
They should ask for some 2018 picks too to stagger things a bit.
Quote:
15 picks in the first 2 rounds if that's the route they want to go. Turbo charge the pipeline.
They should ask for some 2018 picks too to stagger things a bit.
I'd have asked CBJ for their 2018 pick - they're a team I think can fall a bit next year.
Quote:
In comment 13502729 Deej said:
Quote:
15 picks in the first 2 rounds if that's the route they want to go. Turbo charge the pipeline.
They should ask for some 2018 picks too to stagger things a bit.
I'd have asked CBJ for their 2018 pick - they're a team I think can fall a bit next year.
It's also a better crop of prospects in next years draft. McPhee must feel like a kid in a candy store with all of his options.
Spoke with a GM yesterday who was guessing that Vegas already had 3 1st-RD picks in their back pocket with more picks to come before Wed
Im not sure of everything involved here, but hearing CAL and ARIZ are working on a Mike Smith deal
Quote:
Pierre LeBrunVerified account @PierreVLeBrun
Spoke with a GM yesterday who was guessing that Vegas already had 3 1st-RD picks in their back pocket with more picks to come before Wed
Hell, I'd give Vegas our first rounder if it meant not losing Raanta, Fast, Lindberg and Grabner AND taking Staal off our hands.
Im not sure of everything involved here, but hearing CAL and ARIZ are working on a Mike Smith deal
Flames were supposedly interested in Raanta. The other team was the Jets
Plus as Anakim pasted before:
As @FriedgeHNIC mentioned, ARI and CGY are indeed working to finalize a trade involving goaltender Mike Smith.
#Sabres trade a 2017 3rd rounder to #Canadiens for Nathan Beaulieu
CGY third-rounder Brandon Hickey, who plays at BU, may also be part of the ARI-CGY trade.
Do it, Slats.
Do it, Slats.
Don't teams have to expose a goalie?
So they can't trade Raanta before today's deadline at least unless they get an exposable goalie back. unless I misunderstand the rules.
Pretty sure it's why the Canadiens locked up Montoya though, so they could meet the expansion draft requirements.
Please pick up Marc Staal. Please.
If the Canadiens do anything with regards to Staal where he isn't entirely paid for they deserve everything that comes to them, they saw first hand how bad he was in the playoffs.
I do however believe at some point this off-season they will trade Galchenyuk and it will likely be for a D. Not Staal.
Assuming trade call gets done, ARI to retain 25 per cent of Smith's salary. CGY will send rights to Brandon Hickey + conditional 3rd rder...
Quote:
Bob McKenzieVerified account @TSNBobMcKenzie 6m6 minutes ago
Assuming trade call gets done, ARI to retain 25 per cent of Smith's salary. CGY will send rights to Brandon Hickey + conditional 3rd rder...
Brennan Klak @nhlupdate
#Coyotes trade Mike Smith to #Flames for rights to Chad Johnson, Brandon Hickey + a conditional 3rd that becomes a 2nd if CGYmakes playoffs
I honestly don't know all the rules. I think you're right, I assume the Rangers would have to get someone back.
Genius:
NHL Rumors @NHLRumorsDaily 42s42 seconds ago
More
There is some smoke to the fire RE: the Yotes looking at a package of Antti Raanta and Derek Stepan from the Rangers
Joking aside, I actually don't see a logical fit in that deal. I seriously can't imagine OEL coming back and not much else intrigues me from Arizona that would make the Rangers better.
Now Canadiens stand to lose Plekanec (fine with me) may enable a Radulov re-signing or Davidson, and if that happens Canadiens D is in major rebuild mode. Not that Davidson is great, but he's a decent bottom 4 pair D.
Vegas is asking for major compensation from teams that are looking to have unprotected players go unclaimed.