Jump to content

2021 Seattle Expansion Draft


Jerzey

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

They earned it by being a decent team with skillful players, good coaching, and actually knowing how to play hockey and run a team.  What did the franchise fee get them?  Aside from not having to give up a player a few months from now?  It got them entry into the league.  It didn't magically make them the first or second best team in the Western Conference.  They did that on their own.

And the point is, being the first or second team in the Western Conference means they don’t need to be protected from losing a single player like every other team. They are already better than most of the league, why should they be exempt?

Paying the fee isn’t the issue, being exempt from the expansion draft is. How is that not preferential treatment by the league? It’s the definition of it.

I’m not saying they did anything wrong, I’m just saying they didn’t do jack sh!t to “earn” exemption from the expansion draft. There isn’t an opportunity for any other team to earn it. They were handed it on their way into the league. Now they are a perennial playoff team and they are protected, meanwhile sh!t teams are at risk of losing a player. 

I’m not pissed at the team, I’m pissed at the league for giving them preferential treatment. 

Edited by mfitz804
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

And the point is, being the first or second team in the Western Conference means they don’t need to be protected from losing a single player like every other team. They are already better than most of the league, why should they be exempt?

Paying the fee isn’t the issue, being exempt from the expansion draft is. How is that not preferential treatment by the league? It’s the definition of it.

I’m not saying they did anything wrong, I’m just saying they didn’t do jack sh!t to “earn” exemption from the expansion draft. There isn’t an opportunity for any other team to earn it. They were handed it on their way into the league. Now they are a perennial playoff team and they are protected, meanwhile sh!t teams are at risk of losing a player. 

I’m not pissed at the team, I’m pissed at the league for giving them preferential treatment. 

Because they're only 3-4 years into the league.  Why penalize a team for being good?   It's a rare feat, but that doesn't make it illegal or somehow worthy of punishment.  No one expected them to be this good.  But they are.  That doesn't mean you should bend the goal posts and now change the rules and treat them the same as a franchise that has been in the league for 40 or 50 years.  It doesn't make sense.  

It's not preferential treatment, it's recognizing the unique and individual circumstances of a team that just came into the league a few years ago.   And to your other point, there isn't an opportunity for any other team to earn exemption from the expansion draft because they're all established franchises with long tenure in the league.   Apples and oranges.

Edited by NJDfan1711
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vegas did get a leg up in comparison to other expansion franchises in their expansion draft.  However, in exchange, they had to pay an enormous expansion fee ($500M).  For comparison's sake, the Blue Jackets and Wild (the next most recent expansion teams) had to pay $80M each in 2000 which is a little over $124M in 2021 dollars.

While Vegas won't lose a player this round, they will also not partake in a share of the expansion fee from Seattle which is $650M (about $21.6M per team).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

Vegas did get a leg up in comparison to other expansion franchises in their expansion draft.  However, in exchange, they had to pay an enormous expansion fee ($500M).  For comparison's sake, the Blue Jackets and Wild (the next most recent expansion teams) had to pay $80M each in 2000 which is a little over $124M in 2021 dollars.

While Vegas won't lose a player this round, they will also not partake in a share of the expansion fee from Seattle which is $650M (about $21.6M per team).

I think Vegas' fee was $600M.  

But you're right, they're not getting monetary compensation from Seattle's fee, so it's not exactly like the league is saying "Vegas gets EVERYTHING, and everyone else gets nothing!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

I think Vegas' fee was $600M.  

But you're right, they're not getting monetary compensation from Seattle's fee, so it's not exactly like the league is saying "Vegas gets EVERYTHING, and everyone else gets nothing!"

I went back and re-checked and Vegas did indeed pay $500M.  It's still an enormous amount of money.  Also, $500M in 2017 dollars is now $544M in 2021 dollars FWIW.

According to Forbes from Dec 2020, the Devils operating income was $4.1M.  If accurate that is 5 years worth of operating income in one shot.  I don't think the owners are all that upset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

I went back and re-checked and Vegas did indeed pay $500M.  It's still an enormous amount of money.  Also, $500M in 2017 dollars is now $544M in 2021 dollars FWIW.

According to Forbes from Dec 2020, the Devils operating income was $4.1M.  If accurate that is 5 years worth of operating income in one shot.  I don't think the owners are all that upset.

Gotcha. I thought someone else here had said 600M - I really had no idea what they paid.   Definitely a large chunk of money.  Gotta imagine it has to do with the health of the league, and the fact that there's probably not likely to be another expansion team for many years to come (at least I hope not).  Somewhat of a supply and demand factor there.  Not sure who else was in the running for the last location (Quebec, maybe Hartford or Houston?), but assuming there was other cities interested, it probably helped justify the price.  Not suggesting that there was a "bidding war", but I think it was somewhat of a "it's worth what someone is willing to pay" type of situation.  In this case, it seems logical/obvious that many people felt it fair to pay $500M for entry into the league.

Edited by NJDfan1711
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

Because they're only 3-4 years into the league.  Why penalize a team for being good?   It's a rare feat, but that doesn't make it illegal or somehow worthy of punishment.  No one expected them to be this good.  But they are.  That doesn't mean you should bend the goal posts and now change the rules and treat them the same as a franchise that has been in the league for 40 or 50 years.  It doesn't make sense.  

It's not preferential treatment, it's recognizing the unique and individual circumstances of a team that just came into the league a few years ago.   And to your other point, there isn't an opportunity for any other team to earn exemption from the expansion draft because they're all established franchises with long tenure in the league.   Apples and oranges.

No, I don’t think they should change the rules. The rules should have been the same from the start, in my opinion.

And I only raised the other teams because you said Vegas “earned it”, which I still don’t understand and you didn’t really explain. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mfitz804 said:

No, I don’t think they should change the rules. The rules should have been the same from the start, in my opinion.

And I only raised the other teams because you said Vegas “earned it”, which I still don’t understand and you didn’t really explain. 

I'm saying they earned it in the sense that they drafted quality players and put them in a position to win, either by hiring the appropriate staff around them, or coaching them up to play a certain style and system, or both.  

My point is, all of the other half dozen or dozen expansion teams that I mentioned from the last 20-30 years had pretty terrible starts, but they weren't all that different or disadvantaged compared to Vegas.  They all had the opportunity to draft an entire team worth of players. Vegas happened to hit on their picks.  What does that make them guilty of, other than being good at identifying and selecting talented hockey players?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NJDfan1711 said:

Gotcha. I thought someone else here had said 600M - I really had no idea what they paid.   Definitely a large chunk of money.  Gotta imagine it has to do with the health of the league, and the fact that there's probably not likely to be another expansion team for many years to come (at least I hope now).  Somewhat of a supply and demand factor there.  Not sure who else was in the running for the last location (Quebec, maybe Hartford or Houston?), but assuming there was other cities interested, it probably helped justify the price.  Not suggesting that there was a "bidding war", but I think it was somewhat of a "it's worth what someone is willing to pay" type of situation.  In this case, it seems logical/obvious that many people felt it fair to pay $500M for entry into the league.

I think there was a bunch of different factors going in there.  There certainly was the overall health of the league, especially with greater cost certainty due to the hard cap.  I also speculate the other owners probably demanded the higher amount due to further dilution of an already diluted league talent-wise.  The league then probably evened it out with Vegas ownership by giving them more favorable expansion drafting terms.  Plus, add into the fact that the NHL has had some recent issues with some southern teams like Florida, Arizona and Carolina, the NHL was likely keen on making sure Vegas succeeded along with being the first major-league level professional team in the Vegas market.

The man hurtle with Hartford and Quebec is that it seems like the NHL is not too eager to get into markets as small as that.  Also, as I mentioned the other day, I doubt Hartford's voters approve of paying for a new arena there that the NHL would demand.  Houston is a more feasible destination along with KC, but I have my suspicions that they would be more of an option for owners looking to move rather than expansion team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

I'm saying they earned it in the sense that they drafted quality players and put them in a position to win, either by hiring the appropriate staff around them, or coaching them up to play a certain style and system, or both.  

My point is, all of the other half dozen or dozen expansion teams that I mentioned from the last 20-30 years had pretty terrible starts, but they weren't all that different or disadvantaged compared to Vegas.  They all had the opportunity to draft an entire team worth of players. Vegas happened to hit on their picks.  What does that make them guilty of, other than being good at identifying and selecting talented hockey players?  

To be fair, Vegas did get more of a leg up than previous expansion drafts.  I mean look at the list of players taken in the 2000 expansion draft by the Wild and Columbus and compare it to the level of talent to the ones chosen in the Vegas expansion draft.  The 2000 draft is either full of crap players or ones who were at the the tail-end of their career.  Teams back then could also protect more players as well.  Vegas was able to take guys who were in their prime or just starting their prime from teams who had a more limited amount of protected players and had to work with a hard cap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_NHL_Expansion_Draft

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DevsMan84 said:

To be fair, Vegas did get more of a leg up than previous expansion drafts.  I mean look at the list of players taken in the 2000 expansion draft by the Wild and Columbus and compare it to the level of talent to the ones chosen in the Vegas expansion draft.  The 2000 draft is either full of crap players or ones who were at the the tail-end of their career.  Teams back then could also protect more players as well.  Vegas was able to take guys who were in their prime or just starting their prime from teams who had a more limited amount of protected players and had to work with a hard cap.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_NHL_Expansion_Draft

The rules about protecting players is fair, but the fact that there just happened to be better quality players available in Vegas' expansion year isn't their fault at all.  That's just circumstantial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

I'm saying they earned it in the sense that they drafted quality players and put them in a position to win, either by hiring the appropriate staff around them, or coaching them up to play a certain style and system, or both.  

My point is, all of the other half dozen or dozen expansion teams that I mentioned from the last 20-30 years had pretty terrible starts, but they weren't all that different or disadvantaged compared to Vegas.  They all had the opportunity to draft an entire team worth of players. Vegas happened to hit on their picks.  What does that make them guilty of, other than being good at identifying and selecting talented hockey players?  

I didn’t say anything about Vegas. The team gave them an exemption, years later, that no other team has. There’s no good reason for it. It’s one player. They could spare one player. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mfitz804 said:

I didn’t say anything about Vegas. The team gave them an exemption, years later, that no other team has. There’s no good reason for it. It’s one player. They could spare one player. 

Right... so couldn't you make the argument that their team is good despite losing (or not losing) one player?  I just don't see how the upcoming draft and them not being forced to have a player plucked from their team somehow discredits what they've done in their short existence so far.   

People make it seem like Vegas starts every single game with the scoreboard reading 1-0 in their favor before the puck drops lol.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

I didn’t say anything about Vegas. The team gave them an exemption, years later, that no other team has. There’s no good reason for it. It’s one player. They could spare one player. 

It was in their agreement.  The league knew another expansion was soon to follow, and it was decided, before they were an official team, that they wouldn't have to surrender a player in the next draft.  Whether Vegas was 31st in the league every year (like most figured they would be), or 1st or 2nd in the league and contending for the Cup (which few people saw coming).  It's not like the league decided all of this yesterday, or that they said "hey Vegas, even though you're already amazing, we're gonna go ahead and let you slip out of the Seattle expansion draft".  No one knew how Vegas was going to do in their first few years.  You can't fault them for being good.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

Right... so couldn't you make the argument that their team is good despite losing (or not losing) one player?  I just don't see how the upcoming draft and them not being forced to have a player plucked from their team somehow discredits what they've done in their short existence so far.   

People make it seem like Vegas starts every single game with the scoreboard reading 1-0 in their favor before the puck drops lol.  

It doesn’t discredit anything. I’m just saying, they could have given up a player like everyone else. Being as good as they are, there is no justification for it. I understand it was the rule, I’m just saying it’s a stupid rule. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mfitz804 said:

It doesn’t discredit anything. I’m just saying, they could have given up a player like everyone else. Being as good as they are, there is no justification for it. I understand it was the rule, I’m just saying it’s a stupid rule. 

I don't necessarily like the rule either, but what I do think is incredibly stupid is adjusting the rule after-the-fact.  What do you think was (or should) have happened? "Hey Vegas, we didn't expect you to be awesome, or even decent, but since you are, we're gonna go ahead and make you have to give up a player in this upcoming draft, even though we said you wouldn't have to.  Sorry.  We hope you understand"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

I don't necessarily like the rule either, but what I do think is incredibly stupid is adjusting the rule after-the-fact.  What do you think was (or should) have happened? "Hey Vegas, we didn't expect you to be awesome, or even decent, but since you are, we're gonna go ahead and make you have to give up a player in this upcoming draft, even though we said you wouldn't have to.  Sorry.  We hope you understand"

I’m definitely not saying to do that. I’m saying it should have been that way from the start.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Suggested Protected list:  (Jack & Ty Smith don't need to be protected)

FW's- Nico, Bratt, Sharangovich, Wood, Zacha, Johnsson, McLeod (take one out for Kuuokenen)

D- Severson, Siegenthaler, Subban       G-Blackwood

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, vadvlfan said:

Suggested Protected list:  (Jack & Ty Smith don't need to be protected)

FW's- Nico, Bratt, Sharangovich, Wood, Zacha, Johnsson, McLeod (take one out for Kuuokenen)

D- Severson, Siegenthaler, Subban       G-Blackwood

I would not protect Johnsson over Kuokkanen. Last season may prove to be an aberration, but my dud really sucked it hard. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

I would not protect Johnsson over Kuokkanen. Last season may prove to be an aberration, but my dud really sucked it hard. 

I think Fitz will protect Johnsson & Siegenthaler because he traded for them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, vadvlfan said:

I think Fitz will protect Johnsson & Siegenthaler because he traded for them. 

He traded for Kuokkanen. And he win this trade. He will never protect Andreas over Janne after this season. May be he doesnt think to protect Mcleod(I dont think so) and will protect Andreas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Guadana said:

He traded for Kuokkanen. And he win this trade. He will never protect Andreas over Janne after this season. May be he doesnt think to protect Mcleod(I dont think so) and will protect Andreas. 

I can't imagine. If anything, I saw the Siegenthaler move as a way to have an extra guy to expose rather than him being a guy to keep. 

But it seems like Kuokkanen was an absolute steal and I don't think I would protect Johnsson over Kuokk. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

I can't imagine. If anything, I saw the Siegenthaler move as a way to have an extra guy to expose rather than him being a guy to keep. 

But it seems like Kuokkanen was an absolute steal and I don't think I would protect Johnsson over Kuokk. 

Janne was a part of what was workin this season. +\- they were work with Yegor all season together. Devils were fail all of the Hughes`s trajectory before Ruff centered him with Sharkannens.  I know devils have some future right wingers, devils have options on the market, may be they want to draft someone else(Guenther may be). But this is options and maybe`s. Holtz may not become an NHL player, Ducks may draft Guenther, and no real impact right wingers may sign with us this summer. Seattle draft is first post season activity, draft is second and free agent market is third. On seattle draft day we have only three working right wingers and Janne is one of them. If Fitz think he isn`t a part of our future core, he can trade him before seattle draft easily.

Andreas played with every center and sucked. 5 on 5, 4 on 5, 5 on 4. He has option to trade\be picked this year and NMC\NTC(I dont remember correctly) next year. He is older than we need. Devils have Zacha and Yegor as top-6 LW`s. Wood is our bottom-6 left winger. What other trade did Fitz make? He traded Coleman for Foote. Another left winger. Devils have Maltsev, Boqvist. There are no place and need for Andreas, and Fitz paid the lowest price for him.

It's like I'm telling you this, but it turns out I'm explaining it to vadvlfan)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.