But he might play and might do decent, let's just say for the sake argument he plays 45 games and has 20 points. Do you protect him over baertschi or Granlund and they both have disappointing seasons?
- belcherbd

No I wouldn't, but like Benning I would be dragged over the coal for making a decision.

Haha Calgary loses to Buff.. Wow: the Wideman curse continues. That and coaching. What were they thinking!

I read it as in if you're not exempt, you're eligible. I could be wrong, but I used to think if a player didn't play 40/70 they were also safe, but then if you read over the minimum exposure rules, thats the only place it says anything about 40/70. No clause is mentioned that you need to play a certain amount to be protected. It DOES say that injured or inactive NHLers do not count



That clause would cover the Pronger, Datsyuk, Horton players
- WhiteLie

Yeah I can see that. I just went with eligibility requirements of draft as restrictive as in must have rule. Like the Bure eligibility to draft on games or Mathews age restriction on draft year. I see draft elegible as a certain pool and that teams are required to have a minimum amount of that type available.

Yeah, i'm confused too.

Rodin and Biega both need to reach a minimum number of games to be exposed do they not?
- dbot

Here is how the expansion works. It is very easy

teams must expose 2 forwards 1 defenseman and 1 goalie that meet a minimum requirement. This is to ensure that NHl quality players are available. After that LV can choose ANY PLAYER on that team that is not protected/has been in AHL or NHL for more than 2 years. So if we expose Dorsett, Rodin, Sbisa, Bachman. LV can still take Pedan, or Gaunce, or Baerschi, or anyone else that has been in pro more than 2 years even if not exposed as minimum exposure. To simplify, we will technically expose over 12 players to this draft.

Yeah I can see that. I just went with eligibility requirements of draft as restrictive as in must have rule. Like the Bure eligibility to draft on games or Mathews age restriction on draft year. I see draft elegible as a certain pool and that teams are required to have a minimum amount of that type available.
- Nuck4U

Totally, thats how I originally read it, but then I thought about AHL players who dont meet the 40/70 and your comment earlier about waivers. If Vegas had to take 30 NHL contracts, then tried to send the cuts down to the minors, it would be possible they would/could loose all of them on the waiver wire

Here is how the expansion works. It is very easy

teams must expose 2 forwards 1 defenseman and 1 goalie that meet a minimum requirement. This is to ensure that NHl quality players are available. After that LV can choose ANY PLAYER on that team that is not protected/has been in AHL or NHL for more than 2 years. So if we expose Dorsett, Rodin, Sbisa, Bachman. LV can still take Pedan, or Gaunce, or Baerschi, or anyone else that has been in pro more than 2 years even if not exposed as minimum exposure. To simplify, we will technically expose over 12 players to this draft.
- Retinalz

But he might play and might do decent, let's just say for the sake argument he plays 45 games and has 20 points. Do you protect him over baertschi or Granlund and they both have disappointing seasons?
- belcherbd

Why this TDL will be very interesting as sellers will have more motive to sell not to lose assets they can't protect to buyers who are going for it and will take that risk.

No I wouldn't, but like Benning I would be dragged over the coal for making a decision.
- A_SteamingLombardi

Perhaps, would be a good problem to have though, but as you said most likely won't come into play.

Here is how the expansion works. It is very easy

teams must expose 2 forwards 1 defenseman and 1 goalie that meet a minimum requirement. This is to ensure that NHl quality players are available. After that LV can choose ANY PLAYER on that team that is not protected/has been in AHL or NHL for more than 2 years. So if we expose Dorsett, Rodin, Sbisa, Bachman. LV can still take Pedan, or Gaunce, or Baerschi, or anyone else that has been in pro more than 2 years even if not exposed as minimum exposure. To simplify, we will technically expose over 12 players to this draft.
- Retinalz

Your post would be correct if you swapped out Rodin for Sven.

They are required to expose the two forward 40/70 games played bodies. Out of the names you list, that would be Dorsett and Sven unless Rodin plays 40. If we don't, they can steal a 40/70 player that is protected.

Totally, thats how I originally read it, but then I thought about AHL players who dont meet the 40/70 and your comment earlier about waivers. If Vegas had to take 30 NHL contracts, then tried to send the cuts down to the minors, it would be possible they would/could loose all of them on the waiver wire
- WhiteLie

Not sure about that. The players union would want a player that can play in the NHL given a chance on waivers, right? Does Vegas get an exemption to assign 9 NHL players to the minors?

Not sure about that. The players union would want a player that can play in the NHL given a chance on waivers, right? Does Vegas get an exemption to assign 9 NHL players to the minors?
- Nuck4U

I dont think they would, which is why I think they will look at taking a few fringe players they could squeak through. There are some scenarios (like this) that I havent seen addressed yet

Just had a bottle of 2014 Painted Rock from the Okanagan, really nice.....FYI.
- LeftCoaster

Really good wine but I've had bad luck with them. I've had to return corked bottles on two different occasions.

Here is how the expansion works. It is very easy

teams must expose 2 forwards 1 defenseman and 1 goalie that meet a minimum requirement. This is to ensure that NHl quality players are available. After that LV can choose ANY PLAYER on that team that is not protected/has been in AHL or NHL for more than 2 years. So if we expose Dorsett, Rodin, Sbisa, Bachman. LV can still take Pedan, or Gaunce, or Baerschi, or anyone else that has been in pro more than 2 years even if not exposed as minimum exposure. To simplify, we will technically expose over 12 players to this draft.
- Retinalz

So why do they need to expose? Why not just say You can protect so many players and the rest they have access to that is not on a ELC?

Your post would be correct if you swapped out Rodin for Sven.

They are required to expose the two forward 40/70 games played bodies. Out of the names you list, that would be Dorsett and Sven unless Rodin plays 40. If we don't, they can steal a 40/70 player that is protected.
- boonerbuck

You are right, thank you for correcting my insignificant mistake

So why do they need to expose? Why not just say You can protect so many players and the rest they have access to that is not on a ELC?
- VANTEL

the 40/70 rule ensures that each team is providing NHL talent in the draft. That way LV doesn't just get AHL caliber players from all 30 teams.

Lot of concern over the expansion draft...we are going to lose a replaceable piece literally a piece we could replace on the waiver wire

Lot of concern over the expansion draft...we are going to lose a replaceable piece literally a piece we could replace on the waiver wire
- CanuckDon

Is there a team with less to lose at the expansion draft than the Canucks? We're straight up trolling Vegas.

So why do they need to expose? Why not just say You can protect so many players and the rest they have access to that is not on a ELC?
- VANTEL

Because if a team like Toronto protects the usual suspects, they dont have anyone exposed that has played 40/70.



The NHL wants Vegas to have the option to choose someone half decent

Because if a team like Toronto protects the usual suspects, they dont have anyone exposed that has played 40/70.



The NHL wants Vegas to have the option to choose someone half decent
- WhiteLie

I am surprised they don't have to protect Nylander as this is his 3rd year of pro. He played 37 games in 2014-2015 in AHL. Shouldn't that count?

Is there a team with less to lose at the expansion draft than the Canucks? We're straight up trolling Vegas.
- CubanBuffet

Exactly being bad is a blessing this year

Your post would be correct if you swapped out Rodin for Sven.

They are required to expose the two forward 40/70 games played bodies. Out of the names you list, that would be Dorsett and Sven unless Rodin plays 40. If we don't, they can steal a 40/70 player that is protected.
- boonerbuck

Capfriendly has a really nice tool that you can use here:

https://www.capfriendly.com/expansion-draft

You can pick the team, and it shows you who is definitely eligible, and also a countdown for those that meet all requirements except games played. Has a nice list of all exempt players too

I am surprised they don't have to protect Nylander as this is his 3rd year of pro. He played 37 games in 2014-2015 in AHL. Shouldn't that count?
- Retinalz

He's exempt because of the Euro rule (i.e. he was allowed to play in AHL at 18/19 because of not playing CHL). As he was below the age of 20 and didn't play 10 or more NHL games that season slides.

Is there a team with less to lose at the expansion draft than the Canucks? We're straight up trolling Vegas.
- CubanBuffet

Arizona - they only have 7 roster forwards who are under contract beyond this coming summer, and out of those, Domi/Crouse/Dvorak/Dauphin are ineligible. They do also have Duclair who is RFA and needs protection, but still - slim pickings!

Arizona - they only have 7 roster forwards who are under contract beyond this coming summer, and out of those, Domi/Crouse/Dvorak/Dauphin are ineligible. They do also have Duclair who is RFA and needs protection, but still - slim pickings!
- lumlums

I assume they're exposing Datsyuk and Pronger. That's two pretty good players right there.

Exactly being bad is a blessing this year
- CanuckDon

Well... Less of a curse...