Wanna blog? Start your own hockey blog with My HockeyBuzz. Register for free today!
 
Forums :: Blog World :: Carol Schram: Canucks grind out hard-working win over Oilers, now hit the road for 4
Author Message
NewYorkNuck
Vancouver Canucks
Location: New York, NY
Joined: 07.11.2015

Mar 15 @ 1:40 PM ET
Not sure I understand how Rafferty doesn't qualify because of not enough games but Kole Lind does. Not a big deal though they can sign Briesbois Chatfield Sautner .
- VANTEL


Kole Lind doesn't qualify for exposure, but he could still be picked by Seattle.

Teams have to expose at least one forward, defenseman, and goalie that meet minimum requirements (pro seasons, games played, etc.). Lind, Rafferty, Breisbois, Catfield, Sautner don't meet the requirements to be exposed as that one player, but the still can be picked by Seattle if they're not protected.

The Canucks only have two D that are signed through next year that meet the requirements for exposure: Schmidt and Myers. They are FORCED to expose one of them, unless they can sign another player that meets the requirements for exposure. Benn, Hamonic, and Edler all meet the requirements, except that they're not signed for next year.

https://www.capfriendly.c...m/expansion-draft/seattle
Reubenkincade
Location: BC
Joined: 11.18.2016

Mar 15 @ 1:43 PM ET
RFA counts as signed. I thought this was technically his 3rd season?

EDIT This is his 3rd season and still an RFA. He should be able to count as our exposed goalie.

- Retinalz


He is in his 2nd pro season. If you check his stats, you will see he never played pro until last season, plus he is not signed for next season, which would be an easy fix.
1970vintage
Seattle Kraken
Location: BC
Joined: 11.11.2010

Mar 15 @ 1:44 PM ET
Not sure I understand how Rafferty doesn't qualify because of not enough games but Kole Lind does. Not a big deal though they can sign Briesbois Chatfield Sautner .
- VANTEL


It isn’t that Lind does, or doesn’t. Seattle can literally take anyone who isn’t protected or exempt. But the team has to meet a certain requirement in exposing a “legitimate” NHL player (or two) at each position.

If the Canucks don’t protect Lind, Seattle can still select him, even if he doesn’t qualify. Just like they could select Edler, even though he is a pending UFA. Vegas did a bit of this because they had too many players, so selecting a UFA allowed them to just take nothing.
Reubenkincade
Location: BC
Joined: 11.18.2016

Mar 15 @ 1:44 PM ET
Well look who knows it all...
- 1970vintage


VANTEL
Joined: 07.03.2010

Mar 15 @ 1:45 PM ET
He needs protection, but hasn't met the games played threshold, that the league has set for leaving players exposed in the expansion draft.
- Reubenkincade


I know it is fun to talk about but I remember the Vegas draft and some of the long discussions that went on in here. We ended up losing Sbisa and we will lose a player of similar value this time.

Benning was asked if he was concerned about it by Rintoul a few days back and he said not at all.

Also something you might like to hear Gadjovich has a few greasy goals this year with scrambles at the goal crease. Liking this kid more and more. Lind is injured but the whole team is shut down now as you know.


Reubenkincade
Location: BC
Joined: 11.18.2016

Mar 15 @ 1:47 PM ET
Kole Lind doesn't qualify for exposure, but he could still be picked by Seattle.

Teams have to expose at least one forward, defenseman, and goalie that meet minimum requirements (pro seasons, games played, etc.). Lind, Rafferty, Breisbois, Catfield, Sautner don't meet the requirements to be exposed as that one player, but the still can be picked by Seattle if they're not protected.

The Canucks only have two D that are signed through next year that meet the requirements for exposure: Schmidt and Myers. They are FORCED to expose one of them, unless they can sign another player that meets the requirements for exposure. Benn, Hamonic, and Edler all meet the requirements, except that they're not signed for next year.

https://www.capfriendly.c...m/expansion-draft/seattle

- NewYorkNuck



Your New York counterpart isn't going to like you...oh that's right he already doean't
VANTEL
Joined: 07.03.2010

Mar 15 @ 1:48 PM ET
It isn’t that Lind does, or doesn’t. Seattle can literally take anyone who isn’t protected or exempt. But the team has to meet a certain requirement in exposing a “legitimate” NHL player (or two) at each position.

If the Canucks don’t protect Lind, Seattle can still select him, even if he doesn’t qualify. Just like they could select Edler, even though he is a pending UFA. Vegas did a bit of this because they had too many players, so selecting a UFA allowed them to just take nothing.

- 1970vintage

1970vintage
Seattle Kraken
Location: BC
Joined: 11.11.2010

Mar 15 @ 1:50 PM ET

- VANTEL


I agree, Canucks aren’t going to lose anything important.

Which is both good, and a bit depressing.
Reubenkincade
Location: BC
Joined: 11.18.2016

Mar 15 @ 1:51 PM ET
I know it is fun to talk about but I remember the Vegas draft and some of the long discussions that went on in here. We ended up losing Sbisa and we will lose a player of similar value this time.

Benning was asked if he was concerned about it by Rintoul a few days back and he said not at all.

Also something you might like to hear Gadjovich has a few greasy goals this year with scrambles at the goal crease. Liking this kid more and more. Lind is injured but the whole team is shut down now as you know.

- VANTEL


Like Benning, I am not concerned about losing a player to expansion, it is 1 thing I think Benning has done well at. I am slightly concerned that they don't have a defenseman to expose, other than Myers and Schmidt, but should be an easy fix, just sign someone who is eligible, if any are available.

Really hoping to see both Lind and Gadjovich sometime next season and maybe a quick look-see this season.
VanHockeyGuy
Joined: 04.26.2012

Mar 15 @ 1:53 PM ET
I agree, Canucks aren’t going to lose (or gain) anything important.

Which is both good, and a bit depressing.

- 1970vintage



Fixed
VanHockeyGuy
Joined: 04.26.2012

Mar 15 @ 1:54 PM ET
Like Benning, I am not concerned about losing a player to expansion, it is 1 thing I think Benning has done well at. I am slightly concerned that they don't have a defenseman to expose, other than Myers and Schmidt, but should be an easy fix, just sign someone who is eligible, if any are available.

Really hoping to see both Lind and Gadjovich sometime next season and maybe a quick look-see this season.

- Reubenkincade



Let them take Myer's and his $.
Reubenkincade
Location: BC
Joined: 11.18.2016

Mar 15 @ 1:54 PM ET
Fixed
- VanHockeyGuy


Unfortunately.
VANTEL
Joined: 07.03.2010

Mar 15 @ 1:54 PM ET
I agree, Canucks aren’t going to lose anything important.

Which is both good, and a bit depressing.

- 1970vintage


Timing is everything. They have protected well .
Reubenkincade
Location: BC
Joined: 11.18.2016

Mar 15 @ 1:56 PM ET
Let them take Myer's and his $.
- VanHockeyGuy


I am 1 of the few that likes Myers, but if they took Schmidt I would be fine with that.😁

In all honesty, although both are overpaid, they are both needed on this team, due to a lack of replacements.
VANTEL
Joined: 07.03.2010

Mar 15 @ 1:56 PM ET
Like Benning, I am not concerned about losing a player to expansion, it is 1 thing I think Benning has done well at. I am slightly concerned that they don't have a defenseman to expose, other than Myers and Schmidt, but should be an easy fix, just sign someone who is eligible, if any are available.

Really hoping to see both Lind and Gadjovich sometime next season and maybe a quick look-see this season.

- Reubenkincade


Don't be surprised if they take Jake or Zack. If they do take Lind what can you do.
LordHumungous
Vancouver Canucks
Location: Greetings from the Humungous. Ayatollah of rock and rolla!
Joined: 08.15.2014

Mar 15 @ 1:57 PM ET
Yes it is good news, Virtanen is starting to play better.
- Makita

He's had like two or three decent games lol

#consistency

Reubenkincade
Location: BC
Joined: 11.18.2016

Mar 15 @ 1:58 PM ET
Don't be surprised if they take Jake or Zack. If they do take Lind what can you do.
- VANTEL


I see no reason why Lind isn't protected, unless management feels he isn't going to make it.
Pretty hard to protect 7 forwards out of this group.
VANTEL
Joined: 07.03.2010

Mar 15 @ 1:58 PM ET
He's had like two or three decent games lol

#consistency


- LordHumungous


I counted one good game
VANTEL
Joined: 07.03.2010

Mar 15 @ 2:09 PM ET
Looks like Petey out all week
VanHockeyGuy
Joined: 04.26.2012

Mar 15 @ 2:17 PM ET
Province writer on Pearson signing and JV trade.


Patrick Johnston
@risingaction
·
1m
Answer changes from day to day
Reubenkincade
Location: BC
Joined: 11.18.2016

Mar 15 @ 2:21 PM ET
Looks like Petey out all week
- VANTEL


It is a wrist injury, I would hold off until the end of month. They have a 5 day break coming up, take advantage and let that injury heal.
VANTEL
Joined: 07.03.2010

Mar 15 @ 2:24 PM ET
It is a wrist injury, I would hold off until the end of month. They have a 5 day break coming up, take advantage and let that injury heal.
- Reubenkincade


I haven't heard what type of injury it is but I do admit I like seeing the different combinations without him. I think if gives a different perspective of what to try when he returns.
LordHumungous
Vancouver Canucks
Location: Greetings from the Humungous. Ayatollah of rock and rolla!
Joined: 08.15.2014

Mar 15 @ 2:24 PM ET
Looks like Petey out all week
- VANTEL

That fu*cking blows.

Reubenkincade
Location: BC
Joined: 11.18.2016

Mar 15 @ 2:39 PM ET
I haven't heard what type of injury it is but I do admit I like seeing the different combinations without him. I think if gives a different perspective of what to try when he returns.
- VANTEL


Same.
Canucks are what 4 and 1 without him.
VanHockeyGuy
Joined: 04.26.2012

Mar 15 @ 2:46 PM ET
Have to agree.

Dhaliwal on Pearson: The desire to keep him is real. Everyone in the organization likes this guy but it's easier said than done (cap issues)...I just don't see how they can make him a competitive offer.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22  Next