That they're going to protect Ullmark as their long goaltender, which means Seattle cannot negotiate or sign with them until free agency begins.

Who else would they protect as their goaltender? Hutton? Houser? They can't protect Tokarski.

https://www.capfriendly.c...m/expansion-draft/seattle
- kingcong39

Ok
Sorry to the board for giving wrong information
I must be better

I always wanted Kuemper and he’s on the trading block, but, with the current state of the team he wouldn’t make much sense; putting lipstick on a pig type thing.
- turbo044

He makes no sense as he's a UFA after this coming season.

Longer term solutions in net should be explored.

I hated some of Vogl's trade ideas but I agree with his idea of targeting a long term goaltending solution.

bye bye Kerfoot then
- homiedclown

If you are Seattle, why would you take Kerfoot over McCann?

Ok
Sorry to the board for giving wrong information
I must be better
- Anderdog

Had you included one word--unprotected--all would have been fine

Ok
Sorry to the board for giving wrong information
I must be better
- Anderdog

Always go to the CapFriendly website. They're an outstanding reference.

If you are Seattle, why would you take Kerfoot over McCann?
- kingcong39

I think he is the better player

. Seattle has exclusive signing period for all up coming ufa's
- Anderdog

If the player is not on a teams protected list, right?

Begs the question, why burn a Expansion pick if Francis is confident he can sign the player during the FA period. He could talk to said player during the ED period to gage interest and agree to a price, then circle back to sign him a few days later.

Landeskog left unprotected.

Interesting. Does Seattle take him and try to sign him or is that too big of a risk for them?

If the player is not on a teams protected list, right?

Begs the question, why burn a Expansion pick if Francis is confident he can sign the player during the FA period. He could talk to said player during the ED period to gage interest and agree to a price, then circle back to sign him a few days later.
- IonSabres

I don't think that's allowed, and if Seattle is caught talking to a protected UFA, the NHL could drop the hammer.

Had you included one word--unprotected--all would have been fine
- Michael Pachla

I am still waiting for TaroTsujimoto5/texting sources/I am not a troll to finish the list

Landeskog left unprotected.

Interesting. Does Seattle take him and try to sign him or is that too big of a risk for them?
- Stripes77

That's where the exclusive negotiating window comes into play

I think he is the better player
- homiedclown

Disagree with that sir. I'd take McCann.

Landeskog left unprotected.

Interesting. Does Seattle take him and try to sign him or is that too big of a risk for them?
- Stripes77

they are not allowed to take him and then trade his rights, correct?

Had you included one word--unprotected--all would have been fine
- Michael Pachla

Thanks pach

they are not allowed to take him and then trade his rights, correct?
- homiedclown

I think it's for a year. But why do that, really. He's the type that can help anchor the franchise

Landeskog left unprotected.

Interesting. Does Seattle take him and try to sign him or is that too big of a risk for them?
- Stripes77

Only if he agrees to a deal during their negotiating window before they make their selections. Otherwise it’s probably a wasted pick.

Disagree with that sir. I'd take McCann.
- kingcong39

kerfoot does all his production 5 on 5, mostly on third line

mccann has a lot of pp points


when given a shot on colorado's pp, kerfoot was much better production wise


I think he would be the better second line player for seattle

Only if he agrees to a deal during their negotiating window before they make their selections. Otherwise it’s probably a wasted pick.
- Ratsreign

They have to take at least a few UFAs either way

Always go to the CapFriendly website. They're an outstanding reference.
- kingcong39

I use them
Just thought I new the answer with out checking
My fault
But thanks 39

I think it's for a year. But why do that, really. He's the type that can help anchor the franchise
- Michael Pachla

so can skinner

They have to take at least a few UFAs either way
- Slump Buster

they could sign some rfa's/younger guys for their ahl team

so can skinner







- homiedclown

Oh my

kerfoot does all his production 5 on 5, mostly on third line

mccann has a lot of pp points

when given a shot on colorado's pp, kerfoot was much better production wise

I think he would be the better second line player for seattle
- homiedclown

I think McCann drives offense better than Kerfoot and is also better defensively.

they could sign some rfa's/younger guys for their ahl team
- homiedclown

Sure, absolutely. This is also why I've come around with being ok if we expose Borgen. Not sure he would be better than 8 other D available and he cant be sent down without going through waivers.

I don't think that's allowed, and if Seattle is caught talking to a protected UFA, the NHL could drop the hammer.
- kingcong39

Should have been more specific....talk to unprotected UFA's ... then make a ED pick from the exposed list...circle pack during normal FA to sign the UFA they spoke to during their three day period.