Sheng Peng: Grading Golden Knights' Expansion Draft, Part 2 Reviewing George McPhee's Expansion Draft, from Detroit to New York.

Dave Goucher

I think when you say McPhee went with a mixed approach between building for winning now and winning later you hit the nail on the head.

What I think you are being far too generous in your grading about is that he completely failed to put together a team that can compete in the NHL come this fall and only had limited success in preparing for the future.

About the only thing that most seem to agree on is that McPhee ended up drafting well with the picks he did get... albeit in what was perceived to be one of the weakest drafts of the past 10+ years.

I think it was very apparent that McPhee was overwhelmed by the whole process, easy enough to understand because it's an incredibly tough situation, but still shouldn't happen.

I love that you are breaking down the components but right now it looks like you are doing so more to rationalize/make excuses for than being completely fair.

McPhee's grade in terms of producing a competitive team has to be an F on paper anyways. He easily "could" have had the best expansion team by a country mile, at least on the surface it appears that way.

McPhee's grade in terms of the future is a C+ on paper right now and we won't know for sure until another 5-10 years. Could end up being an F as well.

Same as Ana... if Vegas wasn't willing to deal with Minny they likely move dumba or brodin so they don't lose them for nothing. getting tuch who was a top 50 prospect and huala was pretty damn good.

I think when you say McPhee went with a mixed approach between building for winning now and winning later you hit the nail on the head.

What I think you are being far too generous in your grading about is that he completely failed to put together a team that can compete in the NHL come this fall and only had limited success in preparing for the future.

About the only thing that most seem to agree on is that McPhee ended up drafting well with the picks he did get... albeit in what was perceived to be one of the weakest drafts of the past 10+ years.

I think it was very apparent that McPhee was overwhelmed by the whole process, easy enough to understand because it's an incredibly tough situation, but still shouldn't happen.

I love that you are breaking down the components but right now it looks like you are doing so more to rationalize/make excuses for than being completely fair.

McPhee's grade in terms of producing a competitive team has to be an F on paper anyways. He easily "could" have had the best expansion team by a country mile, at least on the surface it appears that way.

McPhee's grade in terms of the future is a C+ on paper right now and we won't know for sure until another 5-10 years. Could end up being an F as well.
- Aerchon

this is 100% inaccurate. Mcphee didn't have the leverage most people thought he has as teams could of told him they will trade their players (and with d men there would have been plenty of takers) if he didn't wheel and deal. And he pulled 2 1st round picks, two top 50 prospects, plenty of serviceable nhl players and good trade bait at the deadline to get more 1st and 2nd rounder's. Blogger is pretty accurate with his assessment and if anything is being overly critical.

Goood afternoon Mr. Peng

No one truly knows what it was like behind the scenes but I find your logic extremely faulty.

1. He absolutely had a ton of leverage. The NHL purposely set it up to be significantly more advantageous than previous expansion drafts.

2. The NHL has final vote on whether or not trades get accepted and if they figured a team is trying to circumvent the expansion draft they absolutely would have the final say whether to allow it or not.

3. The only way a team could circumvent the draft is by trading away players they want to keep, and then they would STILL have to provide McPhee a player that meet the rather stringent rules for expansion draft eligibility and be accepted by the NHL.

I believe the NHL, the GMs, and McPhee came to an agreement not to rock the boat too much and uproot/trade a lot of players just to circumvent the expansion draft. But on the surface anyways ALL the power was with McPhee and he went easier on most teams than he should have.

The results, short term, on paper anyways make him and the team look very weak.

No one truly knows what it was like behind the scenes but I find your logic extremely faulty.

1. He absolutely had a ton of leverage. The NHL purposely set it up to be significantly more advantageous than previous expansion drafts.

2. The NHL has final vote on whether or not trades get accepted and if they figured a team is trying to circumvent the expansion draft they absolutely would have the final say whether to allow it or not.

3. The only way a team could circumvent the draft is by trading away players they want to keep, and then they would STILL have to provide McPhee a player that meet the rather stringent rules for expansion draft eligibility and be accepted by the NHL.

I believe the NHL, the GMs, and McPhee came to an agreement not to rock the boat too much and uproot/trade a lot of players just to circumvent the expansion draft. But on the surface anyways ALL the power was with McPhee and he went easier on most teams than he should have.

The results, short term, on paper anyways make him and the team look very weak.
- Aerchon

If Ana or minny wanted to trade a d man to say jersey because McPhee wouldn't play ball then the NHL would not have stopped them. Leading up to the trade freeze those teams would have talked to George and said be reasonable or we trade these players and you will get to select from a pool of diddly squat. McPhee didn't have all the leverage at all. It was a game of chicken. And some of the players McPhee got should make it so team should compete each night. I expect them to be contenders for 1st overall pick odds but they wont be and abomination on the ice. Until maybe the deadline. Then more 1st rounders and second rounders for rental. Vegas will be top 5 in future watch in a couple seasons imo. That from nothing.

Good write up. I didnt realize engell was a ufa thats terrible asset management. Now do us a solid and trade Pitt karllson for hornqvist or hags? They probably have nmc lol.

Again with the terrible logic.

Why would Minnesota trade away a great D to Devils and still have to give yet another player. Minnesota loses 2 players not one. They are a team that had 2 or 3 big assets exposed. You think Minnesota trades away 2 or 3 players for squat and then still loses someone on top of that?

Other GMs will gladly take players like Dumba and Stall but it's not like those GMS will give up much to take them. Guaranteed those GMS only offer cents on the dollar and getting said player exposes more for them in the expansion draft.

It's literally a lose lose for all the teams that had significant assets exposed. McPhee did not capitalize on the situation.

What I think you are being far too generous in your grading about is that he completely failed to put together a team that can compete in the NHL come this fall and only had limited success in preparing for the future.

McPhee's grade in terms of producing a competitive team has to be an F on paper anyways. He easily "could" have had the best expansion team by a country mile, at least on the surface it appears that way.

McPhee's grade in terms of the future is a C+ on paper right now and we won't know for sure until another 5-10 years. Could end up being an F as well.
- Aerchon

Thanks for reading.

I think we'll find that McPhee leaned -- which was correct thinking on his part, in my opinion -- on looking toward the future instead of building the best possible team next year. This might explain some of my "generous" grading, because I believe that's more important than a fringe-playoff expansion team.

I actually agree that McPhee built a relatively-poor expansion squad, in terms of competitiveness. They won't be expansion Senators-bad and they'll probably be better than a couple current teams, but that's about it.

Anyway, we can debate this further in Part 4 of this piece, when I share my conclusions.

Goood afternoon Mr. Peng
- Otiss

Gonna find my baby, gonna hold her tight
Gonna grab some afternoon delight
My motto's always been; when it's right, it's right
Why wait until the middle of a cold dark night

Good write up.
- Jordy8

Blogger is pretty accurate with his assessment and if anything is being overly critical.
- ChrisMS

Thanks for the kind words!

Again with the terrible logic.

Why would Minnesota trade away a great D to Devils and still have to give yet another player. Minnesota loses 2 players not one. They are a team that had 2 or 3 big assets exposed. You think Minnesota trades away 2 or 3 players for squat and then still loses someone on top of that?

Other GMs will gladly take players like Dumba and Stall but it's not like those GMS will give up much to take them. Guaranteed those GMS only offer cents on the dollar and getting said player exposes more for them in the expansion draft.

It's literally a lose lose for all the teams that had significant assets exposed. McPhee did not capitalize on the situation.
- Aerchon

it makes perfect sense if you look at the big picture. take McPhee and minny gm. they sit across the table from each other. Minny has the potential to lose a trending up top 4 d man for nothing, trade this d man to another team for futures (picks/prospects that don't need protected) (also, teams like jersey and Arizona would have no problem paying the price for this asset and certainly wouldn't mind protecting him over the other junk they protected... Im positive shero counted on mchpee not playing ball and that's why his d isn't shored up... cause he had plans to get brodin/dumba or vatanan) or make a deal with mchpee. Mcphee has the option of playing hard ball and making minny pull off a move... which if they do will decrease the quality of assets minny will be exposing leaving vegas with a less than stellar choice... he can also play ball and make a deal with minny. then he gets a decent return (maybe not as good as dumba, but he doesn't have to gamble that minny pulls off a move leaving him in the lurch). So it comes down to a gamble by McPhee... so I call minny's "bluff" and hope they cant pull off a trade... or do I make the safe play and take the top 50 prospect and give pennies on the dollar for a potential top 6 forward. Because minny would have had NO problem getting decent value for a top 4 d man from teams.

Again with the terrible logic.

Why would Minnesota trade away a great D to Devils and still have to give yet another player. Minnesota loses 2 players not one. They are a team that had 2 or 3 big assets exposed. You think Minnesota trades away 2 or 3 players for squat and then still loses someone on top of that?

Other GMs will gladly take players like Dumba and Stall but it's not like those GMS will give up much to take them. Guaranteed those GMS only offer cents on the dollar and getting said player exposes more for them in the expansion draft.

It's literally a lose lose for all the teams that had significant assets exposed. McPhee did not capitalize on the situation.
- Aerchon

Not to mention that any team that does MIN (whoever) a "favour" by trading for Dumba, has to then protect Dumba. Diminishing trade value further.

it makes perfect sense if you look at the big picture. take McPhee and minny gm. they sit across the table from each other. Minny has the potential to lose a trending up top 4 d man for nothing, trade this d man to another team for futures (picks/prospects that don't need protected) (also, teams like jersey and Arizona would have no problem paying the price for this asset and certainly wouldn't mind protecting him over the other junk they protected... Im positive shero counted on mchpee not playing ball and that's why his d isn't shored up... cause he had plans to get brodin/dumba or vatanan) or make a deal with mchpee. Mcphee has the option of playing hard ball and making minny pull off a move... which if they do will decrease the quality of assets minny will be exposing leaving vegas with a less than stellar choice... he can also play ball and make a deal with minny. then he gets a decent return (maybe not as good as dumba, but he doesn't have to gamble that minny pulls off a move leaving him in the lurch). So it comes down to a gamble by McPhee... so I call minny's "bluff" and hope they cant pull off a trade... or do I make the safe play and take the top 50 prospect and give pennies on the dollar for a potential top 6 forward. Because minny would have had NO problem getting decent value for a top 4 d man from teams.
- ChrisMS

I'd call the bluff.

I can't pretend to be familiar enough with the depth players of other teams to have a strong opinion, but as a Flyers fan I was very puzzled by the Bellemare pick.

Bellemare is 32, and has had 12, 14 and 8 point seasons, (6, 7, 4 goals) while being one of the go-to forwards on a very mediocre PK.

Michael Raffl is 28, and had a down year with some injury trouble, but still netted 11 points in 52 games. He's had a 21 goal and 13 goal season, has played on both special teams units the last few years, and has shown an ability to fit in on line 1 when necessary, while generally being a 3rd line and occasionally 4th line player. The Flyers PK was better statistically when Raffl was on it than Bellemare. Raffl is also one of the best flyers forwards at protecting the puck, he just doesn't have the hands / playmaking ability to snipe a ton of goals or thread eye popping passes after he fights off defenders.

Matt Read is 31, and while he hasn't looked like his first few seasons, he has still put up double digit goals in 6 of his 7 seasons, breaking 20 goals twice. He has also been excellent defensively most years, and again has spent time on both special teams units. The PK unit was again better statistically a few years ago when Read was heavily used on it.

I don't see how Bellemare was a better pick than either of those two forwards for any role in Vegas, for either the present day or the future. Read and Raffl slide up and down the Flyers lineup better than Bellemare has, are just as good or better defensively, and significantly better offensively.

IMO, even Macdonald would have brought more value to Vegas than Bellemare if they wanted to take a few less dmen. Mac is maligned in Philly for his cap hit, but he is probably an average 2nd pair dman and would be a very above average 3rd pair dman. Vegas would have the room to absorb his cap hit, and at 30 he's younger than a lot of the dmen vegas did take.

While Macdonald would have been a stretch due to cap hit, I was shocked that Vegas didn't take one of Raffl or Read.

I'd call the bluff.
- Blue Clam

and likely lose a top 50 prospect a potential top six winger... to draft... junk?

Good write up,looking forward to part 3


Could Vegas not figure out a better team logo or name (kinda sounds ohl ish )? It looks like a space age Senators logo

and likely lose a top 50 prospect a potential top six winger... to draft... junk?
- ChrisMS

I'd call the bluff because I think it's very unlikely Min would make their team significantly worse, to spite Vegas.