i say they finish 20th in the league.

Typically, I'd agree with you, but you have to consider how absolutely weak the Pacific is going to be next year. The rebuilding Kings are projected to be in a battle with the Flames or Canucks for the 4th seed. Anaheim and San Jose are in shambles. If Calgary opts to retool or either of the Canucks or Kings have a setback, it's miles of open highway for the Kraken.

If CGY gives up any assets to steer Seattle away from Gio, I will be slightly annoyed.

It's a tough thing to expose your captain, but they should and they should also be ok with Seattle taking him. Easiest way to shakeup the team.

The returns for your capdumps is way too low.

Based on the Marleau dump 4-5M = 1st. And the price should be higher with the flat cap.

Anyway, teams learned from the Vegas draft and will keep their futures.

IMO, take the money to make a sweep on the UFA market instead and let the other teams struggle with their own cap. You'll end up with a far better team than this.

I don't disagree with the notion that names like Burns could be had for more. I think Duchene and Voracek have enough value over at least the next 3 years to suggest that a major return isn't completely necessary. Stralman probably fetches more too.

Burns, Stralman, Ladd, Johnson, Voraceck 👎

Better go for Hamilton, Barrie, Saad, Granlund, Palmieri...

I reckon Hamilton stays in Carolina and Saad has good odds to be an Oiler for the next 3 seasons. Likewise, I don't see Palmieri leaving the tri-state area. Barrie seems stylistically redundant with Miller and Shattenkirk being likely selections from their respective clubs. Granlund is a possibility.I think you're missing out on the idea of marketability to Burns, Johnson, and Voracek. Johnson's the hometown local boy. Burns may not be able to defend, but he produces. Voracek is still at a point-per-game pace. Having a competent on-ice product helps further ticket and merchandise sales on top of adding to the potential of playoff revenues.

They might not be pieces you'd immediately trade for to aid the Canadiens, but for an upstart Seattle team with no long-term cap concerns, bringing in these players at cost is strategic and worthwhile.

Likewise, you're missing the point I was after: I've long held that Seattle shouldn't look to try and duplicate Vegas star-for-star. This expansion draft doesn't have the same degree of quality to it nor do I think teams pay the incredible ransoms paid at the last expansion draft. Instead I opt for a middle-of-the-road approach in order to obtain high picks and quality prospects. I've admitted Burns and Stralman may fetch more, the jury's out on Johnson given I don't see the McDonagh+Johnson deal as very realistic, but otherwise acquiring Ladd for Bellows and a first is very much the kind of move the Kraken should be very eager to make.

I totally agree with your agument I've put in bold up here. And the way to do it is to weaponize all Seattle's capspace, but it's hard to convince you UFAs signings bring back more quality players when you make them sign elsewhere to fit your narative...

But I will go on: Tatar, Hyman, Danault, Hall, Hoffman, Savard, Wennberg, Dredger, Raanta,etc...

It's the kind of talent needed to be competitive, because half your top 6 (Drouin, Johnsson, Appleton), your top 4 and your first goalie isn't at all.

I mean sure, it is convenient for me to claim players x, y, and z are signing with teams a, b, and c BUT is speculating Hamilton staying put that out to lunch? Or one of Saad/Tatar being signed by Edmonton, a team in clear need of more in its top-six? If I was wildly speculating about signings I could understand the idea of a narrative, but I see no reason why Hall or Hamilton want out of their current situations in Boston or Carolina respectively. Why does Hyman want to leave his boyhood team when they're that good? Very rarely do we see the top UFA talent pack their bags in search of greener pastures. Tavares and Pietrangelo are the only significant names of late to do so (I don't exactly count Hall given that he's bounced around a fair bit).

I think Drouin outside of Montreal is a top-six winger and that the lack of a genuine top center and an increasingly toxic relationship with the fanbase is to blame. Appleton posted just shy of half a point per game this year and isn't so old that we can claim that'll be his ceiling (he is a better 3rd line forward however). Johnson put up similar production but from either the third or fourth lines this year. There's minimal powerplay usage for TJ: Vegas took players that were otherwise pushed aside by their original clubs, gave them an opportunity, and turned a few nobodies into household names. The situation here will be no different. Also put more respect on Hill's name. He's been exceptional for an otherwise drab Coyotes team. I think he and Vanecek will play well of off each other as they split starts.

Granted, I do agree with you regarding there bing UFAs out there better than some of the pieces I have here (at the very least, more suited to the roles asked of them). I think I'd like to fit Danault in as the #2C. Savard is an option too but I also don't find a name like Hoffman worth pursuing.

I'll work with you on this however: I want to keep Johnson as a marketing thing and suspect that he's more suited to the 3rd line (as is Appleton). Assuming Tierney and Fast are the pieces I need to bump off the roster in order to accomodate Danault, Tatar, and Savard, who would you have Seattle taking from Carolina and Ottawa? I'm much more preferential to prospects than I am run-of-the-mill 4th liners. In order to make the money work, I assume I'll have to lose out on Burns as well: is Dahlen enough to take from San Jose during expansion?