Golden Knights de Vegas

Gave this a lot of thought over a few hours today.

Started by simply using the quick pick feature for teams protected lists. Doing it myself seemed like far too much work.

That said I put in a few hours of research & some thought into choosing a team from that list that met all guidelines including drafting at least twenty players signed to 2017-2018 contracts.

It's quite amazing how many high quality Europeans will be available.

Like many I'm not keen on Yakupov, but if Vladislav Namestnikov, who grew up in North America from the time he was 6 years old, is available, I couldn't think of a player better suited to help better acclimate him to North America.

Vadim Shipachyov's signing, only three days following this mock draft confirms my suspicion of Vegas having European roster leanings. Talk today is the Capitals trading Ovi.

Still 5 weeks to wait before what I see as the busiest trade weekend in NHL history.

So a few of my guesses after looking at your roster,
Murray/Fleury won't end up in Vegas. The Pens will find some way to get return for losing one of them.
I think FLA will protect Demers and expose Pysyk/Petro
LA will find a way to protect Mcnabb and do their best to have LGK take Brown/Gab
COL will protect Andrighetto
ARI will expose Doan and protect Pulk
LGK doesn't select DSP because he has zero value
TB might expose Killorn because they dont want to lose Namestnikov
LGK won't go Yak (even with the russian ties) Yak is out of the league next yr
NYR protects Hayes leaving players like Grab,Lin,Fast,Raanta, might swing a trade to LGK to shed salary and protect said players
ANA protects Silf by buying out or getting Bieksa to waive, also trading a Dman, ANA is very high on Silf

I'm guessing LGK will be very active in stocking their youth and taking bad contracts for future. They will also be selecting some players for the sole reason of trading them immediately. These are all guesses but aren't we all just guessing?

Murray will not happen. Raanta will be picked.

I appreciate the feedback guys.

As mentioned initially I began my picks simply by using the auto protect feature, so there's some players listed whose teams may hatch deals prior to expansion that make certain players here unavailable. The most obvious is the Fleury/Murray situation in Pittsburgh.

Until such things happen I don't see any need to over complicate an already cloudy matter. As you said we're all just guessing. Best to simply use auto protect & avoid complicating matters further.

Using auto protect also eliminates this as a variable, allowing all users a better frame of reference against others using the same method.

I think it would be wise to not to include Silfverberg or Murray in any predictions. Their respective teams will find some way to keep those guys.

How they gonna find a way to protect Silf?! I keep seeing this argument but then Josh Manson and Richard Rakell will also need to have side deals done. It's too many moving pieces. They will lose one player. Not surprised at all to see Silf leave. They can't trade Manson, Rakell and Silf this off season nor would it worth it. Take your one lump and move on as a franchise

Pittsburgh only has Fleury to worry about. He should get traded I agree. It's an easy fix especially with Calgary and Winnipeg in the hunt for goaltending.

New Jersey has positioned themselves quite well for expansion. No NMC's to worry about. They can choose completely what is in their best interests. Further with that in mind, the players they'll expose with current contracts is limited to just Callmalleri, Smith-Pelly, Lovejoy, Prout & Loov. The few 2017 RFA's they have to expose aren't in the realm of players like De Haan, Oullet, Mason, Oleksiak, Gaunce, Andrighetto. Beau Bennet isn't considerably better, but choosing him limits other options for a more premium player.

Perhaps Vegas selects Cammalleri to help hit the cap floor, although nothing so severe should be needed. At 34 he's still playing great two-way hockey. Still an elite defensive player & would be a great team captain.

They will expose Manson I believe, they are pretty solid at D without him, but I can't see Silvferberg or Rakell being exposed...

If you can't see this happening, you must have a good argument to explain how you prevent this from occurring.

How about sharing it? Why post if you can't be bothered to share your rationale?

Perry, Getzlaf, Kesler, Bieksa have NMC's. Lindholm is elite. That's five. Vatanen, Fowler are easy adds forcing a 4-4-1. Now you're down to protecting one of Rackell or Silfverberg.

Hey it's entirely possible Anaheim goes 7-3-1. As a Jets fan I encourage that. Anything that's handing Vegas high quality 2nd pairing LD's is fine by me. The only interest I have in expansion is in Winnipeg trading for any one of the surplus of defensemen made available to the Knights. If Anaheim wants to add to that list I'm sure Las Vegas won't be complaining.

Sorry, I should have gone into more detail. I'm new to this feature today and I am just now going through comments so .....

I do believe Anaheim will switch to 7, 3, 1 because of their D depth. I think with Getzlaf and Perry getting close to past prime you need to look to the future which should be Silfverberg and Rakell up front. They seem to have plenty of D depth to be exposed there instead.
As a Jets fan, what are your thoughts on Trouba? Will you lose him?

Trouba had a lights out season. See linked chart.
http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=2346779

He's in ULTRA ELITE company & the Jets will want a kings ransom to part with him.

All recent reports & interviews have him happy in Winnipeg, but until that long term deal is signed, the rumours will persist of him wanting to play elsewhere.

It's always possible he gets dealt. One of Trouba's biggest concerns was playing time behind Byfuglien & Myers. Myers season long injury allowed Trouba to flourish & Myers is expected to return at 100% next season. No NHL team can afford all three in their line-up.

My personal thought has been the Jets are waiting until the Trouba situation resolves itself either via long term contract or trade. Until that happens we have unquestionably the best cumulative top 3 RD's in the league, with former AHL all star Postma in the wings & the recent signing of Tucker Poolman , UND's player of the year & a 2017 Tobey Baker finalist.

Despite the right side strength, the Jets left side if among the leagues weakest. Josh Morrissey looks to be the real deal but after that it's an aging Enstrom & literally nothing more than two LD prospects in their entire system, Swedish 7th rounder Sami Niku who just signed today & 1st round project Logan Stanley who is years away from playing NHL hockey. Jets need to make a deal for an LD desperately. Until then one's of the leagues worst defensemen in Mark Stuart & perennial AHL'ers Melchiori & Chiarot are the only other options.

As outlined my sole interest in the expansion draft is the opportunity to be trading from the NHL's deepest prospect pool at forward for a top end LD from Vegas' picks. Any of De Haan, Manson or Ouellet would look great in a Jets uniform. Lot's of choices for Vegas be it ultra high end prospects like Kyle Connor, blue chippers like Roslovic or others like Dano, Armia, Petan, Lemieux could be available for the right price.

NHL Award weekend should be the most exiting it's even been.

I believe ANA will either get Bieka to waive his nmc or buy him out. They will then try to trade one of Vant,Lind,Fowler, or Manson. That way they don't lose something for nothing. This also gives them a way to protect Silf and gain an assest as opposed to losing an assest. They are very high on Silf and Mason from what I've seen. It makes to much sense for them to trade a Dman, than lose a dman outright.

It's quite possible that a few teams may try to get players to waive their NMC's, but as I outlined in the opening post I've tried not to overcomplicate matters with that factor & simply concentrate on what may be available. Anaheim is one of of many teams facing tough decisions & also the most talked about likely for nothing more than being alphabetically first & people immediately realizing the complications facing them. I don't mind addressing that here though.

Regardless of 7-3-1 or 4-4-1, the Ducks face losing a quality player. 7-3-1 doesn't really help as it opens the door for Vatanen, Fowler, Depres, Stoner & Manson to all be exposed. Sure it allows Rackell & Silferberg to be protected, but then who is the final forward protected? Cogliano? Vermette? Surely every defensemen previously listed has far more value.

So we're back to 4-4-1 with either Rackell or Silverberg exposed & also with Fowler or Manson. Still looking lousy for the Ducks.

This brings us to your point. Getting Bieksa to waive his NMC allows all of Rackell, Silvferberg & Manson to be protected. Sounds great, as Vegas likely doesn't choose him anyways & rather choose Depres from the Ducks under this scenario. Should Bieksa say no, he could always get bought out. The Ducks have no shortage of defensmen with Manson, Theordore & Montour all vying for more ice time.

I doubt they trade, as a buy out is a better option & any trades prior to the draft have to factor in the expansion plans of other teams, many of which are facing the same tough decision the Ducks are in. Certain teams just can't add another forward, others have no room for defensemen. Some have no room either way.

I'll concede that of all the talk around the NHL of getting NMC's waived (the Jets & Toby Enstrom has gotten a lot of talk on the Winnipeg boards) it seems as the Anaheim decision is one that makes the most sense. No fear that he'd be selected, & even if he was they'd be doing Anaheim a favour. Ducks need to shed salary & need to create more playing time for their defensive prospects. Further they are very deep defensively, unlike the Jets, & have substantial options available to them on the back end.

What do you think the likelihood of Anaheim asking to waive NMC? How about a buyout? Do you agree a trade is the least likely for the reasons I outlined?

A buyout/waive of Bieksa doesn't solve all of ANA problems, it's just the first step. If ANA goes 4-4-1 then they will lose one of Silf or Rak. I just don't see them letting that happen. They will either get Bieksa to waive or buy him out period. They just don't have the luxury of protecting him. Then go 7-3-1 and protect 3 of Vat,Lind,Fowl,Manson. Whichever of those three they don't protect will leave in a trade, gaining an asset, most likely a high pick. After that, the only D having to be exposed is Des and Stoner. I think the Ducks would happily give away one of those two for no return, gaining cap and roster space. By just making two moves (Bieksa waiveNMC/buyout + trading one of Vat,Lind,Fowl,Manson) they are able to keep their forwards and D they are high on. They do lose a solid D man to trade but they will get return for their loss. Losing one of Stoner or Despres actually helps their long term outlook. I'd be shocked if it goes down any other way. I'm 99% certain they go 7-3-1. If they do go 4-4-1 they will be paying out the nose to vegas in a deal not to take Silf. If thats the case they can protect Vat,Lind,Fowl,Mason but have to give up assests to vegas to leave Silf. Why would they lose assests to protect all their players when they could gain an asset for losing one of their D that they have the talent to replace?

Doubtful Anaheim buys Bieksa out because he refuses to waive his NMC

With Montour and Theodore on the way, I think the Ducks could afford to lose Vatanen/Manson (protecting Bieksa, Fowler, Lindholm) more so than Silfverberg/Rakell.

Both Lindholm & Vatanen now require surgery. Lindholm out 4 months, Vatanen indefinately.

This may very well affect Anaheim's protected list.

Doubtful. Not career ending injuries. They will be protected.

There's just too many moving parts with this team. Every team can't just ask NMC's in contract to be waived then trade/buyout. It can't happen, there isn't enough room around the league and the cap hits still count with buyouts.



Think about it. Okay trade Silfverberg for a 2nd rounder. Trade Manson for a 2nd rounder. That makes it so you don't lose either for nothing or you simply let one go. I think two 2nd rounders isn't worth it compared to keeping one of Silf or Manson. This is such a video game scenario to think Gms will simply accommodate Anaheim that is a bad corner right now. Nobody gonna give them a handout.

I don't see how one of Manson, Silf, Rakell don't leave for Vegas

How is that a video game scenario? Have Bieksa waive or buyout. Trade one of Vat,Lin,Fowler,Manson. Two very likely moves gives ANA return for trading one of their top 4 D. If Ana makes those two moves Silf gets protected along with their 3 choice Dmen. Vegas is then left selecting a Despres,Stoner,Megna type player. 99% sure Bieksa won't be on the protect list. Trading one of their D will be much harder to do. If they don't trade one of those 4, Vegas will take Manson.

Likely gonna retire responding to this thread. Thanks for the tips & feedback from everyone! I took some of it to heart when creating an updated version which I just published.

https://www.capfriendly.com/forums/thread/66055

So what would PIt give Begas to not take Murray and what would Vegas want? A first round pick? 2 second round picks?

The main issue here is obviously Murray. The Pens will either trade Fleury, or if Fleury refuses to waive at all, then trade Murray to avoid losing him for nothing. I would switch that if you don't want to manually pick anyone.

Luckily it won't affect the draft much. Assuming Fleury is traded he will likely go somewhere like Calgary where no goalie was being chosen there anyway.

Everyone else is mostly an opinion of "they won't take him" or "they would protect him". Nice list otherwise.