Mid-May Vegas Mock

[Eskimo Brother]

@EB - I think Vegas is going to be drafting "contracts" or "assets" rather than simply drafting a ready-now team.

It is a valid point. I have heard that they think they can be competitive off the bat, so it's a fine line to walk. Tough to do both. They could certainly go the route of someone like Nichushkin over Hamhuis and it wouldn't surprise me one bit. So many unknowns at this point.

The whole point of the mock I think is to get ahead on player evaluations, and to sort out whose stock may be going up or down due to the expansion fallout. That's the main hope of me doing this now.

[Moses]

This is the one and only shot that Vegas has at stocking their cupboards. I have to think that every pick they make will be moving towards a common goal and I don't think that that goal is to be middlingly competitive with the likes of Vrbata and Hamhius. I wonder if Vegas is going to make offers to other teams along the lines of, (*hypothetically) "Mr. Yzerman, you trade us Drouin and we give you 6 expansion draft players of your choice." (*Swap out Drouin for any example you want to use).

[Eskimo Brother]

This is the one and only shot that Vegas has at stocking their cupboards. I have to think that every pick they make will be moving towards a common goal and I don't think that that goal is to be middlingly competitive with the likes of Vrbata and Hamhius. I wonder if Vegas is going to make offers to other teams along the lines of, (*hypothetically) "Mr. Yzerman, you trade us Drouin and we give you 6 expansion draft players of your choice." (*Swap out Drouin for any example you want to use).

I do agree with you on that, however Vegas does have to have a minimum salary from the draft, so they may need a couple other picks to get them to the price level they need to reach.
Also it's tough to really see much else that you can get out of Arizona, so someone like Vrbata would be perfect to fill a slot until February when he can get traded for a 2nd-4th rounder.

[Mr. Guru]

Agree with Moses.

Theres a couple poster on here who think Vegas should try to be competitive to get butts in the seats.

Their first priority should be looking 3-5 years down the road.

[Eskimo Brother]

Agree with Moses.

Theres a couple poster on here who think Vegas should try to be competitive to get butts in the seats.

Their first priority should be looking 3-5 years down the road.

And I'm not disagreeing with either of you, I'm just pointing out that in some scenarios, it's not the young guy that holds the most value, it's the piece that you can peddle into the highest return.

Depending on what Min, Arz and Dal do, then the guys I listed probably won't be the picks from them. I could also see very good arguments for Rattie out of STL over Berglund, and Pickard out of COL over Barberio.
Hamhuis, Vrbata and Hanzal are exactly the kind of guys you ship out at the deadline though, and draft picks will be Vegas' best currency over the next three drafts.

There are so many ways to approach all of this though, and there's really no one right answer. It is a fun exercise and creates a lot of good discussion.

[2014olympicgold]

Vegas needs to get fans before the Raiders get there. They need to be somewhat relevant before then and the Owner even mentioned how the Raiders move timing was unfortunate during an interview on the day of the Golden Knights reveal.

[Jouko-Pouko]

And I'm not disagreeing with either of you, I'm just pointing out that in some scenarios, it's not the young guy that holds the most value, it's the piece that you can peddle into the highest return.

Depending on what Min, Arz and Dal do, then the guys I listed probably won't be the picks from them. I could also see very good arguments for Rattie out of STL over Berglund, and Pickard out of COL over Barberio.
Hamhuis, Vrbata and Hanzal are exactly the kind of guys you ship out at the deadline though, and draft picks will be Vegas' best currency over the next three drafts.

There are so many ways to approach all of this though, and there's really no one right answer. It is a fun exercise and creates a lot of good discussion.

Loading up on D-men and centers might be a wise move because everyone is always looking to add those guys. Wingers and backup goalies just don't hold that much value in the NHL trade market.

[donpaulo]

Many in the Rangers community are hoping Vegas doesn't take Lindberg

[Pengwin7]

btw EB, gotta throw you some rep for this thread.
Making threads like these are typically very easy to criticize, rather than compliment.
I dig anybody willing to promote the conversation and take some knocks in doing it!

[Eskimo Brother]

btw EB, gotta throw you some rep for this thread.
Making threads like these are typically very easy to criticize, rather than compliment.
I dig anybody willing to promote the conversation and take some knocks in doing it!

Thanks Peng. I was actually hoping for a little more to be honest, as I have really enjoyed all the different points of view that everyone has on the Vegas strategy. There will be a lot of fluctuations in player value this offseason, most of it due to Vegas. Getting on top of the movement is going to be key for a lot of us in dynasty/keeper leagues. There is going to be a lot of movement over the next month leading up to the expansion draft, but a lot of the strategy will likely remain the same.

It's also just a fun/different undertaking that we don't get every season, so I'm taking advantage of it.

[Bstbullies]

I have a hard time believing ANA lets Silf or Manson get away for nothing. I truly think they will have Bieksa waive and if he refuses, they buy him out. They have to many moving parts to have protecting Biek as an option. With Biek either exposed or bought out then they will go 7-3-1. Then they trade one of Vat,Lin,Fowl, or Manson. Names being floated most are Vat and Fowler. In that scenario ANA protects Silf and a couple more young forwards they like. They also keep the top 3 D they want in their system. Trading one of vat,lin,fowl,manson sucks but they get an asset in return and roster spot for Montour/Theo. Why would they lose an asset for nothing to Vegas when they could easily gain an asset for a loss when loss the is inevitable?

[Eskimo Brother]

I have a hard time believing ANA lets Silf or Manson get away for nothing. I truly think they will have Bieksa waive and if he refuses, they buy him out. They have to many moving parts to have protecting Biek as an option. With Biek either exposed or bought out then they will go 7-3-1. Then they trade one of Vat,Lin,Fowl, or Manson. Names being floated most are Vat and Fowler. In that scenario ANA protects Silf and a couple more young forwards they like. They also keep the top 3 D they want in their system. Trading one of vat,lin,fowl,manson sucks but they get an asset in return and roster spot for Montour/Theo. Why would they lose an asset for nothing to Vegas when they could easily gain an asset for a loss when loss the is inevitable?

It is a lot more likely that they find something to do with their D, or at least pull off a side deal with Vegas. If Manson isn't there to be selected, then it will probably be Megna taken instead. Or maybe they see enough in Bernier to try and give him a shot. Lots of options off of Anaheim, and definitely one to watch.

[Pengwin7]

re: Bieksa.
My mistake, he'll be bought out.
(I was on capfriendly and I was looking at wrong row, Despres has the long contract... I thought that was Bieksa's going another 4 years.)

re: ANA.
Yeah - they are an interesting case. I think Fowler has been one of their top two D-men (with Lindholm).
But do they take a risk on Fowler who will be UFA in 2018?
How does a team deal with that - a defender that is shaping up to be a $7m/year player??
Do they keep him for one year, maybe re-sign him, maybe deal him at the deadline?
Or... do they have work the phones on a team that thinks they can sign Fowler and will protect him among their 3D.
That's the hard part on moving a player now, you still have to find a "taker" that has a D3 spot they can protect AND throw back a considerable asset.
There's not THAT many NHL teams that don't have their solid 3D picked out already.

I could see PHI as a dance partner here, with an ANA-D.
PHI really only has two quality D to protect (Gudas-R UFA 2020, Ghost-L RFA 2017).
MDZ-L (UFA 2017) and Manning-L (UFA 2018) are considerations... probably Manning, though I don't think that's a big loss.
Of course, PHI has 4 exceptional D in the pipeline (to add to Provorov-exempt from exp): Myers, Sanheim, Morin... maybe Hagg.
What they could really use is a more veteran, right-handed-D.
Issue with Fowler is that he is a lefty - so perhaps its Vatanen-R, that gets the interest.

It could possibly be that PHI takes on Vatanen(R) for one of their lefty-kids that might be blocked anyways: Morin or Hagg.
And we've already seen Hextall take on a veteran contract (Filppula-Finnish!!) if he feels it is a reasonable term/price for the player.
[I could see the more stay-at-home Morin being the trade piece.]



(btw - One of my FAVE things about "mock expansion" threads - is that it fuels some prospective trade talks. Obv, some teams have some assets that they don't want to "lose for nothing" - which really suggests some moves, like Ben Bishop, will be made in the next 25 days.)

[LuigiC173]

I doubt they let Alzner walk he is a rock back there who plays big minutes night in and night out and never hurts them defensively overall plus he is smack dab in prime they would be foolish to let that walk.

[Eskimo Brother]

I doubt they let Alzner walk he is a rock back there who plays big minutes night in and night out and never hurts them defensively overall plus he is smack dab in prime they would be foolish to let that walk.

It would be foolish, but they have Carlson, Niskanen, Orlov, Orpik, etc to make do, and they have other UFAs like Oshie and Williams to manage. Someone is going to have to be on the way out. It would be ideal for WSH to lose one of their UFAs to Vegas in order to not lose them anyways in addition to losing roster players.