SB Nation's "Expansion Draft", Part 2: Carolina's Protected List
by Bob Wage on Sep 1, 2010 7:00 AM EDT
Email
Print
As I mentioned a couple of days ago, the gurus of SB Nation have decided to perform a mock expansion draft. The two expansion cities are signed, sealed, and set to go along with the franchise names. (Apparently, most folk who voted are traditionalists as the "new" teams will be the Winnipeg Jets and the Quebec City Nordiques.)
The general managers of each of the clubs were introduced to the public on Tuesday and Gabe Desjardins will be making the draft selections for the Jets while James Mirtle will be building the new and hopefully improved Nordiques.
The next step in this process is for the current NHL teams to submit protected player lists. The good news for the Canes is that several of their players do not need protecting. According to the league mandated rules, any players who have less than 49 games of NHL experience are automatically exempt from the process. This would include Zach Boychuk, Jamie McBain, Zac Dalpe, Drayson Bowman, Jerome Samson, and several other prospects who hope to make the roster this fall.
But hard choices still need to be made.
Once again, the rules that teams must abide by are as follows:
- Teams can protect either "1 goalie, 5 defensemen and 9 forwards" OR "2
goalies, 3 defensemen and 7 forwards."
- If you go the two goalie route, at least one goalie left unprotected must
have played in at least 10 games last season OR 25 games in the last two
seasons combined. One game = at least 31 minutes.
- Each team must leave unprotected at least one defenseman who appeared in
40 games last season OR 70 games in the last two seasons combined.
- Each team must leave unprotected at least two forwards who appeared in 40
games last season OR 70 games in the last two seasons combined.
- Players who have played in 49 or fewer games are automatically exempt and
do not need to be protected.
*
Ground rules on drafting:*
- Each expansion team selects 30 players. A total of 60 players will be
selected.
- The first 26 picks are to be used on three goaltenders, eight defensemen
and thirteen forwards.
- The final four picks can be used to pick a player at any position.
- Only one goalie or one defenseman can be selected from each existing team.
- Team must be compliant with the salary cap.
It's a no-brainer that the Hurricanes would protect goalie Cam Ward. The other goalies in the system don't qualify, so don't need to be protected.
The definite protected defensemen would include, Tim Gleason, Joni Pitkanen, and Joe Corvo. Jamie McBain, Bobby Sanguinetti, and Jay Harrison do not need protecting, they don't qualify. (Correction: Harrison is eligible for the draft because he has played more than 49 games in his career, but he does not qualify for being the mandated unprotected defenseman bcause of too few games played in the last two years. In that case, we might as well put him on the protected list.)
That leaves Anton Babchuk and Brett Carson, one of whom would need to be left unprotected.
The protected forward list will include Eric Staal, Brandon Sutter, Tuomo Ruutu, Jiri Tlusty, and Jussi Jokinen. There might be some discussion about the next three, but I'm also going to protect Erik Cole, Sergei Samsonov, and Chad LaRose. That leaves Tom Kostopoulos and Patrick Dwyer available for the draft. (We are only protecting eight forwards, but just ten qualify for the draft and we must leave two of them unprotected).
As acting Hurricanes general manager, I feel pretty comfortable about the forward selections, although I'm open to suggestions and feedback in the comment section.
But I'm having trouble deciding between Babchuk and Carson. Both bring different skill sets to the team. Last season, the choice would have been to protect Babchuk because the team needed help on the powerplay. But this season, the Canes have plenty of options for offense and perhaps Carson's stay-at-home mentality is more valuable.
Babchuk makes $1.4 million and has more skill but Carson only makes $500,000 and might be the better bargain. Another factor to keep in mind is that Babchuk might have more trade value if the Canes are in a position to trade players for assets like they did at the trade deadline last season, especially if he goes on a scoring binge like he did two years ago.
Which one do you save?
62 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This may be a dumb question, but if a player goes unprotected and neither expansion team wants him, what happens to him? Is he returned to his original club or do other teams get a shot at him?
I only ask because if the player is returned to his original club, then my vote is to protect Babs and hope no one realizes how good Carson is. If we lose Carson no matter what then I need to think a little more.
"What Carolina really has going for them is Brandon Sutter. When that kid first showed up, he looked like a skinny little thing that wouldn’t last two weeks. But he’s turned into a real star."
by caniacgirl on Sep 1, 2010 7:10 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Players’ status remains unchanged unless the expansion team selects them. With the NFL, during their expansion years, being left unprotected tended to signal to players they were not the favorite sons of the GMs; but other than ruffled feelings, unprotected players remain with their teams unless picked.
hey AD
you’re here !! did you get back late or you still there in Tn ?/
And if it Aint Hockey,It Aint Nothin !!
That Checkers 3rd Sweater ROCKS !!!
In that case, protect Babchuk, apologize to Carson, offer him a cookie at the next pre-game meal and hope for the best.
And my reasoning is along the lines of everyone else on here-if you protect Babs you still have the chance to trade him for something of value (or keep him) whereas I think Carson, despite how great he’s been for us, is still unknown enough to fly under the radar, both in terms of the expansion draft and possible trades.
"What Carolina really has going for them is Brandon Sutter. When that kid first showed up, he looked like a skinny little thing that wouldn’t last two weeks. But he’s turned into a real star."
Well Bob
once again you have done a great job..and i do agree with ya on 90% of this…but personally i’d rather keep K-Stop instead of Samsonov…but that’s just me!!
And if it Aint Hockey,It Aint Nothin !!
That Checkers 3rd Sweater ROCKS !!!
Regardless of which player you like more, Babchuk’s value is much higher than Carson’s, so I choose him. Carson was left out there as a UFA for a month, and he still came back and signed here for the minimum. That being said, I like what Carson did here last year and I think he can improve. However, protected value wise, Babchuk is more valuable than Carson. You’ll start hearing about a lot of teams interested in Babchuk at the trade deadline, and there’s a good chance JR pulls the trigger on a deal seeing as how with all the drama that has surrounded Babchuk in recent years it’s not hard to imagine he walks at the end of the season anyway as a UFA. But Carson’s a UFA at the end of the year too, and you won’t hear any similar proposals.
Babchuk is the choice, and it’s not even close. (HF humor)
Agreed. I like Carson more when you consider cost and what he brings, but Babchuk is much more likely to get claimed.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 1, 2010 8:42 AM EDT up reply actions
I’d really like to hear a Carson voter give solid reasoning as to why you’d protect him and leave Babchuk available. I think it’s just folks who are fed up with Babchuk voting for Carson just because he played here last year and was real nice when they saw him at Harris Teeter.
My reasoning: I think when evaluating dmen the 1st thing that has to be looked at is their ability to play defense and keep the puck out their net. I think Carson is clearly better at this. He’s not a flashy guy, he makes good first passes, doesn’t get lit up very often (yes I remember the M.St.Louis gaff), plays the body well, and can hold his own offensively. The thing I like about him most is his character, he’s been a leader at every level. He does whatever it takes to help his team and seems to embrace this task. Yes, Babchuk has the big shot and you can’t teach that, but I think if we got in the playoffs and Gleason got hurt and we needed someone to step up and play big minutes I’d rather it be Carson than Babchuk.
Carson exposed
I’m repeating an analysis offered in the original thread, but I would expose Carson for a couple of reason.
One, he’s not likely to be selected, since we’ll be seeing maybe 14 or so D-men chosen by the two expansion clubs from a menu supplied by 30 teams. My guess is that better known D-men than Carson are available, as attractive as he might be with his two-way contract.
Two, if we lose him, his skill set is replaceable, either from within or without.
Three, an expansion draft is going to inflict some pain, so minimizing the trade value and function lost is one of the key variables. I would argue that Babchuk, with his UFA status this summer, is a trading deadline candidate for which we will at least secure a draft pick. Carson, on the other hand, has dubious trade value.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I agree, Carson wasn’t picked up by any team for league minimum as a UFA… I doubt he would get picked up in an expansion Draft. He is definitely an unknown name around the league. Carson is very solid defensively which we need, but he is also relatively easily to replace. By comparison, few D in the NHL have Babchuk’s up-side and in general offensive D are more valuable than defensive D. I’d go with Babchuk, worst case scenario I think he gets traded for a 2nd or 3rd Round pick this offseason. Best case scenario everyone is over the drama and we have a serviceable offensive asset until a kid like Justin Faulk is ready to take his place.
Does Harrison need protection?
Well, don’t we all? :-D
Not that it much matters, since we have the capacity to protect him if he needs protection, but I thought Harrison was eligible for the expansion draft.
No, he doesn’t have the requisite 40 games last season or 70 games over the past two combined seasons, so cannot be a required exposure candidate.
But, he has skated in 58 total NHL games through the years (stats), so would have more than the minimum 49 games that players needing protection must have (unless they are limited to the past two seasons, which wasn’t stated in the rules supplied).
So, I thought he had to join the “protected” list, but we couldn’t expose him as our required D-man to be exposed.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Protected forwards
Again I will be repeating an general analysis and a forward discussion offered in the original thread, but I do agree on the Patrick Dwyer exposure choice.
However, the contract and function that Kostopoulos plays on the team are both just too good for me to expose him to this expansion draft. Even if I want to open up a roster spot for next year, I’m going to get something for him in trade, even if he’s made part of a bundle.
To me, it came down to two UFA’s that probably will not be re-signed by the Canes: Cole and Samsonov.
And I went with exposing Cole because I think he has little trade value with his history of injuries, whereas Samsonov has trade deadline (or before) value.
So, I’m curious as to why you decided that Kostopoulos was the second forward to expose?
Here we are now...entertain us.
Whoever made the point about Harrison above is correct. He is eligible for the draft, but the Canes would still need to unprotect one other defenseman because Harrison does not have enough games played in the last two years to qualify as the final unprotected player in that respect. Since we still have an open spot, we might as well protect Harrison as well.
Regarding why I left TK unprotected and protected Cole and Samsonov:
I really love what TK can bring, but feel that Cole and Samsonov both have more possible upside for success next season. Most would agree that Samsonov had a bad year last year, but he still easily out-scored TK. (while playing in 10 fewer games).
Cole had a great (point per minute played) stat and was effective when he was able to play. While his health is a valid concern, again I feel he brings more to the table overall. He scored more goals in 40 games, (11), than TK did in 82, (8).
TK would be missed, but players like Nick Dodge, Chris Terry, Oskar Osala, or Jerome Samson would be more apt to replace what he brings rather than replace Cole or Samsonov’s scoring.
Editing Manager of CanesCountry.com
I now at least understand your criteria. You’re valuing “what can this player bring to the team this season” moreso than me.
If I lose a player for this season, especially at this mid-range level (we’ve protected all the top flight talent), then I’m assuming I can duplicate function and scoring from within.
This is particularly interesting when I have a plethora of prospects to evaluate.
So, I’m looking at dangling Cole as an opportunity to move some salary (which now allows a mid-season roster adjustment in the salary budget) that I can’t move by trade (assuming Cole is a tough trade due to injury concerns) and opening up a roster spot early for Bowman or whoever if someone bites.
I’m more focused on the overall value of the assets and what I think I can get for them, and Kostopoulos (with his $0.9M/$1.1M contract and utility role) is a more valued asset to me than Cole who is starting to look like a UFA contract that’s going to expire on me for no value.
So, in minimizing the hurt mode, I dangle Cole, daring someone to bite and possibly dumping some salary earlier than I ever thought possible.
Here we are now...entertain us.
In fact, if someone does bite, I can now financially afford, and have a right wing roster spot waiting, for…drumroll…Skinner.
Here we are now...entertain us.
That’s an interesting take on Cole. That’s one thing that makes this issue of picking who to protect and who not to protect so difficult. For instance, will the Blackhawks protect Campbell? I can’t help but wonder what Chicago would have done differently if they could have someone simply take Campbell off their hands and get no salary back in return. Will the Oilers protect Souray? Will the Bruins protect Savard?
Is it possible to be addicted to hockey?
The Bruins might protect Savard b/c his salary is reasonable, but the others would all be made available — I’m sure of it.
by Cory Lavalette on Sep 1, 2010 11:27 AM EDT up reply actions
yep, I am trying to put the best possible team on the ice this season. Hence the indecision between Babchuk and Carson. I think Babchuk has more overall value, but Carson brings more of what the team needs this season.
I also think Cole is worth much more than TK at the deadline. Health history or no history, the Habs and Sens would love to get their mitts on him. I realize that TK has another year on his deal, but at 1.3 million, it’s at the high end.
The timing of this whole process could be better. Shrewd GM’s might try to acquire cheap assets ahead of time, which would qualify for the draft, in an attempt to circumvent the process. The timing of this is not giving us a chance for any proactive planning.
Editing Manager of CanesCountry.com
If you think Cole has trade value, then I would agree with the Kostopoulos decision (although his ’11-12 season is actually an even more affordable $1.1M than the $1.3M number you were using).
Not sure he would even be chosen, since he would probably only be in contention of fourth line duties with an eye to utility fill-in for injuries…same way we use him.
Two teams choosing two right wings total for that job from 30 teams, 20 of which statistically have a shot at including a right wing among the two forwards they must expose.
So there’s theoretically only maybe a 10 percent chance of him actually being selected.
Although the combination of skills, roles played, and affordable two-year contract would make Tommy look pretty good to me if I’m an expansion team GM.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree about Cole. I still think there is plenty of value with him and more so than TK, who even at just 1.1 million is an expensive fourth liner. (although if a GM picks him, I guess he slots in on the third line).
(not sure where I got 1.3 million, thanks.)
So you think Cole has zero trade value and is finished? I agree he is overpaid for what he brought last season, but I’m willing to gamble that his numbers will be higher than TK’s at the end of this season. And for 1.1 million, I can get a pretty good fourth liner to replace TK in 2011-12.
Editing Manager of CanesCountry.com
I think I’m slowly coming around to your view of exposing Kostopoulos, especially if you (and maybe others) feel we might still be able to trade Cole, IF we’re not headed for the playoffs and he is healthy (two admittedly small windows of opportunity).
I would agree that we can find replacements for Kostopoulos among our prospects, including someone volunteering to go out and lose a fight for us. :-D
Here we are now...entertain us.
I noted this in the original draft thread, but I think with Cole you’ve got a lot of upside ability to get a second round pick or a lower pick and a prospect if you trade him. His injury history cannot be over looked, but if he plays well he will be very valuable come the trade deadline assuming the Canes are sellers (one could make the case that if Cole is playing well the team may be a playoff contender).
For me the Cole/TKO issue is how young do the Canes want to go. If you leave Cole unprotected he’ll get drafted which opens up another spot for a young kid. TKO is also likely to get drafted IMO, but his fourth line spot isn’t ideal for a young player. I can’t really argue with Bob’s contention that keeping Cole puts the better team on the ice compared to keeping TKO. However, I could potentially re-frame the argument and ask if having the best team this season is best for the future? Is the team perhaps better served by opening another spot for a young kid and having more idea of what team they have on their hands after this season?
Is it possible to be addicted to hockey?
That’s the long-term hat that I was wearing in my original decision to expose Cole and dare someone to take him.
I was taking the long range view that I’m not going to re-sign Cole, do not really know what his contribution will be in a non-Cup year (will he be healthy the entire season and/or perform?), and because of these unknowns I don’t know his trading value (assuming I’m even in a position to trade him at the deadline, since there are some odds we’re in the playoff mix and/or he’s hurt).
So, I was of the opinion that I get proactive on the salary dump by exposing him and do something with that slot and money by bringing in one of the prospects instead.
If I ever tire of Kostopoulos in the next two seasons (and we don’t have someone demanding his job right now), he’s easily disposed of for value, by being bundled with someone else, if nothing else.
I’m still not entirely convinced that the best management of assets says I can do something good with that $3M in salary that losing Cole would free up in my salary budget.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Bob explain Carson/ Babs vis a vis this year!!
Can’t agree about Babs, but maybe u can explain
Carson vs. Babchuk
Looking at the team through your eyes, and applying the value system of who more helps the team this season, I might agree with you that Carson brings more of what we need (especially considering the number of right-shot offensive defensemen we have as JR seemingly tries to corner the market) than possibly Babchuk and his PP trigger shot.
What’s your feelings on Babchuk actually being selected by an expansion GM, when he has 30 defensemen from which to choose?
Carson might look pretty good to an expansion team as a bottom pairing (or even seventh) D-man, but what do you think?
Not that “I dare you” has to be a selection criteria for who we expose, but gauging realistic chances of loss is at least a decision factor, even if eventually ignored.
Here we are now...entertain us.
But, I still hate to give up that draft pick that I would get for Babchuk at the deadline.
The only way I can rationalize that loss is to now view Carson as that “pick”, retaining his RFA contract and known skill package as my “bird in the hand” asset going forward, rather than how ever many birdies (none to maybe one or two) I might have eventually received for Babchuk.
So, I might could talk myself into exposing Babchuk, if Carson is to be part of my top six going forward.
But I have so many nice D-men prospects in the system that I don’t know that I can make that assumption.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I don't get it!!!
Babs is a talented scorer, and as most people know "offensive D-men " are quite valuable!! Why would u GIVE HIM AWAY???
Because the team has Pitkanen, Corvo, McBain, and Sanguinetti. No one is wanting to give up on Babchuk, but the exercise does require that at least one defensemen who has played either 40 games last season or 70 games in the previous two remain unprotected. Additionally, only 5 can be protected. Gleason, Corvo, and Pitkanen are definites to be protected. The only two defensemen who meet the game threshold are Babchuk and Carson. Personally, as I’ve said above, I’d protect Babchuk and leave Carson unprotected, but a decent case can be made either way.
Is it possible to be addicted to hockey?
randycane
like C-leaguer said, just redundancy, that’s the only reason I am considering.
Editing Manager of CanesCountry.com
Still...
Up to a point i would agree, but if you think he’s the worst scoring d-man on our team (which i think is CRAZY) u still would trade him rather than let him go for free! however, there’s no way he’s less valuable than Carson IMO!!
That’s part of the fun of this exercise though, we have to leave someone unprotected. The Cole/TKO discussion above is very interesting IMO, and I think this discussion about Babchuk v Carson is pretty interesting as well. Carson is probably the lower talent, his salary is easier to afford, he’s less likely to be drafted if left unprotected, and he fills a need the Canes have this season. Babchuk is the better talent, has a higher salary, is very likely to be drafted if left unprotected, and his skill set is somewhat redundant.
Is it possible to be addicted to hockey?
Exactly. The variables that are in motion to be applied to the decision are fascinating.
And, I like that this theoretical exercise is at least a pure one, since as Bob noted, in reality GM’s could lode up with “sacrificial nodes”, as per your early suggestion C-Leaguer.
At least this way, we see how amateur GM’s would play in a “hold ’em” environment, playing with the true existing assets of the org.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Love this discussion!
Awesome, stuff, Bob!
A little bit of hockey roulette never hurt anyone! (Sorry, Rick Tochett)
First Goal: Cole vs. K-Stop? Keep Em Both!
I would let Cole go unprotected a) because he’s prone to injury and b) slightly overpaid at 2.9M. I think GM’s would have a higher tendency to pick up K-stop who is more rugged and functional for a brand-new team. Cole is a heart-string puller – not what I would want building a brand new team.
Second Goal – Win-Win with Samsonov
Most are of the belief that Sammy could have a 40-50 point season since he’s due a contract renewal – this may be true so that’s a win if we protect him. If he stays (and I really like this guy) then I’m just as well off because I have that skill I can use for the playoffs, and if he plays well while the rest of the team tanks, then he makes an attractive trade. On the other hand, his 2.5M off the books would clear that budget up nicely for Mr. PK, and I could see one or more of our rookie wingers putting up the same points (Skinner, maybe Boychuk). So it’s a win for me to expose him and if he were to be picked up as well.
Dwyer? That’s a toughy. He’s good stuff but, as I think someone above mentioned, Dodge would fill in just as well. Must expose Dwyer.
Babs or Carson
Here’s more roulette. Long term, as the Canes’ GM, I’m more interested in Carson. But Babs is obviously more attractive to other teams. I say expose Carson in the hopes no one picks him up (lol @caniacgirl: buy him a cookie). Use or trade Babs as the season dictates.
and to think
all of this is a what IF & make believe !! hehehe…gee i hate to see what most of us here will be like at the trade deadline !! welll on second thought…maybe not !! hehehe…good night all
And if it Aint Hockey,It Aint Nothin !!
That Checkers 3rd Sweater ROCKS !!!
I imagine it would be here.
Is it possible to be addicted to hockey?
I’ve been eavesdropping on some of the conversations occuring on various SB Nation hockey blogs about this expansion draft.
No question, some are tempted to dump bad contracts in a “I dare you to draft this player” (think LeCavalier) move.
But sanity is usually prevailing and they’re dumping mid-to-low level talent instead.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I was still waffling up to the last minute, but decided to go with the majority and protect Carson.
Editing Manager of CanesCountry.com
Protecting Carson
Bob, you are the man. It’s not a simple call, but I think you made the correct choice. I was, am, and will continue to be a strong fan of Babchuk. We were fans of his from the time he came to Carolina; but I wonder if he is as committed to franchise long-term as if Carson. Babchuk could be a big time player for the Hurricanes; and I am hoping for the best. Despite all that, Carson is a player who fits extremely well within the Hurricanes system and has better upside offensively than one might think. He is like Gleason in that he seems to focus on doing his job on defense as by far and away his priority; and for Carson, he’s a player who seems to be at his best when he is not being noticed.
Fast forward a few seasons and we could see a defenseman lineup that includes:
Gleason
McBain
Dumoulin
Faulk
Sainquinetti
Carson
with Borer, Alt, Jordan, and Biega all wanting Carson’s job, if he’s even still around.
I think we can live without either Babchuk or Carson for the long haul, so your short term “who helps me the most this coming season” approach is a valid one.
Even though I would probably have exposed Carson, myself, and traded Babchuk at the deadline regardless of our playoff chances. :-D
Here we are now...entertain us.
Even though I would probably have exposed Carson, myself, and traded Babchuk at the deadline regardless of our playoff chances. :-D
That’s the choice I would make. I think it’s the best asset management. Like I said elsewhere though, I can see the merits of either choice.
Is it possible to be addicted to hockey?
Since the debate about Babchuk vs Carson seems to come down to value now (Carson) vs possible trade value later (Babchuk) let’s play devil’s advocate for a minute. What if: a) Babchuk hasn’t gotten any better at playing defense? b) his accuracy shooting the puck is no better (or possibly worse)? c) his susceptibilty to pressure is as bad or worse than it became in the playoffs? d) other teams actually begin preying on his shoortcomings? It’s possible he could wind up being our “odd defenseman out”, and sitting a lot. At that point, his trade value would be whatever is next to zero. The choice between Carson and Babchuk, to me, becomes a choice between a known value, and “potential”. I think I would protect Carson.
C-Leaguer – then I suppose this makes Babchuk our acquired “sacrificial node”, as per your strategic option posed on the original expansion draft thread.
Wasn’t intentional when he was re-acquired, but by function he becomes that sacrificial player that wasn’t on your roster last season, but is now and meets the required D-man exposure criteria, thereby preserving your existing roster.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I would have to believe that the Canes have kept close tabs on Babchuk and are excited that he has developed in his past season in Russia instead of gotten worse. I’m pretty sure that was said in some of the interviews with JR around the time of his signing (along with top-4 predictions).
The Canes willingly sought out Babchuk and signed him immediately to a contract that was a pretty decent raise on the last QO they gave him (did anyone else expect $1.4 million? I didn’t). I have to assume they really think he developed positively and were excited to get him back in a Canes jersey. I doubt they blindly signed him to that kind of deal, have some faith in the scouting department who has been pretty good about D prospects lately.
+1000
Exactly, there’s no evidence at all of Babs having less skill or scoring ability! You could make that same argument about any player, but let’s be REAL! I understand he’s not everybody’s favorite, but come on, the kid has talent!! Fortunately JR has the only say about him, so all of u who think he’s not better than Carson….(who i like), well …each to his own?
Carson and Babchuk
I really like both players. I am positive the Hurricanes kept track of Babchuk’s play while in the KHL; and my guess is although Babchuk’s decision-making in terms of leaving for the KHL was not the choice the Hurricanes hoped he would make, they really like Babchuk’s positives and feel he has worked on some of his areas of weakness. I doubt personally Babchuk is going to be one of the two or three players selected off the Hurricanes roster; and I see both sides of the argument. I would also agree that in terms of upside potential, I’d put Babchuk ability to launch rockets at the point as a tremendous upside. I like Carson’s potential as well; and think he will only get better as his play matures. My take is the Hurricanes will be glad they have both players. If either of the two get traded, however, I think it is Babchuk who will be the one to be traded.
As long as Babchuk has any trade value whatsoever, it was worthwhile for the org to re-acquire him. It almost doesn’t matter if he helps the org or not this season (although if he’s not a helpful piece, his trade value will decrease accordingly).
Preservation of the value of our 2003 second round draft choice (Danny Richmond) that Babchuk now represents after our 2006 trade with Chicago is only accomplished by having Babchuk under contract and not in the KHL.
If Babchuk can return a second-round pick, or a RFA prospect that represents that value, then the RFA status of that asset is preserved and continued, right before Babchuk goes UFA this summer.
So, I’m viewing the wooing of Babchuk back to the org as fullfilling not only a powerplay trigger man role (of which we now have several), but also reclaiming a RFA contract position, which is super-critical to preserve in a salary cap environment.
Only the RFA contract slots that an org controls offer any form of predictability, continuity, and affordability in a salary cap environment. We only want to be fulfilling needs through the UFA market as a last resort or to solve a missing piece of the puzzle.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Puck Previews: Blues host Kings in first game after break; Blackhawks’ road struggles
- Best barometer of the St. Louis Blues’ success? Gifts from political lobbyists
- ‘Scott Gomez Can’t Put Anything In’: The ‘Hey Jude’ of Scott Gomez protest songs (Video)
- Puck Headlines: Jimmy Howard’s injury; top 50 players; drinking beer out of hockey skate (yuck)
- Jersey Fouls: Wayne Gretzky embarrassments; homemade Sedin; minor league Yzerman
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- Oilers' Gagner still in awe of his 8-goal night
- Website highlights Scott Gomez's one-year (well, almost) scoring drought
- Montreal Canadiens recall Palushaj, Blunden not expected to face Capitals
- Center Vitale signs a two-year, US$1.1-million extension with Penguins
- Sabres G Miller a win short of breaking Hasek mark
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
