Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Vin Tanner
MVP
MVP
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Vin Tanner »

Expose Myers... he’s been ok but he has three seasons left at a top 35 d salary. He’s at best a solid 4 guy.
We wan out of da time- James Elmer Benning
theman
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1724
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 2:51 pm

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by theman »

At this point I am not worried at all about the expansion draft, doubt we are losing an impact player.
User avatar
Vin Tanner
MVP
MVP
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Vin Tanner »

theman wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:23 pm At this point I am not worried at all about the expansion draft, doubt we are losing an impact player.
Lol we have how many impact players?
Bo
Petey
Brock
Miller
Hughes
Schmidt
Demko

After that it’s a pile of shit
Last edited by Vin Tanner on Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We wan out of da time- James Elmer Benning
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 29932
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Strangelove »

^It's a drunken cry for help...
____
GO CANUCKS GO!!!
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 8788
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Meds »

Doyle Hargraves wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:28 pm
theman wrote: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:23 pm At this point I am not worried at all about the expansion draft, doubt we are losing an impact player.
Lol we have how many impact players?
Bo
Petey
Brock
Miller
Hughes
Schmidt
Demko

After that it’s a pile of shit
And this year the only ones who seem to be consistent are Hughes and Boeser.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 20717
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Do I have this right?

Forwards who will be protected

1. Miller
2. Pettersson
3. Horvat
4. Boeser
5. Virtanen
6. Motte
7. Gaudette

Exposed

MacEwan
Beagle
Roussel
Eriksson
Lind
Ferland
Jasek

UFA’S - Sutter, Pearson, Hawryluk

Exempt - Podkolzin, Hoglander, Lockwood, Michaelis

Defenceman protected

1. Juolevi
2. Schmidt
3. Myers

Exposed - Rafferty, Sautner, Chatfield

UFA’s - Benn, Edler, Hamonic

Exempt - Hughes, Woo, Tryamkin, Rathbone

Goalies protected - Demko

Goalies exposed - Holtby, DiPietro

To me it’s Lind or Holtby who we end up losing???
“Benning should fired for not drafting Jack Wise” - Doyle Hargraves
User avatar
Cousin Strawberry
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14877
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Cousin Strawberry »

Chef Boi RD wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 11:47 am Do I have this right?

Forwards who will be protected

1. Miller
2. Pettersson
3. Horvat
4. Boeser
5. Virtanen
6. Motte
7. Gaudette

Exposed

MacEwan
Beagle
Roussel
Eriksson
Lind
Ferland
Jasek

UFA’S - Sutter, Pearson, Hawryluk

Exempt - Podkolzin, Hoglander, Lockwood, Michaelis

Defenceman protected

1. Juolevi
2. Schmidt
3. Myers

Exposed - Rafferty, Sautner, Chatfield

UFA’s - Benn, Edler, Hamonic

Exempt - Hughes, Woo, Tryamkin, Rathbone

Goalies protected - Demko

Goalies exposed - Holtby, DiPietro

To me it’s Lind or Holtby who we end up losing???
Not bad...It'll be Lind. Leave him on the farm and hope they go for the Holtby
If you need air...call it in
User avatar
Cherry Picker
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1961
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:56 am

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Cherry Picker »

They also have to expose a defensemen under contract next season. Unless they sign or trade for a defensemen that is under contract for next season before the expansion draft and expose that defensemen, they will have to expose one of the only two defensemen that qualify, either Schmidt or Myers. I didn’t think Dipietro qualified, but I could be wrong.

The way I see things right now the Canucks will protect three of Gaudette, Motte, Lind, Virtanen and MacEwen.
My guess is Virtanen and MacEwen get exposed.

So my guess is the best choices for Seattle will be from:

Virtanen, MacEwen
Myers
Holtby, Dipietro (if he qualifies)
We are all Jim Benning.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 20717
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Cherry Picker wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:02 pm They also have to expose a defensemen under contract next season. Unless they sign or trade for a defensemen that is under contract for next season before the expansion draft and expose that defensemen, they will have to expose one of the only two defensemen that qualify, either Schmidt or Myers. I didn’t think Dipietro qualified, but I could be wrong.

The way I see things right now the Canucks will protect three of Gaudette, Motte, Lind, Virtanen and MacEwen.
My guess is Virtanen and MacEwen get exposed.

So my guess is the best choices for Seattle will be from:

Virtanen, MacEwen
Myers
Holtby, Dipietro (if he qualifies)
I’m still not getting why some suggest Myers will be exposed? As of now prior to contracts we only have to protect

Myers
Schmidt
Juolevi

Now they sign a player like Hamonic in which I don’t mind they then expose Juolevi protect - Hamonic, Myers and Schmidt.

If they sign Tryamkin I imagine he’s still exempt or not?

Why wouldn’t they protect Virtanen? Unless they want to shed his contract which is $2.5 million? Or to protect Lind?

Motte and Gaudette you definitely protect. MacEwan meh, expose him, his ceiling looks very limited
“Benning should fired for not drafting Jack Wise” - Doyle Hargraves
User avatar
Cherry Picker
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1961
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:56 am

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Cherry Picker »

Myers might be exposed because at this time only he and Schmidt are under contract for next season. Every team must expose a defensemen that is under contract for next season regardless of the three protection slots. I believe they would rather expose Myers than Schmidt. This situation could change if trades or signings are made before the expansion draft.
We are all Jim Benning.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 20717
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Cherry Picker wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:13 pm Myers might be exposed because at this time only he and Schmidt are under contract for next season. Every team must expose a defensemen that is under contract for next season regardless of the three protection slots. I believe they would rather expose Myers than Schmidt. This situation could change if trades or signings are made before the expansion draft.
Signing any of Hamonic or Tryamkin or Benn would change that? It does Tryamkin remain exempt if signed?

I’d like to see Hamonic resigned, if he’s asking for too much resign Benn
“Benning should fired for not drafting Jack Wise” - Doyle Hargraves
User avatar
Cousin Strawberry
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14877
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:19 pm
Location: in the shed with a fresh packed bowl

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Cousin Strawberry »

Cherry Picker wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:13 pm Myers might be exposed because at this time only he and Schmidt are under contract for next season. Every team must expose a defensemen that is under contract for next season regardless of the three protection slots. I believe they would rather expose Myers than Schmidt. This situation could change if trades or signings are made before the expansion draft.
I can see JB exposing Myers as well if he suspects theres interest down the I-5. The three big RFA extentions will vacuum up almost all of the space they have left.

I wonder if we might see a hold out situation even...
If you need air...call it in
User avatar
Vin Tanner
MVP
MVP
Posts: 22248
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Vin Tanner »

Cherry Picker wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:13 pm Myers might be exposed because at this time only he and Schmidt are under contract for next season. Every team must expose a defensemen that is under contract for next season regardless of the three protection slots. I believe they would rather expose Myers than Schmidt. This situation could change if trades or signings are made before the expansion draft.
He’s as thick as a brick. Reading isn’t his strong point.

Who the fuck cares if they lose Lind? Or Myers for they matter? Then they have 6 million to spend on a third layer that suits the team more.
We wan out of da time- James Elmer Benning
User avatar
Cherry Picker
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1961
Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:56 am

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Cherry Picker »

Yes, signing Benn or Hambone changes the situation. If they’ll sign prior to the expansion draft knowing they will likely be exposed.
Except maybe Tryamkin. I don’t think he qualifies unless he plays a game this season.
We are all Jim Benning.
User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 20717
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Seattle Expansion/Canucks players

Post by Chef Boi RD »

Cherry Picker wrote: Sun Mar 21, 2021 12:20 pm Yes. If they’ll sign prior to the expansion draft knowing they will likely be exposed.
Except maybe Tryamkin. I don’t think he qualifies unless he plays a game this season.
I believe Hambone will get signed here. He has come out saying he wants to stay here

When is the expansion draft? After the July 1st UFA season? Or before? Tryamkin from what I gather cannot be signed until July 1st? If expansion draft is after that and Tryamkin is signed and Hamonic as well maybe you expose Myers then to shed some cap space

I could card less if they expose Juolevi. Would rather expose Lind than Virtanen
“Benning should fired for not drafting Jack Wise” - Doyle Hargraves
Post Reply