Crzydrvr Posted August 3, 2012 Report Share Posted August 3, 2012 I was asked to do one of these, and so I will happily oblige. A hypothetical situation: If Greg Jamison's bid falls through and Phoenix is forced to fold (not relocate, FOLD) then what do you think happens? Personally, I don't think Bettman will ever let his baby die like that but strictly speaking, IF IT DOES happen, how would it go? Running through standard dispersal draft rules: Draft order is the same as waiver order (i.e. reverse order of NHL standings), only players that are property of the Coyotes can be drafted (i.e. no Shane Doan, but yes unsigned prospects), 2 rounds (passes allowed), cap rules still apply. Opinions? MY take on what would happen: 1. CBJ: D Oliver Ekman-Larsson: Easily the player with the most upside on the Phoenix Coyotes; another asset for their backend. 2. EDM: D Keith Yandle: The true top pairing defenseman that Edmonton has sought; Yandle is one of the best offensive defensemen in the NHL. 3. MTL: C Martin Hanzal: Two words: Big center. Also has a developing two-way game. 4. NYI: D Brandon Gormley: The Islanders need young guys who can step into an NHL lineup right now; Gormley is about as NHL ready a defensive prospect as their is. 5. TOR: G Mike Smith: Burke doesn't like long contracts but doesn't want to part with assets for a goalie. So here's one ready-made. 6. ANA: C Antoine Vermette: Vermette adds some great two-way abilities and depth to Anaheim's top 9. 7. MIN: D David Rundblad: Skilled offensive defenseman; Wild can just add him to their list of top prospects. 8. CAR: D Connor Murphy: Canes have no pressing needs at the NHL level, so they can take their time with the project defenseman. 9. WPG: F Lauri Korpikoski: Speedy two-way winger on a cheap 1 year deal and with untapped offensive abilities. 10. TBL: F Mikkel Boedker: See above. If he works out, great. If not, the Lightning aren't locked into a longterm contract. 11. COL: D Zbynek Michalek: Top 4 defenseman is really good at what he does; could free up Johnson to play a more offensive game. 12. BUF: F Alexander Ruuttu: Gritty Finnish prospect won't take up a contract just yet; Buffalo is full up right now. 13. DAL: D Chris Summers: Good depth player on a short deal; Stars, like Sabres, have barely any contract room. 14. CGY: C Boyd Gordon: Gritty, two-way center who wins a lot of faceoffs. Would immediately contribute to the team's bottom 6. 15. OTT: C Andy Miele: Slick center will be given time to develop in Ottawa. 16. WSH: F Radim Vrbata: Caps need scorers; Radim Vrbata is Phoenix's biggest offensive threat. 17: FLO: F Steve Sullivan: Florida gets a savvy, veteran forward who can play in their top 6. 18. SJS: F Brett MacLean: Young, skilled forward can play in San Jose's lineup right now and still has room for growth. 19. CHI: F Raffi Torres: Big hitter will add the aggression in the bottom 6 that has been lacking in Chicago since 2010. 20. NJD: G Mark Visentin: This one seems pretty obvious. 21. DET: D Rostislav Klesla: Detroit gets a proven top 4 defenseman, on a short and reasonable contract, for free! 22. BOS: D Michael Stone: Stone will immediately become one of Boston's best defensive prospects. 23. PHI: [pass]: Philly has no space anyways. 24. NSH: D Derek Morris: Like Detroit, they get a proven veteran defender on a good contract. 25. PIT: F Henrik Samuelsson: Bloodlines run deep; Henrik is a pretty good prospect as well. 26. STL: F Viktor Tikhonov: Blues can afford to take a chance on Russian forward. 27. NYR: F Paul Bissonette: Biznasty2.0 joins a pugilistic Rangers 4th line. And I mean REALLY pugilistic. If you can't beat them, beat them. With brass knuckles. 28. VAN: F Darian Dziurzynski: Canucks still looking for tough sons-of-spicy orange ducks. 29. LAK: F Lucas Lessio: Lessio has some good pro potential and doesn't take up a contract slot. 30. CBJ: F David Moss 31. EDM: F Phil Lane 32. MTL: [pass] 33. NYI: G Jason LaBarbera 34. TOR: [pass] 35. ANA: D David Schlemko 36. MIN: [pass] 37. CAR: [pass] 38. WPG: F Chris Brown 39. TBL: D Maxim Goncharov 40. COL: F Brendan Shinnimin 41. BUF: [pass] 42: DAL: [pass] 43. CGY: D James Melindy 44. OTT: [pass] 45. WSH: F Samuel Fejes 46. FLO: [pass] 47. SJS: [pass] 48. CHI: G Louis Domingue 49. NJD: D Rhett Holland 50. DET: [pass] 51. BOS: [pass] 52. PHI: [pass] 53. NSH: [pass] 54. PIT: [pass] 55. STL: [pass] 56. NYR: F Jordan Martinook 57. VAN: [pass] 58. LAK: [pass] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demonous_Xodus Posted August 3, 2012 Report Share Posted August 3, 2012 Vrbata would probably go a lot higher and if not, we should probably take him. I'd also love to take Hanzal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 Love it. Thanks man. If I were Tambo and company, I'd take Gormley over Yandle though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crzydrvr Posted August 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 If I were Tambo and company, I'd take Gormley over Yandle though. Well, I was thinking of it in terms of what Oilers management would think. Considering they've been talking about the need to make major progress THIS season, I figured an NHL-ready top pairing defender would be exactly what they would need to move up the standings. Brandon Gormley is a good prospect, but even if he's NHL ready it's unlikely that he'd be a major contributor right off the hop, and having a guy who can come in and immediately be the guy on the backend is what Edmonton needs right now to make a push for the playoffs. Vrbata would probably go a lot higher and if not, we should probably take him. I'd also love to take Hanzal. With dispersal drafts, the big thing is team politics. Vrbata is easily the most skilled player on the Yotes roster, but all the teams in front of Washington either have a specific need that they could fill with another player (i.e. Anaheim with Vermette, Calgary with Gordon), lack the cap space or the contract space to add Vrbata's contract (i.e. Buffalo and Minnesota) or are currently rebuilding and need to add prospects more than they need to add roster players (i.e. Columbus and the Islanders). Either that, or they just don't need a scoring winger right now. It's not like an entry draft where you go BPA, here you have to consider the contract salary and length, the age, the fit, team needs....if you're taking on a contract like Michalek for example, you better know what you're getting into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted August 4, 2012 Report Share Posted August 4, 2012 Well, I was thinking of it in terms of what Oilers management would think. Considering they've been talking about the need to make major progress THIS season, I figured an NHL-ready top pairing defender would be exactly what they would need to move up the standings. Brandon Gormley is a good prospect, but even if he's NHL ready it's unlikely that he'd be a major contributor right off the hop, and having a guy who can come in and immediately be the guy on the backend is what Edmonton needs right now to make a push for the playoffs. With dispersal drafts, the big thing is team politics. Vrbata is easily the most skilled player on the Yotes roster, but all the teams in front of Washington either have a specific need that they could fill with another player (i.e. Anaheim with Vermette, Calgary with Gordon), lack the cap space or the contract space to add Vrbata's contract (i.e. Buffalo and Minnesota) or are currently rebuilding and need to add prospects more than they need to add roster players (i.e. Columbus and the Islanders). Either that, or they just don't need a scoring winger right now. It's not like an entry draft where you go BPA, here you have to consider the contract salary and length, the age, the fit, team needs....if you're taking on a contract like Michalek for example, you better know what you're getting into. I agree that the Oilers will put an emphasis on improving this season. That's why I don't think Yandle is the best fit. He played the most protected minutes on Phoenix's defence last season. IMO Oilers need a guy that you can put on the ice in the last minutes of a game to prevent getting scored upon. Gormley is projecting to be a two way defenceman. I agree with what you're saying about team need over BPA in a dispersal draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Don Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 I would laugh my head off if the Flames take Boyd Gordon ahead of Radim Vrbata. Vrbata probably goes by Winnipeg at the latest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crzydrvr Posted August 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 I would laugh my head off if the Flames take Boyd Gordon ahead of Radim Vrbata. There were a couple of major factors that led me to Gordon instead of Vrbata. One was the fact that we already have a plethora of wingers on our team, another is that we're right up against the cap; sure we could take on Vrbata's contract, but is it really worth taking out any remaining cap flexibility in order to take on another winger? Unfortunately, the Flames just don't have the cap space to take on any big contracts, so I went for the cheap, grinding faceoff artist. It works out fine because he's the type of player that can fill a hole on this team up the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 There is just too many problems with the whole scenario, even ignoring the biggest which is it will never happen; I see the following issues. The waiver order is determined by the regular season and not the playoffs, so you would need to redo that draft order. If there were a dispersal draft it would have to include a penalty free buyout (or 2) because you have to consider the limit of 50 contracts and not just the salary cap. The salary cap would increase because the number used for salaries would now be divided by 29 rather than 30. Players with a NMC would have to be offered the choice of entering the dispersal draft or becoming a free agent (all would choose free agency I am sure). Any such draft would have to take place prior to July 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted August 5, 2012 Report Share Posted August 5, 2012 There is just too many problems with the whole scenario, even ignoring the biggest which is it will never happen; I see the following issues. The waiver order is determined by the regular season and not the playoffs, so you would need to redo that draft order. If there were a dispersal draft it would have to include a penalty free buyout (or 2) because you have to consider the limit of 50 contracts and not just the salary cap. The salary cap would increase because the number used for salaries would now be divided by 29 rather than 30. Players with a NMC would have to be offered the choice of entering the dispersal draft or becoming a free agent (all would choose free agency I am sure). Any such draft would have to take place prior to July 1st. Bettman is definitely using the possibility of folding the Coyotes as leverage. Financially, it makes more sense than moving them to a market that would pay more money for a worse team (Quebec) or putting them in another city where the might fail (Kansas). Your other points are valid but don't show why the draft would be less likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zirakzigil Posted August 6, 2012 Report Share Posted August 6, 2012 Bettman is definitely using the possibility of folding the Coyotes as leverage. Financially, it makes more sense than moving them to a market that would pay more money for a worse team (Quebec) or putting them in another city where the might fail (Kansas). Your other points are valid but don't show why the draft would be less likely. No hes not. Hes using the possibility of relocating the team as leverage to get a better deal on the arena lease, which is holding up this entire process. There is no way that the team folds. If they dont stay in Arizona then places like Seattle, Kansas and Vegas are likely destinations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 No hes not. Hes using the possibility of relocating the team as leverage to get a better deal on the arena lease, which is holding up this entire process. There is no way that the team folds. If they dont stay in Arizona then places like Seattle, Kansas and Vegas are likely destinations. Yes he is. Why wouldn't he? That would take away 23 jobs away from the NHLPA. If Phoenix is sold they stand to gain 170 million. If they are reloacted, maybe it goes up to 200 million. The league could opt to fold the franchise and then sell an expansion franchise to Quebec for 300 million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demonous_Xodus Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 Yes he is. Why wouldn't he? That would take away 23 jobs away from the NHLPA. If Phoenix is sold they stand to gain 170 million. If they are reloacted, maybe it goes up to 200 million. The league could opt to fold the franchise and then sell an expansion franchise to Quebec for 300 million. Holy crap, Connie said something smart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C_worthy Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 Holy crap, Connie said something smart. No he didn't. There is no way that the league would get away with folding one franchise and then opening the doors to an expansion team. There would be lawsuits everywhere. Also, the optics would be terrible after several years of trying to keep them afloat. Phoenix won't fold, they will be relocated if they don't stay in Phoenix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 No he didn't. There is no way that the league would get away with folding one franchise and then opening the doors to an expansion team. There would be lawsuits everywhere. Also, the optics would be terrible after several years of trying to keep them afloat. Phoenix won't fold, they will be relocated if they don't stay in Phoenix. I agree. Seattle or Kansas(??) are more likely than Quebec, even though you may see a team there in the future. IMHO Bettman would prefer a US move more than another move back to Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 No he didn't. There is no way that the league would get away with folding one franchise and then opening the doors to an expansion team. There would be lawsuits everywhere. Also, the optics would be terrible after several years of trying to keep them afloat. Phoenix won't fold, they will be relocated if they don't stay in Phoenix. Agreed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL44 Posted August 7, 2012 Report Share Posted August 7, 2012 Seattle! Seattle! Seattle! Keep the Yotes alive for a couple more yrs till the arena gets built! I think they would completely thrive there... massive support from the Vancouver market, along with an already present small core hockey base and history. Would make for an easy road trip on game day: get off work, drive down the I5, watch the game, buy gas, milk, butter and cheese, drive home, be in bed by midnight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 No he didn't. There is no way that the league would get away with folding one franchise and then opening the doors to an expansion team. There would be lawsuits everywhere. Also, the optics would be terrible after several years of trying to keep them afloat. Phoenix won't fold, they will be relocated if they don't stay in Phoenix. No, he really didn't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 Markham is supposed to have a 20,000+ arena ready by 2015. The GTA could use an NHL team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 No he didn't. There is no way that the league would get away with folding one franchise and then opening the doors to an expansion team. There would be lawsuits everywhere. Also, the optics would be terrible after several years of trying to keep them afloat. Phoenix won't fold, they will be relocated if they don't stay in Phoenix. Explain how there would be lawsuits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C_worthy Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 Explain how there would be lawsuits. yes, because educating you is why I come to these boards Markham is supposed to have a 20,000+ arena ready by 2015. The GTA could use an NHL team. Markham (anywhere in the GTA) is the least likely relocation location, IMO, because the GTA would be the most lucrative expansion site. The reason the NHL would never let Balsilly buy a team and move it to southern Ontario is that the new franchise fee for that area could well be in the $500m range. The league isn't going to just walk away from that kind of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demonous_Xodus Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 And I just noticed something else. Torres to Chicago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gsp393 Posted August 8, 2012 Report Share Posted August 8, 2012 A team anywhere in canada doesn't benefit the nhl near as much as an american team because all of canada already watches hockey. Also another team in the gta will definatly show an impact in buffalos attendance record as people from hamilton and south go to more buffalo games then toronto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConnorFutureGM Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 yes, because educating you is why I come to these boards Or is it so you can talk out of your a$$? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kulstad Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 yes, because educating you is why I come to these boards Or is it so you can talk out of your a$? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ring-a-ding-dong-dandy Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Markham (anywhere in the GTA) is the least likely relocation location, IMO, because the GTA would be the most lucrative expansion site. The reason the NHL would never let Balsilly buy a team and move it to southern Ontario is that the new franchise fee for that area could well be in the $500m range. The league isn't going to just walk away from that kind of money. technically they could charge that as a relocation fee.in fact I would argue it would be best for the league to move an existing franchise to the GTA rather than place an expansion team there because a team that is somewhat competetive right away (like Phoenix) would have a better shot at landing Leafs and Sabres fans that might be waivering a little after some poor seasons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.