1 hour ago, Ducky said:

So, he either gets traded or picked by Vegas in the draft....which do you think he takes?

Depends where the other options are.  He would look at it as play in Vegas or stay in Winnipeg.  if the Jets come to him and say we have three trade offers: Edmonton, Columbus, Buffalo.  And he says 'I'd rather go to Vegas.', well thats his choice.

Let me take a crack at this:

Ehlers-Scheif-Wheeler

Perreault-Little-Armia

Connor-Lowry-Dano

Burmi-Copp-Thorburn

Out of those top 12, Ehlers and Connor are not eligible.  So you protect Scheif, Wheeler, Perrault, Little, Armia, Lowry, Dano.  That's 7.  You expose Burmi, Copp, Thorbun (and scratched guys like Peluso).  So if Vegas has to choose, they probably choose Copp (or even Burmi maybe).  Not the end of the world for the Jets.  Using the above line up, the entire top nine is protected.

And in fact, Thorburn is a UFA.  So if the Jets want him back, just tell him you will re-sign him after the draft.  Vegas wont pick him (even if they wanted to).  Burmi and Copp would be RFA's so they *might* be less desirable to Vegas because they'd have to re-sign them.

They protect Buff, Trouba, Myers(or Hamonic) and expose Enstrom, Stuart, Chiarot.  They protect Helle and expose...whomever the back up is, let's presume its Hutch.  So we come full circle...Jets *probably* lose Enstrom (or whatever top four D they leave unprotected).

6 hours ago, sweep the leg said:

Why would an expansion team move Stuart to forward?

Based on our roster now, if we could only protect 3 dmen we'd probably lose Enstrom. That's a pretty solid player for them.

If you can't recognize the immense offensive potential of Mark Stuart then you don't know anything about hockey.

1 minute ago, Atomic said:

If you can't recognize the immense offensive potential of Mark Stuart then you don't know anything about hockey.

His potential is offensive alright...

Just now, Atomic said:

If you can't recognize the immense offensive potential of Mark Stuart then you don't know anything about hockey.

Other than possibly his immediate family, there's no bigger fan of Stu than this guy. I just think he's better suited to controlling the game from the blueline.

The expansion draft will be held before Myers contract cuts in so he won't have a clause in his contract.

I wouldn't protect Perreault because he would be an UFA after the expansion draft. Same as Staf. I'd cut a deal with Perreault beforehand anyway. Sign him after the draft.

Scheif Wheeler Dano Armia Little Lowry Burmi and Copp.

Chevy either decides to leave Copp or Burmi unprotected or give Vegas a 2nd or 3rd or whatever so they don't draft him if you want to retain him.

 

Does Enstrom have a NMC or a NTC... cuz if it's no trade, He's not being traded, he's being picked in an expansion draft. 

 

It makes a difference, NMC might or might not be exempt, NTC probably won't be exempt. Plays a huge factor. 

 

Buff and Enstrom have NMC clauses.

Little, Stuart and Wheeler all have NTC clauses.

Myers has an NMC starting July 1, 2016.

Edited March 18, 20169 yr by Ducky

Myers NMC only kicks in if the Jets want it too tho, it's their choice.  There are some thought that he actually doesn't have it since he was traded and the Jets didn't give him that NMC.. nobody knows for sure what Myers has except Myers and Chevy pretty much. 

Why would a NMC be a team option? No team would choose that option as it hamstrings themselves. 

Speculation in a jetsnation article that came out yesterday.

http://jetsnation.ca/2016/3/17/nhl-expansion-and-what-it-means-to-the-jets/score

Quote

The Winnipeg Jets have extended No Movement Clauses to Dustin Byfuglien and Toby Enstrom, so they would automatically be two of the Jets three defenders. Tyler Myers, however, is an unknown. Myers had a No Movement Clause placed into his contract he signed with the Buffalo Sabres that activates next season, but the Jets would have been given the choice whether or not to accept that portion of Myers contract when he was traded

I've never heard of anything like that before either.  

I'm still thinking there is a good chance NMC may be exempt from the expansion as a NMC only limits trades, waivers, and loans.   

According to this site though, NMC follow players after a trade.

https://www.capfriendly.com/faq#nmc_ntc
 

Quote

A No-Movement Clause (NMC) prohibits a team from moving a player, or assigning a player to the minor division without their consent (by trade, loan or waivers). This ensures the players’ presence on the team, unless they consent to moving. However, an NMC does not prevent a team from buying out or terminating a players contract. An NMC follows a player even if they waive the clause and are traded, but it does not protect a player from being bought out. 

 

Yeah, but Myers never had a NMC, it apparently doesn't kick in until July 1st 2016 so he could be traded at the draft i guess or who knows, lots of people out there really don't have a clue what's up with Myers The Jets and the apparent NMC that he has or doesn't have coming July 1st. It's confusing for sure. The only people who actually know are Myers and Chevy. The rest is really just people guessing big time. 

I'd suspect if he does have it, you will probably see him moved at the draft. Who knows tho.

 

The interesting part about NMC is players have to play a certain amount of years in the NHL to get one so Trouba for example, he couldn't have one until 2020 at the earliest..Scheif also, hence why Myers doesn't currently have one but might July 1st... cuz that's when he will be entering the start of his "eligible for NMC" year. 

Edited March 18, 20169 yr by Goalie

Yup, they need to be 27 or 7 years in the league if I am not mistaken.....

Why would the Jets honor it if they didn't have to?

Also, the teams will know before this draft what the rules are going to be so they can be informed before the draft.

37 minutes ago, Rich said:

According to this site though, NMC follow players after a trade.

https://www.capfriendly.com/faq#nmc_ntc
 

 

Here is what the CBA says...

 

11.8

Individually Negotiated Limitations on Player Movement.

(a)

The SPC of any Player who is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent under Article

10.1(a) may contain a no-Trade or a no-move clause. SPCs containing a no-Trade or a no-move

clause may be entered into prior to the time that the Player is a Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agent

so long as the SPC containing the no-Trade or no-move clause extends through and does not

become effective until the time that the Player qualifies for Group 3 Unrestricted Free Agency.

If the Player is Traded or claimed on Waivers prior to the no-Trade or no-move clause taking

effect, the clause does not bind the acquiring Club. An acquiring Club may agree to continue to

be bound by the no-Trade or no-move clause, which agreement shall be evidenced in writing to

the Player, Central Registry and the NHLPA, in accordance with Exhibit 3 hereof.

Edited March 18, 20169 yr by Ducky

So, I ask again, Why would the club honor the NMC or NTC?

Well, if they wanted him in their long term plans, that would be a good way of showing the player some love but my thought with Myers was he was always going to be traded by the Jets eventually, not sure why i feel that way, I just think if they had to chose between Buff Trouba and Myers, and they had to get rid of one... Myers would be the obvious choice. 

 

RHD is not an issue for the Jets... Myers could very well end up being traded soon, he might not be tho, who knows, might be an interesting off season and draft this year. 

This off-season and upcoming season will be one of the more interesting for awhile. GMs will have to be on their toes once the rules get confirmed.

If Expansion to Vegas i'm gonna say does go through for June of 2017... yeah gonna be quite interesting to see.

 

You could see lots of interesting trades by teams. Guys from the Jets like Enstrom and Myers could possibly be moved, maybe others also like Stuart or Thorburn even, Burmi? Perreault? Stafford? Pav? Doubtful, this almost would confirm Pav coming back for 1 more year lol, cuz obviously you leave him exposed or you sign Hutch and buy out or trade PAv, cuz maybe a team has a young goalie they want to protect?? Anaheim being interesting with Anderson and Gibson, Tampa with Bishop and Vasilevsky, Pitt even with Fleury and Murray. No goalie comes back to us, but... They get to decide which one to keep and trade to other teams also for maybe a VET guy. Like Pav, leave him exposed and either trade one of your younger goalies for Picks or help elsewhere or lose them for free to Vegas

 

Anderson or Gibson????

MAF or Murray?? 

Bishop or Vas??? 

 

Man, the expansion team will have good goaltending either way.

 

If/When  they don't take PAV.. he's UFA July 1st 2017 and free to go elsewhere. 

Hutch? Sign him for 2 years, Helle/Hutch next year.... Leave Hutch unprotected. Helle Comrie 2018.!!!!!!!

 

 

I can't see them taking Hutch when they have a great choice of goalies. The Ducks will probably lose a pretty good D man though. I can't see them taking any UFAs in the draft. I think there will be lots of behind the scenes deals made such as.........take player A instead of player B and we will trade a 7th rounder for a 3rd or something like that. Pitt has a huge decision to make regarding their goalies and they should play Murray quite a bit this year to decide who to protect. They'll draft 30 players and only roster 22? They might draft and trade some...maybe Chevy can pick up a 2nd pairing LHD for under value?

I know this is off topic but we need to trade Stafford........sooner the better.

Yeah we are probably over valuing our goalies, outside of Hutch.  If Comrie was eligible he might be in play only because Vegas might decide he hs the potential to be goalie of the future so they take him.  Not hard to sign a goalie in UFA.  I think if we re-sign Hutch and leave him unprotected, unless he has a tremendous year next year, then he's probably safe.  Should be better goalies available.  

However, Im not sure we resign Hutch,  We still have Paves for next season.  So Hutch would have to either be willing to sign a two way deal which he won't or accept the fact that he will end up on the Moose for much of the year.  Unless the Jets somehow move on from Pavs... still possible they trade him to the Flames and retain half his salary,

I think we have to get rid of one of Pavelec or Hutch next season.  I don't want to see Hutch sent down.

Assuming Hellebuyck is up with the Jets next year, that leaves Comrie and Olkinuora (current in the ECHL) with the Moose.   We also have Jamie Phillips who has really come on strong in the NCAA this year.  13th in the NCAA with a GAA of 1.97 and 27th with a save percentage of .922.   Good enough IMO to at least get consideration for the backup job with the Moose.

With what Hutch has shown over the last 2 seasons, I don't think he is much more than an NHL backup.  Even if he is sent to the Moose next year, I can't see him being the starter and taking development time from Comrie.  And I'd much rather see the backup job go to Olkinuora or Phillips. 

If you trade Pavelec then sign Hutch for a 1 - 2 year deal until Comrie is ready to come up (even if the second year Hutch ends up playing for the Moose).  Or if no one wants to bite on Pavelec, trade Hutch for whatever you can get as I don't think he should be taking playing time away from the other development goalies.

My preference would be to trade Pavelec, even if we have to retain some salary.  

 

 

Its posible the Jets arena sold on Helle as an every-game starter.  While he was our best goalie this season he did fade a bit before he was sent back down.  Its entirely possible he would have worked through it and returned to form (he is playing well for the Moose), but the knock on Pavs when he was playing well was that he just rant out of gas as the season wore on.

On the other hand if Pavs sucks, what good does it do to have him as the back up.  I don't mind Hutch as back up.  But with a "rookie" starter like Helle, you have to expect your back up to play more than a few games.  The question is whether the Jets think Hutch is good enough to start 20 games.  I think he probably is...

1 hour ago, Rich said:

I think we have to get rid of one of Pavelec or Hutch next season.  I don't want to see Hutch sent down.

Assuming Hellebuyck is up with the Jets next year, that leaves Comrie and Olkinuora (current in the ECHL) with the Moose.   We also have Jamie Phillips who has really come on strong in the NCAA this year.  13th in the NCAA with a GAA of 1.97 and 27th with a save percentage of .922.   Good enough IMO to at least get consideration for the backup job with the Moose.

With what Hutch has shown over the last 2 seasons, I don't think he is much more than an NHL backup.  Even if he is sent to the Moose next year, I can't see him being the starter and taking development time from Comrie.  And I'd much rather see the backup job go to Olkinuora or Phillips. 

If you trade Pavelec then sign Hutch for a 1 - 2 year deal until Comrie is ready to come up (even if the second year Hutch ends up playing for the Moose).  Or if no one wants to bite on Pavelec, trade Hutch for whatever you can get as I don't think he should be taking playing time away from the other development goalies.

My preference would be to trade Pavelec, even if we have to retain some salary.  

 

 

I agree with all of this unless Phillips doesn't sign with us.

Then I would be okay with Helle and Pavs backing him up with Hutch backing up Comrie and even getting called up if someone is hurt. Ideally we trade Pavs for whatever Chevy can get and I would take anything.

I would go as far as trading Pavs and a 4th for a 6th just to get him off of the team and lose his salary.

Whichever way they do it, I expect to see Comrie backing up Helle in the 2017-2018 season.

Trade Stafford with Pavs.