Feb
14

Expansion draft in 2020 impacts Rangers’ trade deadline decisions, and more

February 14, 2018, by

filip chytil

When exploring the trade deadline possibilities, the Rangers should naturally be looking for the best deals available. In division trades shouldn’t matter too much if a team in the Metro can give the best package for a rental. But one thing that is potentially getting overlooked here is the looming expansion draft in 2020.

Seattle has officially begun the expansion process, submitting their bid to the NHL to be the 32nd, and hopefully final, NHL team. If/When that bid is accepted, the club will fork over $640 in expansion fees to the league’s 31 owners –something that won’t be shared with the players, which is just on them for terrible negotiating skills– and then the expansion draft process will begin. All signs point to the same process as with Vegas.

With those same rules in place, it means that first and second year pros are going to be exempt. Any young NHL player the Rangers acquire during this year’s expansion draft will need to be protected at the expansion draft. Assuming the same 7-3-1 format, things could get a little dicey.

As an aside, this might be the reason why we don’t see Filip Chytil or Lias Andersson until next season. Their North American “pro years” don’t start until their ELC contracts stop sliding. It’s a weird loophole, but if it means they don’t need to be protected, then I’m all for it.

Looking at some of the potential deals we’ve already spoken about, the Rangers might be in for some difficult decisions if they don’t plan properly. Using Boston/McDonagh as an example, any roster player they acquire (we discussed Matt Grzelcyk, Danton Heinen, Brandon Carlo, and Jake DeBrusk) would need to be protected. Double the trouble if it’s a pair of roster players.

It’s probably a good problem to have, but it’s something that Jeff Gorton will need to navigate as he strikes deals at the deadline. This might be less of a concern for the pure rentals like Rick Nash, where the going price rarely includes young players off the NHL roster.

This all gets thrown to the wayside if the NHL tinkers with the rules, like expanding the “pro years” to international hockey as well. But there isn’t anything the club can do now to prepare for those changes. That said, Gorton would be wise to keep a keen eye on who he might be forced to expose in 2020. It shouldn’t be the main driver in a trade, but it should be something he is cognizant of.

"Expansion draft in 2020 impacts Rangers' trade deadline decisions, and more", 5 out of 5 based on 20 ratings.

47 comments

  1. SalMerc says:

    It would be nice to have so many good players that we had that challenge. If we had that task today, we would have a hard time finding enough players to protect!

    Our cupboard is bare. We need young studs. If we have that problem in 2 years, we move guys like Hayes, JT or (god-forbid) Krieder to protect the future.

    Our biggest problem should be to have too many good young players. Laughing hard at that one.

    • Mintgecko says:

      It’s either they move JT now or like Hayes who will be in for the next 5-6 year plan. JG should just trade Mcd now for Point and use Zib to get a bottom 4 name who’s under 26 years old.

      • Egelstein says:

        To disclaim, this is coming from a guy who doesn’t think size is quite as important in the NHL anymore as many, depending on the situation – he’s a “diminutive” center (I put that in quotes because he’s got an inch in height on me, but I’ve got like 20 pounds in weight on him, haha). Not too many of those types stay in the middle AND have a long and productive career (see Desharnais, David). If he’s not in the middle, he loses value right there. He wouldn’t command as much in trade. He also is not lighting the world on fire – just has been reasonably solid, which alone does not get you 1.5 seasons of McD @ $4.7M per. So Point straight up for McD…that’s a hard no. Real hard no.

        Regarding Zib for only a bottom four name who’s under 26 years old…put down the pipe.

        • Mancunian Candidate says:

          Eg—it’s a pipe-driven narrative every time with Mint. Fantasyland via clouds of smoke.

          My fave of his stuff is the constant calling of Zib “soft”, yet Kevin Hayes is his favorite Ranger. That’s a paradox that’ll take years to unravel.

  2. Johnny Red says:

    Not a big issue but I do agree with you in that it is something they should keep in the back of their minds. Oh by the way does everyone remember how you all said I was crazy when I mentioned a rebuild earlier in the year?
    I am getting my wish before I die. If you recall I wanted a rebuild with us getting as many draft picks and prospects as possible. Now the only thing is if Hank wants a cup then we give him what he wants and trade him. I LOVE Hank and all he’s done for this team all these years. Let’s hope Gorton doesn’t screw this up.

    • SalMerc says:

      Also, this team has an identity issue, that won’t be solved in the 2018/19 season with the current crew. We need to add studs that are on the ice next year AND can be groomed for a few more years to come. Back up the truck! Get all you can get for any marketable player and start from scratch with Hank, 4 of the D that played last night (plus Shatty and someone new) and Vesey, Buch, Krieder, Fast, Zibby and Letteri. Everyone else should be offered around.

      We should get sick of hearing the “NY Rangers select with their 4th first round pick _______”

  3. RagsFan says:

    I think we are a better team with Kreider. Had to lose Grabner, but he would take a contending team over the top for the cup this year. And Nash would be a big boost to any team on their 2nd line to boost scoring and is solid defensively. Hope we get some good prospects and picks in return. Other than that, we should trade non motivated players or players with little upside on the team or in Hartford.

  4. Leatherneck says:

    How would a trade of McDonagh to the Isles look like? I like the idea and the return from them the best

    McD for Clutterbuck, Bouvellier, Dal Colle, 1st and 2nd

    • Egelstein says:

      It’s confirmed, everyone. Leatherneck really is here to just troll us.

    • Richter1994 says:

      Bro, you should be banned again for this post.

      Quality, not quantity, that’s the key to trading McD. I would take Sergy or McAvoy over all of that.

  5. Mintgecko says:

    If Point could be had in the Mcd trade then I would get him immediately. I’m cool with Hayes as the 2c because changes like having consistent quality linemates would help his game grow ,bottom 6 centers like Andersson and Chytil will either take advantage of what Hayes goes against or could free him up to see more OZ starts.

    Zib on the other hand can’t even be a 2c. Has anyone been paying attention to his 5 on 5 game? Put someone against a top line and Zib won’t still take advantage of it and he’s not a 3 zone top line center so he gets burned by actual 1c’s of the league like when Hayes went down. The Sens fans were right about him that he’s just a scoring winger who can play better by covering a 140 ft a game.

    This is why I would sell JT right now and move Mika over to the wing or even use Mika in a trade and keep JT. Point is 21 and if he’s been offered for Mcd than JG needs to swallow that opportunity up like right now. Point would be better for Kreider’s game in the near future and he’s already a much better scorer than Zib will be.

    • SalMerc says:

      Zib has been invisible

    • Rich S says:

      Agree regarding Zib, except for the 1st ?? 20 games of the season after he returned from injury he has been invisible!!!! But he is a right handed center, young , has good shot……so he still has good value in trade……IMHO JT is a keeper!!!!!
      A mcdonagh , zib and #1 package would fetch a really good haul…….maybe Nylander??????

  6. Emile the Cat says:

    Can’t see a problem with the 2020 expansion, just stick to getting draft picks and stop giving out those stupid NTC’s.

  7. Andy says:

    it’s a great point. Thanks for bringing that up. Hopefully management keeps that in mind when they think about passing out NTC’s with new contracts. Also if we are talking 2020 we will need to protect M Staal again unless we buy him out.

    • Walt says:

      Andy

      What are you talking about protecting Staal, I know your jerking our chain right? Why would they have to do that?????

      • Andy says:

        unfortunately Walt if the same rules apply he has a NTC and his contract expires in 20-21…so if we have an expansion draft ins 2020 by my calculations we would have to protect him ..I am not advocating protecting him…just pointing that out…

        • Andy says:

          I meant the same rules for expansion as this past expansion.

        • Walt says:

          If that’s the case, we would buy out the contract before we are forced to get screwed that way!!! There you go folks, those damn NMC come back to haunt us, dumb SOB Sather!!!!!!!

          • Andy says:

            Amen Walt…and if we thought there was a remote chance we could move him even if we retain salary…forget about it..agree Walt NTC’s are a terrible practice.

        • Reenavipul says:

          Staal will be bought out/retire before 2019-20 season.

    • Egelstein says:

      Even if not for these expansion drafts, NTCs and especially NMCs need to reigned out of hockey. It is completely asinine to have NMCs especially in a cap league, IMHO. I’m not saying teams should be able to cut players and not pay off the contracts at will, mind you. I think what the NFL does with many contracts only partially guaranteed (either term or dollars) is quite unfair to the players, for example. I’ve always thought, however, that if an NHL team wants to pay an ineffective player who isn’t injured – just lost his game, which unfortunately seems to happen a lot in this sport – $5M a year to play in the AHL… well, then they should be able to do that. It serves the game in no way for teams to be watering down the on-ice product by sending out players who simply put are not NHL material any longer. It surely sucks for the player to have to finish his days in the AHL, but I would think the paycheck would ease that sting just a bit.

      • Walt says:

        Egelstein

        Agree 100000000000000%. But there are fools, Glen Sather for one, who will sign these retreads over, and over again, to contracts with NMC, NTC, thinking there is nothing wrong with it. I wouldn’t be surprised that if they go to a new NHLPA contract, players will have to give this up in order to get an agreement from ownership!!!!!!!!!

        • Walt says:

          “Non-Rangers point, but how shocking are those twin 13-year deals for Zach Parise and Ryan Suter? They have seven years left on those deals! Seven!! Parise and Suter are 33! Woof”.

          I may have to re-think how stupid Sather is, well there is someone dumber in the GM’s office of the Wild organization!!!

          This is from an article by Joe Fortunato today on the Blue Shirt Banter!!!

  8. tanto says:

    Technically Andersson and Chytil could play up to 9 games before their contract kicks in and doesn’t slide …

    Also let’s not forget a small elephant in the room, they still have to sign Ty Ronning.

    • Mikeyyy says:

      Chytil already played 2.

    • Egelstein says:

      I’m not super into the lower level rules and process. Do you know, is Ronning at risk of being a Marchessault-type casualty, or are those inherently different/not similar situations?

      • Walt says:

        What’s all this fanfare over Ronning, he’s not even been offered a contract by the organization yet, or am I wrong???????

        • Ryne says:

          Played an ATO with Hartford last year and did well. Would also help Hartford bolster its roster for a playoff push.

          • Walt says:

            ATO isn’t a contract is it, that to me is a try out agreement, not long term, or am I wrong?

        • Chris A says:

          Ronning is having a breakout season as an overage junior player. He’s regularly playing against boys that he’s 3 or 4 years older than.

          He’s interesting, but nowhere near a sure thing. There are lots of junior players that all of a sudden breakout as 20 year olds and then fade back into irrelevance once they bump up to pro hockey and lose that age advantage.

          I’m not saying that’s going to happen, but Rangers fans should really temper their expectations for Ronning. I will say in Ronning’s defense, coming to Hartford on an ATO (Amateur Try Out) and posting 5 points in 12 games is a positive sign.

      • Chris A says:

        Marchessault was never Rangers property. He was a junior teammate of Rangers draftee Ryan Bourque so the Rangers had Hartford sign him to an AHL contract to help Bourque’s development.

        Marchessault took that opportunity and played well, once he became a FA after his first year in Hartford, TB snapped him up and, I think, eventually traded him to the Panthers.

        • Richter1994 says:

          JAM came here for a try out and I thought they signed him?

          • James1090 says:

            He was with Hartford in the 2011-2012 season. Then he played the next 1 1/2 seasons on Columbus’ AHL. Then Tampa Bay’s AHL team before joining the NHL Lightning.

            • Richter1994 says:

              I thought he was with the Rangers’ org at some point.

              • Chris A says:

                Nope, only Wolfpack property.

                Maybe the Rangers already had 50 contracts? Maybe JAM didn’t want to sign an NHL contract at that time and wanted to use that AHL season as an extended showcase?

        • Egelstein says:

          Thanks! I wasn’t fully aware of the distinction between the two situations.

  9. Ryne says:

    In this scenario I’d trade Miller, with him gone protect Zib, Hayes, Buchnevich, Chytil and Andersson. Leaves two spots open for young players we may accquire. Even if as you suggest Gorton plays with when they come up to circumvent expansion protection, that would leave 4 spots open for forwards.

  10. Moose Klein says:

    Won’t there be a new CBA by 2020? That could change the chess board…if losing one player to Seattle is so critical, we have bigger issues as fans to be concerned about. There is no superstar on the horizon for the Rangers who are stuck in neutral.

    • Spozo says:

      The current CBA has an opt out clause for both the players and owners in September of 2019. If history tells us anything, someone will opt out and try and leverage the other side.

      The silver lining with any new CBA?? Since the lockout in 2004, with every new CBA there has been an amnesty buyout of any contract. As in, you buy anyone out, for just cash with no implications on the cap hit. IE, how this team rids itself of Marc Staal’s contract. Instead of buying the guy out and having a cap hit for the next half decade, let him stay on the team for another season then buy him and be rid of his contract once a new CBA is established.

  11. jacksprat47 says:

    Another expansion draft provides a further argument for not trading Nash or McDonough at all, and instead fight for the playoffs this year and bring up more kids if we fall out of the race. Simply put, Nasher and Mac give us a better chance for a Cup, both this year and next, than do some marginal prospects on teams in contention that we may have to leave unprotected in a year or two anyhow. Only people who have never played or watched hockey, and who live to write silly controversial columns, could think otherwise.