Yo Rico....

Can Kronwall be exposed even if he's injured? I have him in on the LTIR.

I'm submitting my list now on the "expansion draft thread".

I think Martinook should qualify though. He had two years of NHL experience and meets the 40/70 requirement so the only reason he isn't on the expansion tool is because he has yet to sign an extension. Tampa has extended him so he would now qualify.

Unfortunately, we're going with the system of only players with green checkmarks in the expansion tool here at capfriendly counting towards exposure requirements. This means any unsigned RFA's as of right now IRL will not count towards exposure requirements. That's the current system we have now.

First of all, thanks to Matt and all of the BoG's for working hard to get this all right.

But I do have a beef with this. I totally understand, and agree, that we're going by the CapFriendly site for all of the expansion standards and rules, and that only players that have green check marks CURRENTLY meet exposure requirements. However, we were allowed to sign our RFA's if we chose to, and many of the RFA's meet all of the exposure requirements except for having a contract in 2017/18. These players are indicated with a black check mark. It seems silly that if we're allowed to sign these "black check" RFA's to a 2017/18 deal in the GM Game that they wouldn't then be grandfathered in as "green checks", doesn't it? If the only thing preventing a player from graduating from a black check to a green check is a contract, then giving them a contract should make them exposure eligible.

Anyways, just my two cents. I'll put Dorsett back on the team temporarily and adjust my list.

So we're not supposed to put all of our eligible players on the list to make it easier for Vegas to choose players? I know 2-1-1 is the minimum requirement, but I assume a lot of teams will have more to choose from then that

The reasoning behind that is just to ensure each team meets the minimum exposure requirements without needing to show everything. There still needs to be some responsibility for Vegas to fill out their roster by themselves and do some digging to find a good player.

Also always, I'll address you comment here, too tired to make a second post ?
But I generally agree with what the popular opinion you share about the whole green vs black checkmark thing. I still don't fully understand the technicalities of why we're running under that system, but for the most part I've been so busy trying to get the rest of expansion right that it's tough to try and fight that rule or learn about why it works the way it does now.

Yes. He qualifies in the expansion tool, he qualifies in the game.





Those are the rules we have in place and it was up to GM's to check their list against the CET. Changing the rules at the 11th hour in order to accommodate the GM's that failed to do so, is bad precedent. We can't keep making changes in order to protect GM's from their own mistakes, or there is no incentive to actually pay attention to the rules and manage your team well. We had GM's trading to acquire qualified players to expose as well, so do we let them reverse those trades to keep it fair, or do we punish them for managing their team correctly? We need to be more proactive as a group, and if you want the ability to do something as a GM, make your voice heard when we have these discussions.



We tried to make it as easy as possible for the GM's. Rather than have to sort and check your entire roster, you only need to find the 4 qualified exposures and the rest is up to Vegas to sort through to see who he is allowed to take. Your only responsibilities are to expose the 4 qualified players, move all of your players to the main roster so he can see them, and then protect the remaining players you choose.

Ignore this post, just my own notes:

Anaheim Ducks: DONE
Arizona Coyotes: DONE
Boston Bruins: DONE
Buffalo Sabres:
Calgary Flames:
Carolina Hurricanes: DONE
Chicago Blackhawks: DONE
Colorado Avalanche: DONE
Columbus Blue Jackets: DONE
Dallas Stars: DONE
Detroit Red Wings: Beauchemin must be protected. Wideman exposed.
Edmonton Oilers: DONE
Florida Panthers: DONE
Los Angeles Kings:
Minnesota Wild: DONE
Montreal Canadiens: DONE
Nashville Predators:
New Jersey Devils: DONE
New York Islanders:
New York Rangers: DONE
Ottawa Senators: DONE
Philadelphia Flyers:
Pittsburgh Penguins:
San Jose Sharks:
St Louis Blues: DONE
Tampa Bay Lightning:
Toronto Maple Leafs:
Vancouver Canucks: DONE
Washington Capitals: Carlson exempt. Holtby exposed. (all other goalies are exempt)
Winnipeg Jets: DONE

I will be checking in every 15-20 minutes until the deadline. Use this thread if you need assistance!

What's the deal with expansion everything still on

expansion picks begin in 2.5 hours right?

Yes and yes. Vegas has 48 hours (maximum) to make his selections starting at 12pm EST.
The BOG will submit on behalf of any teams that have not made their submissions by that time.
If you have already submitted in this thread, view post #66. If you have corrections/instructions listed, that will be your final submission unless you submit your own modified list in the new thread.
For teams that have not submitted, we will do our best, but if you lose a player we weren't aware you wanted to try to keep, it is your fault for not submitting in time.

Hey Rico, would you mind checking my protected list in the New expansion thread?

I believe it is 100% correct, but just to double check, I thought I'd follow up with you.

Thanks.

Good. I'm marking teams as DONE in my notes when they have submitted and everything looks good.

Ok so I'm just wondering why I can't expose Brandon Pirri? I know his contract is up in real life but I extended him as an RFA. I know it's a little late to be asking questions with less then 2 hours left but I was hoping I could maybe get an answer. Thanks

Wow.. phillyjabroni, you're gonna have two good goalies bahaha.

I think you would be able to, though I would ask Rico as he knows a lot more about this.

Rico? do you have an answer?

Look up the player on the expansion tool. That is their status for the expansion draft, as we agreed upon. Re-signing players for the purpose of exposing them was never put into place as an option.

You hadn't moved all of your players up to your roster when I looked. So if you have another qualified player I couldn't see at the time, you can expose that player instead of Miller when you submit your list. Be sure to look the player up first and make sure they qualify and ask for help if you aren't sure. Have you moved all of your players up to your main roster yet?

EDIT: You also have a deal in place for Vegas to select Holden, so it isn't going to impact you regardless.

Yeah that's what I was thinking. (Part 1)

Hey Rico, can Washington expose Keith Kinkaid instead of Holtby, isn't there a rule in place that Vegas can use their pick on a UFA?

Yeah I just did that. Thanks

Didn't they make a deal with Vegas? So doesn't that allow them to keep Holtby?

Wait so as of right now Washington is going to expose Hotlby? lol

Kinkaid doesn't qualify for exposure. Goaltenders must either be signed through 17/18 or be an RFA (2017) in order to qualify.
Vegas could select Kinkaid as one of their 10 non-17/18 contracts, but it doesn't prevent Holtby from being exposed.