Expansion draft: who gets protected?

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I seem to recall reading somewhere that unrestricted free agents do not have to be protected in expansion drafts. I'm pretty sure that's how it works in the NBA, so I would expect it to work that way in the WNBA as well. Having said that, does anyone know which players are going to be free agents, and will any roster spots be "wasted" on them, for expansion purposes?


EDIT - Just to add a little credibilty to my earlier comments, here is a cite which echoes what I was saying about free agents and whatnot, but it doesn't say where they got their information from. So, again, does anyone know who Sacramento's free agents are?

 

[DWalkfan22]

don't know about all of the players, but i do know that Ticha is a UFA

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

That's good news for the Monarchs, if Whisneant plays it smart. Hopefully, there will be at least two other free agents, so that we can keep the top nine in our rotation, at least.

 

[kennadog]

In the NBA, if a restricted free agent is chosen, I believe they automatically become unrestricted free agents. Is that true in the WNBA?

 

[RDub21]

Here's my list from another thread which got buried in with the rest:

Ticha - UFA, but wants to stay in Sac.
Chelsea - Must Sign
Nicole - Protected
Becky - Protected
Yo - Contract to 2006 - Must sign

Kristin - Must Sign
Kara - Protected
Maiga - RFA
DeMya - Contract to 2006 - Must Sign
Erin - RFA
Olympia - UFA

Ticha and Olympia are our only UFA's. The sacbee article said that Kara, Becky, and Nicole will be protected, so only three of Chelsea, Yo, Kristin, Maiga, DeMya, and Erin will be protected. Looks like Yo and DeMya are two of them, so we might lose Chelsea, Kristin, Maiga, or Erin in the Expansion Draft!!

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Are you sure that didn't mean that they are "protected" as in, exempt from the expansion draft, due to them being traded before the start of last season?

 

[6th]

Rdub, where did you get your list? What does "must sign mean?" Is that the same as saying we must protect? I grouped my questions below.

Ticha- UFA - does not need protecting?
Olympia - UFA

Nicole - Protected - Does this mean we plan to protect?
Becky - Protected
Kara - Protected

Yo - Contract to 2006 - Must sign - What does this mean?
DeMya - Contract to 2006 - Must Sign
Kristin - Must Sign
Chelsea - Must Sign

Maiga - RFA - These need to be protected if we want them?
Erin - RFA

 

[RDub21]

Here's the link:
http://www.sacbee.com/content/sports/basketball/monarchs/story/13602903p-14443642c.html

Sorry, those "must signs" next to DeMya and Yo should say "must protect." Also, those "protected" next to Kara, Nicole, and Becky mean the Monarchs will protect those three. I don't know exactly how the expansion draft works, like if we need to protect RFA's, but was hoping someone had more insight.

Some quotes from the article:
Ticha....
"She could go anywhere, but I'm hoping she'll stay," Whisenant said.

Penicheiro wants to stick with Sacramento.

"I'm a very, very loyal person," said Penicheiro. "Sacramento has become my second home; the Monarchs are my second family. And after this championship, I can't imagine myself in another WNBA uniform. Basketball is still a business, but I'm hoping I'll be back."

Yo...
Whisenant has one important Monarchs guarantee: Griffith, 35, will play one more year for Sacramento before retirement.

Becky, Kara, and Nicole...
"We'll protect Becky, Kara and Nicole for sure, but after that, I don't know," Whisenant said. "I definitely want to keep our rookies, but we've got to see how this all works."

 

[6th]

Thanks, RDub, that makes more sense. So, we now need to get the definite skinny on the new contract (as far as protecting players is concerned). Last I heard, we could protect 6 and then 2 more if someone is taken. We don't have to protect UFA's but I don't know about RFA's. Now this may have nothing to do with the new contract, though.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Restricted Free Agents have to be protected if you want to keep them, if it's like the NBA at all. Expansion teams rarely take restricted free agents, because those players immediately become Unrestricted Free Agents, and do not have to sign with the expansion team. But, that's a dangerous play for the team being drafted from, because if the expansion team takes one of their RFA's, even if the now-UFA decides not to sign with the expansion team, they are not legally allowed to re-sign with their original team, at least not that season.

Now, if this is based on the NBA model, then teams should be able to offer Chicago a draft pick, or number of draft picks, in exchange for them not picking a player.

 

[6th]

Now, if this is based on the NBA model, then teams should be able to offer Chicago a draft pick, or number of draft picks, in exchange for them not picking a player.

I noticed that comment by Coach Whiz in the article. Apparently, we have 2 1st round picks this year. It did not indicate how high the picks are, however. At any rate, If we cannot protect 1 thru 9 or 10, then I would rather give up a pick than lose a player.

 

[Monty'sBiggestFan]

The picks we have are very low because they are ours and Connecticut's pick (by way of San Antonion in the Anderson deal). Whiz had said in the article last week that he will consider offering Chicago one of the two picks in lieu of losing a player to the draft. I had figured Chicago would want to cherry pick from one of the deeper benches in the league - of the picks Maiga, Newton and Haynie the two rookies would be the most logical for salary cap reasons and where else can you get a plug and play point guard on the cheap like that? Chicago could however go the draft route there and take one of the many point guards coming out this next draft - if we lost Haynie I would not mind Erin Grant out of Texas Tech in a Monarchs uni. After Pondexter, Grant should be the next point guard selected in the draft unless something happens to her or her game next season.

 

[6th]

So, basically we have the last 2 picks of the 1st round? If I were Chicago, I would want a proven player, someone who could make an immediate impact, as MBF says.

So, MBF, what have you heard are the rules in the draft by Chicago?

 

[Monty'sBiggestFan]

I'll see if I can dig that up, I know on another board that Bill Laimbeer posted something about the expansion draft rules I didn't have a whole lotta time to read it when he posted it back in August. I do remember thinking that we might have more protecting to do than I originally though. I don't recall here if the RFA automatically become UFA if they are selected, but I'd like to assume that they would have structured this the same way as the NBA operates.

Maiga and Haynie seem to me to be the prime candidates to be taken from this roster.

This draft does have a tad bit more depth than the 05 draft, and Chicago will have the #6 pick in addition to whatever else they cull from other teams in lieu of plucking players off their roster.

 

[kennadog]

Maiga is an RFA. If they take her, she might, if the rules are like the NBA, become a UFA and Chicago wouldn't be guranteed to be able to sign her. To me it looks like Haynie or Newton are most likely. Good young players, who've shown they can play in the WNBA. I would really hate to see either go.

 

[stever]

I'm confident Newton & Haynie will both be back, GMWiz will work something out. Those two first-round picks give him a lot of leverage. There will most likely be more than one situation where a team will have an "agreement" with Chicago NOT to pick an unprotected player, it's happened in previous expansion years. I read in one of the Conn. papers that the exp. draft will be late Oct. or early Nov., we won't have to wait too long to find out.