Compare the small 10+1 (skaters plus goalies) protection list in a 30-team NHL to the 1979 WHA-NHL "expansion" draft where each of the existing 17 NHL teams were allowed to protect 15+2 players and also had the right to sign many WHA players whose rights they held!
I did a quick search on other previous expansion drafts and came across the following:
1991 (1 team) ... 21 existing teams could protect 16 skaters and two goalies. There was also an odd "dispersal draft" this year, with the North Stars allowing the new San Jose Sharks to draft a number of players as part of the deal which allowed the North Stars owners to sell the team and then be awarded the expansion bid for San Jose.
1992 (2 teams) ... 21 of 22 existing teams could protect 14 skaters and 2 goalies (San Jose was exempt from the draft because they were an expansion team in 1991).
1993 (2 teams) ... 24 existing teams protected 14 skaters and 1 goalie.
1998 (1 team) ... 26 existing teams protected 14 skaters and 1 goalie, or 10 skaters and 2 goalies.
1999 (1 team) ... Same as 1998, with 26 existing teams (the Nashville Predators were exempt as a new arrival in 1998). Any team that lost a goalie in the 1998 expansion draft couldn't lose another one in 1999.
2000 (2 teams) ... Same as the prior two years, with the 26 teams in the NHL before the 1998 (all except Nashville and Atlanta) exposing players.
It's interesting to see how much less important the NHL seems to think protecting goalies has become in these expansion drafts. That seems to reflect my view that goaltenders have lost a lot of their value in the modern NHL.
I don't see the new ways of analyzing talent as a big advantage for an expansion team. That's an advantage that ANY team in hockey has right now -- and it's reflected in the interesting disconnect between player salaries and NHL playoff success in recent years. Heck -- look at last year's Pittsburgh Penguins. I thought they'd be a marginal team at best for a few years after they won the Cup in 2015-16. They had almost 60% of their salary cap space allocated to just six players, and 75% to their top nine players. And they won the Stanley Cup even with their best defenseman out for the entire playoffs.
That's all about advanced metrics -- like the NHL version of "Money Ball." It's also about a dilution of NHL talent combined with the elimination of the enforcer from the game -- which means depth has slowly become more important than talent in the NHL these days.
Problem with those early expansion drafts is they were designed to hose the expansion team and make sure they sucked as long as possible. That’s bad for the product and bad for the league.
Goaltending league wide has gotten too good. With so-so players having save percentages over 90 they’ve become fungible.
Analytics are a better advantage for an expansion team because they start from scratch. They can come in and say “these are the kinds of players we want” and go get them. They don’t have to clear out players that don’t fit that model, they aren’t carrying any crappy contracts, they odn’t have to worry about getting rid of fan favorites. Starting from scratch can be a huge advantage. Just look at how long it’s taken the Canucks to get out from under the mess their crappy GM who loved long term no trade contracts, heck they still aren’t out. All the analytics in the world can’t help the Canucks because of all that baggage.
Depth has always mattered. Even back in the high flying days, 3rd and 4th line scoring got you Cups. High talent first liners are greats, champions roll 4.