Archives for August 2024

Topics in this edition of the mailbag include Jeremy Swayman’s situation in Boston, if Torey Krug’s injury will make St. Louis look for another defenseman, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next weekend’s column.

bottlesup: It looks like Dallas’s roster is set, do you see Jim making possibly another trade some point in the season or any other moves?

The answer to this question is going to depend on what happens with Thomas Harley, their lone remaining restricted free agent.  They have a little over $6.2MM in cap space at the moment, per PuckPedia, but that’s with a 20-player roster.  Assuming they want to carry an extra forward at least (Harley’s eventual contract would give them seven defenders), they’re closer to $5.4MM to play with.

How much of that will Harley take up?  If the two sides work out a long-term agreement that covers his remaining RFA years and buys some extra years of team control, it’s going to be at a number that’s actually higher than their current cap space.  In that scenario, instead of adding to their roster, they’d have to subtract from it to get back into compliance.  From there, they’d probably wind up tight to the cap, limiting their in-season flexibility.

But if it’s a bridge deal, things change.  Using K’Andre Miller and Evan Bouchard as some recent comparables, a two-year bridge for Harley should check in around the $4MM per season mark.  If they did that and carried a 13th forward, they’d be around $1.4MM or so (depending on the exact cost of Harley’s deal and the cost of the 13th forward), giving them some flexibility to hedge against injuries.  I could see them maybe using a bit of that to top up from a minimum-salaried extra forward to more of an impactful one around the $1MM mark which would then put them closer to $1MM in wiggle room.

At that point, the question of any in-season activity would be dependent on injuries and how aggressively they paper Logan Stankoven and Mavrik Bourque to the minors on off days to bank extra cap space.  If there’s enough room left at the deadline, I could see them making a move to shore up their back end as they did with Chris Tanev back in March.

I’ll also mention the possibility of a three-year bridge, one that probably pushes the cost closer to $4.5MM.  At that point, they’d have to fill the 13th forward spot with a minimum-salary contract and hold on to their minimal flexibility after that.  In that case, they could look to a UFA or have a 13th forward come up from AHL Texas; after that, any movement would again be linked to their ability to bank cap space in-season depending on injuries.  Again, I think there’s a move to make on the back end but it’ll be closer to March than October.

FeeltheThunder: There have been some reports and chatter that Tampa should go after Nashville’s young goalie Yaroslav Askarov to backup Andrei Vasilevskiy. Many feel Vasy would be more open to not taking on so many games if he had a backup goalie that he felt comfortable sharing with.  Not that he doesn’t like Johansson or anything but the reality is Johansson is just an average goaltender at best. Furthermore, it wouldn’t hurt if that backup goaltender had the same cultural background either as Vasy.

What would Tampa have to give up to get Askarov from Nashville? One would assume the 2026 1st round pick would be the starting point. I’m sure a potential prospect would be added but I don’t think Tampa would give up Conor Geekie, Isaac Howard, or even Ethan Gauthier in the trade. Maybe they just bundle some draft picks.

First, while there has been chatter about Nashville dealing Askarov for more than a year now, I don’t recall seeing anything credible linking him to Tampa Bay specifically.  While he’d be an upgrade on Jonas Johansson, there’s not a path to prime playing time until Vasilevskiy’s deal ends in 2028.  If Askarov had a chance to pick his landing spot (he wouldn’t, I’m just making the point), I’d have to think the Lightning would be pretty low on his list.  Going and being a multi-year backup or platoon partner isn’t a path to a big-money contract.

As for what the cost would be, you’re really constraining them by taking Geekie, Howard, and Gauthier off the table.  If Nashville isn’t getting a high-end prospect in this trade, what’s their motivation to do it?  A future first-round pick (which might land in the 20s) isn’t exactly the ideal centerpiece of a swap; I have to think they turned down better than that at the last two drafts.  That pick with some lesser picks or lesser prospects is a package that I suspect quite a few teams would easily beat.

The hope is that Askarov is a future franchise goalie.  The cost has to be somewhat commensurate with that; a quantity over quality approach to a trade isn’t it.  I could see Nashville’s preference being a prospect-prospect swap where they’re getting an NHL-ready (or near-ready) impact player (top-six forward or a top-four defenseman) back for the netminder.  I don’t see Tampa Bay being the team to give that to them.

SkidRowe: Two Bruins topics:

1) What’s going on with Swayman? How far apart do you think they are? Could Swayman’s camp be asking for more than the Bruins have remaining under the cap ($8.6m)? What’s he gonna do, sit out?

2) Apparently, the Bruins are counting on middle-six minutes and secondary scoring from a couple of youngsters; Poitras (20 yo, former 2nd-round pick, 15 points in 33 NHL games) and Lysell (21yo, former 1st-round pick, zero NHL games). If either of those guys fail, they can turn to Merkulov (23yo, former college free agent, zero points in four NHL games) or elevate Brazeau (26yo, undrafted junior player, seven points in 19 NHL games) from the 4th line. Is this strategy going to pay off?

1) With no arbitration option this time around (both sides passed on filing), there is no real pressure point on either side for a while yet so this probably will drag out for a while longer.  It’s hard to guess how far they’re apart as part of the issue here I suspect is that they’re still working on deals of varying lengths, meaning the gap will be different for each one.  My guess is that they’re not overly close and until we get closer to training camp where one side might move a little, I don’t expect to see much news on that front.

I don’t see Swayman’s camp asking for more than $8.6MM per season.  His career high in games played in a single NHL season is 44 so as of today, he’s not even truly proven as an undisputed number one.  He’s heading in that direction but hasn’t played enough to get there yet.  I think the end result on a long-term deal starts with a seven, maybe eight times eight at most.  If they wind up on more of a medium-term agreement, the cost probably begins with a six.

2) At this point, what other option do the Bruins have?  They couldn’t afford to make a commitment to a more impactful forward earlier in free agency as they need to get Swayman signed first to see what they have left to spend.  If they went and added a top-six piece, then they’re forcing themselves into probably taking Swayman to arbitration, getting a one-year settlement in the $5MM range, and going through the same thing next year.  The patient approach will limit their options to add short-term depth but should allow them to get their franchise goalie signed.

At some point, the Bruins need to start getting some contributions from their prospect pool.  Matthew Poitras was starting to slow down before his injury but he’s earned a chance to break camp and see if he can hold down a spot.  Fabian Lysell is one of their top prospects and flirted with a point per game in the minors last year so yes, he’s probably worth a look.  Frankly, those two have more pure upside than what’s left in free agency and they don’t have a lot of trade chips to use.  Having said that, I do see Boston being active on the PTO front to see if they can get a decent veteran or two in as a hedge against the youngsters struggling or Swayman signing a shorter-term deal (opening up more cap flexibility).

vincent k. mcmahon: If Krug’s playing career is hypothetically over (although it’s still up in the air on if he can or can’t resume playing) does this put pressure on the Blues of adding another d-man outside of the additions of Suter and Joseph?

It depends on what their intentions are for this season.  If they think they’re a playoff team, then yes, they need to go add another blueliner (although there’s not much left on the open market).  But looking at the Central Division and St. Louis’ roster in general, I don’t see the Blues being a playoff team this season.

If that’s the case, my thought is that they’d be better off not filling that spot, instead using it to learn more about their younger options.  They have four rearguards either 24 or 25, Matthew Kessel, Scott Perunovich, Tyler Tucker, and the recently-signed Pierre-Olivier Joseph.  How many of those are future building blocks?  At some point, they need to figure that out.  Using this season to do just that might be the better play in the long run.

Read more