Let’s start off the new year with a mailbag.  Topics in this edition include an assessment of Calgary’s top trade chips, what Chicago could be looking to do over the coming months, and much more.

Cla23: Is it just me or are there more players on or heading to IR than previously; if yes, why?

Devil Shark: Can you do a team comparison of injuries? Most specifically games lost to top six forwards or top two D? Interested to see if anyone had been as unlucky as NJD…

Using NHL Injury Viz’s Injury Frequency chart, it looks like fewer players are injured now than a year ago by about 10-15 per league game.  Meanwhile, when comparing this season to the average over the past two decades, it has been pretty close, either slightly above or slightly below.  So from a games-missed standpoint, it doesn’t feel like there are more injured players than usual.

But there’s a bit of a difference between what you’re asking and what that link measures.  I don’t think there are that many more players landing on IR but some teams are known to get creative with their placements.  That can be done for roster or cap management purposes.  If a player lands on IR, they only have to miss seven days and it’s from the date of the injury, not the day of the placement.  So even if they’ve missed a couple of games, they can backdate a placement to get a replacement up for sometimes even just a single contest.  That’s an option that quite a few teams utilize.

Meanwhile, some teams are starting to use LTIR a bit more frequently.  That can be used if a player will miss 10 games and 24 days; we’ve seen a few placements this year where the player is back after just missing the minimum number of days.  But for teams near the Upper Limit of the salary cap, the LTIR placement gives them some much-needed relief so that is starting to be used a bit more often now with so many teams tight to the cap.

As for a team comparison, NHL Injury Viz has some tools for that as well so let’s use that although it doesn’t break down top-six forwards and top-pairing defensemen.  From a cap hit perspective, San Jose has had the biggest impact; Logan Couture skews that one quite a bit.  Vegas is right up there thanks to Robin Lehner; Max Pacioretty skews Washington’s number somewhat as well as does Gabriel Landeskog in Colorado.  Next are Columbus whose list of injuries is long and quite significant, followed by Anaheim and Montreal, teams who are in varying degrees of a rebuild.  Then it’s New Jersey so at a minimum, they’d be right up there for bad luck from an injury standpoint.

wreckage: Realistic returns for the Flames’ big three chips? I listen to Flames radio and follow a couple of their other sites and it seems all their fans are expecting close to, if not a 1st plus for each and all of them. They seem to value Lindholm as a 1C based on his one above-average season two years ago with Gaudreau and Tkachuk on his wings. Every other year is closer to 65 points. Tanev is a great defender who often gets injured and if they hang on, he could be hurt again. And Hanifin is good, but expiring… Are any really worth a 1st+ or is that wishful thinking?

I don’t think Calgary would get a first-rounder for all three but two of them seem quite likely

Elias Lindholm doesn’t have to be a true number one center to fetch a first-round pick at the trade deadline.  Look at Ryan O’Reilly a year ago, he was under half a point per game with St. Louis and still landed a first-round pick.  Lindholm is producing at a better rate than that, is well above average at the faceoff dot, and plays in all situations.  If Calgary is willing to retain 50%, they can get that contract to under $2.5MM pro-rated which should be affordable for several contenders without moving much of consequence the other way in terms of matching money.  He’s probably going to be the best middleman available if the Flames ultimately turn around and sell.  If I’m being honest, I don’t see how he doesn’t bring at least a first-round pick back; it’s how much more comes with it.

As for Chris Tanev, this is the one I agree with you on.  With his injury history, I can see teams being hesitant to move a first-rounder, even though he’s an expiring deal that can be paid down to $2.25MM while being a right-shot player, by far the most coveted side.  There are even recent comparables (David Savard in 2021, Ben Chiarot in 2022) that suggest a shutdown defender on a paid-down expiring contract could fetch a first-rounder plus something else.  But the injury risk drops it to a second-rounder and something else.

Then there’s Noah Hanifin.  Here’s a top-pairing player that can fit in with any contender and is also under $2.5MM with 50% retention.  He’d probably be the best blueliner that moves, assuming he moves.  If you’re the best defenseman available, you’re probably getting moved for a first-rounder.  And if you’re like me and think he’ll move in a sign-and-trade, there’s no doubt at least one of those picks will be part of the sizable package going to Calgary.  Whoever gets him is likely then out on Tanev, which will hurt Tanev’s market a bit in the end.

YzerPlan19: Does the Flames’ recent success change the course of things? Do they still try to pony up $ to keep this group? Is it the FAs that are contributing factors to the success or the kids? Is the success sustainable or should they continue on in rebuild mode anyway? Do we have to wait until the trade deadline to see where they are in the standings before any moves/signings materialize?

I don’t think we’re at a point where a few weeks should be determining their course of direction.  Generally speaking, that’s probably not a wise course of action either way.

I thought Calgary was going to be pretty good this year.  Lots went wrong last season but they still have a decent roster on paper.  But they can’t score enough to truly contend; adding a piece up front would certainly help but I don’t think they’d be more than a mid-tier team anyway.  If I’m GM Craig Conroy, am I ponying up a bunch of money to lock in a core that probably isn’t good enough to contend?  If one of Lindholm or Hanifin wants to take a team-friendly deal, sure, I’d make that move.  But I don’t think that’s happening.

Adding Connor Zary has certainly helped so he deserves some credit but for the most part, I’d pin their recent improvement on the backs of the veterans (not necessarily just the pending free agents either).  Zary has given them a bit more offensive depth but they’re still among the lower-scoring teams.

Can they hang around where they are?  Probably.  They’re more or less a bubble team and if they play around .500 hockey, they can stay in that area.  But again, holding steady probably isn’t the best approach for them to be taking.

Unclemike1526: What additions do you see the Hawks making by the trade deadline? With Hall on LTIR and Tyler Johnson and Mrazek likely out the door that leaves the Hawks with a lot of Cap space money. They need more draft picks like I need hemorrhoids, But I would rather see them add some NHL-ready talent to add to the pool. Nazar should be here one day after Michigan is out of the Frozen Four but most of the Hawks’ top talent is still a couple of years away. Commesso might get some run after Mrazek is gone or if he gets hurt but I think some decent ready talent might be available. Thoughts? And no, Campbell is a hearty No Thanks.

The Blackhawks have plenty of cap space before the possibility of moving out some of their rentals.  But why would a team that’s bottoming out in an effort to land another high draft pick acquire players that will make them more competitive in the short term, hindering their efforts to finish at the bottom of the standings?  That seems a bit counter-productive in my books.

You may not want to see them add more draft picks but over the next couple of months, that’s what they should be doing.  If there’s a market for Tyler Johnson and Petr Mrazek, it’d likely be a draft pick return.  If they take on a contract or act as a third-party facilitator to help another team make a deal, it’d be a draft pick coming their way.

If you want them to flip the switch and go for it, that’s an offseason decision.  At that time, they have what should be another high draft pick to go with Connor Bedard and then they can use their collection of draft picks and prospects to look for some more win-now pieces, or at least prospects that are a bit closer to being NHL-ready.  I think there’s a good chance that will be their strategy but it’s one that has to be executed after the season, not now.

As for signing Frank Nazar after his college season ends, that makes sense.  That gets him a taste of the NHL before a potential spot with the US squad at the Worlds; if he signs and burns the first year of his deal this season, he’d be ineligible to go to Rockford.  As for getting Drew Commesso some NHL looks, I’d like to see him fare a bit better with the IceHogs first.  Throwing him to the wolves on what’s likely to be an even weaker team after the trade deadline comes with some risks and I think their preference would be to let Arvid Soderblom get the bulk of the work down the stretch to help further assess if he’s in their future plans.

Johnny Z: Would the Hawks make a bid for Laine? Seems like CBJ would settle for a bit less to get his salary off the books and the Hawks have ample cap space.

Patrik Laine has been a popular speculative trade candidate although I’m not sure I agree that Columbus would be willing to move him at a discount to get his salary off the books.  Yes, things have not gone well this season from both an injury and production standpoint but he’s also a year removed from nearly averaging a point per game after averaging a point per game the year before.  Does one bad season mean they should want to sell low on a player who has been one of their top performers before that?  I don’t think that’s the right course of action for them to take.

If I’m GM Jarmo Kekalainen and I want to clear salary, I’d be focusing on moving some of the lower-cost overpayments, players like Andrew Peeke and Adam Boqvist, for example.  They may not get a great return straight up but if clearing money is the main goal, selling low on one of them makes more sense than selling low on one of their top liners.

Having said that, someone like Laine would make some sense for Chicago, after the season of course.  An overpriced contract where they could get in a trade for below market value like they did with Taylor Hall would be a nice bridge addition to allow some of their younger prospects ample time to get established in the pros.  I don’t think Laine specifically will be one of those players but you’re on the right track with what type of trade candidate might be viable for the Blackhawks.

PyramidHeadcrab: Looking at advanced stats and yadda yadda, which current “winning” team is most likely to fall off in the New Year? It’s sure been an experience watching Anaheim drop from near the top of the Pacific to the bottom of the league already!

Full disclosure, I don’t know my advanced stats as well as I should but here goes nothing using stats from MoneyPuck heading into Sunday’s action.  For me, the answer is Vancouver.

Let’s talk about PDO, the sum of a team’s shooting and save percentages at five-on-five.  The league average is 100.  Good teams can be in the 101-102 range without it being too concerning.  The Canucks, meanwhile, check in at 104.73.  For context, there are only three other teams above 102 and none of them are at 103.  Vancouver is far and away ahead of the pack.  Buoyed by a shooting percentage of 12% (well above the league average), this tells me they’re due for some regression.

Now let’s look at Expected Goals For and Against based on shot quality and location.  Vancouver has scored 18.56 goals above their expected rate, the second-best rate in the league.  It’s good for them that the shots are going in but this is another one that seems unsustainable.  From a Goals Against standpoint, they’ve allowed 15.26 fewer than expected.  I think there’s a bit of credence to this one being a bit sustainable as their tandem of Thatcher Demko and Casey DeSmith gives them quality goaltending each night.  They should be on the happy side of this ledger although down 15 goals allowed in this category might be tough to sustain.

If we add those two numbers up, Vancouver has a Goal Differential Above Expected at 33.82 (in just 36 games played).  For context, the only other NHL team above 16 in this category is Winnipeg (28.77), the next highest team in PDO.  (If you’re looking for who’d be next on my list based on advanced stats, it’d be them.)  The Canucks are a good team but I don’t think they’re quite this good and I expected some sort of slide back in the second half.  They should still be a playoff squad but I doubt they’ll still be atop the Pacific Division at the end of the regular season.

WilfPaiement: When did NHL officials stop calling games by the rulebook and start calling games based on the score/situation? And why does the league think it’s okay that officials can now manipulate the outcome easily, especially with the new revenue stream that is gambling?

Officiating in the heat of the moment can be frustrating at times, especially if you’re a fan of the team who isn’t getting the benefit of the call.  We’ve all been there.

I’m going to be a bit picky here with the first part.  If officials called everything to the letter of the rulebook, the majority of the games would be played at three-on-three for the overwhelming majority of the time with more players in the penalty box than on the bench.  No one wants to see that.  There are tons of smaller infractions (a hook here, a late bump on the boards a half-second after the puck went by there) that go uncalled but are technically penalties based on the rulebook and that’s a situational judgment call right there, the score notwithstanding.  There is always going to be some level of game management from officials; there’s just no way around it.

Now, as to officiating based on the score?  I don’t have any empirical data to show one way or the other that says it’s happening more or less than before.  Personally, I haven’t seen it as much this season as I feel like I’ve seen in the past.  Sure, there’s the odd questionable call (or non-call) in a late-game situation but again, when you’re already operating on some level of game management for determining what infractions are worth calling (and which of the many smaller ones won’t), that’s going to happen.

I’ve yet to see any evidence that the league thinks score manipulation is okay but there’s not a lot they can do.  It’s not as if they can arbitrarily fire every official who they think has done it and I’m pretty sure officials are cautioned about not doing this at multiple times per season.  I also don’t think there’s a ton of this happening so maybe I’m not the best one to answer this question.  From a gambling standpoint, it’s not like gamblers of other professional sports don’t have the same issue; there’s subjectivity and human error everywhere.  The best thing I can say is that if bettors feel this is subjectively happening, factor that belief into what bets are and aren’t made.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.