Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include Chicago and their goaltending, way-too-early predictions for new playoff teams next season, Sergei Bobrovsky’s volatility, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our last two mailbags.

Unclemike1526: The Blackhawks have Mrazek and Soderblom-Stauber for this year. We’re stuck with Mrazek. So Commesso, and maybe Basse in the system. I think the Hawks should draft Hrabal, however they need to. I saw one mock draft saying the Hawks would draft Trey Augustine in the second round. What is your opinion of Hrabal and Augustine? I think the Hawks stay put at 1 and 19. Then they take their high second-round pick and package it with a player or more picks to get back into the late 1st round and take Hrabal or if he’s gone, Gauthier. I think that would be a great scenario for the Hawks. I think you can never have enough good goalies. Thoughts?

I like Michael Hrabal but it feels to me like his stock is soaring a bit too high right now.  Yes, he’s big and big is good for a goalie but I’m not convinced he’s a 1A starter down the road.  He’s raw and rangy and those players don’t always pan out.  Size allows him to get to more shots but he still needs to be technically sound and by most accounts, that’s something that still needs a lot of work.  If he’s a platoon player, he can still have a long and productive career but is a platoon goalie worth a first-rounder?  I don’t think it is.  I wouldn’t be shocked if someone picks him in the first round but I’m not convinced that it’s a good idea.  In your scenario, I like the idea of trading up for Ethan Gauthier more than I do for Hrabal.  If Hrabal is there at 35, grab him then.

As for Augustine, I think he might be the better goalie of the two but while Hrabal’s size has sent his stock soaring, Augustine’s size has lowered him in the rankings.  He’s more of a technically-sound netminder and in a structured system, I think he can do quite well, at least as a platoon option.  Chicago is anything but structured right now but any goalie being taken is going to be four years or more away from being NHL-ready.  I’m betting that by then, the Blackhawks’ defense will be much better than it is now.

As for the philosophical idea of never having enough good goalies, I tend to agree if a team is trending toward a platoon as many are.  The value in that approach is saving money relative to having a true starter and a backup but it also means that you need to have a few netminders in the system.  As soon as one of those platoon pieces gets too expensive, the next in-house option needs to be ready for this to work as planned.

Generally speaking, there are only around 20 goalies that are picked in a typical draft year.  With more teams going to a platoon system, that number should be higher.  We’ll find out soon enough if that trend continues or if teams get more aggressive in getting netminders into their prospect pools.

random comment guy: I would like to piggyback off this, with the Hawks needing to reach the cap floor (roughly $16M or so), what teams will be calling to get high-salary players off their roster? I assume the Hawks will want 1-2 year contracts as it will fit their timeline. Also, do you feel that the return should be more draft picks or prospects/players?

There are a few groups of teams in the category of needing to move money.  There are those that have a high-priced contract for an underachieving player that are just looking to get out of the deal.  Think the Islanders and Josh Bailey.  There are those that wouldn’t mind offloading an LTIR-bound contract such as the Maple Leafs and Jake Muzzin.  Then there are teams that don’t want to move a player but whose cap situations are going to force their hand.  Boston and to a lesser extent Edmonton are among those.  Vancouver is sort of here as well although they don’t have to make a move, they just might prefer to.

I agree that Chicago – or any team acting as a clearinghouse – will be looking for short-term contracts.  Why take on a long-term agreement that could be problematic down the road if it can be avoided?  Sure, there could be more futures coming their way as compensation but there’s a limit to how much a team is going to pay to offload an unwanted contract and it probably won’t be enough to justify a long-term acquisition.

I’d put the Blackhawks in a spot where they should be targeting prospects.  They’re not ready to push for a playoff spot yet, even with Connor Bedard giving them a big boost offensively.  They’ve just gutted too much of the core to turn it around in a year.  But getting more draft picks that are years away from playing doesn’t make sense either.  The sweet spot for them should be drafted players between 19 and 22 (give or take a year) that are on the cusp of being ready.  Those will be the core pieces that align with Bedard’s timeline and part of the core that eventually helps lead them back into contention.  A year or two from now when it’s time to flip the switch, then go after the win-now players who will then be augmented by this prospect core.

M34: Waaaay too early predictions. Two or three teams from each conference’s playoff picture, that won’t make the playoffs next year. And who takes their spots?

The next couple of weeks could make me look silly on this but here goes nothing.

East: Even with Alex DeBrincat likely to be moved, the Senators can still do some damage next season.  A full season from Josh Norris will help.  I think they’re going to get a goalie.  And with the cap space they free up from a DeBrincat swap, they’re likely to add a piece or two of note in free agency or by taking on a player in a trade.  I also expect the Penguins to find a way to get back in.  They have some cap flexibility this summer and while they have a few holes to fill with that money, I think they’ll be able to add a piece or two to help get them over the hump for a Wild Card position.  It wouldn’t shock me to see Buffalo get in there as well as their roster continues to improve and likely has a move or two to be made in the coming weeks.

In terms of who misses out, the Panthers come to mind.  I had this same concern with Boston last summer (and boy, was I wrong there) but I figured their injuries would cause them to struggle out of the gate and even though they’d be a playoff-caliber team, they’d have too much of a hill to climb by the time the team got healthy.  I could see this happening with Florida.  I’ll say the Islanders also just miss out.  Their desired style of play is good for keeping things close but they still lack an above-average attack and their back end could be weakened if Scott Mayfield can’t be retained.  They’ll be competitive but just miss out.  If Boston really has to blow things up, it wouldn’t shock me if they just missed out.  It also wouldn’t shock me if Tampa Bay, bereft of even more depth next season, gets bit by the injury bug and with a weaker roster, ultimately comes up short.

West: I have one team that I have a bit of confidence in that could get in and that’s Vancouver.  Thatcher Demko should be better.  Their offense is already strong.  I don’t think they’re going to leave their back end as is.  On paper, that roster should be a playoff-caliber group.  Calgary is going to be forced to sell, Nashville might be bottoming out, Arizona and Chicago should be better but not playoff-ready and Anaheim and San Jose aren’t close.  I guess St. Louis is my second team by default since I have to pick at least two but let’s just say I’m not typing this with much conviction.

Winnipeg is the logical team to be replaced as it sure feels like they, too, are heading for at least some sort of step back.  It’d be tough to move that much of their core and improve.  And if I have to pick a team for St. Louis to knock out, I guess it’d be Seattle.  There’s a fine line to navigate for teams built like they are.  When it works, they can be a handful but if a couple of players take a step back offensively, that could be the difference, especially with their question marks between the pipes.

PyramidHeadcrab: So what’s the deal with Sergei Bobrovsky? Every player has ups and downs, but this guy seems to swing wildly from Vezina caliber to $10MM paperweight. Has any other goalie in NHL history been so wildly inconsistent? And what might you surmise the reasoning behind it is? Injury? Personality? Poor coaching?

There’s a 33-point gap between Bobrovsky’s best year and worst in terms of save percentage.  That’s definitely on the high side.  My first instinct when I saw the comparables question was Ilya Bryzgalov but as erratic as he was, the gap in the prime of his career wasn’t anywhere close.  Tim Thomas also has a 33-point difference but I wouldn’t put him on the same scale of wild inconsistency.  Mike Smith went from .899 one year to .930 and then within a few years, was down to .904.  Objectively speaking, there’s probably someone whose year-to-year volatility is comparable to Bobrovsky but one doesn’t come to mind right away.  And even so, Bobrovsky’s game-to-game and even period-to-period variances still could make him unique.

He has had enough goalie coaches over his career that it’s probably not that.  I don’t think it’s injury-related either.  I think it’s a confidence thing.  Some players rattle easy and he might be one of them; a bad goal bugs him and eventually it nosedives into another bad one, then another, etc.  On the flip side, a few big saves beget a few more big saves and then he gets on a roll.  Goaltending is just a weird position and there isn’t necessarily a lot of predictability involved other than to say there shouldn’t be much in the way of predictability.  This JFresh article from 2020 (Bobrovsky’s first season with Florida) better describes the volatility of the position.  Bobrovsky manages to take that to a whole other level.

The Duke: Crystal Ball – Goaltenders Edition: Where do Gibson, Saros, UPL, and Hill play next season – and how successful will each be?

John Gibson – I guess the ball doesn’t get to say Anaheim anymore, does it?  Let’s go with Pittsburgh with the Ducks retaining a small percentage of the deal to get the net cost closer to $5.5MM.  Playing behind a better team with playoff aspirations, he adds 13 points to his save percentage of .899, giving the Penguins a net gain on their team save percentage and that’s enough of a difference to get them a few more wins in the standings.

Juuse Saros – Nashville is moving a lot of players but this is one of those cases where they’re not going to get a max return if they move him now.  Not with Connor Hellebuyck out there; there are only a handful of teams that will be willing to pay up for a true starter.  He might not finish the season there but he should start it there.  With a weaker group in front of him, he loses a few points off the .919 SV% he put up last season.  That’s still well above average but it probably won’t be enough to get a bunch of wins unless they wind up buying big after selling big.

Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen – There’s a definite case to be made for Buffalo to add a goaltender and if they do, Luukkonen is probably going elsewhere.  But the ball sees them investigating the market and then deciding to go with Luukkonen and Levi to start, believing that if they need to make an in-season move to get a stabilizer between the pipes, they’ll be able to do so.  After putting up an .891 SV% this past season, Luukkonen winds up closer to the NHL average (which should be somewhere in the .905 range).

Adin Hill – Staying in Vegas seems like the most probable scenario, especially since it appears that he’s nearing an extension.  With a heavier workload than he’s used to having during the regular season, Hill’s SV% dips a few points from .915 to .911.

Red Wings: Panthers should have some cap space this summer. If they add one piece, should they target Bertuzzi or Orlov?

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include a discussion about the impending spending frenzy, Roman Josi’s future in Nashville, next week’s draft, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s mailbag.  We also have one more to run from the most recent call for questions so it might be in there too.

jason830: Is Clayton Keller an option for the Blackhawks to trade for if he is available? Also, would pick 19 plus some prospects entice the Coyotes to trade him?

It’s fair to wonder if Arizona might be inclined to move Keller.  GM Bill Armstrong has said previously that he envisions the team being about halfway through the rebuild.  In other words, they’re a few years away from trying to contend.  Keller has five years left on his contract so three more non-playoff seasons would mean they’d be holding onto him for two years of hopeful contention.  Logically, you could sway me on moving him for someone that better fits their timeline.

That said, they wouldn’t be looking for draft picks to trade for him.  If they were, I expect they’d be aiming considerably higher.  Remember the Alex DeBrincat move from the draft last year?  I fully expect they’d be asking for more than that if they were moving Keller.

Chicago isn’t at the point yet where it’s time for them to start moving draft picks and trying to contend.  That’s the time for them to go after someone like Keller.  Arizona, meanwhile, is probably looking for players more than picks so I don’t think there’s a mutual fit for a trade.

NSco1996: Do you think the NHL will address the LTIR/No Salary Cap loophole to add better quality/more expensive depth at the deadline for the future playoffs? As a Blackhawks fan, it more notably seemed to have started with them in 2015 with Kane, 2021 Kucherov and Stamkos, 2023 Mark Stone. All three teams added good quality depth that they otherwise couldn’t afford with their high-price star not counting against the cap.

First, this isn’t just an NHL decision.  The salary cap and the rules that pertain to it are collectively bargained between the league and the NHLPA so any changes would need joint approval.  At first glance, I don’t think this a topic that’s going to be remotely near the top of the list for new Executive Director Marty Walsh to look at.  Frankly, I don’t think they’re upset about the loophole either as it allows players to go to a Cup contender that wouldn’t be able to otherwise which some would be quite happy about.

I also don’t think there’s much of an appetite from the teams to do something about it.  Yes, it’s a tiny loophole (which isn’t so small now as it has been exploited enough that you can drive an 18-wheeler through it) but at a time when many teams are cap-strapped, they’re probably not going to want to close something that they might need to rely on depending how their injury situation goes.  So if the league isn’t getting pushed to look at it and the NHLPA isn’t inclined to change it, it’s not going to get addressed.

For fun, though, let’s say they’re open to the idea.  How do you do it?  Do you put a rule in that says if a player is on LTIR after the trade deadline, they have to miss a certain number of playoff games?  That might seem like the easiest way to do it but what about the player who legitimately suffers a two-month injury right before the trade deadline, lining them up for a first-round return?  Such a rule might help eliminate some of the more overt exploitation but it might punish the teams who are legitimately in that situation with a valid injury timeline that matches the start of the postseason.  That probably isn’t going to get the support from NHL teams at the least.  As far as fixing it goes, it’s easier said than done.

WilfPaiement: Why do GMs continue to be their own worst enemy when it comes to a player’s worth? The latest example would potentially be Tyler Bertuzzi who reportedly is looking for term and $7 million a season.  His resume thus far tells me he would be 3 at 3 at best.  Anything after that is just plain dumb!!!!! Don Waddell recently stated he’s not against bringing back Pacioretty, just ridiculous. What kind of bad money will they throw at Toews and Kane?

This is pretty commonplace around professional sports.  Managers want to improve their team and when you have the same teams bidding for the same impact players, dumb moves are going to happen.  Add that to the expectation of a higher salary cap in the near future and it’s a guarantee that there are bad signings on their way next weekend.

As for Bertuzzi, your valuation of him would actually represent a cut in pay compared to what he has made in the past three seasons.  That’s probably not going to happen.  Yes, injuries are a valid concern and that will probably prevent him from getting what he’s asking.  But he’s asking for a contract that’s high enough to justify him not seeing what’s on the open market (where he’ll be one of the more sought-after players, no less).  He’s not taking himself off the free agent list for an underpayment; he might not even do it for a fair-market deal.  I don’t think there’s any chance he gets $7MM and I’m skeptical that he gets max term.  But right now, why not see if Boston is willing to play ball on one of those ends?  There isn’t much risk to doing so.

I have no problem with Waddell saying he’d be open to bringing back Max Pacioretty.  He didn’t say he’s open to bringing him back at $7MM again, just that they won’t close the door.  If Pacioretty winds up signing a one-year, bonus-laden contract, Carolina is a team that makes a lot of sense for him with the short-term cap space they have before so many regulars are up heading into 2023-24.  For the right price, that might be worth pursuing.

I don’t expect Toews to get a big-ticket contract.  If he decides to play next season, I think it will be a situational choice, one that allows him to play closer to home or try to chase one more Stanley Cup.  Those situations lend themselves toward a cheaper contract.  As for Kane, we’re in the middle of finalizing our upcoming Top 50 UFA list and while I won’t spoil the final number, I suspect you’ll find it above the value you think he should get.

GBear: If the Preds are going in a rebuild phase, doesn’t it make sense to move Josi? He’ll be on the downside of his career once the team becomes above average again, so why waste his prime years in a rebuild when you could get a huge return for him now?

Not every rebuild has to be a strip-it-down one with an extended buildup after that.  Going the route of trading Roman Josi would be the Predators tearing it down and starting a long-term rebuild.  Is that really what Barry Trotz signed up for when he takes over as GM next weekend?  I don’t know about that.  I’m not even certain that today’s trade is a sign in that direction; they might just be opening up flexibility to make a splash on the trade front at their hometown draft.

I’m also not convinced that the return would be as high as you might think it would be.  Look at San Jose and Erik Karlsson.  They’re the same age (born one day apart), are the top-scoring blueliners from the last two seasons, and are on long-term contracts.  And yet, what is the scuttlebutt around Karlsson?  To move him, the Sharks will need to retain a significant chunk of the deal and probably settle for an underwhelming return.

Yes, Karlsson makes roughly $2.5MM more but Josi has one more year left on his contract which doesn’t help his trade value.  If Nashville was going to consider seriously moving him, they’d be asked to retain a sizable chunk.  Even at $2MM per, that’s $10MM they’re paying for him not to play for the Preds.  Are they going to want to do that and tie up another retention slot long-term?  I’m not sure about that.  Even if they were, I think they’d get better offers than San Jose is for Karlsson but this is not a cap environment to move big money for big value.

If you’re moving big-ticket contracts right now, the cap space is a big part of the return, likely bigger than the asset value you’re getting back.  And if that’s all you’re going to get for Josi, holding onto him might be the smarter play.  There are only so many teams that can afford to be in on Karlsson and when goes, that list will get even smaller.  Accordingly, this might not be the best spot to move him.

Schwa: With speculation of Konecny being moved by Flyers, and it seeming like they are willing to retain salary, could you see the Rangers making an offer here/the teams working out an in-division move? Konecny plays a scrappy two-way game and is a solidified top-6 RW. Seems to fit Rangers’ needs if he can be had for the right price. 1st and a prospect for Konecny with 30% retained by PHI? Thanks!

I don’t think Philadelphia is in a spot to turn down better offers just to avoid moving him to a division rival, especially if they’re looking to bottom out for the remaining term of Travis Konecny’s contract.  If the Rangers were to make an offer and it was the best one, they’d do it.

Having said that, I’m not sure that New York would make a legitimate offer for him.  They have around $11.7MM to work with right now, per CapFriendly.  With that, they need to re-sign Alexis Lafreniere and K’Andre Miller, sign a backup goalie, and probably another defenseman and at least three more forwards.  As it is, they probably need to try to offload Barclay Goodrow just to accomplish that, let alone add Konecny, even at a reduced rate.  (And no, putting Goodrow into the trade won’t solve that problem as the Rangers would need to incentivize the Flyers to take that deal on.)

As for your proposal, it depends on the prospect.  From Philadelphia’s perspective, if they’re retaining 30% for two years, it better be an ‘A’ player, one of New York’s best.  Otherwise, they’re probably going to pass on an offer like that in search of a stronger one.

Read more