Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include some Brady Tkachuk trade proposals, discussions about rebuilds, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our last two mailbag columns.

SkidRowe: Any potential for a deal centered around David Pastrnak for Brady Tkachuk?

I would say probably not.  For starters, moving a pair of franchise players within their own division is something we rarely see and I suspect both teams would hesitate there.  Cap-wise, Ottawa can’t afford to take on an extra three-plus million per year on their books so that’s a deal-breaker as well.  But let’s dig a bit deeper.

For the Bruins, can they afford to lose even more firepower?  While Tkachuk undoubtedly fits the Boston archetype, so to speak, he has been a point-per-game player just once in his career and he just barely got there.  Pastrnak has been at or above that level every year since 2018-19.  Going into play today, the Bruins sit 26th in goals scored.  While their numbers are a bit closer this year, I’d be really hesitant about taking away more natural scoring talent from a team that frankly doesn’t have a lot of it at the moment.

As for the Senators, Tkachuk is their one true power forward out of their young core.  (I know Joshua Norris has been more physical this year but they’re not in the same class.)  The fact that he can play center when needed also gives him some extra value.  He also fits in with the age of their core group whereas Pastrnak is three years older (and again, $3MM more expensive for longer).  It’d be hard to see them make that swap.

Value-wise, it’s not a bad foundation at all.  But it’d shock me if this move was made.

SoCalADRL: Zegras, Mintyukov, Sidorov, and a 2026 1st for Brady Tkachuk. Who says no?

I’d say Ottawa says no at a minimum.  Picking up from the above thoughts, they’re still losing the power forward without getting anything like that in return (Yegor Sidorov is not that type of prospect).  Ottawa ran into an issue last year with three top-four left-shot defensemen which played a role in them moving Jakob Chychrun at the start of free agency last summer.  Adding Pavel Mintyukov – a promising rearguard, no doubt – puts them basically right in that spot.  And Trevor Zegras’s trade value is about the lowest it has ever been.  To me, the most intriguing asset is the 2026 first-rounder, assuming it’s unprotected.  With Ottawa in a fight for the playoffs and trying to emerge from its rebuild, this isn’t the type of move they should be making.

Anaheim, on the other hand, I think would say yes to this, even though it means losing two premier assets in Mintyukov and the first-rounder.  If GM Pat Verbeek was looking to make a move earmarked toward helping its young core become much more competitive, adding a player like Tkachuk would give them a dimension they don’t necessarily have while his style of play would fit in the West.  But I don’t see a good case for the Sens to accept this offer.

Brassroo: Realistically, what kind of return could the Red Wings expect for any of Compher; Tarasenko or Talbot? Detroit needs to make some room in their Cap and roster for ‘25-‘26.

This probably isn’t a good time for Detroit to be trying to move J.T. Compher.  He’s signed at $5.1MM a year through the 2027-28 campaign and is having a rough year with six goals and 14 assists in 43 games while seeing his playing time cut by nearly three minutes a night from last season.  At the moment, his value is probably the lowest it’s been in a long time.  While I understand the desire to create cap space, the likeliest outcome if they moved him now would be a swap of similarly-priced underachieving contracts, meaning they wouldn’t be getting much cap room.  He feels like more of an offseason move when teams have more flexibility heading into free agency although again, offloading the full freight of that deal seems unlikely.

At $4.75MM for one more season after this one, it probably would be easier for Vladimir Tarasenko to be dealt although he has a full no-trade clause to contend with.  But the Red Wings would be trying to sell a team that his struggles with them is the outlier, not a sign that he’s slowing down at age 33.  I don’t think he’d be a priority add for most teams though but rather a third or fourth option type of addition.  Without retention, they’d probably have to take a smaller contract back and maybe land a third-round pick.  With some retention, he’d be worth a second-rounder but then you’re obviously hamstringing your cap space for next season.  Again, he’s probably easier to move in the summer and his trade protection drops considerably at that time.

There doesn’t appear to be a particularly strong goalie market at the moment.  That can change with a few injuries, of course, but I don’t think there’s a return out there that would justify moving Cam Talbot.  And frankly, at $2.5MM for next season, they’re not really saving a whole lot there either as unless they feel Sebastian Cossa is ready for full-time action, they’ll have to sign a replacement who will probably cost a similar price anyway.  With his age and the extra year, I’m skeptical they could land a second-round pick so I don’t think there would be much value in moving him.

Grocery stick: Are good old full-scale rebuilds still a thing? It’s been a while since we’ve seen a team pull it off. The Red Wings had multiple top-10 picks who should deliver by now, but they are still playing catch-up. The Sabres had two firsts overall, and they are nowhere near playoff contention. The Coyotes have been at or near the bottom for years, and they are a bubble team at the moment. The Devils are leading the Metro, but it’s already been more than five years since they drafted Jack Hughes, and they have been lucky to trade away their prospects at the right time since then. Do we need to be more patient with rebuilding teams? Is it the fault of the individual GMs? Or is tanking for high picks a strategy of the past?

Full-scale rebuilds are definitely still a thing.  Look at what Chicago and San Jose have been doing in recent years.  I’d put Anaheim in that class as well as a team that has been out for a few years already and is probably a few more away from being even a playoff threat again.  When a team goes that route, they’re not embarking on a short-term solution.

You mentioned the Coyotes (now Utah).  It was fairly recently that GM Bill Armstrong said he felt that they were only at the midway point of the process and that they were still several years away from getting where they think they can get to.  That franchise has been at it even longer than these three so viewed in that lens, more patience is probably needed.  A rebuild isn’t a matter of a quick teardown and a few years to build back up; it clearly takes more time than that to do it properly.

As for it being the fault of the GMs, it largely does fall on them.  The teardown to bottom out is the easy part as teams will happily trade for better talent.  But if that’s not executed properly and they don’t maximize their assets, then that delays things.  Then, as they’re building up, do they commit to the right core players and acquire or sign the right pieces to move things along?  That last bit is especially difficult.  In the meantime, is the proper infrastructure in place in terms of coaching and player development?  Hit on all of these and a team can truly do this type of rebuild and thrive afterward.  But miss along the way and it definitely slows the process down.

I don’t think this is a strategy of the past simply because top talents are going to be tantalizing to try to get.  But it also can’t be a strategy that more than a few teams take at one time simply by virtue of there generally only being one elite star (or sometimes generational) player in a draft class; ten teams can’t tank for that.

We’re now starting to see teams start a rebuild and then trade draft picks and future assets for some younger but still established NHL players to try to speed up the process.  Montreal is a team that seems to be taking that approach, for example.  I’ll be curious to see if more try to follow suit this way knowing the higher risks associated with the ‘scorched earth’ approach that doesn’t always work as well as planned.

KL: Can Columbus build on their spirited play at home in the first half of the season to challenge for a playoff spot?

I don’t think anyone would have realistically thought that the Blue Jackets would be one of the top-scoring teams in the league this season after losing their two most prominent veterans but entering today’s action, they’re fourth.  That’s a testament to the young players stepping up, Zach Werenski having a Norris-worthy season, and the coaching staff for bringing it all together.  If they can keep that up in the second half, sure, they can stay in the mix.

Having said that, I’d still pick against that happening.  I’m not convinced that their high-scoring ways are sustainable, especially with a young roster.  On top of that, their goaltending is still a significant issue.  Elvis Merzlikins has shaved 0.4 goals per game off his GAA but his save percentage is down to just .890 which is below average.  Daniil Tarasov is having an even rougher season while third-stringer Jet Greaves hasn’t played enough to reliably be counted on at this time.

Now, if GM Don Waddell can find a move to make to upgrade his goaltending, that could change their fortunes in a hurry.  In that instance, I think they’d have a much better chance of getting to the playoffs.  But for now, I think they’ll fall out of the race at some point.

Read more