PHR Mailbag

Topics in this edition of the mailbag include RFA winger Jesse Puljujarvi, the Rangers’ backup goalie situation, David Backes’ big contract, players that could be on the rebound and decline, and how Seattle’s 2021 debut could affect activity around the league this season.

acarneglia: Are the Rangers a potential match for Puljujarvi?

met man: How do you think the Ranger goalie situation will play out?  Which Russian will be Lundqvist’s’ partner?  What happens to the odd man out?

As far as possible fits for Puljujarvi go, the Rangers would be one of the better ones.  With a pretty young group of forwards, they’re the type of team where he could potentially fit in on a second or third line and have some success.  Unfortunately for New York, they’re not a realistic landing spot.

With minimal cap space to work with and Brendan Lemieux and Anthony DeAngelo needing new contracts, the Rangers simply aren’t in a spot where they can realistically afford to add salary.  It’s not that Puljujarvi would be commanding a pricey deal but he’ll want more than his qualifying offer and that might be too rich for what they can afford on the cap unless they offset some money elsewhere.  Yes, Edmonton wants a top-nine forward for him but the only viable option would be Jesper Fast and that’s probably not going to get it done.

I actually think Puljujarvi’s trade odds have gone down.  Going back to Finland is a good thing for his development.  He’ll be out of the spotlight and can work on some of the elements that are lacking.  A good season there will help his trade value and GM Ken Holland knows it.  They’re not going to get much of a return now if they trade him so they might as well wait it out unless someone gets desperate.  The Rangers won’t be that team.

As for the backup goalie situation, both Alexandar Georgiev and Igor Shesterkin are waiver-exempt which is actually a good thing here.  I see the pair spending some time at both levels as a result.  That way, they get a bit of time in the NHL but also see a fair bit of action in AHL Hartford.  A young NHL backup is rarely an ideal situation from a development perspective so with two youngsters in the discussion, this is the best compromise they can make.

azcm2511: How does Boston get out from under the Backes contract? Taking into account his movement control, do you think it would be possible for Sweeney to find a buyer who will take on the entire contract if he was to package him with Torey Krug? I don’t see how they will manage to fit Krug into the budget if he is projected to be a 7-9 mil a year player after this season. The B’s have McAvoy and potentially Gryz to fill the PP void, do you see any potential matches for this scenario?

While I doubt they’d be willing to part with Krug to get out of Backes’ deal, I applaud you for thinking outside the box.  I know contract talks haven’t really started with the pending UFA defender but there’s still plenty of time.  They’re a team in win-now mode so parting with a top offensive weapon from the back end is counter-productive even if freeing up the money helps them re-sign Charlie McAvoy and Brandon Carlo.  I agree that his price tag may very well be too high to be a long-term fit but the internal discussion about trading him for that reason would come at the trade deadline and be based on where they are in the standings.

As for what they’ll do with Backes, he doesn’t have a no-move clause so they’d save a little bit by sending him down.  If they replaced him with a minimum-salaried player, that’d free up an extra $375K in cap room.  That’s not a lot but if that money isn’t spent over the course of the season, that’s worth a small addition at the trade deadline.  I wonder if there’s a move to be made with 50% retention and a sweetener; their system is deep enough that it could part with a prospect or pick to do so without it hurting too badly.  And if all else fails, they can try to find a doctor to certify him as injured and try to go the LTIR route.  His style of play has made him susceptible to being injury-prone at this point of his career.  It probably wouldn’t be a season-ender like some other players but it’d buy them some time and allow them to get into compliance to start the season and re-sign Carlo and McAvoy.

pawtucket: Which teams will surprise everyone and make or contend for a playoff spot and which teams will disappoint and shock us all?

pitmanrich: Which players do you see having a bounce-back season after a poor 18-19 season and which players are just in decline and will continue to get worse?

I made my picks for surprise teams a couple of mailbags ago and not much has changed since then.  I think New Jersey could make some noise with some of their additions, the return to health from Taylor Hall, and a healthy season from Cory Schneider.  On the flip side, Pittsburgh has taken a small step back on paper and they weren’t at their best last season so I could see them slipping out of the playoffs this time around.

In terms of bounce-back candidates, William Nylander in Toronto is a good place to start.  He never looked right after missing the first two months of the year due to a contract holdout.  I suspect this will almost feel like a fresh start for him (even though he didn’t change teams) and get back closer to his 60-point form.  Arizona is clearly banking on a bounce back from Clayton Keller with the extension that he just got and playing alongside Phil Kessel should certainly help in that regard.  Assuming Nikolaj Ehlers stays healthy, he should be in line for a big jump offensively as well.

I’m always hesitant to predict players on the downswing but I’m not sold that a coaching and system change in Anaheim will revive Ryan Getzlaf’s offense.  He has a lot of heavy minutes under his belt and at some point, he’ll have to be scaled back a bit which won’t help his point total.  The speed of the NHL concerns me when it comes to Ilya Kovalchuk and I’m not sure a new coach will vastly turn his game around.  I’m also uncertain that Wayne Simmonds will turn things around considerably.  I don’t mind his addition on a one-year deal but his rugged style of play screams potential decline.  He should outperform his play with Nashville (three points in 19 games between the end of the season and playoffs) but I don’t expect him to get back to the level that he was at a couple of years ago with Philadelphia.

CarmanDyer9: What impact will the upcoming expansion draft have on this season? What potential moves could you see teams making to compensate for the expansion draft?

I feel a little bad for Seattle GM Ron Francis.  Quite a few of the side deals that teams made to protect a certain player worked out quite well for Vegas and not so well for the other team.  That’s going to make teams a little less willing to start moving things around and will just bite the bullet when the time comes and they lose a player.

I think we’re a year away from the 2021 expansion draft really having an impact on movement around the league.  While teams are certainly planning ahead, it’s hard to see some thinking about moving their fourth defenseman now in fear that they’ll lose him to Seattle.  Rosters will change considerably between now and then; who knows what the 2020 UFA market will bring?

Once we get to 2020-21 and things start to look a little clearer on the roster side, then we’ll start to see some effects.  Teams may hesitate on UFA extension talks and a swap or two could be made with that in mind.  A team that’s out of it midseason could try to take advantage of someone’s expansion situation in a rental player trade.  But that’s still a year away.  For 2019-20, don’t expect the expansion draft to really have too much of an impact on player movement around the league.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include the slow-moving RFA market, future salary cap projections, Washington’s key pending unrestricted free agents, Minnesota’s top-paid veterans, and Marcus Pettersson’s situation in Pittsburgh.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next week’s edition.

random comment guy: Why haven’t other teams made offers to the remaining RFAs? I understand there are draft picks connected to them but this standoff looks like it will playing into the season.

Just because no other offer sheets have been signed beyond Montreal’s attempt for Sebastian Aho doesn’t mean that there haven’t been other attempts.  There were reports at the beginning of July that the Canadiens wanted to explore an offer sheet for Tampa Bay’s Brayden Point but were rebuffed.  Teams can try to poach an RFA all they want but the player still has to agree to a deal.  Lots of times, the player doesn’t want to.

Draft pick compensation certainly has to play a role as well.  At the rate that Montreal’s offer sheet for Aho was, teams are going to match on any of the forwards.  They’d probably match at the next tier as well (two first-rounders plus a second and a third) without much hesitancy.  So what’s the point of trying?  That was the common response to the Aho offer sheet.  Now we’re talking four first-round picks to get the player plus having to sign them to what would be an above-market deal.  That’s a lot to give up no matter how talented the player is.

If I’m a team that wants to submit an offer sheet, I’m taking a look at the Rangers right now.  They don’t appear to be willing to move off their one-year qualifying offers for Brendan Lemieux and Anthony DeAngelo as that’s basically all they can afford.  Both players have some upside still and an offer at the top of the third-round pick range (just over $2.1MM) could give them some pause with their cap situation.  If a team wanted to go into the next tier, there’s a good chance they could get the player.

With the current thresholds, the bottom of the market is where the best potential for a realistic offer sheet is.  As for the top players, there’s a very good chance that several of these will drag into the season although I expect to see a few deals get done over the next couple of weeks.

M34: Multi-part question:

What is your best guess at the new cap number when the TV deal kicks in, and when is that supposed to happen?

When that happens, what tier of players benefit most; the star players, the middle six type guy’s, or do teams start using more money to add better quality depth guy’s? Or do you think it’s somewhat even across the board?

I don’t share the same enthusiasm as some when it comes to a big boost in the cap when the new US TV deal gets done.  There’s demand for live content but with a lot of bloated contracts on the books for other sports, it’s not going to be a bidding war.  Networks will be a little thriftier.  Could they double the current $200MM per year revenue?  Sure, that’s possible.  But that’s only roughly a $3MM increase to the cap (half of the increase divided by 32 teams).  I’d have a hard time thinking the league will get a lot more than that though as the ratings just aren’t that strong.  The new contract (or contracts if they split it between more than one network) isn’t going to be shattering any benchmarks like the deal in Canada did.

Let’s say they do slightly better than double it.  That would amount to a $3.5MM to $4MM increase in the cap.  Assuming there’s a bit of growth in revenues as well, that could push an increase to $5MM.  At that level, the NHLPA would probably hold off on exercising its inflator to help claw back escrow payments.  A $5MM jump isn’t that significant in the grand scheme of things; it’s happened several times before already.

As for who benefits, there could be a small boost for the mid-tier players depending on who is still unsigned at that point.  Teams will pay up for whoever’s out there and if it’s middle-six players, then that group will get a nice bonus for a year.  However, the long-term eventuality is that the top players will be the main benefactors, just as they have been lately.  The second line winger isn’t getting much more now than they were a few years ago in free agency but salaries for top liners have gone up quicker.  That trend should continue after the TV deal is signed.

CapsFan34: Do Nicklas Backstrom or Braden Holtby get signed or do they hit the free agent market and what do you think their contracts would look like? Seems to me that the comparable for Backy is the Joe Thornton deal while Holtby is looking at a Bobrovsky style deal.

One thing is for sure – the Capitals can’t afford both of them.  They already have over $62MM in commitments for 2020-21 so new deals for them would push them over $80MM with several roster spots to be filled.  I expect that Backstrom will ultimately stick around while Holtby moves on.

As for what the contracts would look like, let’s start with Backstrom.  He’s a pretty safe bet to reach the 70-point mark having got there for six straight seasons since the lockout-shortened campaign (where he averaged a point per game).  He’s a reliable defensive player and isn’t a liability at the faceoff dot.  He’ll also be 32 next summer so while a max-term contract is off the table, a five or six-year deal is possible if not probable.  (That takes Thornton off the table as a comparable as has always gone with shorter-term pacts.)  His current AAV is $6.7MM and he should beat that given the relative scarcity of impact centers that are slated to become UFAs.  I wouldn’t expect it go higher than $8MM though on a long-term pact as there will inevitably be some front-loading in place with one or two of those years being tacked on to try to lower the AAV.

Holtby’s comparable is a little more direct in Sergei Bobrovsky’s seven-year, $70MM pact as you suggested.  The two have had numbers that are pretty close and like Bobrovsky, Holtby will be the undisputed top netminder available a year from now.  If the Capitals believe that Ilya Samsonov is their goalie of the future, it wouldn’t be wise to even entertain the idea of signing Holtby for that long.  Add or subtract a few hundred thousand to Bobrovsky’s $10MM AAV and that’s why Holtby’s next deal should look like with a new team.

jb10000lakes: With the Wild kind of stuck in no man’s land, will Parise (or Suter) agree to be traded to a contender; and if so, how much salary will the Wild need to eat? On a side note, is there any chance Zuccarello hasn’t signed that contract yet?

I touched on a similar question a few months ago in a previous mailbag so I won’t go into too much detail here.  If new GM Bill Guerin wanted to trade Ryan Suter, he could do so easily without needing to retain salary and get good value back.  Yes, the last couple of years could be rough but he’s still a legitimate top-pairing defenseman and those don’t come available very often.  The acquiring team would only have to have him for three years before the potential for salary cap recapture was basically mitigated as well and he easily has three years left (and then the really low salary years begin).  As for Parise, his injury history makes him a tougher sell even if he wanted to be moved.  I don’t think there’s a point where it would be justifiable to move him – they’d either have to retain so much of his contract (and the higher risk for cap recapture given the front-loaded contract) or take so little in return that they’d be better off just keeping him.

When it comes to Mats Zuccarello, I don’t quite get the negativity on his contract.  Is it too much term?  Sure, but the same can be said for most UFA deals.  $6MM for a 50-point winger isn’t a bargain but it’s not a drastic overpayment either.  I know the contract goes against the grain for a team that probably needs to rebuild but they should be able to get out of it via trade (assuming Zuccarello was to waive his no-move clause) without too much concern.

Rayno15: Are you surprised the Pens haven’t made a move to make room to get Pettersson back here? How do you see them making it happen?

Teams only have to be cap-compliant at the start of the season which is still more than a month away so no, I’m not surprised a trade hasn’t happened.  I expect to see a fair bit of movement over the next few weeks as some of the RFAs start to sign and in doing so, some of the remaining UFAs will as well.  That will give teams more certainty as to what they can or can’t do on the trade market and open up the windows for teams like Pittsburgh to make their required cap cuts.

Plan A would be to trade a veteran player like Bryan Rust, Erik Gudbranson, Jack Johnson, or even Nick Bjugstad who didn’t fit in all that great after being acquired.  Even if they had to take a player back to offset some of the money, that would free up enough room to re-sign Pettersson and even potentially leave a big of wiggle room for in-season moves.  That will take a bit of time to do depending on the rest of the market.

Plan B may be to just get creative with the waiver wire.  Chad Ruhwedel and Zach Trotman are capable depth options but both should clear waivers (or if they didn’t, they wouldn’t be big losses).  There’s $1.4MM right there.  Johnson would clear waivers because of his contract which would free up another $1.075MM in cap room.  It might take waiting until the season to start with this approach but they’d have enough space to re-sign Pettersson at that point and then they could shuffle the veterans back and forth between the minors to bank a bit of cap space in the early going of the season and take full advantage of having their AHL team nearby.  It’d be a tough pill to swallow for Johnson but it might just work.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Topics in this edition of the mailbag include what’s next for the Rangers, David Backes’ future in Boston, teams that could surprise, possible trade candidates over the next month, and Ottawa’s lack of spending.  If your question isn’t covered here, check back with last week’s column.

met man: Now that the dust has settled, do the Rangers trade or extend Chris Kreider?  What about Namestnikov?

It’s probably the status quo for the time being when it comes to Kreider.  The team has indicated that they expect him in training camp which was a subtle way to say let’s stop with the trade speculation.  That probably won’t happen though.  They’re going to have a hard enough time fitting him under the Upper Limit this season at his current $3.625MMMM rate.  Add a couple million to that on a long-term extension and the big penalty from the Kevin Shattenkirk buyout and it’s very difficult to see them being able to fit Kreider in a year from now even if the salary cap goes up a little bit.  That’s always going to keep him trade speculation.

I don’t expect a quick resolution to his case though.  They’ll find a way to get under the cap for 2019-20 without needing to move him and they’ll see how things play out.  If they get back into playoff contention, they’ll certainly consider holding on to him and try to use that as a case for why he should take a bit less than he could get elsewhere to stick around.  If they’re a bubble team or out of the postseason picture though, then a trade near the deadline becomes the likeliest outcome where he’d be one of the more prominent players available.

As for Namestnikov, they’ve been trying to move him for a while now with no takers.  I happen to think there’s still some potential upside with him – he’s only 26 and one year removed from a 22-goal, 48-point season.  Sure, it hasn’t worked out too well for him in New York but a change of scenery could get him back closer to 15 goals and 35 to 40 points.  Is that great value for $4MM?  Not really but he’d still be a useful player.  If the Rangers are open to retaining some of his contract, they could find a taker for him although the return wouldn’t be a strong one.  But that might be enough to get them back in cap compliance for next season so it may be a hit worth taking.

pitmanrich: Considering the moves the Rangers have made this summer and the high draft picks they’ve used over last two drafts is the rebuild over? And if so, how much pressure will coach Quinn be under to get results this season?

I don’t think it’s fair to say that the rebuild is entirely over.  This is still a team that’s going to be icing a lot of youngsters in prominent roles and with that, there will be inevitable growing pains, even with the additions of Artemi Panarin and Jacob Trouba.  This is a team that should certainly be improved and I don’t think I’d be overly shocked if they got into the playoff mix as there isn’t going to be a lot of separation between the third-place team in the Metropolitan and one that finds itself on the outside looking in at the postseason picture.  Accordingly, I would say that their rebuild has been accelerated but it’s still a year too early to call it over.

With that in mind, expectations shouldn’t be too high on David Quinn.  The priority for this season should be getting steady development out of players like Kaapo Kakko, Vitali Kravtsov, Filip Chytil, Lias Andersson, Brett Howden, and Adam Fox.  That’s the eventual young nucleus of this team with their high-priced veterans helping to give them enough of a push to get them over the top.  At least that’s the plan.  If their youngsters show signs of improvement towards living up to their draft billing, it’s a successful season regardless of where they finish in the standings.  Those are the results in which Quinn should be evaluated on.

mcase7187: Could the Bruins package a deal like David B?

It all depends on what the package includes.  Is it possible that Backes could be traded?  Sure.  If Milan Lucic (whose contract is twice as long) can be dealt, then Backes certainly could as well.  The question becomes, what is Boston going to part with to entice a team to take him?

With several teams needing to free up cap room in the coming weeks, it’s not a great time to be trying to move Backes.  Boston has a good core of young players to work with but GM Don Sweeney has been hesitant to move them out.  That’s certainly understandable but if he’s not willing to attach a sizable sweetener, it certainly complicates things.

With Backes now being able to be sent to the minors (his no-move clause converts to a partial no-trade now), it’s possible that Boston just opts to send him down and free up $1.075MM in cap room if they don’t bring someone up to replace him.  If not, about the only way that I could see him moving is if they are open to taking another bad contract in return.  Unless that contract carries a lesser cap hit, I have a hard time thinking a trade will happen.

Mr. Mark: Your way too early prediction of a team who could be better than most are anticipating and your team who won’t be as good as most are anticipating.

I think New Jersey is a team that could turn it around pretty quickly and they haven’t received a lot of attention this summer.  They’re only a year removed from being a playoff team and a healthy Taylor Hall will be huge.  P.K. Subban represents a big upgrade on the back end.  Jack Hughes should make an impact this season and Wayne Simmonds, though on the downside of his career, should still help as well.  Nico Hischier should continue to improve.  Cory Schneider finished up better down the stretch and fared well at the Worlds, a sign that he’s now fully recovered from his hip issues.  Add all of these elements together and you have a team that’s quietly poised to make some noise.

On the flip side of it, I could see this being the year that Pittsburgh starts to slide.  They were vulnerable last season and it’s fair to suggest that they’ve taken a step back this summer in terms of talent.  Their core is getting up there in age and I have concerns about Matt Murray being the type of goalie that can carry a team if need be.  I wouldn’t be shocked if they finished in a top-three spot in the Metropolitan Division (it’s hard to bet against Sidney Crosby) but at the same time, missing the playoffs entirely is something that I could certainly see happening.

jdawglasalle: Who do you believe are the biggest trade candidates that will likely be traded before pre-season starts?

Beyond Namestnikov, Pittsburgh’s Nick Bjugstad stands out as a good trade candidate.  The Penguins need to free up some money and he didn’t have a big impact after being acquired from Florida.  He’s still young enough and only a year removed from a career season.  Although his $4.1MM AAV is on the higher side, I think some team will take a chance on him.

As for an under-the-radar candidate, I’ll pick Buffalo’s Zemgus Girgensons.  The Sabres could stand to free up a bit of room and he basically has had the same year the last four seasons.  A change of scenery could do him some good and I think Sabres could still get a bit of value for him.

Originally, I had T.J. Brodie pegged as a likely candidate but with Juuso Valimaki out long-term, that’s the end of that.  They still need to free up some cap room for a Matthew Tkachuk contract so I’d put the odds of Michael Frolik moving a bit higher now.  He’s a useful player, albeit at a fairly high price tag ($4.3MM) and with his limited usage last season, it’s hard to imagine him invoking his partial no-trade clause if a trade was to present itself.  I don’t know if it’ll get done before the start of the exhibition season but if not by then, probably soon after.

melkor77: What happens to all the RFA’s waiting for Marner to sign when he holds out the remainder of 2019?

First, I don’t see Mitch Marner opting to sit out the entire season.  That would be too much money to leave on the table.  They’d get a one-year deal done before it comes to that.  Having said that, I think it’s very possible he’s unsigned when the puck drops on regular season action (and he won’t be the only one).

It’s a waiting game right now but eventually, someone’s going to blink.  That will probably come close to the start of training camp when one or two sign.  A couple more will go at some point during the preseason.  That will leave probably three-to-five unsigned into the season.  It’s easy to say let’s wait for Marner as he’ll likely top the market in mid-August.  It’s a lot harder to do so once the games are being played.

ThePriceWasRight: I know the talk was that the league would not step in on the Sens ownership situation as long as cheques were not bouncing, but seeing as that it’s quite likely the ACTUAL dollars he is paying significantly is less than the floor, when does the PA step in to say that this could limit future player earnings.

I don’t think the NHLPA would have a leg to stand on here.  It’s not as if Ottawa’s low spending is going to negatively affect the salary cap as that’s based on total league revenues, not actual cap spending.  I think their decision to keep players like Marian Gaborik and Clarke MacArthur around will actually help future player earnings when it comes to the Senators.  Young players that wouldn’t be getting the playing time if they were actually trying to be competitive will get better numbers than they otherwise would have which will yield better second contracts.  (At least it should, in theory.)

Sure, it’s possible that other teams could be motivated by Ottawa’s thriftiness but it’s hard to think they’d be willing to go to quite this extreme.  The PR from doing so is quite negative and while bad press is something that the Senators aren’t too worried about, most owners are.  If others did follow suit, then it’d become something that would come up in CBA discussions a year from now, perhaps by shrinking the gap between the floor and the midpoint.

It’s not a pretty situation in Ottawa at the moment but as long as they spend the minimum that they’re required to, there isn’t much the league or the NHLPA can do about it.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include Kevin Shattenkirk’s deal in Tampa Bay, Samuel Girard’s long-term extension, Colorado’s plans for Mikko Rantanen, predictions for some of the other top restricted free agents, and when Boston may finish their offseason signings.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next week’s edition.

CoachWall: Shattenkirk was “pissed off” about the way it ended in New York. Based on his performance over the past 2 seasons, does he anything left in the tank to help the Bolts?

I really liked Tampa Bay’s pickup of Shattenkirk.  Is he the type of player that can log 22+ minutes a night like the Rangers were hoping (and paying him to do)?  No.  But the Lightning aren’t paying him to be that player, nor do they really need him to fill that big of a role.

Shattenkirk gives them some much-needed right-side depth as the strength of their back end lies on the left, even if Mikhail Sergachev shifts over.  That will probably result in him getting a bit of time in their top four and anytime you can get someone that can do that for $1.75MM, it’s a good contract.

I expect Shattenkirk will see some regular power play time on the second unit as well and with the firepower that Tampa has, he could put up some points.  If he can average 16-18 minutes a night and pick up 20-25 points (expectations that are relatively realistic), he’ll certainly be able to help them.

M34: What has Girard done or shown that got him 7×5?! Is Sakic going to regret it a few years when Mack and Rantanen are on the books for big money and Makar needs a new deal?

I was caught off guard by the price tag when the signing initially came down but I’ve come around to it a little bit having had some more time to think about it.

Is Girard a $5MM defenseman right now?  Not yet.  However, as is often the case with these type of early extensions, GM Joe Sakic is paying for potential and projecting that Girard will be worth more than that down the road where the deal will eventually become a bargain.  I’m inclined to agree with that in this case.

Girard is already a top-four defender.  While his offensive numbers don’t stand out, that should change with Tyson Barrie no longer in the fold.  (Even with Cale Makar joining on a full-time basis, some more offensive minutes should fall Girard’s way.)  Assuming that happens, that would have given him some higher leverage next summer to the point where it would cost a lot more than $5MM to do a long-term deal.

The hope is obviously that Girard will be outperforming that deal as some of their younger core needs new deals down the road and that surplus value would come in handy at that time.  But Sakic will need to spend carefully, that’s for sure.  Speaking of which…

coachdit: Thoughts on Sakic giving Rantanen 12 mil AAV and sticking it to the cap-strapped teams that have stud unsigned RFAs? The Bolts played their hand with Shatty, now they can only afford a bridge deal for Point. I think my idea causes these bridge deals to be too pricy.

Just because Colorado has the cap space to give Rantanen that type of deal doesn’t mean they should or would even want to.  They have their own budget to work within and as a young team with a lot of players currently on cheap entry-level deals, they will need to fit those players in down the road.  Giving Rantanen an extra two or three million just for the sake of it could ultimately come back to bite them.

From a league-wide standpoint, the Avs wouldn’t necessarily benefit from this.  Let’s surmise that this deal ultimately does push up the barometer for everyone else (something I’m not even sure would necessarily be the case as one rogue contract doesn’t always automatically result in a changing of market value).  Teams now have to clear out some players to make room.  Those players certainly aren’t going to Colorado as they won’t want to ‘reward’ Sakic for messing up their plans.  I suppose there’s a small benefit in potentially messing up Winnipeg’s plans with their two RFAs as that’s a division rival but that’s a tough sell to ownership.  Let’s give out an extra $15MM or more (over the life of the contract) to mess up a few teams including one division rival.  That’s not great bang for the buck.

As for Point and Tampa, I’ll hold off on that one until we get to another question later on.

acarneglia: Are the Coyotes a playoff team as is?

I think they are.  Mind you, I said this a year ago as well and look at how that turned out.  There are a few reasons to be optimistic though.

First, they can’t possibly be hit harder by the injury bug than they were last year.  That’s not necessarily the most objective of thoughts but it stands to reason that if fewer core players go down with long-term injuries, they should be able to pick up more wins along the way.

Second, I still think their back end is largely underrated.  I believe they played a big role in Darcy Kuemper having a career year in 2018-19 and even if he takes a step back, Antti Raanta should be able to pick up the slack.

Third, their offense will be improved.  Phil Kessel may not be able to reach the point-per-game mark but he’ll certainly outperform Alex Galchenyuk’s numbers from last season.  A full season from Nick Schmaltz will give them a boost.  The same can be said for Christian Dvorak who should give their bottom six a bit of an improvement as well.  Carl Soderberg should at least be able to replace Richard Panik’s production.

Arizona won’t be at the top of the scoring chart next season but they’ve definitely improved in that regard.  That coupled with their strong defense should net them a few more wins and get them back in a Wild Card spot at the very least.

pawtucket: Tell me the contracts for the following. Maybe what they deserve (in your opinion) and what they will get.

Point
Rantanen
Tkachuk
Marner
Boeser
McAvoy
Connor
Laine

This is something I imagine we’ll dig deeper into as the offseason progresses where we start to get into cap percentages, comparables, etc.  Each player is worth probably its own article so instead of getting into too many specifics (including some notes on what they’re worth at various lengths), I’ll toss out some very quick thoughts on each.  I haven’t looked at any comparables for the purpose of answering this question though so keep that in mind when going through my projections.

Brayden Point – It’s hard to see Tampa going higher than $9.5MM (Nikita Kucherov and Andrei Vasilevskiy’s new deal are worth that) so locking in long-term may not be the best move for him.  The Lightning don’t have the cap space to do it either.  A three-year bridge deal in the $7MM range (the market has really changed since Kucherov was bridged a few years back) would fit in their cap structure and give Point a chance at a better payday later.

Mikko Rantanen – While he’ll probably want to be in that five-year range to get to UFA status early, I could see the Avs upping the ante a little bit to lock him in longer.  If it’s five years, I’d peg him around $9MM but seven years at closer to $10MM per would be my quick guess.

Mitch Marner – I wouldn’t even bother discussing a long-term deal here.  He wants money closer to that of Auston Matthews and Toronto doesn’t want to do that unless it’s for a max term or close to it which is something he doesn’t want to do.  So instead of playing the waiting game on that, move on and focus on a bridge.  Three years has been thrown around and if that happens, I’d put him in the $9MM range (since they’re all RFA seasons).  If I were Marner though, I’d push for a one-year pact instead (even though that’d be closer to $8MM) and get to arbitration eligibility which would up his leverage a bit and give him a chance to go year-to-year if getting to UFA status as soon as possible is a priority.

Brock Boeser – I know he doesn’t have the full track record that some of the others do but I don’t find his $7MM asking price all that outlandish.  With Vancouver believed to have offered six years at $6MM per, they should be able to find some middle ground around $6.5MM.

Charlie McAvoy – Could he be a $7.5MM defender down the road?  Sure.  But I don’t think he is now.  He only has two real seasons under his belt and he missed considerable time in both of them.  I like a two-year deal here with an AAV around the $4.5MM range.  It gets him arbitration eligible on his next contract where he could get that big deal while in the short-term, Boston may be able to get him and Brandon Carlo signed without having to move anyone of note for cap reasons.

Kyle Connor – He has a similar profile as Boeser in my opinion even though he has flown a bit more under the radar.  Accordingly, I think he’s in that six-year range at $6.5MM to $7MM per year.

Patrik Laine – There really aren’t many valid comparables in terms of pure goal scorers which will probably complicate things.  Laine’s struggles this season aside from one high-end month also makes things difficult.  I think Winnipeg would like to get a long-term deal done but if I’m Laine, I’d want a short-term deal unless they’re willing to get into the $9MM+ range.  I can’t see the Jets doing that.

I know that bridge deals for impact players have largely gone the way of the dodo bird but with the escalating salary demands and the increased salary cap pressures, some teams may be forced to go in that direction.

@thegrump13: What do you think Carlo and McAvoy sign for and when?

I covered McAvoy above but let’s look at Brandon Carlo.  He’s an important piece of Boston’s back end but a lack of offensive upside limits his earnings ceiling.  Accordingly, it’d make a lot more sense for him to go short-term and if he improves a bit in that regard, then something like Josh Manson’s deal in Anaheim ($4.1MM for four years) could be doable.  He won’t get that now.  I’d say two years around $3MM per which would squeeze him and McAvoy (on a bridge) into what they can afford.

As for when they sign, I think Carlo will get something done around the start of training camp.  McAvoy’s could take a little longer, especially if his camp is waiting for something to happen with Ivan Provorov or Zach Werenski first.  I wouldn’t be shocked if that one carried early into the season which is something I think we’ll see with several players from the previous question.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Topics in this edition of the mailbag include CBA discussion, Chicago’s veteran defensemen, arbitration walkaway rules, which key RFA will be next to sign, Florida’s offseason spending spree, the Patrick Marleau trade, Jake Allen’s trade value, the slow summer for the Kings, Pat Maroon’s future with St. Louis, and the failed Nazem Kadri to Calgary trade.

This is the back half of our mailbag covering the questions from two weeks ago.  Click here to read the first half.

@K9GY: When RFA & GM are at different salary numbers….the easy way to solve it is….make base salary at lowest dollar figure and the rest performance based…

It’s a bit of a unique idea but it’s not one that is permissible in the CBA.  Article 50.2(C)(2) of the CBA states that the only players that are eligible for performance incentives in a contract are as follows:

(i) Players with Entry Level SPCs under Article 9 of this Agreement;
(ii) Players aged 35 or older as of June 30 prior to the League Year in which the SPC is to be effective, who have signed a one-year SPC for that League Year; and
(iii) Players who are “400-plus game Players” for pension purposes, and who: (i) in the last year of their most recent SPC, spent 100 days or more on the Injured Reserve List; and (ii) have signed a one-year SPC for the current or upcoming League Year.

Restricted free agents don’t fall into any of those categories so the idea of a bonus-laden deal with minimal guarantees isn’t an option here.  It’s also hard to think the NHLPA would sign off to putting something like this in the next agreement either.

skogs14: What’s the likelihood that the Blackhawks find a taker for Keith/Seabrook or Anisimov? What kind of return could you expect?

These players can be put into three separate categories.  Not only could Chicago find a taker for Duncan Keith, they’d also get a good return.  He’s not a true number one option anymore but he can still play top-pairing minutes and at a $5.538MM cap hit, he isn’t really hurting a team cap wise.  That could change over the final four years of his contract but there is still tangible trade value right now (a top-four defender plus another asset at a minimum) if they wanted to deal him.  That said, I don’t think they want to.

As for Brent Seabrook, they’d probably like to get out from under that contract.  He’s more of a number four option at this point and with five years left at $6.875MM per, that’s not a deal any team is going to want to assume.

A week ago when I originally had this question answered, I had Artem Anisimov as being the most likely to be dealt when his $2MM signing bonus was paid.  That wound up happening.  I thought they’d be able to get a mid-round pick or similar prospect as well as a player back.  That didn’t quite happen as they wound up with just Zack Smith (and, perhaps more importantly, $1.3MM in cap space).  It’s an okay deal for them as Smith fits better in the role that Anisimov was likely to fill but they certainly lost the more talented player in the swap.

Greg S: For teams up closes to the cap ceiling, what happens if an RFA with arbitration rights is given more money than the team can spend, or would force a trade to be made in order to have him on the team? Can the team refuse to sign him? Or would you have to sign them, then waive them?

Teams do have an option to walk away from a player if they feel an arbitration award is too high although there are rules on how they’re used.  The threshold for 2019 is $4,397,832; the amount increases annually by the percentage increase to the league minimum salary in the preceding season.  Teams are also limited by the number of arbitration awards to their players.  For teams with one or two awards, they can only walk away from one.  Three or four awards opens up a second walkaway option while a team with five awards (which is extremely rare) has access to three walkaways.

There’s still hope for teams where the award falls under that threshold though.  Teams can go over the salary cap by 10% (though there are special rules for what counts against that cap…I’ll spare you the minutia of that one) so even if an award puts a team over the Upper Limit, they’d still have a couple of months to make a corresponding move as they don’t have to be in cap compliance until right before the regular season gets underway.

pawtucket: Who will be the first high-profile RFA to sign (not named Aho)? Are they all playing the waiting game to see who gets what for leverage?

I figured it was going to be a long game of chicken all summer long and Sebastian Aho signing quickly doesn’t really affect that all that much other than giving teams a bit of a baseline to work with.  The only leverage at this point is to not sign and hope the other side gives in which is another reason why a lot of these deals are going to drag out this summer.

As for who may be the next one to sign, I think it’s going to be a defenseman.  There are enough forwards out there that there are going to be a lot of comparables to work with.  That isn’t the case on the back end as Charlie McAvoy and Zach Werenski are the only top pairing ones that remain unsigned.

So I’ll take Werenski for being the next to sign.  Columbus has plenty of cap space and with so many pricey players leaving, they have the ability to frontload a contract without worrying about how it affects their overall budget.  He’s basically in a class of his own this summer (there is a drop-off between him and McAvoy) so there shouldn’t necessarily be a desire to wait it out to see what others get.  It may still take some time but he’ll get a deal done before the other forwards do.

Mark Black: Are the additions of Bobrovsky, Connolly, and Quenneville and a full uninjured season of Trocheck enough to get the Panthers back in the playoffs? And how much will they regret that Bobrovsky contract next year when they are paying goaltenders 13+ million and still need to re-sign or replace Montembeault, Hoffman, Weegar, and Dadonov?

Let’s add Anton Stralman to that list of additions as well.  I know his contract has been ridiculed for the high price tag but he brings some stability to a back end that hasn’t had a whole lot of it.

I’m confident in calling them a playoff team.  It may just be a Wild Card spot but they should be a pretty safe bet to get in.  Sergei Bobrovsky is worth several wins on his own, even if he plays like he did with Columbus in the regular season last year (below his usual level of performance).  Assuming the team stays healthy, that’s probably enough to get them in right there.

Then there’s the offense which is among the best in the East.  This was a top-ten group despite Vincent Trocheck’s injuries last season and it’s basically the same group coming back.  Even if Mike Hoffman takes a bit of a step back after a career year, the continued development of players like Trocheck, Aleksander Barkov, and Jonathan Huberdeau should help offset that.  They’ll be in good shape.

As for a year from now, I don’t see Samuel Montembeault looking for much of a raise.  To be honest, I don’t think he’s in the NHL next season and that their backup goalie isn’t currently in the organization (they’re poised to jump on the waiver-eligible youngsters if they so desire).  MacKenzie Weegar’s next deal shouldn’t be too pricey either.  Yes, they’ll probably be forced to pick to keep only one of Mike Hoffman or Evgeni Dadonov but to get a franchise goalie, that’s an acceptable price to pay next summer.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include what’s next for New York’s teams, finding a fit for Jake Gardiner, offer sheets, Rasmus Ristolainen’s future in Buffalo, Ryan Dzingel, Nikita Gusev’s trade market, Niklas Kronwall’s future, and the latest on Calgary’s arena situation.  As we’ve done over the past several mailbags, we’ll run another edition next weekend so if your question doesn’t appear here, look for it then.

acarneglia: Do the Rangers trade someone, like Kreider or Shattenkirk, or buy someone out, like Smith or Shattenkirk, to get more cap room to sign their RFAs?

@DAN35NY: Will the Rangers make more moves and what do you see who can be moved?

If extension talks with Chris Kreider go nowhere, then he’d become a logical trade candidate.  While some may want to wait until closer to the deadline to deal an impact rental player, I still like the idea of moving him now.  They’d get a sizable return and alleviate some salary cap concerns.  Of course, an extension is still preferable but a Kreider trade isn’t a bad Plan B.

Other trade candidates would be winger Vladislav Namestnikov and center Ryan Strome.  Namestnikov ($4MM) hasn’t produced like he did with Tampa Bay and with their young incoming wingers in Kaapo Kakko and Vitali Kravtsov, the odds of him getting more of a chance to produce.  They’d be selling low but his value may only go lower if his role is lessened when the season starts.  Strome ($3.1MM) was decent last season but if they want more playing time for their young centers, he could be expendable.  However, given what his trade value was last season, they shouldn’t be expecting too much in return.

I think they’d like to go this route over a buyout to save the salary cap implications down the road.  If they do have to that way though, it’s basically a coin flip.  Buying out Brendan Smith is the lesser of two evils (particularly from a PR perspective) but he can go to the minors after clearing waivers whereas Kevin Shattenkirk (NMC) can’t.  If GM Jeff Gorton covets greater in-season flexibility, then maybe it’s Shattenkirk who goes knowing that Smith can go to Hartford to free up a spot later on if needed.  That’s a last-ditch resort though.  Pavel Buchnevich’s arbitration hearing is near the end of the month so they still have a couple of weeks to work with.

Pawtucket: Where does Gardiner best fit?

In terms of pure fit (money aside), Montreal and Winnipeg stand out as good options.  The Canadiens lack a legitimate top-four option on their left side, especially one that provides a punch offensively.  Winnipeg’s left side features Josh Morrissey and not a whole lot else.

However, neither of those teams realistically have the type of money that Gardiner is believed to still be seeking.  To be honest, not a lot of teams do which is part of the reason that he’s still sitting out there nearly two weeks into free agency.

In terms of teams that have a vacancy and cap space, the Kings stand out as their left-side depth is shaky but they’re not really in a position to be adding veteran help at the moment as they’re in a soft rebuild.  The Devils don’t really have an opening this season on their left side but with Andy Greene and Sami Vatanen a year away from UFA status, Gardiner would represent a nice hedge against them leaving town.  I thought if the Flyers were to trade Shayne Gostisbehere that Gardiner would make some sense as a replacement but it doesn’t appear as if they’re moving their young defender which takes them out of the equation.

At this point, Gardiner may want to consider a one-year pillow contract in the hopes that staying healthy will alleviate some concerns about his back.  That would also expand his market a bit more.  But right now, there really isn’t a great fit for him.  I like Winnipeg the most here but they’d need to clear out another contract first (or sign Kyle Connor and Patrik Laine to cheaper than expected deals).  This has already dragged out longer than expected and it may take a while yet for something to get done.

nk: If the Isles do not offer sheet Marner or Laine, what move(s) do you expect them to make this summer?

@billagave: What is next move for NYI?

I don’t expect a big offer sheet coming from them.  To be honest, I think they’re pretty much finished beyond re-signing their RFAs, headlined by Anthony Beauvillier.  That will leave them with a fair bit of in-season flexibility, even if they opt to give Beauvillier a longer-term deal.

If they do want to tweak a bit more, I believe they’ll look at upgrading their center depth.  Someone like Derick Brassard makes some sense on a short-term deal.  There’s a middle-six role available for him and it would be a pretty low-risk proposition overall.  Brian Boyle anchoring the fourth line would make some sense as well and GM Lou Lamoriello has already traded for him once before.

Depending on how the UFA market shakes out on the back end, there could be an opportunity to cash in on some of their surplus defensive depth.  That market is certainly developing slower than expected though so anything like that may come later in the summer or even closer to training camp.

thefenwayfaithful: Why aren’t we seeing more offer sheets this year? I understand everyone wants to “play nice” but with so many teams up against the cap and unlikely to match, it’s bizarre that no one but Montreal has tried to take advantage. If you have the opportunity to put out an offer sheet on a guy you want, the worst case scenario is you’re forcing a team to tie up cap space giving you a deadline advantage when they run into more cap challenges. Slims down the competition. Maybe I’m too cutthroat…

Offer sheets rarely actually yield the player a team is coveting so for some teams, they just decide that there isn’t much point to trying.  You can decide for yourself how much credence you lend to the notion that there is an agreement between some GMs to not engage in those either.

I think part of the challenge this year is figuring out a threshold where a team is comfortable paying the picks and getting the player at that price.  Look at what Montreal did.  The offer sheet for Sebastian Aho was clearly crafted to minimize the compensation as it was clear that they didn’t want to go into that next tier.  They were largely ridiculed for that despite it being the third-largest offer sheet in league history and the highest ever in terms of AAV.  If someone wasn’t willing to go higher for Aho (if they were, he’d have signed with that team instead of the Canadiens), how many are going to jump into that next tier for any of the remaining free agents?

On top of that, how many can afford to?  The list of teams with cap space at or greater than $10MM is pretty small when you factor in players that still need to be re-signed.  Not all of them have the draft pick capital to present a substantial offer sheet either.  The stars just don’t seem to align here.  If there’s going to be another offer sheet, I think it’s going to be at the lower tier (someone like Brendan Lemieux of the Rangers or Marcus Pettersson of the Penguins, players on cap-strapped teams that won’t command expensive deals in terms of draft pick compensation), not a top-end player.

sabres3277: The Sabres: Is it still possible that Ristolainen could be traded for a forward? I like the moves so far but I think they need to add some grit up front or acquiring a player in a trade. What do you think?

While their offseason additions (Colin Miller and Henri Jokiharju) make it more of a possibility that Ristolainen could be on the move, I still wouldn’t classify it as a likely outcome.  For starters, Jokiharju is waiver-exempt and could start in the minors next year.  Miller and Brandon Montour (their other longer-term right-shot option) still have some upside but neither have really been asked to play top minutes so far.  While Ristolainen may be better suited for the second pairing, trading him for a forward takes away a significant security blanket.

It’s believed that they were asking prospective coaches during their interview stage how they’d get Ristolainen back at the top of his game.  I know there are reports saying he’s available but I think it’s more of a case of they’re listening to offers and not actively trying to deal him.

You had initially mentioned Micheal Ferland as part of your question but as we now know, he’s off to Vancouver.  He’d have made some sense as a physical player that can score with the latter element being the more important.  Of the pickups that the Sabres have made, it’s still fair to question whether or not they’ll be able to score enough.  If they can find a way to free up enough room to sign another free agent (they still have a few restricted free agents to re-sign that will eat up most of their cap room), adding scoring depth would be my priority over grit.

M34: What’s with the hate for Ryan Dzingel? The biggest knock on the guy is that his production dipped when his ice time and exposure to top line guys went down. Seems that would be the case for anyone, doesn’t it? One could make the case that even the leagues’ biggest stars would suffer a decline in production if they were relegated to third line minutes with third line talents around them.

What I’m getting at is, as an Avs fan, Sakic’s moves tell me that he thinks Burakovsky and Donskoi are ready to step up productivity with larger roles; why not go get Dzingel who has already proven he can do that? Doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

Dzingel’s track record of success isn’t the deepest so I’m not sure how proven he really was in the eyes of general managers.  He basically has two seasons of above-average production under his belt and in one of those, he wound up being a healthy scratch at one point in the playoffs.  It’s safe to infer that those struggles played a role in his market being pretty soft.

Just because he produced like a top line player with the Senators doesn’t mean that he is one.  Someone had to play big minutes for them and he got the opportunity (and, to his credit, made the most of it).  However, that role wasn’t available in Colorado or elsewhere.  In terms of having success in a secondary role, there are arguably as many question marks as there are with Andre Burakovsky and Joonas Donskoi.  His output in that situation is still somewhat spotty.

Personally, I’d have signed Dzingel over trading two pretty good draft picks for Burakovsky, even if Dzingel’s $3.375MM AAV with Carolina winds up being a bit higher than what Burakovsky ultimately gets.  He wouldn’t have been a bad fit in Colorado to give them some extra depth but I suspect their focus is to get Mikko Rantanen and some of their other RFAs under contract first to see how much budget room they ultimately have before pursuing other free agents.

Read more

Free agent frenzy has come and gone, though several interesting names remain available. The market is being held up by a huge crop of outstanding restricted free agents,  ready to demand expensive contracts that will eat up cap dollars and limit other opportunities to spend. The dog days of summer are almost here, and hockey fans are starting to put away their favorite sweater only to find out their local baseball team is already 90 games into the MLB season.

Still, there are minor signings happening daily and trade rumors still bubbling up now and again. The most hardcore fan may be dissecting the cap to find out just how much their team can offer Jake Gardiner and Micheal Ferland (update: apparently the answer is $14MM), while also figuring out a young player to target with their leftover draft capital. There are still teams that will improve over the coming weeks and set themselves up for a run at the Stanley Cup in 2020.

With that in mind, it’s time to run another edition of our mailbag. You can submit your query by using #PHRMailbag on Twitter or by leaving a comment down below. Make sure you get your questions in early and we’ll try to get through as many as possible when the mailbag runs this weekend.

If you missed our last edition, it was split into two parts that you can read here and here. The first tackled issues like Jacob Trouba’s next contract and predicted trades for both Phil Kessel and Cody Ceci, which each happened within just a few days. The second took a look at the free agent market and examined how the New York Rangers could be a good fit for Artemi Panarin.