PHR Mailbag

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag including a prediction for a breakout player, potential teams to make and miss the playoffs, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our last two mailbag columns.

Spaced-Cowboy: Who do you expect to be the top 6 forward group for the Leafs come opening night or perhaps the deadline?

Let’s get the easy ones out of the way first.  The top two centers will continue to be Auston Matthews and John Tavares.  On the wing, William Nylander and Matthew Knies, fresh off a new deal this summer, are sure bets to play similar roles as they did last season.

But then it starts to get interesting.  I’d pencil in Matias Maccelli for one of the remaining winger spots.  It’s not that Toronto paid a high price to get him that warrants a look in a key role, nor does his performance from last season which left a lot to be desired.  But he’s a pure playmaker and with Mitch Marner departing, Maccelli could plausibly slide into that same role alongside Matthews and Knies to try to keep the same general line structure intact.  He showed enough skill in Arizona to make me think that he can have some success in that role.

The other winger might be Max Domi, more by process of elimination.  I expect head coach Craig Berube to put a third line together that will have some size and defensive acumen with a trio of newcomers Dakota Joshua and Nicolas Roy with possibly Bobby McMann on the other wing.  Domi doesn’t fit on that line, nor is he a great fit on the fourth line either.  At this point, Toronto’s preference is probably to keep him on the wing anyway so his spot on the second line feels like a mixture of fit and convenience.  Easton Cowan could play his way into the mix but starting with the AHL Marlies feels like the likeliest outcome.

Forecasting the trade deadline is a little difficult as like many, I don’t think Toronto is done yet this summer.  We know they want to move out David Kampf and Calle Jarnkrok and doing so would greatly change their salary cap forecast, unless that money is going to Jack Roslovic who has been linked to them for a while now (but might not supplant Domi in that top-six spot anyway).  If they wind up opening up more room before the season and hold it heading into the deadline, they could afford a top-end acquisition while if they can only move one and spend those savings plus more on Roslovic, they could be shopping in more of the secondary market.  How they operate these next few weeks could materially impact their plans in March.

sluggersdad: What is Ottawa’s next move in upgrading their roster? Thanks…

This is a hard one to project.  They have nearly $4.3MM in cap space per PuckPedia which has them in a good spot in theory to add before the season starts.  However, we also know that they are a ‘cash over cap’ team as owner Michael Andlauer alluded to back in June.  Why that matters is that because of that status, GM Steve Staios acknowledged that he wasn’t going to have the green light to spend to the cap ceiling this summer.  So, while they have close to $4.3MM in cap room, how much budget room do they have left?

There’s also the matter of bonuses, of which they have $3.75MM between Claude Giroux and Lars Eller.  Some of them are pretty easy to reach based on games played while others will require some playoff success as well.  But for a cash over cap franchise, any achieved bonuses become payable when reached.  Honestly, I’m not sure they have much, if any, wiggle room in the budget right now to upgrade their roster.

I’d like to give you a specific answer here but in the short term, I don’t think they’re going to do anything.  I could see them sniffing around the PTO market a little bit, especially on the back end if it looks like Nick Jensen is indeed going to miss some time to start the season even though he’s ahead of schedule in his recovery and maybe there’s a minimum-salary contract that comes out of that.  But beyond that, their next move might be at the trade deadline when they have a better sense of their revenue situation that will dictate if they can actually go ahead and add to their player cost budget.  At that point, it would be assess the team’s biggest need and go from there.

NhaTrang: Training camp looms soon, so it’s time for me to come out with my annual “Tage Thompson” question for Brian: who is the guy who comes out of absolutely nowhere to be a significant impact player this season?

Unfortunately, my track record continues to go in the wrong direction.  Thompson was a great pick the first time.  Taylor Raddysh had 20 goals the year I picked him but wasn’t a big breakout player.  I was a year early on Morgan Geekie as it turns out; I picked him in his 39-point year, not his 33-goal effort last season.  And last year’s was arguably the worst one as Kirby Dach battled injuries, as did his projected linemate in Patrik Laine.  The end result was 22 points in 57 games so that one’s a whiff.

For 2022-23, I put in a self-imposed criterion that a player couldn’t be in the top 300 in scoring.  Otherwise, that player wouldn’t exactly be coming out of nowhere.  Given my recent track record, it’s tempting to change it but I’ll continue to stick with it for this year.

I had my best pick with Buffalo so it’s time to go back to that well with winger Zach Benson.  Yes, his sophomore year wasn’t really any better on paper than his rookie campaign but 28 points in 75 games is still respectable for someone who still could have been playing at the major junior level.  And the underlying numbers were pretty solid.  Benson should have a top-six role this season (possibly even playing with Thompson) and I expect him to have a breakout effort.  If all goes well, doubling last year’s point total could be doable and that would be a nice rebound after last year’s pick.

Breakaway: 4-in and 4-out.

Name one team from each division that made the playoffs last year that will not make the playoffs this year. And what four teams replace them?

Atlantic: I would say Toronto and Tampa Bay remain safe bets to get back in.  Florida should be unless Matthew Tkachuk’s absence proves to be a big problem and they start out how they played down the stretch last season before flipping the script in the playoffs.  Ottawa is more or less the same and on the way up so I’m pretty comfortable penciling them in as well.  By process of elimination, that would mean my pick would be Montreal.  They had some good luck on the injury front last year and their underlying numbers weren’t great.  I could see a scenario where they actually play a bit better this season but instead of just making the playoffs, they just miss them.

The challenge is that I have to pick one of the other three to replace them, something I’m not overly confident in.  I expect Boston’s lack of offense to be their downfall and as much as I think Buffalo is capable of improving, their annual self-destruction makes it hard to actually predict that happening.  So I guess it’s Detroit by default with John Gibson giving their goaltending enough of a boost.  But really, this side of the bracket could largely remain the same next season.

Metropolitan: Carolina is always a top regular season team and they’ve improved so they’re in.  New Jersey slipped down the stretch due to injuries but I still think they’re on the way up so I’d have them in.  On the one hand, Washington won the division last year and didn’t change their roster up much but on the other hand, many felt they were a bubble team at best heading into last season.  Did they overachieve?  I guess since I have to pick one to fall out of the race, it’s them.

On the other end, I don’t expect Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, or the Islanders to be real threats.  Columbus is on the way up but as I noted in a recent mailbag, I don’t trust their goaltending to be good enough to get them in there.  That leaves the Rangers.  Things have to be better for them this season, doesn’t it?  Odds being odds, some of their underachievers will turn things around which might be enough to get them back in.

Central: I see no reason to take Dallas or Colorado out.  Winnipeg may very well drop a bit but as long as Connor Hellebuyck remains one of the top netminders, they should be fine.  That leaves St. Louis and Minnesota.  I could make a case for either one making or missing but I’ll go with the Blues continuing their strong play under Jim Montgomery and getting a Wild Card spot and the Wild missing.  For all the cap space they had this summer, they didn’t get a whole lot better unless Vladimir Tarasenko has a resurgence.  A full season from Kirill Kaprizov would help but given Jesper Wallstedt’s struggles in the AHL last year, their goaltending is more of a question mark than they probably hoped.

As for who gets in, Chicago is a safe no.  I think Nashville will be better than last year and they have the veteran talent to surprise and get back in.  But I’ll go with Utah, a team that’s slowly getting better and just added a top-six talent in JJ Peterka.  That, coupled with continued improvement from their young core, means that this could be the year for them to get back in.

Pacific: There’s no reason to think Edmonton and Vegas won’t get back in.  I have no reason to think the Kings won’t get back in either but since I have to pick one who made it to miss, I guess it’s them as the third-place team.

San Jose isn’t ready to push for a playoff spot yet.  Anaheim is better and a bit of a Wild Card but I think they’re still on the outside for one more year.  Seattle can’t stop treading water with a core group that’s not good enough so they’re probably in the same boat as a year ago.  That leaves Calgary and Vancouver.  I feel Dustin Wolf made the Flames more competitive than they actually were so them taking a step back wouldn’t surprise me.  That would mean Vancouver, a team that struggled mightily last year, finds a way to turn it around.  Having said that, five Central teams and three Pacific teams might be what happens again.

SirCobblestone: How do you think teams with low cap hits (San Jose, Chicago) will navigate the ELC of players worthy of staying in the show while respecting the cap floor? (23 roster player limit also.)

This cap part of this question shouldn’t be overly difficult this season.  All 32 teams are already above the $70.6MM floor and once Anaheim eventually signs Mason McTavish, every team should be $5MM clear of that floor.  Eventually, once they start selling, they’ll open up some space but there will surely be salary retention on some players while if they wait until closer to the trade deadline to make those moves, they should be able to comfortably stay above the floor.  Any achieved bonuses from their entry-level players would also count on the books this season, also helping them stay above that minimum spending amount.

As to the roster element, most of the lower-spending teams have veteran fillers on their roster that aren’t really part of their plans.  They’re placeholders, if you will, until those entry-level prospects show they’re ready.  And when they’re ready, they’ll get the spot and the veteran will either be traded or waived and demoted to the minors.

I’ll use a San Jose example since you brought them up.  Let’s say Sam Dickinson shows in training camp that he’s ready for NHL duty, or at least a look with the Sharks to start.  Yes, they already have eight blueliners on their roster but someone like Vincent Desharnais is clearly not part of their long-term plans.  He was acquired as a low-cost roster filler before they knew they’d be adding three veteran blueliners over the summer.  If they have to trade or waive him to open up a spot for Dickinson, they’re not going to think twice about it, they’ll just do it.  And if it’s the latter with him passing through unclaimed, the net savings to San Jose would only be just over $200K, barely enough to make a difference from a cap perspective while a player in and a player out keeps them in compliance with the roster limit.

I think you might be ahead of the game with this question.  A few years from now when the cap is much higher and more teams are operating with an internal budget that’s closer to the floor than the ceiling, I could see this question being asked as those teams might not have pricey placeholder veterans anymore but rather lower-cost ones.  Perhaps at that point, this could be an issue but for the upcoming season, teams should be able to navigate through this just fine.

Photo courtesy of Timothy T. Ludwig-Imagn Images.

The Robertson brothers get plenty of attention in this edition of the PHR Mailbag.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s column while we have one more to run from our latest call for questions.

bottlesup: As a Stars fan, I would prefer to keep Robertson under any circumstance; if things took a turn for the worst, though, what do you think a theoretical trade package would look like in return?

I know Jason Robertson’s name was out there in trade speculation but that felt more like a speculative way to fix a cap problem that only would have been created had they made a big splash in free agency.  And given that there were very few core players who made it to the open market, I think the idea of trading him was more hypothetical than realistic.  That is, for now at least.

If we look ahead a year, Dallas is still going to be tight to the cap ceiling.  Yes, nearly $28MM in cap space per PuckPedia for 2026-27 sounds great but with Robertson and potentially Thomas Harley heading for double-digit AAV contracts, things are going to get pretty tight pretty quickly.  But that’s a ‘problem’ they can kick down the road to next summer when he’ll be a restricted free agent so I wouldn’t be worried about a trade just yet.

Now, as to your hypothetical, that could go a few different ways.  If they want a top-line forward back that just makes a bit less money, it could be close to a one-for-one swap.  I think that would be their Plan A.  Plan B would be a second-line winger making around half of Robertson’s projected cost (so the player would be in the $5MM to $6MM range), a top prospect who is nearly NHL ready (think someone around Mavrik Bourque’s readiness as of a year ago), and some help on the right side of the defense that would take up most of the rest of the savings.  Basically, fill two important roster spots for the price of one with near-term help coming from the prospect as well.  There’s always a futures-based return but they’d have to have something in place to replace Robertson before they could do that.

Having said all that, I think they find a way to keep Robertson in the fold long-term unless things don’t go as planned this coming season and GM Jim Nill decides a roster shakeup is needed.

bigalval: What are the chances that the Kings could bring Jason Robertson back home? I know they have interest in him and Dallas is near the cap. What would it take to get him?

Let’s address the cap stuff first.  There is a relatively easy way for Dallas to open up the year with a bit of flexibility on the cap and that’s with not carrying a full roster.  If they carry just 22 skaters, they should easily start with a little over $1MM in flexibility, barring any injuries in training camp.  They can shuttle Lian Bichsel down on off days with paper transactions (they’re still legal this season before the restrictions come for 2026-27) as well so I don’t think they’re in a spot where they have to move money right now.

As for the Kings, they’ve burned up most of their cap space this summer from GM Ken Holland’s spending frenzy in free agency where he brought in a bunch of extra depth.  Per PuckPedia, they have less than $3MM in cap room while Robertson makes $7.75MM.  They’d have to send out a good chunk of money to make a move.  That makes adding him without taking away a core piece extremely difficult.

If we look at the scenarios above, I think we can rule out a futures-based return simply because Dallas probably can’t acquire a Robertson-level replacement elsewhere at this time of the offseason.  But let’s see if there’s a fit in the other two scenarios.

First, the player-for-player type of swap.  Kevin Fiala makes slightly more than Robertson this season but he has three more years left on his contract which would be appealing to Dallas.  But there’s a notable drop-off in production between the two so Dallas would want more.  The hope is that Quinton Byfield is on the way up development-wise but one-for-one, he’s not going to cut it for the Stars either.  Up front, there isn’t anyone else worth even considering in a one-for-one swap; Adrian Kempe had more points than either of them but as a pending UFA, he could be commanding something not far off what Robertson could get next summer in restricted free agency.  Unless Los Angeles adds something substantial to either Fiala or Byfield, it’s probably not a great fit.

The problem is that their Plan B scenario that I mentioned earlier is an even lesser fit.  Players like Trevor Moore or Alex Laferriere are the players making around half of what Robertson is now and they barely hit 40 points last year.  That’s too steep a drop-off.  In terms of a prospect who’s near-ready, there’s not a lot that fit the bill.  Brandt Clarke is a little past that but he might be the closest that would be palatable.  And as for proven RD help (not just prospect RD help like Clarke), they just lost Cody Ceci so they’re probably not trading back for him and Drew Doughty isn’t going anywhere.  Basically, if I were Nill, I’d ask for Clarke as the add-on in a Fiala or Byfield swap and keep it simple.  And that’s a steep price for the Kings to pay.  Robertson would certainly help Los Angeles but I think there are some other teams whose rosters might better align with what Dallas might be looking for if they do move him.

Spaced-Cowboy: I’m more curious about a different Robertson but my Leafs bias is showing.

Let’s give the other Robertson some attention now.  Nicholas Robertson recently signed a one-year deal worth $1.825MM to avoid salary arbitration.  But it doesn’t do a whole lot to avoid any of the speculation surrounding his future with Toronto.  He still doesn’t really fit the roster, especially the direction that GM Brad Treliving appears to be taking it.

On the other hand, trading him would have been easier a year ago than it is now.  Last season, he made $875K, barely above the league minimum and an amount that could be buried in the minors if things didn’t go well and he cleared waivers.  But $1.825MM isn’t as easy to get off the books.  Fewer teams have that type of flexibility to absorb the deal in full while if they’re making a swap of young players in need of a change of scenery, expectations will be higher since the other team is parting with someone of at least some value.  Robertson only has 56 points in his NHL career thus far and while he has shown a quality shot, he doesn’t do enough to play in the top six and the rest of his game makes him an iffier fit in the bottom six.  How many teams out there have a top-six spot for him where he could potentially thrive?  Do any of them?

With that in mind, while the fit isn’t great and Robertson probably wouldn’t mind being moved, I don’t see anything changing for him in the future.  For better or worse, he’s probably staying on Toronto’s roster and hoping to get some top-nine minutes.  In that scenario, I expect this season will be a lot like the last two and we’ll be speculating about the potential of trade again before too long.

VonBrewski: Don Sweeney is selling a “Bridge Year”??? More like a flaming bag of dog crap….Will they be a top-10 pick? I think yes.

Is he really selling a bridge year?  I think his public statements are more along the lines of intending to be a playoff team while a bridge year would be one where they actually took a step back and looked toward the future.  Basically, something like they did at the deadline last season but over a full year this time around.

Frankly, I think a bridge year would have made more sense for them over what they did this summer.  In a vacuum, most of the contracts they signed made sense beyond Tanner Jeannot but they put a lot of time, effort, and money into making their team tougher to play against when that wasn’t the reason that they missed the playoffs last season.  They missed the playoffs last year because of their struggles to score offensively, coupled with a subpar showing from Jeremy Swayman.  Viktor Arvidsson could help with the offence but adding more fourth-line depth in Sean Kuraly and Michael Eyssimont over more scoring help felt like patching a weakness that wasn’t really there.

I do think they will have a top-ten pick although it will be closer to tenth than first.  Getting Hampus Lindholm back and having a full season from Charlie McAvoy will help and I expect Jeremy Swayman to bounce back.  That will raise the floor of this group above the other bottom feeders.  But it’s hard to see the Bruins scoring enough to win consistently.  They’ll get some 3-2 victories along the way, sure, but teams near the bottom of the league in goals generally don’t make the playoffs and I suspect they’re going to be near the bottom of the league in that regard.

Gmm8811: Now that the Hockey Canada trial is over…how long do you think Bettman will make the players wait to be reinstated? I’d like to see them allowed back now. They’ve paid a fair penalty already for being found not guilty. Do any of their former teams still hold their rights?

There was actually a notable event earlier this week on that front with TSN’s Rick Westhead reporting that the not guilty verdict for the players wouldn’t be appealed.  Theoretically, had there been an appeal, that could have been enough for the league to say they were still ineligible pending the outcome of that appeal.  But that won’t happen now.

Having said that, I don’t think Gary Bettman has much appetite to reinstate those players anytime soon.  The statement released by the league indicates that they have concerns over the conduct of those players.  To quickly turn around and clear them to play after that statement would be surprising.

While these aren’t direct comparisons, I think back to how things were handled with Joel Quenneville and Stan Bowman.  Some time elapsed and then as a team wanted to at least seriously consider hiring them, the reinstatement process was handled very quietly behind the scenes.  When he was still with Montreal, Logan Mailloux went through a similar process where he was ineligible to play and then when he was entering a season where it looked like he could be a recall candidate, he went through the approval process and all of that was done without an announcement.  I’m sure their preference is to follow a similar process here, let some time pass by and then consider reinstatement if and when a team indicates to the league that they’d like to consider signing one of them.  I’m not sure the NHLPA will let that much time go by but I don’t expect Bettman and the NHL to willingly reinstate the five players quickly.

As for the rights question, all five players were non-tendered by their now former organizations at the expiration of their contracts, making them unrestricted free agents.  They’ll remain UFAs until they’re reinstated which I don’t expect will be anytime soon.

Photo courtesy of John E. Sokolowski-Imagn Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include a look at salary cap spending, several goaltending questions, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in one of our next two columns.

BlackAce57: I don’t know if it’s something that’s been happening for a while or a growing trend, but are more Canadian junior players going to US colleges when they turn 18 now that NIL is a factor? Do you think this will keep increasing?

This isn’t something that has been going on for very long now.  It’s actually the first year where CHL players are no longer viewed as professionals by the NCAA, thereby making players from those leagues eligible to go to college.  NIL money aside, simply changing the eligibility to allow major junior players to go play Division I hockey was going to create a big group of people wanting to make the change.  The ability to potentially be paid much more than what the CHL-allowable stipend is (between $50 and $150 in Canadian dollars per week) only intensified that interest.

I don’t expect this to be something that keeps increasing to any sort of significant degree.  In reality, there are only so many spots available each year as there are only so many Division I teams and there will still be USHL and USHS players vying for some of those.  That means there has to be some sort of a limit on the movement in the grand scheme of things.

Having said that, I suspect we will see even more turnover in the NCAA than we’ve seen in recent years since the transfer portal came into play.  There will still be activity there while more players than we normally see will graduate to the pros after a year or two of eligibility.  Then, there will be efforts to try to get that top recruit which could result in some players getting cut.

I think what we’ve seen this year is the start but there shouldn’t be a huge jump next year.  I expect we’ll see an incremental jump in transfer activity over the next couple of years, a good chunk of which will probably come from the CHL before the volume of annual movement starts to settle.  In the meantime, it will be interesting to see if the CHL is able to do anything to retain some of its top talent or if it will settle in as a league that skews a little younger age-wise compared to what it has been in the past.

yeasties: With the cap going up so much and many teams apparently choosing to maintain a working reserve this year, do you think GMs will maintain this discipline over the long term, or will teams eventually spend up to the cap again?

I’m not sure how much of the underspent cap is something that came from a choice or rather just from a lack of options.  This wasn’t a great UFA class and it’s that market that has a tendency to drive prices upward.  Not every team has had to contend with it yet either.  If you had a team with a lot of core players on long-term deals already, the bulk of the heavy lifting cap-wise is already done, making it easier to have that cushion.  We’re only a few months into this higher Upper Limit projection so a lot can and will change.

It’ll be interesting to see how many teams are able to keep those reserves.  Per PuckPedia, there are 13 teams with $2.1MM or less of cap space already.  For teams near the higher end of that, even one injury can derail a lot of those plans and odds being odds, there will be injuries.  The ones with a million or two more (of which there are four) should have more wiggle room on the injury front while the rest should have ample cap room no matter what.  That is a little abnormal compared to what we’ve seen.

I do think it’s a sign of things to come, however.  The reality is that not every team is going to be willing to spend to the max as that’s a pretty significant year-over-year increase in player costs.  Ideally, profits should be going up as well to offset that but some teams are much more profitable than others; not all will increase revenues at a rate that matches or exceeds the increase in costs.  I can see a scenario a few years from now where we’re talking about budget room more often as fewer teams aim to spend to the ceiling and instead will work within a budget with potentially room to spend if they find themselves in contention.

I’m also curious to see what the impact of significantly restricting double-retention trades in the new CBA will be.  As a refresher, right now, teams can trade a player with retention with that player getting immediately rerouted with further retention to another team.  That type of trade has become quite common leading up to the trade deadline in recent years.  But this season will be the last of those as starting in 2026-27, there will be a 75-day in-season requirement before a player whose contract has already been retained on once can be moved with retention again.

Knowing that the double-retention option is going to largely be off the table, teams will need to have considerably more cap space banked by the trade deadline.  I expect that some squads will place a higher target on their cap room to start the season to account for that, meaning fewer will spend so tight to the cap.  So, I don’t think this is an outlier but rather the beginning of a new shift in spending policy, one that will take a few years to really establish itself.

PyramidHeadcrab: Now that rosters have settled a bit, who has the…

– Worst goaltending roster?
– Best goaltending roster?
– Best goaltending prospects?
– Goaltender most likely to find an extra gear in 25-26?

1) I’m going to go with Columbus, especially as a team that feels it has playoff aspirations.  Elvis Merzlikins has shown that he’s not a capable starter and hasn’t been for several years now.  While they re-signed Ivan Provorov and Dante Fabbro, they haven’t actually improved the back end which could have been a way to improve the goaltending.  Meanwhile, Jet Greaves had quite the finish to last season but before that, he had merely been okay in limited action while his AHL numbers are decent but not necessarily dominant.  Is he the solution?  I’m not certain about that yet and if you have questions about both goalies heading into the season, that’s not ideal.  There are teams with similarly iffy goaltending (especially in that division) but playoff hopes breaks the tie here.

2) This might be a surprise on paper but I’m going to go with Toronto.  Anthony Stolarz showed that his 2023-24 breakout wasn’t a fluke and he was quite impactful when healthy.  Joseph Woll wasn’t quite as impactful but was above average as well.  Both were in the top 11 league-wide in Goals Saved Above Expected, per MoneyPuck.  The fact that they’re among the lowest-spending teams at the position makes things more impressive.  There are teams with a better starter but also a much weaker backup.  An injury to the top dog would be a huge issue but for the Maple Leafs, going to Woll as a near-term starter wouldn’t be a massive drop-off.  Add to that a roster that looks more inclined to play a defensive game and it bodes well for them for the upcoming season.

3) For the single-best goalie prospect, I’ve seen no reason not to pick Yaroslav Askarov.  He has been highly touted for quite some time now and while he’s in for a rough year in San Jose this season, I think he can still be a franchise netminder.  But you said prospects, as in plural.  The Sharks would still be up there with Joshua Ravensbergen getting added in the draft but I might lean ever so slightly to the Red Wings who are headlined by Trey Augustine and Sebastian Cossa.  Cossa is coming along well in the minors while Augustine has been a strong NCAA goalie with a solid showing internationally as well.  Michal Pradel was one of the better goalies in this draft class and he’s in the mix too.  Goaltending has been an issue for Detroit for a while but the future looks bright there.

4) I’m going to pick Spencer Knight in Chicago.  This is his first season as being an undisputed number one goalie and he’s still relatively unproven with fewer than 100 appearances in the NHL.  It’s also a contract year in which he’ll be looking to cement the notion that he is their starter of the future.  I don’t think the Blackhawks will be particularly good this year but I expect Knight to steal some games and make the team a lot more competitive night in and night out than they have been the last couple of years.  I think that will qualify as finding that extra gear.

VonBrewski: Again with Boston….no direction by MGT.

They have the draft capital to go and get a McTavish or Rossi. They might need to move some salary (hello, Korpisalo) to get it done.

I think you’re making an incorrect assumption on this one.  Boston’s draft capital is better than what it was but assuming you don’t want them moving their own first-round picks, having an extra Toronto and Florida first-rounder isn’t good enough to be the foundation of an offer for either player, at least one that Anaheim or Minnesota might be inclined to take.  And with $2MM in cap space per PuckPedia, it would take much more than clearing Joonas Korpisalo’s $3MM to afford the players on the deals they’re looking for.  They’re not willingly signing long-term deals around the $5MM mark.

Let’s look at each situation a little closer.  Despite plenty of speculation, there remains no credible reporting that Anaheim has the slightest bit of interest in moving Mason McTavish or that McTavish is looking to be traded.  The absence of a contract isn’t evidence of that but rather the reality that an offer sheet isn’t coming and with no arbitration rights, it becomes a staring contest.  We see it every year with several players and they all wind up re-signing.  The Ducks have been active this summer in terms of trying to upgrade their roster with the hopes of making the playoffs.  They also have one of the deepest prospect pools in the NHL.  Accordingly, moving McTavish for a futures-based return doesn’t make much sense on either front.  If he’s moving, they’re getting a young core player back; they have no reason to accept less.

As for Marco Rossi, it has been reported that the Wild already declined a trade package that included a late-lottery first-round pick and that was before the few decent free agent center options had all re-signed or signed elsewhere.  So, why would they go that route now with a package that’s probably going to have a lesser pick going the other way?  (Again, assuming that you’re not suggesting the Bruins move their own first-round selections.)  Minnesota has been consistent in feeling that if they were to move Rossi, they’d want an impact center coming the other way if they couldn’t land one in free agency.  I don’t see a Boston middleman that fits.  Elias Lindholm’s contract isn’t great, Pavel Zacha only has two years left, and the rest are either unproven or are more bottom-six pieces.  For what they’re believed to be looking for in a possible trade for Rossi, I don’t think the Bruins are a match.  Ultimately, it’s going to be a staring contest between Rossi and the Wild for a little while longer before Minnesota probably gets its way with a bridge deal.

Dale M: How many August 15th expiring rights were either signed, or set adrift by their drafted teams?

Did Boston sign anybody?

If we look at our list of August 15th free agents from early July, not a lot has changed.  Chase McLane (Nashville) and Ryder Donovan (Vegas) remain with their respective organizations under technicalities but neither of them would qualify as notable prospects at this stage.  The other 29 players all saw their NHL rights lapse yesterday.

At this point, no one has signed yet which isn’t much surprise.  Players technically didn’t become free to sign until today and, well, it’s a Saturday in the middle of August; it’s not exactly a prime day for transactions.  There isn’t going to be flood of signings.  Honestly, I’m not sure there are going to be many signings period from this group, especially around half of them are on minor-league deals already.

There’s basically one headliner from this list that feels like a safe bet to land an NHL contract and that’s Dominic James.  He spurned an offer from Chicago on the heels of a 14-goal, 30-point campaign with the University of Minnesota-Duluth and his doing so suggests he thinks he can find an entry-level pact from a team with possibly a better shot at getting to the NHL quicker.  Beyond that, there are some possible AHL deal candidates (Red Savage and Aidan Hreschuk) but not much more.  It’s not a great group of players to get too excited about.

Photo courtesy of Charles LeClaire-Imagn Images.

We are effectively near the midway point of the NHL’s summer season.  Free agency has slowed down with teams looking for bargains while the last few players of note are holding out hope that a team will improve their offer or find a way to make a trade to open up extra cap space.  Meanwhile, the trade market has stayed cool but that could change at any time.

So, with a general lull in the summer period, it’s a good time to reopen the mailbag to talk about what has happened and what could still be coming.  Our last call for questions saw enough submissions to fill three columns.  The first included discussion about Bowen Byram’s future in Buffalo, the state of goaltending, and the K’Andre Miller trade.  Topics in the second included Washington’s potential forward logjam, tanking in professional sports, and the best and worst summers so far.  Lastly, the third covered what’s next for Montreal, why the Devils haven’t been able to clear Ondrej Palat’s deal, contenders for the Gavin McKenna sweepstakes, and more.

You can submit a question by using #PHRMailbag on Twitter/X or by leaving a comment down below. The mailbag will run this weekend.

Topics in this edition of the mailbag include good and bad moves from this summer’s spending spree, possible contenders for the Gavin McKenna sweepstakes, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our last two mailbag columns.

RPIsFinest: Teams like the Leafs and Rangers seemed pretty open about the need for big changes this summer. Is this what they had in mind? Or are bigger moves coming? Or has the fact that a lot of the top UFAs opted to stay put hampered their plans?

Now that the FA market has come and gone, do we see teams making some big trades to revamp their rosters or stand pat?

I think the lack of impact talent to actually reach the open market really limited some planning.  I suspect Toronto might have preferred to add a top-six piece to replace Mitch Marner but flipped to adding better depth to their roster which I suspect was their Plan B all along.  For the Rangers, they moved out two key pieces in Chris Kreider and K’Andre Miller while adding Vladislav Gavrikov.  Coupled with some of the trades from last season including bringing in J.T. Miller, I think they’ve done the bulk of their big changes.  In general though, I suspect more teams had bigger things in mind than they were able to do.

I’ve seen speculation saying that the trade market is going to be more robust than normal in the next few weeks and some saying that the bigger moves might come in-season but earlier than the market typically heats up.  I agree more with the latter.  We’re at the point of summer where the big player-for-player swap usually doesn’t happen as teams tend to lean more toward keeping the one that they’re familiar with.  But if things don’t get off to a great start 20 games in or so, they might be more inclined to try the shakeup.

Da Hammerer: What has come of the situation between the Flyers and Ryan Johansen? A friend implied he read an article or tweet the grievance was squashed, but I’ve been unsuccessful in finding anything beyond the announcement of the grievance hearing that was scheduled. Of all the articles I’ve read about their cap and dead cap hits, none mentioned any impact from Johansen’s contract situation.

There’s not much out there about this situation.  They’ve gone ahead and held the hearing but the results were never revealed.  Whether that means there was a settlement reached or the outcome is still pending remains to be seen.  I suspect there’s a good chance we won’t hear about it either.

As for the cap implications, let’s start with the easy one first.  Nashville also received cap relief from the Johansen contract termination but they operated so far below the salary cap all season long that even if the cap hit got retroactively reapplied, they’d still be under last year’s $88MM ceiling.  So, for the Predators, they’re fine.

The Flyers are a little harder to pin down given that some of the daily tracking is done behind paywalls so I don’t have a precise end-of-season number for them.  And what is available has a bit of variance.  CapWages had their finishing space at $8.99MM but that included the LTIR pool for Ryan Ellis ($6.25MM); back that out and they’re at $2.74MM.  PuckPedia had them around $2.65M in mid-March so there’s a rough range to work with.  But Matvei Michkov’s $1MM in earned ‘A’ bonuses need to be deducted from that pool.  Accordingly, if Johansen’s cap charge was retroactively applied to last season, there would be around a $2.4MM overage or so applied to the upcoming season.  That would push the Flyers into using LTIR as things stand, meaning that any earned bonuses in 2025-26 would then hit the cap in 2026-27.  So, there’s some murkiness about their situation but given how quiet things have been in this case, I don’t expect it will come to that.

KS Habs: Any further moves by Kent Hughes and the Canadiens? I know they have looked into a 2nd Line wing or center but there is not a lot on the market. Is there a chance Rossi, McTavish head back to the Habs or do they like try with Kirby Dach at center again? A second question is what do you think a Lane Hutson contract extension would look like? 8 x $10? Thanks!

By all accounts, the Canadiens don’t appear to be seriously pursuing Marco Rossi at this time which, given their need and desire to upgrade down the middle, is a little telling.  As for Mason McTavish, I’m sure they’re interested in him but I’m not sure why Anaheim would look into moving him.  The absence of a contract for him isn’t really an indication that he’s available, it’s just what happens with a lot of younger talents coming off entry-level deals without arbitration rights; these situations can often drag on.  But if he were to become available, I’m sure Montreal would make a serious push.  But at this point, I expect they will head to training camp with the centers they have which means Dach getting another look down the middle.

As for Hutson, I took a look at some comparables for him a couple of months back and not much has changed since then with only one more to add to that range, his new teammate.  Your proposal falls within the range of those comparable players and in this marketplace with the salary cap set to jump a couple more times, it’s not crazy even though it’s a sky-high number for someone who has all of one season under his belt.  But I don’t think Montreal would make that offer right now.  When they just gave Noah Dobson, a player with a 70-point season under his belt and a longer track record, $9.5MM per season for eight years, it feels like they wouldn’t go higher for that on Hutson.  It’s notable that only two seasons of Dobson’s deal were UFA years while Hutson has five in his.  So, right now, I think their internal cap for a Hutson contract comes in below that.

Schwa: When we look back in a couple of years, who will we look at as being the best/worst deals (for signings and/or trades)?

You haven’t specified which period to cover for these signings and trades so I’m going to operate as if you’re asking about the recent dealings and contracts from this offseason.

For the best moves, I have some that might be surprising.  Giving Jake Allen five years when he’s about to turn 35 is crazy in theory but they got him so far below market value (he likely would have landed more than double his $1.8MM AAV) on the open market that the risk is mitigated.  Yes, there’s a chance that he might have to be waived and buried in the minors by the end (at which point, the dead cap charge would be less than $500K) but there’s so much surplus value in the first few years that it should work out well.  I also liked the Aaron Ekblad contract with Florida.  Again, it might be problematic at the end but he’s still a solid number two option and should be for several more years and that’s a price that’s well below current market value.  He left a good chunk of money on the table to stay with the Panthers.  As for a trade, I’ll pick Matias Maccelli to Toronto for a conditional third-round pick.  If he goes back to being a legitimate top-six piece as he was in the final year in Arizona, that’s a small price to pay (even if it’s elevated to a second rounder) for a top-six piece with some team control.

On the flip side, I have another Florida contract on the worst list, that being Brad Marchand’s six-year deal worth $5.25MM per season.  If he’s a top-six player, $5.25MM is fine.  But he wasn’t a top-six player with the Panthers and that isn’t going to change unless injuries arise.  So now, you have a high-priced third-liner signed until he’s 43.  I get trying to keep the band together but that could be a problem contract early and often.  The other one that comes to mind covers a signing and trade, that being Nashville sending Jeremy Lauzon and Colton Sissons (with 50% salary retention) to Vegas for Nicolas Hague.  From a value perspective, that wasn’t a great deal for the Predators on its face but add in four years at $5.5MM to a player who has largely been on the third pairing and it goes from bad to worse.  I think Hague is a useful defender but to overpay in cost and contract on a team that doesn’t seem particularly close to a playoff spot seemed largely unnecessary.

DevilShark: Would the Sharks (or Hawks) do a solid to the Devils and pick up Palat like they did with Goodrow? Depth wing, good mentor. They still have issues with the cap floor too… I’m surprised a solution hasn’t materialized here for NJD.

There are a few things that make an Ondrej Palat trade to those teams less likely.  The first is the two years remaining on his contract.  Both San Jose and Chicago have taken on more than a one-year deal but I don’t think it’s something they want to do a lot of.  Also, both teams are already comfortably above the cap ceiling for next season so that’s not a factor as well.

The second is Palat’s 10-team no-trade clause.  It’s quite possible (if not probable) that he has those two teams and some other lower teams in the standings on his list to prevent the type of trade you’re hoping for from actually happening.  Most top teams won’t accept a multi-year cap dump so stack the no-trade list with the teams at the bottom of the standings and he should be protected.  And if you’re thinking about merely waiving him as the Rangers did with Barclay Goodrow, his no-move protection is basically a no-waivers clause so that’s not on the table.

The third is the money.  Goodrow carries a $3.64MM cap charge.  Andre Burakovsky is at $5.5MM for two years but Chicago got to offload the final year of Joe Veleno’s contract which has to be factored in.  Palat’s older than both of them and at $6MM, he costs more too.  That also means he’ll cost more to be offloaded as in New Jersey will need to attach an asset or burn a retention slot to move him, something they probably don’t want to do.  I’m not shocked a move hasn’t materialized for the Devils as this is a harder sell given the cost of the contract.

SkidRowe: Could you please compare and contrast Connor Bedard and James Hagens?

I can try but as I’ve noted before, scouting is not necessarily my strong suit.

Offensively, both are strong skaters but their main skill is different.  For Bedard, he’s an elite shooter and while he’s not a bad playmaker by any stretch (over time, with better linemates, I think we’ll see that part of his game improve), his shot is his high-end threat.  With Hagens, his passing is his standout skill.  If you’re looking for the more cerebral player, it’s Hagens with Bedard being the bigger game-breaker.

Defensively, it’s a little harder to compare, largely because Bedard hasn’t been in a spot to evaluate that.  In junior, he was the go-to player who had the green light to cheat a bit defensively while in the NHL, he’s basically had that same role with Chicago more focused on lottery odds than winning games.  Over time as they get more competitive, it’ll be interesting to see how that side of his game evolves.  With Hagens, while he’s more of an offense-first player (most top forward prospects are), he has adapted well enough to the college game at that end and showed improvement with his defensive reads. He might not be a true two-way threat but Hagens showed that he shouldn’t be a big liability at that end of the ice.

The other element to compare is positional.  Bedard is undersized for a center and while he has been force-fed big minutes down the middle early in his career, the early returns of handling the position haven’t been great.  Again, part of that is the sink-or-swim approach and a bad surrounding cast but there’s a case to be made that he might be better off on the wing.  Hagens is similarly undersized but profiles better as a center with his more cerebral game and at least some defensive conscientiousness.  He should stay at that position long-term while the more I see Bedard, the more I think the wing may make more sense for him.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include assessing San Jose’s busy last few weeks, early offseason winners and losers, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s mailbag while we have one more to run from our last callout for questions next weekend.

letsgonats: The Capitals seemed to come in second place for the Ehlers sweepstakes. If McMichael moves to 3C, who is the 2nd line LW and 3rd line RW? It seems that the Caps trade a lot for Sourdif so he is given a 4th line winger slot. Do the Caps pull a trade we are not thinking about or do they take two from Beauvillier, Frank, Milano, Miroshnichenko, Cristall, Trineyev, or Lapierre and only a few have AHL options so waiver or trades for the others?

Before I answer your scenario, I’m going to throw another one out there.  What if they flip McMichael and Pierre-Luc Dubois, a player who has played on the wing before?  I could see them giving that a shot at some point as well, keeping both players in the top six.  In your McMichael as the third-line center scenario, I think Ryan Leonard is on the right wing, allowing them to continue to ease him in.  Right now, I think Anthony Beauvillier gets the spot on the second line to start at least.  In a perfect world, a youngster forces his way into that spot but better to be conservative in early forecasting.  And I agree on Justin Sourdif; at a minimum, he’s on the fourth line with Nic Dowd and Brandon Duhaime.

I don’t see Ivan Miroshnichenko or Bogdan Trineyev realistically pushing for a roster spot.  The former is waiver-exempt while the latter will need waivers.  Hendrix Lapierre makes it since he’s waiver-eligible and won’t get through without being claimed.  I’d have him as the 13th forward which isn’t ideal development-wise.  It wouldn’t shock me if Sonny Milano and Andrew Cristall are battling for the 3LW spot.  If Cristall is ready, Milano lands on waivers and if not, he starts in Hershey.  That leaves Ethen Frank who I think they’d be comfortable keeping as the 14th forward, something they can afford with their current cap space.  That would push Dylan McIlrath to waivers but he has cleared several times before and should again.

With some waiver-exempt pieces, there isn’t as much of a logjam as it might seem.  Honestly, I could see them sniffing around on another forward should one become available and if that pushes Frank to waivers, I think they’d be okay with that.

SirCobblestone: With the addition of the Sharks on defense (even if it’s not done I assume) and the potential add of Misa with Dickinson and Askarov, where do you see the Sharks land with a top six composed of Celebrini, Misa, Smith, and Eklund at Wing and Toffoli with Orlov and Klingberg. That should be a good add on defense.

You’re missing a top-six forward in there which I imagine will be Alexander Wennberg, at least until he’s traded as a rental center at some point in the season, allowing one of Will Smith or Michael Misa to get some time in at their natural position.  That group has a lot of upside but teams with that many youngsters in prominent roles are going to struggle.  There’s just no way around that with four entry-level forwards in the top six.

As for the defense, it has definitely improved with the additions of Dmitry Orlov, Nick Leddy, and John Klingberg but that’s a low bar to clear as San Jose’s back end was really bad last year.  The problem is that it’s still not very good.  Klingberg is a question mark defensively and Leddy is coming off a really rough year.  Orlov is overpaid but decent at least.  If Sam Dickinson is added to this group (they’re going to need to move out more than just Henry Thrun for that to happen), there will be some growing pains defensively although he’d give them a big lift offensively with Klingberg.  This is the definition of a patchwork back end; of the seven they have signed now on one-way deals, only one (Orlov) is signed beyond this season.  It’s better but this is still not a playoff-worthy group.

As for the goaltending, Yaroslav Askarov is the big wild card.  Like many, I have high expectations for him over the long haul but for the upcoming season, there are going to be some growing pains as he adjusts to being the starter at the NHL level for the first time while playing behind a defense that still isn’t particularly strong.  Alex Nedeljkovic is a serviceable backup but I expect his numbers to nosedive next season given the situation.

So, where do I see San Jose next season?  Probably in the same spot where they were last season, in the basement of the Pacific Division.  Things are definitely looking up and they’re not going to be down there for much longer but this is going to be another season where process and development are more important than results.  They’re not ready to emerge from the rebuild yet and their activity this summer suggests GM Mike Grier is fully aware of that.

SpeakOfTheDevils: Let’s play hypothetical and say the Devils DO trade Dougie Hamilton, what kind of return could we be looking at??? And likeliest trading partners????

I’m going to go with the second question first here.  I could see Toronto being in there as they could use a top offensive threat.  Detroit has done next to nothing to improve a back end that certainly struggled last year so they’d be in the mix I’d think.  I’m sure Dallas would love to swing that but the term remaining would be an option; I think they’re more of a fit for Erik Karlsson if Pittsburgh pays down a good chunk of his deal.  Buffalo has been searching for an impact right-shot defender for ages now but it would surprise me if he’s on Hamilton’s list of 10 teams he’d accept a trade to.

Several teams can afford him but at the stage of the rebuild they’re in, they’re probably not a good fit.  Others like Calgary and Winnipeg don’t seem like teams on his trade list either.  And this is the problem; between Hamilton’s trade protection, cap hit, and performance, there’s not a great market for his services.  I don’t even think Detroit would be on his yes list so we’re down to Toronto and if New Jersey wants to pay down some of the contract, maybe Dallas.

So, the short answer to your question in terms of a return is nothing that would justify trading Hamilton.  If Pittsburgh trades Karlsson, they’ll be able to get positive value but probably nothing of consequence.  Salary ballast, maybe a second-round pick, and perhaps something else.  That’s something, but nothing to get excited about.  Is Hamilton going to be able to bring back more that with three years left on his deal?  Maybe if it’s more of a player-for-player straight-up swap (if Morgan Rielly was willing to waive his trade protection, maybe there’s a foundation of a trade there) but otherwise, I wouldn’t be counting on it.  So, something around what I think Karlsson would get would be my answer to the first question.

Hamilton managed to be healthier last season but also dropped below 20 minutes a night which, for a $9MM blueliner, is a little concerning.  With Johnathan Kovacevic out for a bit to start the season, I don’t expect them to seriously consider trading him.  The Devils want to stay in the playoffs and Hamilton is a better insurance policy than whatever bits and pieces they could get in a trade.

tucsontoro1: Is it time for the league to do something substantial about tanking?

The Blackhawks are clearly in “full tank mode” for the 25–26 season.

Let me answer your question with a question – how would the league do that?  The NHL has already lowered the draft odds and it hasn’t served as a deterrent.  They’ve also put in something saying a team can’t advance their pick in the lottery more than twice in five years, a change that hasn’t garnered much attention yet since it hasn’t come into play.

The NBA gives equal odds for the bottom three finishers (and fourth is only a bit lower) but that didn’t stop teams from tanking for Cooper Flagg.  And the end result for two drafts now has been a team with odds of 3% or less jumping up to the top spot (Dallas from 11th to take Flagg and Atlanta from 10th to take Zaccharie Risacher).  Will that stop teams from tanking in basketball next season?  Probably not.

MLB started drawing for the first six selections back in 2023 instead of going by reverse standings while also putting some restrictions on teams drafting in the lottery back-to-back times.  Did that stop the Athletics from tanking for three straight years?  Nope, even though they were slotted 11th in last week’s draft as a result of the rule changes.  The White Sox were terrible last year but knew going in that they couldn’t pick in the lottery even if they had the worst record; clearly, it wasn’t a deterrent that prevented them from tanking.  Meanwhile, there are some overtly tanking teams there this season too (including the White Sox again, no less).  And the NFL still goes by reverse standings with teams already seemingly jockeying themselves for first overall.

Sure, the NHL could flatten the odds more or put more restrictions on picking in the top five, for example.  But in the grand scheme of things, if that happened, does anyone think Chicago or San Jose would change course?  In a system where top young talents are distributed through a draft system, teams are going to try to position themselves to have the best chance at getting one of those if they know they’re not in a spot to realistically contend for a playoff spot.  This strategy, one that exists in each of the big four professional sports, isn’t going anywhere.

SkidRowe: What can the Bruins do? They need scoring and have only $2 million in cap space. Would you trade Zacha, Poitras, Mittelstadt, Minten, or Korpisalo?

I’m going to say no to trading Matthew Poitras or Fraser Minten.  Might they fetch a capable veteran to help in the short term?  I think they would.  But they’re not going to bring back enough of a difference-maker to materially improve Boston’s fortunes.  These are young centers with some promise and that’s the type of player they need to be keeping around as longer-term fits.

If Boston is confident that Michael DiPietro can be a capable NHL backup, moving Joonas Korpisalo makes sense in theory.  Jeremy Swayman can probably handle a similar workload to last season, meaning DiPietro would only need to make 25 starts or so.  The question here, however, is what market is there for a goalie right now, especially one with a cap charge of $3MM (not including the $1MM Ottawa is covering)?  He could fit in Edmonton but they can’t afford him.  Same with Vegas.  Maybe Carolina but is he demonstrably better than their tandem?  I like the idea of trading Korpisalo more than the potential of it actually happening but if it did, that’s something they could reinvest into their offense.

The other two are a little more interesting.  Casey Mittelstadt isn’t a rental, he has a track record of some offensive success, and he’s a center.  Given the immense demand for capable middlemen right now, I think there would be a good market for him.  On the other hand, Boston’s center depth isn’t great and I’d like to see how he fares under new head coach Marco Sturm first.  If the new system helps get him going, he could be more of a potential longer-term fit.

If Boston is comfortable with deploying one of the two young centers on a regular basis (or playing one of Sean Kuraly or Mikey Eyssimont on the third line), Pavel Zacha could be expendable.  At $4.75MM, he’s someone some teams can afford and while he’s coming off a quieter year, 47 points is still decent; it was good enough for a share of third in team scoring.  But it begs the question of why Boston, a team that needs firepower, would move one of their better point-getters from a year ago?  Maybe if there’s a winger that’s signed or controllable for longer than Zacha (a pending UFA), there’s a lateral swap to be made but otherwise, I’d reassess closer to the trade deadline.

Despite Boston’s spending spree this summer, I don’t think they’ve done enough to get back to the playoff picture.  Moving one of those pieces for a bit more firepower on the wing isn’t going to change that.  So, personally, I wouldn’t be making any win-now trades unless this group proves me wrong and shows it’s worthy of some moves to help them in the second half of the season.  Otherwise, Zacha could be a very useful rental for someone, yielding the Bruins a nice future asset in return.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include Carolina’s acquisition of K’Andre Miller, the Bowen Byram situation in Buffalo, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in one of our next two mailbag columns.

MoneyBallJustWorks: I imagine the Maple Leafs aren’t done tinkering with their lineup. What do you see as the next move for this team and do you think they are a tougher team to play against today than they were at the end of last year?

Technically, it turns out that the next move was them finding a taker for Ryan Reaves with them getting Henry Thrun from San Jose for him.  Maybe Thrun makes the team as a seventh or eighth defenseman, maybe he winds up on waivers.  But with Reaves set to count for $200K against the cap had he been back with the AHL’s Marlies (he makes $1.35MM and the maximum buriable amount is $1.15MM), they at least saved a bit of cap space.

I think there’s some smoke to the Jack Roslovic speculation.  He was recently connected to Toronto and while the talk of reconnecting with Auston Matthews seems a bit overblown, I think there’s a fit.  The Maple Leafs feel like a team that’s going to shake up the lines a bit more next season so having some players who can move up and down in the lineup with some positional flexibility makes sense.  A short-term deal with him that gives him a soft landing and allows Toronto to keep its options open soon after feels like a reasonable move to make.

As for being tougher to play against, it depends on what you mean by tougher.  If you mean are they more physical, maybe.  Nicolas Roy isn’t overly physical but he plays more of a heavy game than Mitch Marner.  Matias Maccelli is one of the least physical players in the league so if you say he takes Pontus Holmberg’s spot on the roster (not in terms of line placement), that might offset any physicality gain from Marner to Roy.  But if you mean more difficult to play against, no.  I like Roy and Maccelli but that’s a big drop in talent compared to Marner.  If I’m an opposing coach, one less star player to gameplan against means they’re probably less difficult of an opponent (but still a strong team in general).

William 12: Is K’Andre Miller worth the price Carolina paid to get him? Also, who is your pick for best sneaky good/under-the-radar trade or free agency acquisition so far this offseason?

If Carolina can get Miller to settle down a bit defensively, he should be.  He is already a top-four defender who has shown flashes of being closer to a number two option at his best.  In this market, $7.5MM for a player with that ceiling isn’t bad, if, again, he becomes more reliable in his own end.

In terms of the trade cost, it would have cost them a first, a second, and a third had they offered $7.5MM on an offer sheet.  They’d have been capped at offering six years at that price as well.  The maximum denominator for an offer sheet is five years so a six-year offer would have been $45MM divided by five or $9MM for offer sheet purposes, keeping them just inside that threshold.  Was it worth parting with Scott Morrow to get two more years on the contract?  If they’re convinced that Miller can be the player they think he can be, I’d say yes.  Meanwhile, New York is probably quite pleased with the return as well.

I think Brent Burns to Colorado is a signing that hasn’t gotten a lot of attention.  Yes, he’s slowing down but he can still play on a second pairing and be a secondary contributor offensively.  With a bonus-laden structure, the contract gives the Avs extra flexibility to add another piece at some point either this summer or in-season and they’ll just have to absorb the bonus hit in 2026-27, cutting into their spending room then.  But when you’re in win-now mode, adding that good of a player for a $1MM base salary is pretty good.

Now, if you’re looking for someone more under the radar than that, I’ll nominate Jakob Pelletier.  He signed a three-year, minimum-salary deal with Tampa Bay with an AAV that will ultimately rise each year thanks to the pending increases to the minimum salary with the CBA extension.  He did pretty well in a bottom-six role last season in 49 games and has a track record of success at the lower levels.  He brings more upside to Tampa’s bottom line than they’ve had in recent years at as low a price tag as possible.  For a no-risk move, there’s some upside to it.

12Kelly: Now that Adams has filed arbitration on Byram, does that hamper any trade the Sabres were working on? I am very disappointed in our GM and I think we will end up keeping Byram as an unhappy player and go through this next year. Why can’t Adams make a good trade, especially since the Blues are really interested in Byram? Another year of missing the playoffs is on the horizon.

In the immediate term, Buffalo’s decision to take Bowen Byram to arbitration doesn’t necessarily hamper any trade talks.  If there’s a team out there – St. Louis or otherwise – who wants him, they can swing a trade and try to sign him before the arbitration hearing which will be scheduled between July 20th and August 4th.  If the hearing is more toward the back of that range, there’s still upwards of three weeks to work something out.  That’s still ample time, especially if the acquiring team has a good indication of Byram’s asking price already.

But once things get closer to the hearing, then it’s going to hamper talks.  Because the Sabres were the team to file against Byram, Byram gets to pick the term of the contract – either one or two years.  The latter would walk him right to UFA eligibility at the age of 26 so that definitely is going to be a temptation.  Once they get to the point of starting the hearing, that’s it and if Byram does pick the two-year deal, his trade value is going to dip as there won’t be the ability to work out a long-term agreement as part of the swap.  Suffice it to say, there’s a firm clock now and it’s definitely running.

The decision to take him to arbitration was to take the threat of an offer sheet off the table, one that would have secured Buffalo only draft-pick compensation.  And at this point, it feels like some of the suitors are preferring to go with futures-based offers which is what GM Kevyn Adams doesn’t want as his goal is to get the Sabres back to the playoffs.  That’s a goal that already seems unlikely and without Byram, it would be even tougher.  The decision to take the offer sheet option off the table hedges against that happening but it cranks up the pressure.

ljfranker: What would the Blues have to pay for Byram? Is Jiricek, Stenberg, and offer sheet compensation reasonable?

haubrick: Do the Blues ultimately pull off a trade for Bowen Byram?

Let’s put the St. Louis questions together here.  I assume the projected contract offer for Byram is in the $7.02MM to $9.36MM tier which carries a return of a first-round pick, a second rounder, and a third rounder.  That plus two first-round prospects in Adam Jiricek and Otto Stenberg feels like quite the overpayment.  That’s more than what Montreal gave up for Noah Dobson who is a more proven player.  And yet, I don’t think Buffalo would say yes to that even though the offer would be in their favor.

As noted above, the Sabres aren’t thinking about rebuilding.  They’re banking on this group taking a step or two forward and getting into the mix for a Wild Card spot this season.  While it’s fair to question whether that’s the right approach, achieving that goal would be much harder by taking out a top-four defender and replacing him with a bunch of future assets that aren’t NHL-ready yet.

For St. Louis or any other team to get Byram in a trade, there has to be a key core player coming back to get Buffalo at least more open to the idea of moving him.  Think Jake Neighbours, Dylan Holloway, Philip Broberg, or even Jordan Kyrou who has popped up in trade speculation although he has a no-move clause that could scuttle that thought in a hurry.  If they want to avoid dipping into Torey Krug’s LTIR pool, they’ll basically need to match whatever they give Byram in terms of outgoing salaries which could add another player or two to the swap as well.  I’m not sure the Blues are willing to part with that core piece (making it a change to the core, not a true addition) which is why I’m skeptical that they can get this over the finish line.

Dan from Buffalo: Lifelong Sabres fan, I’m 100% hoping we re-sign Alex Tuch at some point this offseason. I know he’s due for a nice raise from his current deal, should I be worried the longer the summer goes with no news?

I wouldn’t be worried if the summer comes and goes without an extension.  While some players move quickly to sign contract extensions as soon as they’re eligible – we saw that with a few players on July 1st – many more haven’t yet.  And it’s a pretty prominent list of those eligible who haven’t, one that includes Connor McDavid, Kirill Kaprizov, Artemi Panarin, Kyle Connor, and Jack Eichel, among many others.  Those teams shouldn’t be worried yet so it’s not time to worry about Tuch just yet either.

At this point, it feels like players seem a bit more open to waiting things out and it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s the case with Tuch here.  I don’t question his stated desire to stick around but at the same time, I think he might want to see where things stand before putting pen to paper on a new contract.  If Buffalo winds up having a change of heart and moves Byram for futures or struggles out of the gate in the first half, leaving Adams to seriously start to ponder another rebuild, Tuch’s enthusiasm for sticking around for the long haul might be tempered.

If Tuch remains unsigned a couple of weeks before the trade deadline, that’s when I’d start to get concerned from a Buffalo perspective.  While the Sabres re-signed a pair of pending UFAs close to the deadline back in March, there’s a big talent difference between Tuch versus Jason Zucker and Jordan Greenway.  Those two wouldn’t yield the type of impactful future-based return that Tuch would, one that would be difficult for Adams to pass up at that point.  But for now, the fact that an extension hasn’t been signed less than two weeks after being eligible isn’t too concerning.

PyramidHeadcrab: Is there a goaltending shortage in the NHL? It seems like quite a few teams are searching for a true starter where none are available, with a large drop-off in quality after the top 20-25 netminders. This doesn’t seem to be an issue with other positions, though those positions typically take less time to cook.

If true, how could this problem be systematically rectified within the league? And considering the goalies in development and those yet to be drafted, does relief appear to be on the horizon?

It certainly feels like there’s a goaltending shortage in the NHL right now.  And there definitely is a drop-off quality-wise.  But I’m not sure there’s a big fix that can be made.

More teams appear to be navigating toward a lower-cost platoon system which means there isn’t necessarily a big differentiator between the starter and the backup goalie.  While top goalies like Igor Shesterkin can break the bank, I don’t think there are a ton of organizations who would be willing to go really high on a contract for a player that might only play in 70-75% of the games.

There’s also the matter of shooters being better.  I don’t know how many times I’ve caught myself when writing about a goalie’s save percentage, for example.  I might have something along the lines of so-and-so struggled with a SV% of just .902 before I remember that a mark just over .900 is now considered above average whereas a few years ago, it was below average.  A few years before that, if you could barely scrape above .900, you weren’t a guarantee to stay in the NHL.  Yes, some of that is a drop-off in the supply of good goalies but shooters now are better than they were not even a decade ago.

I suppose the fix could be to try to restrict some of the technological improvements for skaters or allow some equipment improvements for goalies but I doubt there’s much appetite for that beyond the goaltenders themselves wanting some extra help.

You could look at it from a grassroots perspective in that goaltender is the most expensive position for kids growing up.  But there’s no way around that and it’s not the NHL’s responsibility to be funneling money into youth hockey programs worldwide to offset the price of equipment so I don’t think there’s a fix there either.

I don’t expect things to change much moving forward.  There are a handful of above-average goalies in various prospect pools but certainly not an overwhelming amount that will eventually lead to a material improvement in goalie performance in the NHL.  Lots of the prospects out there carry the ceiling of a platoon netminder which, for a lot of organizations, isn’t viewed as a bad thing.

If I’m being honest, I don’t think the NHL truly considers this a problem.  For years, there were summits on how to increase goal scoring and now that this is happening, they’re probably pleased with that result.  There is still enough of a supply of higher-end starters that some teams have some flexibility in structuring their rosters (go for a true starter and a low-cost backup versus the more common 50/30 type of split) so it’s not a cookie-cutter situation in terms of roster-building.  Frankly, instead of it being a problem to solve, I suspect the NHL hopes that this is the new normal moving forward.

frozenaquatic: There was a discussion on r/hockey where we were talking about “best trades that benefited both teams.” There were a lot of obvious answers: Iginla for Nieuwendyk, ROR for Tage, RBA for Keith Primeau. But it got me thinking, what is the real answer to this question? We could only come up with one instance ALL-TIME where traded players won Cups with their new respective teams. STL trades Ian Cole to PIT for Robert Bortuzzo and a 2016 7th on March 2nd, 2015. Both Cole and Bortuzzo won cups with their new teams, both of them playing significant roles in the Cup run. Is this really the only case of this ever happening? Is this the greatest trade in NHL history?

Off-hand, I started looking through several seasons of old trades to see if I could spot one.  It served as a stark reminder about how a lot of trades wind up making very little of a difference in the long run but I couldn’t spot another one that met the criteria of both players winning a Stanley Cup with their new team.  I can’t sit here and say that’s the only instance of that happening – it easily could have back in the Original Six days (and I tried to look through some trades from those days to see if one popped) – but it has to be a pretty short list.

Does that make it the best trade in NHL history?  That’s one of those questions where the answer is in the eye of the beholder.  Was it ultimately a big win-win move (literally) for both sides?  It sure was.  But I suspect a lot of fans would have a different ‘best trade ever’ in mind.

Photo courtesy of Timothy T. Ludwig-Imagn Images.

It has been a busy few weeks across the NHL.  We have a repeat Stanley Cup champion, the draft has come and gone, and many players find themselves on new teams following some big trades and plenty of free agent signings with the bulk of the heavy lifting now finished on the offseason.

With that in mind, it’s a good time to reopen the mailbag.  Our last call for questions yielded enough topics for three columns.  The first discussed Connor Hellebuyck’s playoff struggles, Florida’s playoff proficiency, and more.  Topics in the second included an assessment of the Avalanche, ideal second center options for Montreal, and some offseason predictions.  The third included some talk about the Blackhawks, a Noah Dobson prediction (that didn’t quite hold up), and what Detroit needed to do this summer to have a successful offseason.

You can submit a question by using #PHRMailbag on Twitter/X or by leaving a comment down below. The mailbag will run this weekend.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include talks on what Chicago and Detroit could try to do this offseason plus a center option for the Jets that they haven’t explored yet.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our last two mailbag columns.

Gmm8811: What would it take for the Blues to pry Tkachuk away from Ottawa? Kyrou and what else?

The short answer would be an awful lot.  I don’t see any reason why the Senators would move Brady Tkachuk.  But if they did, they would want someone with some grit.  The power forward nature of his game is a big part of his value and with all due respect to Jordan Kyrou who is a strong player, that particular element is not in his toolbox.

The other challenge with Kyrou as the foundation is that his money basically matches Tkachuk’s.  This might seem a little odd as matching money is normally a good thing.  In a case of a player for a player plus some future assets, that’s normally perfect.  But Ottawa isn’t taking an add-on of a first-round pick and a prospect.  No, they would want some other NHL-established talent.

Jake Neighbours would have to be in there at a minimum as the power forward piece.  I would think they’d want another core piece from that age group, maybe Philip Broberg.  Remember, for a ‘unicorn’ type of player, the price has to really hurt.  But those two make over $8MM now (and will make much more than that in 2026-27).  To keep matching money, the Sens would then need to include or offload at least some of that money, possibly further increasing the ask.  And round and round we go to the point where it’s simply not feasible.

There is probably only a handful of players in the league that Ottawa would trade Tkachuk for.  The Sens are on the rise; trading your captain who plays a pivotal role as you’re just emerging from the rebuild is a tactic that is very unlikely to happen.  And if it did happen, they’d want a similar-value core piece back, not a package.  I don’t think there’s a buildable fit here.

tucsontoro1: Put on your Kyle Davidson hat for a minute.

Who do I target in FA?

Ekblad, Marner, Bennett?

Davidson opted to spread the money around last summer on short-term contracts for veterans to help raise the floor of the group and lead them through what was likely to be a turbulent season.  They didn’t do the former but it was indeed another turbulent season.  But that aside, there’s light at the end of the tunnel.  The prospect pool is well-stocked, a good group of youngsters is coming, and Jeff Blashill is a decent coach which is an upgrade on what they had last year.  Things are looking up.

This makes it the time for Davidson to strike.  They have nearly $30MM of cap space per PuckPedia with their only pricey RFA of note looking like a near-lock to be non-tendered (Philipp Kurashev).  The young core group will get a lot more expensive over time but even so, they have the financial flexibility to go and try to buy a core piece on the open market.  It will probably require an overpayment given that they’re probably still a bit away from coming out of the rebuild but when the acquisition cost is zero, it’s justifiable.

Basically, the easiest way to answer the question is this.  Is the free agent a core player and projects to be one for years to come?  If the answer is yes, the Blackhawks will probably be calling.

Of the three you listed, Mitch Marner feels like the most likely to potentially sign.  Chicago is a big market which he’s accustomed to but the spotlight won’t be on him as much in that market compared to Toronto.  Connor Bedard is a solid running mate to potentially partner with or have Marner be the catalyst of a second line to help elevate some of the up-and-coming core group.  There’s a compelling case to make although a lot of teams will have compelling cases to make if he reaches the open market next month.

tucsontoro1: With the Hawks having the second-worst GA this season, don’t they target at least one solid d-man in free agency?

In theory, yes.  The point from the last question applies to defensemen too.  If there’s a long-term core player out there, I expect Davidson to try to sign him.

How many core defenders are out there though?  Aaron Ekblad would be a good fit – they could turn around and flip Connor Murphy and have youngsters Artyom Levshunov and Sam Rinzel apprentice behind him for a little while and then as Ekblad gets a bit older, move him down the depth chart.  But can they make the best pitch when there will undoubtedly be more win-now options available?  (This is a question that applies basically to any core guy.)

Ivan Provorov and Vladislav Gavrikov are solid on the left side.  Team one of them up with Alex Vlasic and that side of the back end definitely looks better.

But if we’re talking about key defenders that would move the needle in a real way, that’s about it.  The leading point-getter among UFA blueliners is Matt Grzelcyk.  Ryan Lindgren is coming off a quieter year but can be a fourth defender.  Cody Ceci, Brent Burns, and Dante Fabbro are the next-best options on the right side – a player who was moved in a salary cap dump less than a year ago, a 40-year-old, and a player who was on waivers after no one wanted to trade for him earlier in the season.  These are good, useful players, but I doubt it’s the caliber you were thinking of with this question.

I’m sure Davidson will try to add a key blueliner on the open market but it’s a pretty small pool to try to draw from.

breakaway: If the Islanders draft Schaefer, do they look to trade Dobson and what could they get in return for him?

I’ve seen this idea out there and while I can track the logic, I don’t really agree with it.  Adding Matthew Schaefer to the roster does not make Noah Dobson redundant.  This is not a roster full of puck-moving defensemen by any stretch.  Beyond Adam Boqvist who is more of a depth piece, Dobson is the only other proven one in that category they have with any sort of meaningful NHL experience.  He and Schaefer can absolutely co-exist, especially since they play separate sides of the ice.

I wonder if adding Schaefer might make them move one of their lefties, however.  Adam Pelech’s $5.75MM price tag is a bit on the high side although with the way the free agent market could go, it might be viewed as an asset this time next month.  Alexander Romanov is a pending restricted free agent with arbitration rights like Dobson.  Keeping them would push their back end spending past the $30MM range.  But if one of Pelech or Romanov were to be moved, the remaining one, Schaefer, and Isaiah George could comprise the top three on the left side on opening night, keeping the cap charge a little more reasonable along the way.

Coming up with a trade value for Dobson isn’t easy.  Don’t get me wrong, his trade value is quite high.  But I have no idea what direction the Islanders are going here under new GM Mathieu Darche.  To me, I think they need to rebuild.  And if they opted to move Dobson in that situation, I think two first-round picks, a top prospect, and some sort of salary offset (ideally a defenseman) is attainable.  But if they’re not rebuilding (and if I had to guess today, this would be my pick of the route they take), now you’re looking at more of a player-for-player type of swap.  Maybe a two-for-one with a top-four blueliner and a key forward coming the other way with both players being signed or under club control for the long haul.  Going for a short-term veteran or two wouldn’t make sense.

With each scenario, the potential suitors vary considerably with a very strong return coming in either approach.  But I don’t think drafting Schaefer would push Dobson out, not unless Dobson’s contract demands ultimately have Darche leaning toward trading him.

Thefiend313: With Steve Yzerman under pressure from Detroit Red Wings fans, do you think he can pull off a blockbuster move and sign Mitch Marner?

Thefiend313: What do you think the Red Wings will target once free agency starts: Mitch Marner, John Tavares, Vladislav Gavrikov, or someone else?

Thefiend313: What does Steve Yzerman need to accomplish for the Red Wings to contend for the playoffs?

Let’s start with Marner.  Do I think Yzerman will target him?  Of course.  I expect somewhere around two-thirds of the league to at least passively kick the tires.  Detroit would be a tier above that and they have the money to afford him outright (more than $21MM per PuckPedia) without needing to clear out or offset money somewhere else.  That’s a good thing as not every team has that.  But if I’m Marner, the marquee UFA in this class, the Red Wings don’t feel like the most compelling team to sign with.  If I want to win now, they’re not a team to consider.  If I want top dollar and don’t care about short-term success, I can probably get the same money or more out of Chicago or Utah (or even Anaheim), teams that would appear to have a clearer trajectory to long-term success.  Marner leaving his hometown team to sign with a non-playoff division rival would be quite something but that doesn’t feel like a particularly likely scenario.

I’ll use a similar answer to the second question as I did for Chicago as it’s the same philosophy.  You need to get better and you have a lot of money with an RFA group that isn’t going to cost much.  It’s an even cleaner one for Detroit though.  While a short-term veteran doesn’t necessarily make sense for the Blackhawks, it does for the Red Wings who are indeed trying to win now, they just haven’t had much success at that lately.  So the question is basically this.  Is the player a core piece?  If the answer is yes, Yzerman will probably be targeting him.  In a perfect world, a viable second center emerges, potentially allowing them to flip one of J.T. Compher or Andrew Copp whose terms remaining on their contracts aren’t as concerning now for other teams to acquire.  But I doubt Yzerman would be too picky position-wise.  If there’s an upgrade, take it; it’s as simple as that.

As for what he needs to accomplish to be a playoff threat (that’s as far as I’d go, not a contender), they need a top-four upgrade on the back end.  You could sell me on two top-four additions if they want to ease Axel Sandin-Pellikka into the mix.  But you just saw the last answer about Chicago; getting two in this market would be tough.  Another legitimate scoring threat would help as well.  Patrick Kane coming back would help but another one on top of that, basically to fill the role that Vladimir Tarasenko was signed to fill last season.  Defensive improvements should get their roster near the middle of the pack in goals allowed and one more top-six threat might get the offense near the middle of the pack.  That should be enough to get them in the mix.  Not a lot of teams can add or re-sign that much talent in one summer though so this won’t be easy for Yzerman to accomplish.

Read more