PHR Mailbag

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include financial sustainability during the pandemic, what Ottawa might do with their multitude of draft picks, potential upsets in during the NHL’s return, and the top offensive threat beyond the potential top two picks in the draft.  If your question doesn’t appear here, look back at last weekend’s mailbag.

Gbear: How long can the NHL realistically stay financially viable in all of its markets if fans cannot attend games in person even heading into the 20/21 season and thus not able to provide NHL teams with gate revenues?

I think we’re a while away from teams starting to show significant financial cracks.  While the NHL has shown a willingness to get back to playing now without fans, there’s a big difference between biting the bullet to finish the season and award the Stanley Cup and starting up 2020-21 without fans.  I don’t sense there’s a willingness from a lot of owners to try to get next season going in front of empty buildings.  That’s not viable for even the teams with the best financial backing.

If there aren’t any games for a while, the payroll costs are naturally going to be significantly reduced.  As part of the new CBA Memorandum of Understanding, teams will be required to pay 8.1% (15/186ths) of a players’ salary by the end of October if there aren’t any games scheduled before November 15th and it appears we’re heading in that direction.  But until there are games to play, that’s it for player payroll which is by far the steepest cost.

This situation is far from sustainable and is hardly ideal which is why this postseason is going to be a one-off, not a sign of things to come.  Once it finishes, I wouldn’t expect NHL play to resume until at least some fans are allowed in the building.  With that will come some revenues to offset the payroll expenses and teams should be able to scrape by until then.  They have early access to this season’s escrow to help bridge the two gaps in the meantime.  It won’t be pretty for a while but the viability of franchises shouldn’t be in jeopardy for a little while yet.

MoneyBallJustWorks: Do you see the Sens making any draft day trades with their draft capital? I know many are hoping for 3&5 to be packaged for #1 which I don’t see but could they move the Islanders pick (assuming it ends up being this year’s) for a roster player? With the cap crunch, that or one of their many 2nd’s could land them a decent roster piece.

When it comes to their top couple of picks, I don’t see Ottawa doing anything with those.  They didn’t get the lucky draw in the lottery but two top-five picks is still quite good.  They’re going to land two core pieces to their promising crop of youngsters and with them focusing on the long-term picture, doing anything to try to shortcut that isn’t a great idea.

The Sens are in a position where they can leverage their cap room to add other assets but with 13 picks in the draft, they can also part with some to add younger players that fit better with their core.  I wouldn’t entirely rule out the Islanders pick being moved in the right trade like I would their other two firsts but I suspect GM Pierre Dorion would like to hold onto that as well.

However, they have four second-round picks and it’s hard to see them using them all.  Perhaps they package two to move up to the back of the first round and land someone that’s high on their list but sliding.  It’s possible that they trade out with one although it’s worth noting they already have three second-rounders next year which lessens that likelihood a bit.

But even more likely would be using one of those as part of a deal to land a player.  While the speculative focus of cap casualties is on the higher-priced players now, there are likely to be others moved for what seems like below-market value because of a potential cap crunch down the road, because they can’t move out a high-priced player, or even expansion planning a year from now.  Second-round picks seem like a good currency for those moving in that situation and four of them gives the Sens plenty of ammunition if they want to try to make that type of move.

acarneglia: What teams should be on upset watch?

In terms of the Qualifying Round matchups, there aren’t many that would be truly considered as upsets if the underdog won.  Nonetheless, I think Nashville is vulnerable in the West in their matchup against Arizona.  The Coyotes are a strong team defensively and the Predators’ offense has been hit or miss this season.  Arizona also has the edge in goal and with the benefit of rest and the abbreviated training camp, Taylor Hall may be able to produce closer to expectations; with him, Phil Kessel, and Clayton Keller, they have enough firepower to do some damage.

Out East, I’ve talked about the Rangers being a threat before which would make Carolina vulnerable.  Having covered that a few times recently, let’s look at the 7-10 matchup between the Islanders and Panthers.  On paper, Florida should have been a lot better than they were this season and Sergei Bobrovsky showed a year ago that he’s capable of stepping up and playing well in a series.  If he can do that here, New York could be in some trouble, even if their defensive structure can keep Florida’s attack largely at bay.

In terms of top-four seeds that will be playing round-robin games to determine their positioning for the postseason, Dallas could be a team that is ripe for an upset depending on the matchup.  Their offense is talented on paper but struggled mightily during the regular season.  Their goaltending was good enough to keep the Stars at the top end of the conference during the year but in a short series, continued sluggish performances from their top scorers could be problematic in a hurry.

Pieters: For our dynasty league I have the misfortune of having the 4th pick. One through three are expected to be Lafreniere, Askarov (goalies are gold) and Byfield. Scoring cats for skaters are Goals (G), Assists (A), Points (P), Plus/Minus (+/-), Penalty Minutes (PIM), Powerplay Points (PPP), Shots on Goal (SOG), Hits (HIT). Trying to figure out which of the following would be best at 4th, Marco Rossi, Lucas Raymond, Tim Stutzle, or Alexander Holtz? All of the top prospects from previous drafts were picked up. The only one that might be worth considering is Victor Soderstrom.

First, let’s rule Soderstrom out of consideration.  While he showed a bit more offensive upside with Brynas this season, he’s not going to be a big point producer in the NHL and hits alone won’t be enough to offset that.

Rossi may very well wind up with the most points out of the four draft-eligibles you listed but there are some drawbacks to consider.  He’s not the most physical of players and he’s a pure playmaker which will keep his shot total a little lower.  Raymond may not have quite the upside in terms of overall points that Rossi might but he’s a more gifted shooter although again, he’s on the smaller size which limits the hit potential.  Holtz is a little bigger but the overall upside isn’t as high as those two so I’d take him out of the mix.

That leaves Stutzle.  Like Rossi, he’s more of a playmaker for now but he has the frame to put on enough extra strength to make his shot more of a weapon and he has shown no hesitance shooting in the DEL.  I also think he’s more likely to be deployed in all top offensive situations unlike someone like Byfield who may be most valuable as an all-around player which isn’t as important in most fantasy leagues.  I’d go with Stutzle in this situation as he is going to get to the NHL quickly and should pad plenty of stat categories when he gets there.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include the Chicago-Edmonton series, Jack Eichel’s future in Buffalo, forecasting the television picture for the NHL’s Return to Play, and Lindy Ruff’s hiring in New Jersey.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next week’s mailbag.

Mark L: When play stopped, the Oilers offense was looking very strong while the Blackhawks defense was a mess. Because of the long suspension of play, Chicago will have Calvin de Haan back for sure and could have Brent Seabrook back as well.

They also have some younger, talented players who won’t have played a gruelling campaign before jumping into a playoff. If Corey Crawford can stay healthy and in net, what are the chances this is a more competitive series, perhaps one Chicago can steal, than it looks to be at first glance?

With teams being off for as long as they have been, every series has a chance to be more competitive than it may seem on paper.  Good teams can come out of the gate slow in the regular season and this is a longer layoff than a typical summer so there are bound to be some surprises along the way.

It’s interesting that you mention Crawford as I think goaltending will be a huge part of this series but it’s Edmonton’s goaltending that could very well dictate the outcome.  When he’s on his game, Mikko Koskinen can be a real difference-maker.  On the flip side, when he’s off, he’s really off.  If he’s not sharp out of the gate, that’s one area that Chicago can exploit.  Mike Smith is a capable backup that can steady things in that instance but he’s probably not going to steal games at this point of his career.

Crawford’s top level isn’t as good as Koskinen’s but the inconsistency isn’t as sharp either (which is good as turning to Malcolm Subban wouldn’t be ideal given the year he had).  If Chicago can get the better goaltending, they’ll have a decent chance in this series unless Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl steal the show and with how they performed during the regular season, they can win games on their own even if Crawford outperforms Koskinen.

Getting de Haan back will certainly help defensively and on the penalty kill but I don’t know if they’d want to risk putting Seabrook back in.  He’s just starting to skate now after being off since mid-December and he was struggling before being taken out.  Even if Seabrook does play, it’s hard to see him getting more than a spot on the third pairing which will limit his chances of making any sort of tangible impact in this series.

Baji Kimran: Do you think Buffalo is considering moving Jack Eichel? If so, what would they want in return, High-end talent that is already in the NHL or a slew of draft picks (#1’s, #2’s)? Finally, if they were open to moving Eichel, don’t you think the team that wins the Alexis Lafreniere sweepstakes would be smart to try to acquire Eichel?

Eichel’s comments back in May where he indicated that he is “fed up with losing” certainly raised some eyebrows around the league and evidently caught the attention of Sabres ownership as they decided to change course with the firing of Jason Botterill as GM with Kevyn Adams taking over as his replacement.  I think Adams’ mandate is now to change things up while still building around Eichel, not moving him out though.

With all due respect to Adams who has clearly done enough to impress ownership to give him the nod, this will be his first crack at being a part of management.  Having a raw rookie in the GM role is risky enough let alone asking him to try to find the right trade for your franchise player, disgruntled as he may be at the moment.  It’s not a good time to move him, especially with his AAV of $10MM being near the top of the league at a time where teams are going to be in tough for cap space.

But for the sake of discussion, let’s say Adams was considering it.  Moving him for another established top talent doesn’t really move the needle much – now you’d have a different top player with a supporting cast that still needs some work.  So about the only way moving Eichel would make some sense is if Buffalo decided to do yet another rebuild with the target return being two or three core assets (top draft pick, top prospects, or young NHL players with top-half potential) plus some veteran salary ballast similar to what Patrik Berglund and Vladimir Sobotka were in the Ryan O’Reilly trade with St. Louis.  That doesn’t seem like a particularly appealing route for the Sabres to take at the moment so I’d be very surprised if Eichel is on the move.

M34: Are all the remaining games going to be nationally televised?

This is something that is being discussed now that the ratification is done with a schedule being set and an answer is expected in the very near future.  So with the risk of this being proven incorrect in a hurry, here is my prediction.

Exhibition games, the play-in round, and the round-robin games for the top four teams in each conference will be shown regionally with national networks being allowed to convert a handful to the wider coverage level.  The league has gone out of its way to call these games non-playoff contests and I suspect part of the reason is that they want to use this for inventory for regional sports networks to make up for some of the lost games as a result of the effective cancellation of the rest of the regular season.  (Of course, the stats are counting as playoff stats which goes against their long-stated assertion that these aren’t playoff games but let’s play along with the league here anyway.)

I also wouldn’t be shocked if some RSNs will get the ability to show games in the first round to also help make up the lost game inventory.  I could also see those games getting national coverage and while that seems somewhat redundant, it wouldn’t be that hard to do.  A world feed will be produced with individual networks doing their own graphics.  Accordingly, it would be easy enough for NBC (in the United States) or Sportsnet (in Canada) to have their own commentators doing the game nationally while the RSN has the same video feed but with the local broadcast team.  It’s a bit of a compromise and there has been plenty of that lately with the CBA MOU and Return to Play protocols getting finalized.

MoneyBallJustWorks: Thoughts on the Lindy Ruff signing by NJ and where do you think some of the more prominent names could end up going?

I was a bit surprised by the hire as I figured he’d be behind some of the more prominent names but I don’t mind it.  Ruff is not the long-term coach that’s going to steer New Jersey out of their rebuild, into contention, and onto a Stanley Cup championship.  Instead, he’s what I call a ‘transitional coach’.

Ruff’s reputation is that he gets the best offensively out of teams although the defensive play leaves something to be desired.  But right now, that’s okay.  I’d rather have that than the opposite even though that would normally be the smarter route for a team in their situation.

The strong point of this roster is their offense.  They have a pair of top picks in Nico Hischier and Jack Hughes who have plenty of skill but have been hit or miss at times in their early NHL careers.  Their top priority in a coaching search should have been finding someone who is best equipped to help these two develop.  Ruff should be able to help do that.

Are they going to struggle defensively?  Sure.  But that was going to be the case no matter who they installed as head coach unless they went to a pure trapping system and tried to win games 2-1.  That wouldn’t have been ideal for their two hopeful franchise cornerstones though.  The Devils have some talent on their back end but some of those defenders are more offensive-minded than defensive-minded so a change to a more up-tempo style may benefit them as well.

A few years from now, Hughes and Hischier have established themselves as offensive stars in an ideal world and the focus can then shift towards really shoring up the back end.  (By then, they’ll also hope to have their goaltending situation figured out as either Mackenzie Blackwood has established himself as a starter or someone else will be in that role.)  By then, they should be back in the mix for a playoff spot and will probably have made it once or twice.  That will be the time to look for the longer-term coaching option but by then, Ruff should have helped steer the franchise in the right direction.

It’s difficult to forecast where some of the other prominent names will end up as right now, there aren’t any vacancies.  With cash flows being much more limited in the short term, it’s quite possible that there aren’t any openings for coaches like Gerard Gallant, Mike Babcock, and Peter Laviolette to pursue until sometime in 2021.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

It’s time for another edition of the PHR Mailbag.  Topics in this one include Seattle, draft risers and fallers, the Rangers, playoff surprises, and compliance buyouts.  If your question doesn’t appear here, look for it in last weekend’s mailbag.

BOSSports21: Future question – so 20-21 will be delayed, most likely resulting in a mid-summer 2021 end, thereby pushing the draft/FA back again, and presumably the expansion draft. How do you think this will impact Seattle if the expansion draft isn’t until July or Aug, 2021 and you’re starting that October?

M34: Does Seattle benefit or suffer from the recent world events impact on the NHL?

I don’t think a potentially shortened turnaround from the end of 2020-21 to the start of 2021-22 really affects much in the scheme of things for Seattle.  They first have to pick their team and they’ll have data and scouting from that season (plus this one too) to use to make their information.  That’s not really affected by the timeline.

They might, however, be positively affected by the salary cap crunch.  Vegas was used to offload some bad contracts but it seemed like teams would learn their lesson for this one.  However, the expected flattening of the cap due to the pandemic is simply going to force some teams to have to go through that procedure again and that should be to Seattle’s benefit.

A shorter offseason might ultimately expedite some of those moves (or at least squeeze them into a narrower window) but a lot of these could still be pre-arranged while the playoffs were going on.  They’ll have ample time to prepare so even if their team ultimately gets built in a rather short period of time, they’ll be well-positioned to do so.

Winter in Colorado: Detroit shocked most when they drafted Moritz Seider 6th overall, a possible reach. Opposite of that, Arthur Kaliyev was drafted at 33 overall. He went lower than most mocks had him going, a definite slide. Which two players do you see filing these roles in the upcoming draft?

The first thought I had when I read this question was that Russian goalie Yaroslav Askarov could actually fit in both categories.  Not everyone believes that a goalie should go in the top-10 and if he’s taken there, some would call it a reach.  But if enough teams believe in not ‘reaching’ for a goalie early, he could fall deep enough to qualify as a slide as well.

Jake Sanderson is one that might qualify for the possible reach category.  He seems to be somewhat of a late bloomer (which is hard to do considering there haven’t been any games for basically three months) but there are rankings that have the defenseman outside the top-20 and others as high as third overall.  He looks like someone that’s in the 10-13 range but if there’s a team that sees him as the number two blueliner on the board behind Jamie Drysdale (or number one even), they’ll do like Detroit did with Seider a year ago and grab him early.

In terms of a possible slider, I’ll take Mavrik Bourque.  He was top ten in the QMJHL in points per game this season, second behind only Alexis Lafreniere in terms of 18-year-olds in their first year of NHL draft eligibility.  He’s ranked from the mid-teens to mid-twenties by most publications but concerns about his size, skating, and injuries make him a candidate to slide back.  A team that gets him in the late first round or early second (like Kaliyev) should be quite happy to see him there.

acarneglia: Who starts for the Rangers in goal? Are the Rangers the biggest sleeper in the whole postseason?

The debate over who starts is almost certain to be covered in our storylines for them which will run in the coming days so I won’t bother getting into the complete discussion here.  I do think it’s Igor Shesterkin’s spot to lose though.  His strong play is a large factor in them simply getting to this spot as they weren’t really going anywhere before they brought him up partway through the season.  I also think he’s the one that has the best chance at getting on a bit of a run.  The lack of experience is concerning but for me, Shesterkin is the one with the most short-term upside (as well as having the best long-term upside).  In a short series, I’m going for that over giving one last nod to Henrik Lundqvist or potentially trying to aid Alexandar Georgiev’s trade value.

As for part two of your question, I’ll get to that momentarily.

wu tang killa beez: Who would you see as the biggest surprise in these playoffs? After all, there is no momentum for anyone, all the teams are a little rusty and are starting a new season.

Two playing styles come to mind as ones that can really stand out and make a run.  One is that a bunch of players get hot offensively for a few weeks and the other is a team that can get a hot goalie and/or gets their defensive system down quicker than everyone else.  Even better are the teams that can get all of the above and those are the ones that have the potential to surprise.

In the East, that pick would be the Rangers.  They had a top-five offense in the regular season and while career years from Artemi Panarin and Mika Zibanejad played a big part of that, the supporting cast is still relatively strong.  They get good production from the back end as well.  And if Shesterkin plays like he did after being recalled (and that’s a big if given the inexperience), they can win a few rounds.  Of the teams that weren’t in a true playoff spot when the pandemic hit, they’re the biggest sleeper.

I also want to talk about Arizona a little bit as a potential surprise team in the West.  The goaltending was there all year and if Darcy Kuemper falters, Antti Raanta has shown that he can carry the load for a while without the team skipping a beat.  They have the defensive structure in place that they should be able to pick up again without much difficulty despite the layoff as they aren’t really integrating any newcomers from the trade deadline into the fold.  And with Taylor Hall, Phil Kessel, and Clayton Keller, they have a group of players that are capable of carrying the load offensively.  They didn’t do it much during the season but if they play to their potential, the Coyotes go from a decent team to a dangerous one.

aias: Do you think compliance buyouts will happen?

As you noted in a follow-up comment, I did touch on this in a mailbag last month but that wasn’t really a prediction on whether they’d happen and instead answered some more specific questions about it including my proposal on how they could make it a little different.

I think these will be tied to the ongoing CBA talks which are tied to the ongoing Return to Play talks.  If the NHL and the NHLPA can reach an agreement on an extension, a revised financial framework is likely going to come to fruition as well.  It will probably involve some sort of combination of increased escrow, a multi-year negotiation of the Upper Limit without the NHLPA having the ability to use the inflator, salary deferrals, and some revisions as to what is and isn’t classified as HRR.

A fixed salary cap at or around the current $81.5MM next season would be a problem for quite a few teams.  It wouldn’t be pretty but it would be manageable.  Keeping that rate for two years (or longer) is going to cause a lot of problems for a lot of teams and cause significant damage to the UFA market.  There probably isn’t much of an appetite for them if the cap problem is a one-year thing but if it goes longer, then a lot of general managers are going to want it and a lot of pending free agents will want it too to preserve their chances of getting a good contract on the open market.

I think they ultimately do reach a multi-year agreement about running a fixed salary cap so yes, I do think there will be some form of compliance buyout when all is said and done.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

It’s time for another edition of the PHR Mailbag.  Topics include hub cities for when play resumes, roster sizes, the upcoming UFA market, Stanley Cup Final marketability, and Vegas.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in our next edition.

GBear: Two questions in one here. Do you think the degree in which individual states have reopened their economies and allowed for social gatherings might be the determining factor as to where the games are played, and linked to that, could a limited number of fans in attendance be a possibility?

BOSSports21: What do you think the 2 hub cities will be? In an ideal world, I think they’d like to have them in Vegas and Toronto. But with Canadian COVID regulations, it might need to be shifted to a US Eastern city. In that case, thinking either Columbus or Tampa.

My first thought when I saw this was yes, the potential for fans could certainly impact where the NHL chooses to go.  Even at partial capacity, that’s still more money than no capacity.  And with escrow and the salary cap being huge considerations at this point, it’s hard to turn away the possibility of some extra money than expected.

But there’s also the safety element at play.  Allowing fans (and subsequently, more arena staff) brings more people into the proverbial bubble.  More people creates a higher risk of transmission if a fan transfers the virus to others.  Perhaps it’s a limited risk to the players and NHL staff but it wouldn’t look good on anyone if there was a rash of positive COVID-19 cases that come from people attending hockey games.

There’s also the fact that multiple games are going to be played each day at the start.  The enhanced sanitization protocols would need to be done in between each game which may not be possible.  Perhaps it’s done in a way where a certain section is open for each game with the rest of the facility cordoned off.  Game two is in a different level using only certain entrances, and so on with full sanitization being done at the end of the final game to get ready for the next day.  But capacity would still have to be limited.  Will it be a factor?  I think so.  But will it be the determining factor?  Probably not.

It looks like Vegas will be one of the hub cities with an announcement to be made official over the next week and a half.  The league is believed to want a Canadian team as the second option and it’s reasonable to think they’ll want one in the Eastern Time zone.  That would mean Toronto is their other likely target at this time.  If Canada’s current quarantining rules aren’t changed though, I could see them looking to Columbus ahead of Tampa Bay with there being a recent spike of COVID-19 cases in Florida.

Eric Lord: The proposed NHL roster size of 28 players seems low to me. There could be a rash of injuries due to the long layoff. If a team carries 16 forwards on their 28-man roster and gets 5 forward injuries, they will be shorthanded. Will teams be allowed to keep a black aces squad practicing in another location in case they get overrun by injuries?

pitmanrich: Do you think an increased roster size could be made permanent and not just for this playoff tournament? The salary cap might not go up by much but rosters could be filled up with young players or veterans on cheap contracts allowing players to heal properly from injury.

To clarify, the speculated roster limit at the moment is 28 skaters, not 28 players total and the expectation is that the number of goalies teams can carry is unlimited.  As a result, teams won’t be carrying 16 forwards.  It’ll be closer to 18 forwards and 10 defensemen which should allow for some injury protection.

I’d like to see a taxi squad be available and the last mailbag I did back in May, I thought there would be one.  Nothing has come out on that front yet which surprises me.  Having a few more players doing some sort of conditioning camp to stay in shape would be beneficial and I’d like to see a scenario where if a player is ruled out for the rest of the playoffs, they can recall someone from that Black Ace squad if they want.  It doesn’t look like it’s happening yet at least but here’s hoping there is one.

It’s hard to envision roster sizes increasing permanently.  Knowing that the salary cap is going to likely be flattened out for a little while until revenues rebound and escrow drops, adding more players to the active roster is only going to create a tighter squeeze for teams to work around.  The current minimum salary is $700K and jumps to $750K for 2021-22.  More than half the league finished this season with less than $1MM in cap room.  Adding one player would be a huge challenge let alone more.  With CBA talks ongoing, part of me wonders if the NHL will push for roster sizes to be dropped by one to ease cap issues, knowing the overall drop in players would largely be offset by Seattle’s entry in 2021-22.  I doubt the NHLPA would consider it but it wouldn’t surprise me if the concept was brought up at least.

MoneyBallJustWorks: What do you see this year’s crop of FAs doing (especially the mid to high tier guys) with a presumed cap freeze or decline? Do you think we see more 1-2 year deals as a result? Also, as a result of the playoffs not finishing till likely September/October, when do you think we see the start of Free Agency?

It all depends on those CBA talks I just mentioned.  If an agreement is hammered out that sets a fixed cap (or even gradual increases) for several years, there will be enough certainty for teams and players to hammer out some longer-term deals like usual.  If that doesn’t happen though, I expect a large segment of players are going to sign one-year deals with the hopes that things will rebound on the financial side a year from now.  Of that group, I suspect quite a few more will just stay with their current teams and opt for short-term stability as well which is something we don’t see a lot of.

That won’t be the case for everyone though.  The top players are still going to get the long-term, big money deals if they want although the top-end salary may come down a little bit as a result.  Some of the mid-tier players may decide to take a three or four-year deal at a lower rate for long-term stability so it’s not as if the market is going to completely dry up.  It will almost certainly look a lot different though.

As for when free agency might happen, let’s look at the NBA’s latest set of timelines for a clue as their camp and desired start dates are quite close to the NHL’s.  They’re targeting an early-to-mid-October finish for the NBA Finals so let’s use that as a rough timeline for the Stanley Cup Final as well.  The draft would probably be a week or so after that and then there has to be a few days for the UFA and RFA interview window as well.  That’d take things close to the last week of October.  With all that in mind, I could see Monday, October 26 making sense as a free agent start date but if series end quicker than anticipated, that could be moved up as I think they’d ideally like to be into that part of the offseason closer to the middle of the month.

coachdit: What two teams do you believe will make for the most competitive and entertaining finals this year, as that’s exactly what the NHL needs now more than ever?

This is tough to answer as the definition of entertaining is going to vary.  Some may want high-scoring games that are played at a run-and-gun pace.  Others like the tight 2-1 games with lots of chances but high-end goaltending.  Some enjoy the higher level of physicality that the postseason brings and would find a series with more of that entertaining.

I can’t even pin it down as to what the NHL might want.  Would they rather see the top skill teams or would they rather two big-market teams get in to boost TV ratings and advertising revenues?

Personally, I think Colorado could be a compelling team to come out of the West.  They have plenty of high-end skill and relatively unproven goaltending that can be hit or miss which adds to the intrigue.  Washington’s in a similar situation, especially with the untested Ilya Samsonov and the struggling Braden Holtby between the pipes while they have lots of firepower up front.  I think a series with them has the potential to provide a bit of everything and some unpredictability along the way while going close to the distance.  That would be an entertaining Stanley Cup Final in my book.

jrlp: Isn’t it time Vegas got its LAS back?

It seemed strange that the time that the team name wasn’t ‘Las Vegas’ and to this day, it still is a little odd.  But the reality is that a lot of people use the shortened form of ‘Vegas’ when referring to the city.  That’s largely unique as places like Los Angeles and New York aren’t like that and New Jersey isn’t abbreviated anywhere near as frequently as Las Vegas is.  That made the decision to call them ‘Vegas’ more understandable, especially with a two-word team name as well.

Given the success that the team has had on the ice and off of it in terms of merchandise and marketing, I don’t think there’s much of an appetite to change anything.  As a result, expect that the team will remain the Vegas Golden Knights for the foreseeable future.

The NHL finally has some idea of how hockey will look if it returns this summer, and players are back on the ice today as facilities start to open for Phase 2. Front offices are preparing for the draft–whenever that will be–and a playoff that may include 24 of 31 teams.

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

If you missed our last mailbag, it was split into two parts that you can read here and here. In the first, Brian gives his thoughts on which of the extra playoff teams will be the biggest threat to go deep in the postseason tournament, while the second gives some insight into the financial situation of the league going forward.

Topics in this edition of the mailbag look at the possibility of contraction, the latest from Seattle, injuries, next season’s salary cap, Kirill Kaprizov’s situation, and how postseason taxi squads may be comprised.  If your question doesn’t appear here, look for it in last weekend’s mailbag.

@rphx88: Is there a possibility that the league could contract a team do to the financial losses of the Coronavirus? I would think the Arizona Coyotes would make sense with Las Vegas in the fold and the league could return to 30 teams.

At this point in time, I suppose anything is possible.  While we have a better idea of what the NHL has planned for their return, it’s still not the most economically viable strategy.  It’s one thing to play without fans for a short stretch to finish a season that has had most of its regular season games played but it’s another to ask teams to play into next year without fans which is a real possibility if there is a second wave (or more) of the virus.  At that point, it would be tough for lower-revenue teams to stay afloat.

Having said that, I don’t think contraction is in the cards anytime soon.  For that to happen, Alex Meruelo would basically have to turn the keys into the league and the NHL wouldn’t be able to find a local buyer.  Then they wouldn’t be able to find a non-local buyer.  I get that the current picture isn’t ideal from an economic standpoint but for cities with an NHL-quality arena in place that are hoping to get an expansion franchise or a relocated one, they’re not all going to pass up on the opportunity to get one.  In this particular scenario, it might even be a below-market pickup.

I don’t think the Coyotes are in any particular danger.  Meruelo appears to have given them some stability so I wouldn’t be concerned about them being contracted.  Besides, Seattle is still on the way so even if a team was contracted now, they’d be back at 31 pretty soon.  Speaking of which…

mydadleftme: How do you think this will change things with Seattle joining the league?

This might actually work out in their favor when all is said and done when it comes to readiness.  Geoff Baker of the Seattle Times noted last month that construction on the revamped arena has continued during the pandemic as it was deemed essential by the city.  Unless things have been considerably delayed along the way (and that doesn’t appear to be the case at this point), they should be ready to go for puck drop in 2021-22.

When that puck drop will be remains to be seen.  With 2020-21 appearing to be on track for a delayed start by a couple of months, it’s quite possible that 2021-22 doesn’t start in early October either.  That would allow for a little bit more time to get KeyArena prepped and ready to go and would offset any potential slowdowns in construction between now and then.

From a hockey operations standpoint, nothing really changes.  Whenever next season happens, their scouts will be out in full force (if they’re allowed to be; video scouting may be used even more over the next year or two) to aid in the preparation for the expansion draft.  In the meantime, they’ll be sitting and waiting for games to resume like everyone else.

met man: There were quite a few major injuries prior to the shutdown.  What injured players would be ready to play if the league is restarted soon?

Also, is the Seattle team officially named yet?

Let’s wrap up the Seattle talk and do the second one first.  The team name hasn’t been revealed yet and with the current situation, I don’t see that changing anytime soon.  If the NHL’s return plans get up and running, they probably won’t want the team name being announced during the playoffs and taking any attention away from it either.

At this point, most players are ready to return now and if we’re a couple of months away from restarting, even more will be able to come back by then.  Among the notables that are believed to be cleared to return are Jake Guentzel (Pittsburgh), Seth Jones (Columbus), Dougie Hamilton (Carolina), Mikko Rantanen (Colorado), Steven Stamkos (Tampa Bay), and Vladimir Tarasenko (St. Louis).  There are many more beyond that.

This actually creates a very intriguing dimension for this postseason if it happens.  Instead of going in with a few players out and some nursing minor aches and pains, most teams are going to be fully healthy or very close to it.  Of course, with being off for so long, there will be additional risks for small issues that often plague players during training camp and those will be exacerbated by effectively going from not playing to playoff games instead of the preseason.  This will undoubtedly be a unique postseason and player health is certainly going to be a big part of that.

coachdit: Earlier this year prior to the season being halted there was an article proposing an $84-$88.2 million salary cap for next season. With current economic conditions, when they finally settle on a figure do you think it’s in the $84-$88MM range, or an unchanged $81.5MM, or a retraction down to say $80MM, or worse? My assumption is the unchanged $81.5MM, I’m curious what you think.

At this point, it’s safe to throw the higher cap numbers out the window.  While the postseason games would allow them to at least collect TV and advertising revenues, they’re still going to be without fans which play a big part in the bottom line through ticket sales and concessions.  Hockey-related revenues are going down from last season as a result and HRR is a big factor in what sets the cap.  Even on the extremely rare chance that HRR went up, the NHLPA wouldn’t opt to use their inflator in an effort to reduce escrow.

Yes, the dreaded e-word.  Get used to hearing it even more often than usual when it comes to the salary cap discussions.  Teams don’t want the Upper Limit of the cap to go down as that will create an even tougher situation to stay in compliance.  (Compliance buyouts don’t seem to have a lot of support either.)  The players won’t want to accept rollbacks so keeping escrow at a somewhat reasonable number is going to be the key.

Like you, I think that the cap will remain unchanged at $81.5MM for next season and I wouldn’t be surprised if they set the 2021-22 cap at that or only marginally higher at the same time.  They know they’re two years out from the next CBA so there aren’t many long-term ramifications as a result.  If they can agree on a two-year negotiated cap, they may be able to smooth the escrow over the two years instead of a really ugly hit next season.  It’s far from a perfect scenario but as is the case with many things in the sports world right now, the focus is shifting from the perfect plan to the least unideal one.

Lindros88: Will Kaprizov cross the pond?

Just when it looked like we were finally going to be able to escape this question that has basically been out there for four years, we have a new wrinkle in play.  The NHL doesn’t plan to lift the restriction they instituted at the beginning of the pandemic that said 2019-20 contracts were no longer allowed even though players on reserve lists had signed during the playoffs as recently as last year.  That was what was supposed to happen with Wild prospect Kirill Kaprizov as it would allow him to play right away and burn a cheap entry-level year quickly.  That’s now off the table.

The other factor now at play is the start of the 2020-21 season which is in question but it seems like December is a reasonable start point.  The KHL starts up in September and expiring contracts end April 30th in a normal year.  At this point, it appears they’re still operating with that timeline in mind.  Does Kaprizov want to sit for effectively nine months from the time the KHL shut down to the start of next season?  That’s not appealing from his perspective or even Minnesota’s.  Seeing a player that they view as a top prospect sitting for that long isn’t ideal.

To answer your question, yes, I do think he will come over.  But I’m a lot less certain about it being for the start of next season.  A one-year KHL deal that would allow him to play there and then come over late in the season (the end of April may still be the regular season next year because of the scheduling) seems pretty appealing from his perspective.  With normal in-season contract rules applying, he’d still be able to burn the ELC year quickly and get to stay at home a bit longer.  Kaprizov will eventually be in a Wild uniform but the wait may wind up being a little longer yet.

@bk656: Should the NHL return, do you guys think there would be expanded rosters in case a player gets injured or contracts COVID-19?

Yes, there will be expanded rosters.  I was particularly curious to see how things would have played out had the regular season resumed.  There would have been a need for some extra players but with a lot of teams up against the Upper Limit of the salary cap, that would have been a tricky proposition.  However, with the focus now shifting towards going straight to the postseason, the cap doesn’t apply so that won’t be an issue.

Playoff teams typically carry taxi squads as long as their AHL team isn’t in the postseason.  With the AHL season over though, there won’t be any teams that will have a limited group of players to draw from so it’s nice that it’s an equal playing field to work with instead of some teams having more players available than others.  The question is going to be how many are allowed in the hub city.  In the past, some teams basically brought up their entire AHL team to skate as Black Aces in the NHL playoffs but that’s not likely to happen here.

I suspect we’re going to see teams trying to carry two sets of extra players.  One would be in the hub city and would consist of the players that would be most likely to enter the lineup.  I could see that being capped at 30 players per team, enough to have some extras at each position but nothing overly excessive either.  Meanwhile, in the club cities (assuming distancing requirements have been lessened), there would be a smaller second group effectively going through a conditioning camp with the AHL coaching staff and would be called upon to go to the hub city if injuries strike.  It’s going to be an odd setup but everything else is going to be odd for this postseason so why should this be any different?

With most sports on hold indefinitely due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, it’s time for another mailbag.  Topics in this edition include sleeper teams in an extended postseason, the possibility of compliance buyouts, how things are progressing towards an agreement to continue the season, and the recent cancellation of the rest of the AHL campaign.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next weekend’s edition.

acarneglia: Which team currently outside a playoff spot is the biggest threat in a 24-team playoff?

In the East, I’d put the Rangers as a threat.  They’re currently in the top five in the league in goals scored and while their goals against number isn’t pretty (tied for 23rd), they only allowed more than three goals in four of their last 19 games before the stoppage.  Of course, a big reason for this is Igor Shesterkin who quickly ascended to the number one role upon getting recalled and really gave them the stability between the pipes that they were lacking.  It’s a big if given his relative inexperience but if he was to come back and play at that level with New York remaining one of the stronger offensive teams, that could be a pretty good recipe to make some noise.

Out West, the Canucks are only out by virtue of the tiebreaker but of the teams not currently in at the moment, they’re the strongest.  They’re a strong score-by-committee team and that was even before they added Tyler Toffoli just before the trade deadline.  Vegas showed that a team that doesn’t have that elite producer can still do well with a lot of capable scoring depth and Vancouver certainly has that.  Jacob Markstrom has fully recovered from his knee injury and considering he’s showcasing himself for a big contract this offseason, he has a lot to play for.  A healthy starter and a deep attack could do some damage in a very tight Pacific Division.

aias: Any ideas on how the buyouts would work? Is this a one-time deal?

The Mistake of Giving Eugene Melnyk a Liver Transplant: How would compliance buyouts impact recapture penalties on the bought-out contracts? Also, would each team be limited to one buyout? If so, would teams be allowed to trade players so another team can buy them out?

vincent k. mcmahon: With the news a few weeks ago about Alex Steen considering retirement and the possibility of comp buyouts, would buying out Steen’s and Faulk’s contracts make enough room to re-sign Pietrangelo and add someone on the wing to replace Steen?

First off, the talk about compliance buyouts is strictly theoretical at this point.  With the belief that the salary cap will drop or be flattened out for a couple of seasons, some wonder if the league and players will negotiate a brief return of the cap-exempt compliance buyouts as there was following the signing of the last CBA.  But nothing is official yet.

I think it would be a one-time thing and probably limited to one per team.  Not all owners want something like this as it’s something that larger-market teams can exploit easier than ones with pockets that aren’t as deep.  I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a little different than previous versions though because of this particular situation.  An idea I have is that teams that execute the buyout also have to pay an proportional (or equal) amount into a fund that’s distributed to teams that don’t use one and is subject to HRR calculations.  That would provide a bit of disincentive for teams to use one unless they absolutely have to and it would also feed a bit to the players which might help their signing off on it.  I’d like to see the ability to trade players to be bought out (the trade market is limited enough as it is) but that is something the league has frowned upon in the past.

Salary cap recapture is only limited to the now-illegal back-diving contracts from years ago and a lot of those players aren’t in the league anymore.  At a quick glance, there are only seven active players left (excluding those still under contract but effectively retired) that are on one of those contracts and of those, most aren’t buyout candidates anyway as they’re still core players.  Jeff Carter could be a possibility but his lingering injury would make that tough and the Kings have plenty of cap space as it is so that might take Jonathan Quick off the table as well.  Maybe Zach Parise in Minnesota but I think that trade with the Islanders that fell through at the deadline gets revisited this offseason.  If I had to guess, if Parise was to be bought out under this scenario, the recapture would go away since it would be a cap-exempt buyout; it should, therefore, eliminate all lingering cap commitments.  (Sidney Crosby, Duncan Keith, Ryan Suter, and Shea Weber are the other active players on deals subject to recapture.  Zdeno Chara and Tyler Myers used to be but have since signed a cap-compliant contract.)

Would St. Louis really execute a compliance buyout on Justin Faulk?  While the cap hit may not exist in that instance, they’d still be paying him more than $30MM in actual money over 14 years before he played a single game on an extension they gave him.  Factoring in what they gave up to get him from Carolina and that is a huge price to pay to keep Alex Pietrangelo around on an even pricier deal.  Is Pietrangelo worth effectively $100MM when you factor in Faulk’s buyout cost plus what an eight-year deal for the captain would be?  Buying out a contract before it even begins would be unprecedented; even the Flyers waited two years before they decided to pay Ilya Bryzgalov for 14 years (through 2026-27) to not play for them.  I don’t think that’s something St. Louis would want to do.  I think they’d be open to a trade but not a buyout.

Alex Steen is certainly a buyout candidate whether it’s a regular one or a compliance one if those are allowed.  In your scenario, compliance buyouts of both would probably allow them to replace Steen with someone making about half of Steen’s $5.75MM price tag but it’s probably not going to happen.  The likelier scenario is buying Steen out and trying to clear some mid-tier salaries (Jake Allen and Oskar Sundqvist come to mind) for cheap replacements and try to leverage what should be a depressed free agent market into cobbling a way to keep Pietrangelo in the fold.

curtism88: All the talk in the MLB is about how much players will or won’t get paid when the season starts. How have talks in the NHL progressed so far and could we see a snag similar to MLB?

It’s a much different situation in the NHL and MLB simply because of where they are.  MLB owners want to institute an entirely new economic system for this season that would bring in revenue sharing and salaries (beyond the small amounts they were paid at the end of spring training) would be based off of that.  MLBTR has the details on that one so I won’t jump into that here other than to say they have a bit of a mountain to climb based on the early response.  Meanwhile, the NHL is trying to end their season and there is only one payment that players haven’t received yet.  Pierre LeBrun of TSN and The Athletic noted on Friday (Twitter link) that an NHLPA vote is being conducted this weekend to potentially defer it further (closer to a resumption of play).

Effectively, MLB is working on a revised schedule and salary structure while the NHL is basically just trying to either wrap up its regular season or jump to the playoffs.  Any potential snag at this point in the NHL would be tied strictly to safety and family concerns while MLB has that to deal with plus the financial situation which at this point is probably the bigger hurdle they’re trying to jump over.

By all accounts, talks between the NHL and NHLPA in that regard have gone relatively well.  They’re not at the point of a concrete proposal yet (whereas MLB owners have a formal proposal in place) but there hasn’t been a lot of public posturing on either side.  Not every player is going to want to return but I think enough either do or understand the ramifications of not returning are less than ideal that there shouldn’t be a ton of resistance.  A lot depends on the various jurisdictions in terms of allowable public gatherings which could impact how conditioning camps are held.  The 14-day self-quarantine window in Canada after travelling will also play a role.  Work visas typically run until June 30 so some work needs to be done there as well.  If play doesn’t resume, I suspect it will be due to virus-related issues more than the league and Players’ Association not finding common ground on a proposal to resume play.

ldoggnation: The AHL called the season over. Is that a precursor to the NHL doing the same? And (unfortunately) if so, when would the NHL call it?

Winter in Colorado: The AHL has cancelled its season. All the pundits say that league is dependent on ticket sales for revenue. Not all AHL teams are owned by their parent NHL club. With the possibility of no fans in attendance next year, is the AHL truly in trouble?

To be honest, I’m surprised it took the AHL as long as it did to make the obvious call official.  There was no way that they’d be able to resume games anytime soon and from an economic standpoint, they don’t have the TV and sponsorship deals that would allow them to at least mitigate some of the losses from not having ticket sales that the NHL does.  I wouldn’t attribute that as a precursor to the NHL considering the same though.  I believe Gary Bettman when he said he has no intention of calling the season.  With a willingness to delay the start of 2020-21 into December and play into the summer if needed, they can wait this out for a while yet.

With nearly two-thirds of AHL teams being owned by NHL franchises, I don’t think the league as a whole is in any sort of long-term jeopardy.  NHL teams need minor league affiliates and they will do their best to ensure the stability of that league.  I wouldn’t be shocked if there are less than 31 teams next season, however, as independently-owned franchises may not have the same desire to open up with no fans (or a sizable restriction on them).

It’s one thing to wipe out the end of a season due to no fans being able to attend but the NHL teams that own AHL franchises aren’t going to be as willing to throw away an entire year of development; fans or not, they’re going to want to run at least some sort of schedule next season.  I could see some of the independent teams suspending operations for a year, forcing their parent team to try to team up with others in that situation or find a few teams to loan a handful of players each to.  That was quite common not that long ago so in the short-term that should work again.  There will be some pain for next season in the AHL but the league as a whole should remain on solid footing assuming things eventually get back to ‘normal’.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.