PHR Mailbag

Topics in this edition of the mailbag include the types of moves Utah should look to make, the top fourth lines in the NHL, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in one of our last two mailbag columns.

bottlesup: With what the Avalanche are doing right now and with Vegas acquiring Rasmus Andersson, is there a world in which my Stars can possibly make the Stanley Cup Final?

At this point, I wouldn’t be as concerned about Vegas.  Yes, they’re better, but they’re a third-round opponent (Dallas isn’t dropping to a Wild Card spot and lining up with the Pacific Division) and with shaky goaltending this season, they’re beatable in a seven-game series.  Not saying the Stars would for sure win but they’d have a solid chance.

Now, assuming they get past Minnesota in the first round, Colorado is its own unique test.  Yes, they slumped before the break but let’s face it, teams that have a runaway first half tend to take their foot of the gas a little, so to speak.  That doesn’t worry me.  The Avs would be the favorites in that series but they’re also not unbeatable.  I’d say that Jake Oettinger would need to be sharper than he has been this season for them to have a chance.

For Dallas to get the best chance to make it through to the Cup Final, they need to add defensive help.  They have a strong top three but then are piecing it together from there with iffier options that you might not want to rely on for 16-plus minutes per game in the postseason.  A solid defensive second-pairing blueliner that can help the penalty kill and take some pressure off the third pairing would help.  A bit more firepower in the bottom six would help their chances as well.  Once they get a better sense of whether Tyler Seguin can return (keeping their LTIR pool intact) or not (an SELTIR placement would add nearly $6MM to that pool), they’ll see how feasible those acquisitions could be.

Long story short, there’s definitely a world in which Dallas gets there.  They’re one of the top teams in the league for a reason.  They have a strong, experienced core group that has had some playoff success before.  They’re not the favorite to come out of the West today but someone has to survive the gauntlet and it could very well be them.

Cla23: The Winnipeg Jets always claimed to be a draft-and-develop team. Meanwhile, they are one of the oldest teams, the Moose are not very good, and a lot of young players want out as they feel they are not getting a chance with the big club; their drafting is poor as well.

Do you think it is time to shake up the management and scouting staff? Scott Arniel should be safe as he doesn’t have much to work with.

It’s fair to say that Winnipeg’s drafting and development hasn’t been great as of late.  Part of that is not having some of their better picks as a result of making win-now trades.  Losing a first-round pick to retirement at 21 due to a hereditary tissue disorder was something out of their control.  But, in general, if you look at their draft history (HockeyDB has a quick snapshot), the results aren’t pretty.  And the end result is a system that’s certainly toward the bottom of the league.

As to whether an overhaul is needed, that’s a little harder to answer.  We know the Jets are one of the stricter-budget teams in the league and their scouting group is on the smaller side.  So is their player development group.  Is this a case of simply needing more eyes that could aid on the drafting side and a bigger development team to help those prospects?  It’s definitely possible.  I’d like to think that could fix at least some of the problem without overhauling things.

I think the only way that an overhaul would be considered is if ownership decided that the current core has gone as far as they can and that it’s time to commit to a multi-year rebuild.  At that time, maybe you bring in some new decision makers in management and scouting.  I’m not sure the market could survive any sort of extended rebuild from an attendance and revenue standpoint and the fact they’ve re-signed all the veteran players they have suggests that’s not even being considered.  So, for now, the more realistic hope would be that the front office gets a bigger budget to work with to rectify some of the drafting and development issues and hope that over time, that gets things back in the right direction.

GBear: The Mammoth seem to be a legit threat to make the playoffs, what move(s) do you foresee them making near the trade deadline? I’ll hang up and listen for the answer. ☎️

I’ll start with a question of my own.  Where does GM Bill Armstrong feel his team is within the rebuilding cycle?  Are they in the ‘happy to be here’ phase or aiming higher?  The answer to that dictates the answer to your question.

I have them in the former.  They’re not a top-three team in the loaded Central Division and I don’t think they beat Vegas or Edmonton if they wind up crossing over.  I suspect Armstrong feels the same way so it’s probably not the time to swing big.

However, he should also want to reward his roster with some reinforcements, albeit more of the depth variety.  An upgrade over Nick DeSimone and Olli Maatta is a small move that can give the back end a bit of help.  There should be several of those players on the move that would only cost the Mammoth one of their previously-acquired selections.  Up front, getting Logan Cooley back should be enough of an upgrade down the middle so I’d look at the wing.  Someone like Michael Bunting makes a lot of sense.  With the right fit, he can play basically on any line, allowing them to deepen the lineup.  He plays with some jam which should appeal to Andre Tourigny.  And he’s only 30; it’s plausible that they’d want to give him a multi-year deal if things went well so he feels like a fit on that front as well.  And, again, their surplus picks should cover a big chunk of the acquisition cost.

Even if they wind up shoring up their group for an early playoff exit, a team can learn a lot from that short series by getting that taste.  That’s worth using some assets to try to help solidify while also being restrained knowing that the bigger moves (that we know Armstrong will sniff around on) will likely come in the offseason.

Unclemike1526: With Frondell and Kantserov coming late this year in all likelihood, and Murphy and maybe Dickinson too being moved, Name the one guy (under 30) the Hawks could get in a trade that can put the puck in the net? A flat-out scorer. They need that more than anything. Frondell can take Dickinson’s spot eventually and Del Mastro can take Murphy’s; there has to be somebody out there, right? I don’t want to move Mikheyev or Grzelcyk and would rather re-sign them. Grzelcyk is solid and Mikheyev is too valuable as a PK guy. They need a scorer, right? The time for draft picks is over. Thanks.

Unfortunately, this isn’t the time of year when a lot of under-30 impact scorers tend to be moved.  But if St. Louis is ready to shake things up, making a run at Jordan Kyrou makes sense.  He’s not having a great year this season but before that, he had three straight 30-plus-goal seasons so that should fit the bill for what you’re looking for.  He’s 27 and signed for five more years after this one at $8.125MM, a price tag and term the Blackhawks can afford.  It’d take parting with a key youngster and a quality pick or prospect but if the goal is to get an upgrade to help take the next step, he might be it.  Admittedly, I’m not sure he’s a great fit with Connor Bedard but talent is talent and he’d be a big upgrade.

On a smaller scale, they’re the type of team I could see wanting to take a look at Patrik Laine.  It’s starting to sound like Montreal is willing to retain money to move him and take a negligible at best return for him to open up cap space for themselves.  Chicago has loads of cap space and a six-week flyer to see how the 27-year-old might fare with a fresh start and if he might be a short-term solution for a couple of years after this.  It runs counter to them being a seller but if the cost is next to nothing (or nothing), it’s a dart throw that might be worth making.

Daniel M: Blake Lizotte’s recent re-signing has me wondering if the Penguins have the best 4th line in the NHL right now. Their underlying numbers look really good, even though they start a ton of their shifts in the defensive zone. They contribute offensively too. What are some of the NHL’s best 4th lines?

Pittsburgh’s trio would be right up there.  They’ve really impressed and have been together enough to show that it’s not just short-term good luck.  Right now, they may very well be the best.

I pushed this question to the last mailbag so I could watch some games with this question in the back of my mind.  Two fourth lines, in particular, stood out.  One was Buffalo’s with Jordan Greenway and Beck Malenstyn being centered by Peyton Krebs.  It’s a line with a lot of size and physicality but some solid defensive play and a bit of offensive upside to go along with a cycle game.  Greenway’s continuing injury woes are certainly a concern moving forward, however.

The other one that caught my eye was Boston’s trio of Tanner Jeannot, Sean Kuraly, and Mark Kastelic.  A little penalty-prone, sure, but that’s an energy line with some defensive acumen, a bit of offensive touch, and an ability to cycle a team to death in the attacking zone.  That type of line can do some damage as the checking gets a little tighter down the stretch and into the playoffs and I could see it being more successful in the coming weeks.

One of the challenges in evaluating fourth lines is that they’re forever fluid.  It’s rare to find a combination that works for an extended period of time.  Players get hurt, shuffled in and out of the lineup, or moved up if things are going well.  Per MoneyPuck, Pittsburgh’s fourth line of Connor Dewar, Noel Acciari, and Lizotte, is the 18th-most-used line in the league.  Not just among fourth lines, that’s all lines.  That type of consistency is extremely rare for a fourth line and probably gives it a leg up on the rest overall.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include how much (or little) the Rangers might be selling, potential defense targets for the Bruins, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s mailbag while we’ll have one more next weekend as well.

lgr34561: Hi Rangers fan here. A few things. First of all, if you were in the GMs shoes (which you would probably do a much better job than Chris Drury), what direction would you take from here as in what kind of moves would you make? Second of all, do you think that a retool is enough (like Drury says) to put this team back into contention or is he just sugarcoating a long rebuild? Thank you!

Schwa: To piggyback here:

Curious if you expect any of the NMCs under contract to waive? Would you expect Drury to inquire with JT, Mika, and/or Trocheck and consider a heavier rebuild?

I imagine Trocheck would return quite a sum, given what the Canadiens gave up for Danault.

Are Mika and JT high-value given the current center market, despite the length of their contracts?

I’ve been one of those people who look at the Rangers and go ‘they can’t be that bad’.  That was me last season and heading into this year as well.  I say that because I completely get why Drury might still think that way.  With a high-end goalie, a solid group of forwards on paper, and a decent defense (when healthy), they shouldn’t be as bad as they have been.  And it’s why I believe Drury’s intention legitimately is a short-term retool and not an actual rebuild.

I don’t think they’re planning to blow up the core.  Instead, they’ll sell a bit at the deadline, get some future assets, then try to make a trade or free agent signing over the summer to get themselves back into the Wild Card picture at the very least.  It can be done and done with some success as long as they realize that success isn’t going to be defined by a long playoff run but simply by getting back to the playoffs and ideally getting some shine back from a reputational standpoint.

To move quickly to the second question for a moment, I don’t expect the other veterans with trade protection to be in play.  At most, maybe one if a team ponies up a better-than-expected return that Drury can’t refuse.  I think it’s going to be more like move Artemi Panarin, see if there’s a lateral swap for Alexis Lafreniere, maybe look at a move on the back end, and call it a day.  That’s based on my assumption that they’re still eyeing a playoff spot next season so they’re not going to want to give up a lot of talent.

Given how few sellers there are and the fact that a lot of the veteran Rangers could fill positions of need on other teams (particularly given the need for impact centers), I think New York could get big returns for several of their veterans.  Knowing that, I might be more inclined to do more of a multi-year rebuild, assuming that the veterans would waive their trade protection.  But, again, I think the plan is something pretty quick that technically doesn’t fill the definition of a rebuild.

Bigalval: I think the Kings need a full rebuild and changes on the administrative side also. Luc, Holland, and Hiller should all be fired. The game has passed Holland by; he had a brutal start when becoming the Kings’ general manager. Luc also has no clue and Hiller doesn’t know how to fix things. It was a horrible decision to let him coach this year. He should be fired soon, even with a rebuild. It’s probably gonna take four or five years to fix this mess. Thoughts?

Fundamentally, I agree that a shakeup is needed.  I had Jim Hiller being the first coach fired a while back, something that’s clearly not happening since Columbus wound up being the first team to pull the trigger on that front.  I’m not a big fan of speculating about people getting fired but that’s a card that still could get played at this point.

Given that Ken Holland is in his first season with the team, I don’t think he realistically would be in jeopardy of losing his job.  General managers tend to get a relatively long shelf life and while Holland is closer to the end of his career than the beginning (or even the middle), he probably gets a couple more years in some role.

Then we come to Luc Robitaille, who has been in this role since 2007.  He was a Hall of Fame player with his best days coming with the Kings, who have won two Stanley Cups with him in that role.  That’s a hard person to let go, even if I agree that a change of direction and vision might ultimately be beneficial in the long run.  Unless ownership decides they want to overhaul things, I’m not sure we’re at that point yet.  And even if we were, it might very well be Holland who would take over.

Personally, I’d like to see what this group can do with a new coach and a vision of trying to add some skill and speed to the lineup.  This is a playoff-caliber team, albeit more of a Wild Card team than a true contender.  But an influx of some skill and a more aggressive offensive style might get them going.  If that doesn’t happen, then using Anze Kopitar’s retirement as a springboard into a rebuild makes some sense.  If this core has gone as far as it can, then a step back to take two steps forward might not be the worst idea.  I’m not sure that will happen with the current administration in place, however.

rayk: Which pending UFA among Dickinson, Mikheyev, and Murphy has the most deadline trade value and which the least, assuming salary retention for all three?

Let’s start with Jason Dickinson ($2.125MM with maximum retention).  As expected, his breakout showing in his first couple of seasons in Chicago that showed signs of being unsustainable proved to be unsustainable.  Nonetheless, he’s a solid checking forward who can kill penalties and, perhaps most importantly, play center.  Center depth is always in high demand at this time of year and Dickinson’s physicality lends itself well to playoff-type hockey.  I expect he’ll get a lot of interest.

Ilya Mikheyev ($2.02MM with max retention) is having the best offensive season of the three and has also had some success killing penalties, particularly this season.  I think his value now is higher than it was when Chicago was paid to take on his contract but his history suggests he won’t be as successful in the limited role he’d have with a contender.  Where Dickinson is in the same type of role he’d have on a new team (just a little ice time), Mikheyev would be in line for a bigger drop so there are more question marks as to how impactful he’d be.  He’s someone I could see teams viewing as an option further down their list but I don’t think he’ll be as sought after.

Connor Murphy ($2.2MM with full retention) isn’t having a good year.  His best days are behind him but if you’re a playoff team looking for defensive depth, what are you typically looking for?  Good size, experience, penalty killing abilities, good shot blocker, and being right-handed is a bonus.  Technically, Murphy checks them all.  I don’t see a contending team wanting him to be more than a number six but I expect several teams will want him for that role if the Blackhawks are eating half of the remaining contract.

In terms of who’d get the biggest return, I’d go with Dickinson, then Murphy, then Mikheyev.  (I like Mikheyev but his profile is not the type that contenders typically seek out at this time of year.)  One thing worth noting, while this scenario had Chicago retaining on all three, they only have two retention slots available since one is being used on Seth Jones.

Black Ace57: Is it finally time for the Flyers to follow the Rangers’ lead and give up on this season and sell at the deadline?

To add onto this, why not do what the Flyers did in the past with trades like the Carter and Richards ones and at least try to shake things up without strictly buying or selling? Examples I’m thinking of are Wright with the Kraken or Power with the Sabres as targets.

Going into today’s action, the Flyers are eight points out of a top-three seed in the Metropolitan Division and ten points out in the Wild Card chase.  They have at least one game in hand on the teams holding those last playoff spots as well.  That’s not an insurmountable gap.  But it’s an improbable one.  And realistically, if they got to the postseason, I don’t think they’d be a tough out.  So yes, I’d say they should be in sell mode.

You note the old Jeff Carter and Mike Richards trades from a while back as a way to possibly reshape the roster without being a true seller.  But those players were impact centers with strong track records of winning hockey.  Who on Philadelphia’s roster has that type of history and reputation?  Travis Konecny is a nice player, a legitimate top-line winger.  Maybe he’s in that territory but swapping out your leading scorer for the sake of a change carries some big risks.  Owen Tippett feels like a potential change-of-scenery candidate so maybe there’s an option there but he’s not at the level of Carter and Richards and they may not be selling at the peak of his value.

The problem with saying they should be sellers is that they don’t have a lot to realistically sell.  Their pending UFAs are depth pieces that wouldn’t yield a return of consequence.  Rasmus Ristolainen can’t stay healthy which hurts his market.  I expect they’ll try to sign Trevor Zegras to a long-term pact.  They’re not moving Christian Dvorak after extending him while Sean Couturier’s contract takes him off the table.  On defense, Travis Sanheim isn’t moving, Cameron York probably isn’t in play, nor is Jamie Drysdale who they still have hopes for.

Maybe Bobby Brink is an option if the Flyers aren’t thrilled about what his next contract with arbitration rights might cost.  I could see Nick Seeler attracting some interest; he might be their best trade chip.  And while Samuel Ersson might be in play, how much value does he have in a down year?  So yes, while selling makes sense in theory, Philadelphia might not have much to sell.

sovietcanuckistanian: By all accounts, the Bruins made a legit effort/offer for Rasmus Andersson. I get that didn’t get him (he wanted LV and I guess Calgary took a better deal since he hasn’t signed an extension yet), but he clearly filled a glaring need. Who do they pivot to in terms of finding someone to fill that hole – given that their internal options aren’t cutting it at the moment?

The next most prominent right-shot defender in play is Dougie Hamilton.  I think it’s safe to say that option isn’t on the table.  Assuming they’re looking for someone who has some of Andersson’s attributes and isn’t a rental player, the next best option to look at might be Blues blueliner Justin Faulk.

He’s someone who would give them some secondary offense behind Charlie McAvoy while he’s still enough of a minutes-eater to easily slot into a top-four role.  While he’s not a defensive anchor, he’s still a capable penalty killer.  And with one year left after this on his contract, he’s not a pure rental either which might be appealing to GM Don Sweeney.  The $6.5MM cap charge will be a challenge to overcome though, given that it’s unlikely that St. Louis will retain on it whereas Calgary did on Andersson’s expiring deal.  But fit-wise, he’d fit the bill.

Mario Ferraro would also help and he’s easier to fit in on the cap but there’s no guarantee that he’ll move with the Sharks hanging around the playoff mix and trying to re-sign him.  Rasmus Ristolainen is also believed to be available but with his track record of injuries and Boston already having Nikita Zadorov, that might not be the best fit for them.  But overall, Faulk feels like the right fit for them if they can make the cap elements work.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include Artemi Panarin’s future which now won’t be with the Rangers, theorizing a possible Nikita Kucherov extension, and much more.  We had enough questions from our latest callout for two more columns so if your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in one of those.

12Kelly: I really think the Sabres should re-sign Tuch and continue to build this team around the core of Tuch, Thompson, Dahlin, etc. The talent is in place to be able to deal from our young players such as Ostlund, Rosen, and maybe even Power to acquire a solid secondary scorer. Thoughts?

I imagine most Buffalo fans want to see Alex Tuch re-signed to a long-term deal.  At a time when the team is trying to make the playoffs and emerge from a rebuild that has had several iterations already, losing a top-line winger is going to make that process much more difficult.  Yes, it’s going to cost a lot of money (he’s not going to be on a value contract anymore) and with the long-term extension given to Josh Doan this week, it’s not going to leave a lot for pending RFA Zach Benson, among their others who need new deals.  But this is a case of sign him and figure it out later.

While I agree philosophically that your other suggestion of moving youth for win-now help makes sense in the long haul, I’m not sure now is the right time for that.  Right now, the Sabres are doing so well that it’d be hard to mess with team chemistry.  And given how largely inexperienced they are, I’d want to see how their current core fares with the prospect of meaningful games down the stretch and possibly the playoffs.  I’d then use those evaluations to help determine how best to proceed over the summer.  By then, they’ll know what’s happening with Tuch and whether they’re needing to replace him.  Meanwhile, if they do re-sign him, they may be hard-pressed to afford another top-six piece for next season.

I want to highlight Owen Power specifically for a moment.  Yes, he’s overpaid for the role he has right now but Bowen Byram is eligible for unrestricted free agency in less than a year and a half.  If you trade Power for a scorer and then Byram goes elsewhere in 2027, now the back end is in trouble.  If they can extend Byram, then Power looks like more of a viable trade chip.  Needing to wait to do an extension (that can’t happen until this July) should take Power off the table for the time being.

vincent k. mcmahon: What are your thoughts on Steve Ott being named the HC of the Thunderbirds for the rest of the season?

Also, do you think this is a potential tryout for Ott to be the next HC if the Blues move on from Jim Montgomery? (which I don’t foresee happening but it’s not completely off the table).

I’m a little surprised it took this long for Ott to get that spot.  I thought he’d have landed it a couple of years ago when Steve Konowalchuk took over behind their bench.  By all accounts, Ott has done a very solid job behind the bench in St. Louis since ending his playing career to the point where he has been brought up as a speculative head coaching candidate off and on the last two offseasons.  This is the next logical step in his coaching career.

If things go well (it’s always a little tough with more veteran-laden teams where the floor is high but the ceiling often low) and things turn around down the stretch, Ott might get serious head coaching consideration this summer.  Realistically, it might take another year or two.  By then, we’ll know if the Blues are partway through a rebuild or if they’re still trying to win with a veteran core in which case a rookie head coach might not make the most sense for them.

That said, knowing that the shelf life of an NHL head coach is often only a few years, there’s a possibility that the window lines up for Ott and the Blues.  But I wouldn’t be shocked if he’s already behind another NHL bench by the time St. Louis ponders its next coaching change down the road.

LA All Day: I’m curious as to where the Artemi Panarin sweepstakes are at, and if the Kings are considered a frontrunner or possible landing spot here. Does Holland’s aggressive nature end up landing the Kings their much-needed scorer, or will another team end up out-bidding LA once again?

Tucsontoro1: Should the Hawks make a serious run at Panarin?

At this point, it’s too early in the process to call anyone a frontrunner for Panarin.  By all accounts, his goal was to re-sign with the Rangers.  He just wasn’t willing to take a big discount to do so but I believe his and his agent’s expectation was that eventually, something would get done.  While he didn’t say much in the aftermath of the letter that GM Chris Drury released a little more than a week ago, I think the confusion he spoke about was genuine.  To go from that to having a shortlist of teams to go to in a week seems a little too quick for me.

I don’t expect Panarin to give the Rangers a big list of teams he’d be willing to go to.  And with full trade protection, he controls the show.  I could see the list only being two or three teams deep.  Whoever those are will be the ultimate frontrunners.  It might take until after the Olympics for that list to be presented.

As for the Kings specifically, they need offense and Panarin brings a lot of it so from that standpoint, there’s a fit.  I’m not sure he necessarily fits in with the way they play but talent is talent and they need more firepower.  Sometimes, it’s best not to overthink it.  They’re also a big-market team and that mattered to Panarin in free agency.  Having said that, given their inability to get past the first round in recent years and that they continue to spin their wheels, so to speak, I’d be surprised if Los Angeles is on that shortlist.  If they are, however, they have the cap space and some younger assets that might appeal to the Rangers so they could make a real push for him.  I expect GM Ken Holland would go big on an offer, especially if it comes with a contract extension.

Chicago is an interesting idea.  Is he too old to fit in with their young core?  Probably.  But at the same time, they need a legitimate influx of firepower and for all the cap space and young assets they have, they haven’t been able to get a true top liner.  They’ve done alright with some in-between fillers (Tyler Bertuzzi, for example) but Panarin’s at another level.  But for the fit to be viable, there would have to be a contract extension as part of the swap.  Trading for Panarin as a rental isn’t a great idea for a team whose playoff aspirations aren’t the greatest.  But if Panarin is willing to return to the Blackhawks for the longer term, putting him as Connor Bedard’s winger (or anchoring a second line) would certainly help get them to the next phase in their rebuild, one that sees them legitimately battling for a playoff spot.

rayk: The NYR now have only $2.26 mill in cap space. Even at the deadline, how can they find teams Panarin okays (has NMC) that can afford him at his big salary, even with some salary retention? Most of the contenders have little cap space also, and will need the max retained.

For the Rangers, that cap space number is with Panarin on the books in full at $11.643MM.  Even if they retain the maximum of 50% of that, they’re still freeing up over $5.8MM (in full-season space) so they’re more than fine in that regard.  Now, it does limit them a bit in that they can’t take much more back in offsetting salary than what they’re freeing up but it will be more than workable for them to find a suitable trade for him.

A roughly $5.82MM price tag (with max retention) is a lot for some contenders to afford today.  But six weeks from now at the trade deadline, it’s a lot easier.  A team with around $2.5MM in space today has over $5MM at the deadline, assuming no other roster moves are made between now and then.

Looking at some playoff teams (or close enough teams) that have around $5MM in room at the deadline (per PuckPedia), I see Colorado, Anaheim, Boston, Buffalo, Minnesota, Utah, Carolina, Los Angeles, and Pittsburgh above that threshold.  Several others are already there that aren’t playoff threats at the moment but things could change between now and then.  Are all of them going to want Panarin?  Or, more specifically, how many of those will he want?  I wouldn’t be too worried about the cap element, it will be workable enough for New York to get a good return.

Specialist412: Do you think the Pens will be buyers or sellers? Dubas is real quiet right now, I wonder if he has something big up his sleeve.

Kyle Dubas has never been shy about taking swings but I think deep down, he knows this core is not good enough to be a long-term contender.  So I don’t see him being a big buyer, at a minimum.  If they’re still in the mix six weeks from now, they have extra picks in the second and third rounds for each of the next three years.  Flipping one or two of those for short-term help would make sense and could be justified within the context of not significantly affecting their long-term core or depleting their prospect pool.  I doubt they’d do more than that, though.

I think his preference would be to capitalize on a seller’s market if they’re out of the race.  The parity plays into the favor of whoever decides to sell given that there will be more buyers than sellers so there should be good returns out there, especially for someone like Rickard Rakell who it feels like has been in trade speculation for years now.  But the fact they’re in the race will cause them to push pause for the time being and assess things coming out of the Olympic break.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include which of Seattle’s pending UFAs could be on the move, if some Chicago prospects could join the team this season, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our last two mailbag columns.

yeasties: The Kraken appear to be positioned well to be a deadline seller. Assuming they sputter out and become sellers, which of their pending UFAs do you think will be dealt and who will be kept and extended?

For those who aren’t too familiar with Seattle’s pending UFA list, it’s quite a big one, even after they moved Mason Marchment to Columbus on Friday before the roster freeze.  Up front, they have Jaden Schwartz, Jordan Eberle, and Eeli Tolvanen all set to hit the market in July.  They also have Jamie Oleksiak on the back end and since goaltender Matt Murray has been in the NHL all season, I’ll give him a mention here as well although I wouldn’t be shocked if he doesn’t get re-signed or traded by the early-March trade deadline.

Oleksiak is the one I’m most confident in saying will be moved.  His role on the depth chart has been reduced and it’s hard to imagine they’ll want to sign him to another multi-year deal around this price point.  On the other hand, teams want big defensemen with some snarl at the deadline and Oleksiak provides that.  Despite being in the midst of a down year, I expect they’ll get a strong market for his services.

Up front, I’d put Schwartz as the most likely to be dealt.  He has had some good moments when healthy (including this season) but he can’t stay healthy.  However, with salary retention, some contender will want him as a middle-six upgrade to bolster their offensive depth and maybe play on the power play.  On the flip side, I think Eberle stays.  Yes, he could go be a middle-six player somewhere but I think they’ll want to keep him around, assuming a reasonable extension could be worked out.

I could see Seattle taking a run at re-signing Tolvanen.  He isn’t having a great year so maybe they look to try to get him at a lower-market rate.  Failing that, he still has enough of a track record that there should be some teams that like him as more of a depth addition.

frozenaquatic: I hear a lot about prospect development with how bad the team I root for (the Rangers) is at it. I had heard that Tanner Glass and Jed Ortmeyer, two plugs, were in charge of “player development,” but saw some folks talking about how that just meant they were in charge of making sure prospects had proper housing and resources to financial management and things like that, and that they weren’t really coaches. I always hear the refrain that the “NHL isn’t a development league” in the sense that coaches aren’t expected to coddle young players (unless they’re in a full rebuild).

My question is: if a team has “bad player development,” is that more on the Department of Player Development, the scouts, the AHL coaches? Maybe even the skills coach? Let’s say, for instance, the Rangers wanted to get better at “player development” overall. Would that be an overhaul of the scouting department to look for different baseline skills in players? Or something else? I’m thinking of how Laf, Kakko, Kravtsov, Andersson, etc all panned out–is that just horrible scouting, terrible luck, or the mysterious player development?

In recent years, it feels like a lot of teams are adding Player Development coaches.  But most of the time, those are recently retired players.  It feels like these positions are created to give them a chance to see if a coaching position is something they might be interested in.  Meanwhile, they get to relay some pointers to the prospects and help them along.  From a starting point, that’s not a bad thing to have and it does allow those former players to slowly improve those coaching skills.  Ideally, you might want to have someone (or more) who can work on more specialized training for each player to maximize those efforts but Glass and Ortmeyer can certainly be part of a quality department.

As for where the blame might lie when it comes to a lack of proper player development, there’s plenty to go around.  The scouts may have misread the projectability of certain skills although I won’t critique them for the first two on that list as they were largely consensus picks at where they were selected.  Did the Player Development department work enough with the players?  I’d lump the skills coaches into that area in terms of coming up with the proper training regimens.  Then you have the coaching staffs at both the AHL and NHL levels.  Yes, the NHL is not a development league in theory but the reality is, a lot of development does happen at the top level.  Some of it also has to fall on the players.  Some train better than others over the offseason, some are more dedicated to the finer points of development.  I’m speaking generally here, not talking specifically about any of the players you listed.

There’s no simple fix or overhaul here.  Scouts can be evaluated based on their reports; did those players progress over time?  Keep the best ones and if there are some who haven’t been as strong, then you could look to make a change.  The same goes in the development department (more teams seem to be drifting toward adding more people rather than changing some) and with the coaching staffs although they have to balance winning and development at the same time.  In a perfect world, it’s probably a slow build over making a bunch of changes all at once.

Unclemike1526: Do you know when the KHL and SHL seasons end? Frondell will definitely be here after that and depending on whether the Hawks still have a shot at the Playoffs and could play more than 10 games and burn his 1st year of his ELC. Kantserov is not eligible for an ELC but hopefully comes over here and could help also. I doubt the Hawks will let Frondell play more than 10 games if they’re out of it entirely. They could use his size either on the wing or even at C. What do you think?

The KHL regular season ends on March 20th while the SHL ends on March 14th.  Also worth noting, last year, the KHL playoffs ended on May 21st and the SHL ended on May 1st.

Chicago has fallen off a bit since the callout for questions and are now hovering near the bottom of the league and don’t have Connor Bedard.  As things stand, I don’t think the playoffs are a realistic possibility.  However, there’s an outside shot that Anton Frondell could get in a game or two depending on how Djurgardens fares in the playoffs.  There probably won’t be more than ten games left by then so they’re not at risk of burning a year of his entry-level deal.

Roman Kantersov is actually eligible for an entry-level contract as he’s only 21.  It will just be a two-year pact instead of three.  But it might not matter anyway as Magnitogorsk is the top team in the league and likely heading for a long playoff run.  If they went out early enough, it’s possible they’d sign him and burn a year now.  They wouldn’t want to do that but that might be needed to convince him to sign, knowing he could exit the entry-level restrictions a year earlier.  I wouldn’t expect that to come into play but we’ll see what happens in the playoffs.

tucsontoro: Brian – we’re already hearing lots of chatter on who might be on the move. What do you consider the worst contracts in the league right now?

I don’t think the players on the worst contracts in the league are probably going to be on the move but let’s go over some of the bad ones.

Jonathan Huberdeau’s contract with Calgary has to be here.  Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t hate the trade for the Flames at the time it was made.  Getting what we thought was still a top-line winger and a strong defenseman wasn’t a bad return for Matthew Tkachuk.  Of course, Huberdeau is being paid like his best year with Florida while producing about half of the points, making it a well-above-market deal.  There’s a temptation to put Elias Pettersson here on the first year of his new contract but let’s let the season play out and see how he fares as the undisputed top player in Vancouver now.

On the back end, Darnell Nurse is being paid as an elite two-way defender.  He hasn’t been that.  Offensively, he’s more of a third option with them needing to pay to bring in Jake Walman to pick up some of the secondary slack since Nurse wasn’t producing.  Defensively, elite is not the word I would use.  He’s a serviceable top-four defender, sure, but not a number one like he’s being paid as.  On the lower end of the scale, Ryan Graves started the season in the minors after clearing waivers and is now a sixth or seventh option on most nights.  He still has three years left at $4.5MM and even if the Penguins retained the maximum 50%, there still wouldn’t be a trade market for him.

Now, since you referenced this question after mentioning chatter about players who could be on the move, I wanted to think of some bad contracts that could be dealt.  One that comes to mind is Barclay Goodrow.  He’s on an expiring deal at $3.64MM and is a fourth liner.  However, he’s the type of gritty role player some teams will covet and if there’s one with a lot of cap space, I could see him moving.  I’m also wondering about Patrik Laine ($8.7MM, pending UFA) in Montreal.  Since they’ve gone and added Alexandre Texier and Phillip Danault, is there a spot for him when the team is fully healthy?  If not, it wouldn’t shock me to see them try to move him with half retention to give him a chance to play down the stretch and help his case in free agency.  The return would be minimal but after blowing through their remaining room to add Danault, clearing half of Laine’s deal would give them some extra flexibility.

Emoney123: What’s the next move for Danny Briere? Seems Martone, Nesbitt, Luchanko, Bump, Barkey, and Bjarnason are a few years away and with only their own #1 pick this year, how does Briere keep the Flyers in the playoff hunt? Seen this before with big crash and burn late in the second half of the season. Rick Tocchet for Coach of the Year if the Flyers make playoffs?

Right now, the next move is likely patience.  At the moment, Philadelphia is right in the thick of the playoff race, one that no one seems to be making a push to run away with.  It’s great that they’re in it right now but will they still be in the hunt at the Olympic break?  I think that’s going to be the decision point for a lot of teams as to whether to buy, sell, or largely stand pat and the Flyers should be one of those.

If I’m being honest, I’m not sold on them being a viable playoff threat.  A bunch of overtime games have kept them in the mix which is fine but not necessarily sustainable over the course of a full season.  Accordingly, my inclination is that they largely hold or sell a bit, depending on if they can get Christian Dvorak signed to a contract extension or not in the new year.

That said, you asked me about a playoff scenario so there are two buying scenarios I can think of.  One I’ve written about in an older mailbag column and that’s one that sees them buying low on someone who could be around beyond the season.  In other words, another Trevor Zegras type of move where you’re hoping a change of scenery gets them going while knowing that a futures payment is justifiable given that the player isn’t a rental.  That’s still on the table.

The other one is where they’re a soft buyer and basically tell teams that they’ll take a contract off their hands.  With double retention off the table now, other buyers will need to move some bodies out to make the money work for other trades.  This is a good spot for GM Daniel Briere to tell teams that they can facilitate one of those moves by taking an expiring contract back.  Ideally, the player is a forward with a bit of offensive upside.  Frankly, the Laine scenario I mentioned above feels like something worthwhile doing in this instance, flipping a minor leaguer or futures in return.  It’s something that doesn’t jeopardize the future and sends a message to the players that they’re not giving up.  It’s not the route I’d probably go but if they’re buying, I think it’s going to be low-cost acquisitions that don’t jeopardize the future.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include San Jose’s rebuild, speculating about teams that could make a goalie move, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s column.

Zakis: How does the Wild figure out 5-on-5 scoring?

A lot of it is just going to be patience.  They’ve been hovering around a shooting percentage of five at full strength this season.  That’s bound to improve on its own as even bad teams are closer to seven at the end of a year.

There are a couple of ways to improve scoring at five-on-five and neither of them are easy.  The first is upgrading their playmaking, especially down the middle.  GM Bill Guerin has been trying to do that for years without much success.  (He’s hardly the only one who has struggled in this regard either.)  That’s going to be tough to do in-season.

The other is play with more tempo and try to generate more odd-man rush chances.  The problem is that Minnesota isn’t particularly young and a lot of their veterans aren’t known as high-end skaters.  Beyond Kirill Kaprizov’s line, they’re built to play a little slower.  That might work in the playoffs when the checking and whistles are tighter but in the regular season, it’s bit trickier.  Ideally, prospects like Danila Yurov and Liam Ohgren playing their way into bigger roles would help but that, again, takes patience.  But in terms of short-term fixes, I don’t see a viable way for them to significantly change their fortunes on that front and that’s why they’re going to be viewed as more of a bubble team than a contender.

PyramidHeadcrab: It’s looking like Sharks fans are going to have to strap in for another rough season.

We know the Sharks have been building top-shelf assets (Celebrini, Askarov, Misa, Graf, et al), but how long do complete rebuilds like this typically last?

In watching their first few games, I am seeing a team that is completely disorganized, with players being consistently out of position – Celebrini making a tremendous play with no one in position to receive a pass, for instance. There’s the cliche of “veterans mentioning The Youth™” but experienced players like Klingberg, Kurashev, and Goodrow are consistently playing poorly.

At what point do you know if the plan is working, and when do the stars typically align for a team like this to turn the corner on being successful?

And as a brief addendum – the lack of a net-crashing power forward to kite attention from the opposing D is glaring; is there anyone in the Sharks system that could fill this role eventually? Are there any top prospects for the ’26 draft that could fit this bill?

There aren’t a lot of examples of the ‘burn it to the ground and build back slowly’ rebuild to compare to here.  These types of undertakings haven’t gained a lot of popularity until the last decade or so.  Sure, there have been rebuilds with an eye on them taking a few years but few have been to quite this extent.

The best option I can think of is the one that’s still ongoing in Utah.  I remember reading something a few years ago about how long he envisioned his rebuild being and it was something like eight or ten years for the full process to take place.  He mentioned last year in an interview with KSL Sports (video link) that competing for a playoff spot in the fifth season was a realistic target.

So, where are the Sharks in this?  While they’ve missed the postseason in six straight years, it was really only the 2023-24 season where they got serious about it.  Erik Karlsson went that offseason, Tomas Hertl at the deadline, and some youngsters (William Eklund and Fabian Zetterlund) got big minutes.  You could argue 2022-23 was the start when Timo Meier moved but that was done late in the year.  Basically, they’re around the halfway mark before that ‘playoffs in five years’ goal.  With the pieces they’re collecting, I think they’re on the right track and I could see them getting there at the back end of that timeframe.

As I’ve noted before, scouting is not my forte so I could be wrong on this but from what I have seen with some of their top prospects, I don’t really see someone who can be that type of player, at least consistently.  Looking at the top of this year’s class, Ethan Belchetz might fit the bill but as is always the case with power forward prospects, there’s a difference between being that type of player in junior versus being that type of player in the NHL.

At this point of the rebuild, the focus is asset acquisition and getting as many pieces in place as possible.  Once that first wave of prospects is established, then they could start to get a little pickier or use some later-round picks on more aggressive boom/bust selections to try to find a certain type of player that they lack in their system.  I’d say they’re getting closer to that part and it wouldn’t shock me to see them try to address that.

PyramidHeadcrab: I’m legitimately confused at how Barclay Goodrow hasn’t been bought out yet. The only way that makes sense is a) it’s a verbal promise to be like, “sorry for screwing you over”, or b) they REALLY want to keep those retention slots open.

But in that case, why not bury him in the A and just eat the contract? Like it’s a real head-scratcher for me.

I don’t think it’s the first option.  While San Jose is likely operating with some respect befitting a longer-term veteran, if they felt they had to get him off the roster, they’d probably do it.  There might be a bit of validity to Option B.  They only have one salary retention slot available to them.  That’s not just for this season but 2026-27 as well with Karlsson signed until then.  The other one doesn’t unlock until after the 2029-30 campaign.  Adding Goodrow – who is also signed through 2026-27 – to the mix means they’re out of retention options until July 2027.  That’s not ideal.  I’d be saving that one for the trade deadline, potentially for Alexander Wennberg to maximize the return for him.

When the Sharks orchestrated the waiver claim situation to ensure they got him around 15 months ago, they knew (or reasonably ought to have known) that his best on-ice days were behind him.  I don’t think they brought him in thinking that he’d give the bottom six a big boost (mind you, they were probably hoping he’d be at least a little better than this).  I suspect he was viewed as more of a character addition.  In essence, that cliched mentoring idea you mentioned in the initial question.

If they think they need a roster spot, he’s someone who would safely clear waivers if it came to that.  He’d still probably come back after the trade deadline when there isn’t a roster maximum though.  This could be something they look at in the summer though.  They wouldn’t save a ton of money on a buyout since a decent chunk of his salary is in a signing bonus but if he’s done all he can do for them, I could see them buying him out to give him a chance to try to catch on elsewhere, likely for the league minimum.  But for now, I expect he’ll stay up for the rest of the season.

frozenaquatic: Thanks again for putting these together! The last six Cup winners have had depth in common, running out four lines that grind down opponents. I know bottom sixes are deployed differently (and also are more easily shuffled–though the best bottom sixes have chemistry and identity), but they’re usually a combo of grit and timely tertiary scoring. In your view, who has the most effective 3rd line in the league to start 2025? What’s the worst 3rd line on a supposed contender? Would you say Taylor Hall’s 4th line is the best? Who has the weakest 4th line?

Speaking of how quickly lines can be shuffled, Hall now finds himself in the top six in Carolina so he’s technically out of the equation for now.  And best is in the eye of the beholder.  If you’re looking squarely at results, the answer could be one way.  If you’re looking at overall effectiveness (or maybe trying to quantify it using Expected Goals), it’s going to be a different answer.

Colorado’s third line is a bit of an odd mishmash of players but it seems to be working.  Ross Colton has been there for a while now while Jack Drury came in early last season.  They both have some defensive skills but their linemate, Victor Olofsson, is more of an offense-only player, making the trio a bit of an odd combination.  However, it has worked early on with a 64.5 Expected Goals Percentage, per MoneyPuck despite close to a 50/50 split in zone starts.  They’re not scoring much but they’re not getting scored on either.  That’s a quietly effective line.  On the flip side, Nashville’s third line of Michael Bunting, Erik Haula, and Jonathan Marchessault looks quite good on paper but is struggling considerably defensively with the lowest xGF% of any line with at least 45 minutes of time together so far.

Fourth lines are a lot harder to quantify as they often change from one game to the next between injuries and line shuffling.  As a result, there are very few who have played together enough to glean any sort of meaningful information from.  For context, if I use that 45 minutes played as a cutoff, it looks like there are only three lines that would even qualify.  That’s not enough to really be able to accurately answer that question this early in the season.

ljfranker: What are some goaltending changes you expect to see this season?

History suggests that we won’t see too many changes as goalies don’t move in-season anywhere near the extent that skaters do.  I doubt this year will be much of an exception.  But that’s not an exciting answer so I’ll give you a few things I could see happening, just that the odds of all of them happening are low.

Oilers: At some point, Connor Ingram works his way onto Edmonton’s roster, likely at the expense of Calvin Pickard.  I thought his acquisition from Utah was a great move, especially for the low, low price of absolutely nothing (future considerations) despite there being salary retention.  I think he can raise the floor of their goaltending and if all went well, push Stuart Skinner.  With the Oilers not having a lot of wiggle room to try to improve their roster, this is one thing I expect them to do.

Sabres: Their claiming of Colten Ellis came as a surprise given the depth that they have and that Devon Levi is still viewed as part of their long-term plans.  If they’re pleased with what Ellis is showing in practice, Alex Lyon could become expendable.  At $1.5MM per season through 2026-27, he’d be an affordable dart throw for a team to take, especially one that gets hit with a longer-term injury.

Bargain Hunters: While it’s early, the gamble Ottawa made going with Leevi Merilainen isn’t exactly confidence-inspiring and Mads Sogaard may have plateaued.  For a team with playoff aspirations, they can’t afford to stick that out if Merilainen keeps struggling while Linus Ullmark doesn’t typically carry a huge workload.  I think they’ll be looking around at options soon.  We’ve seen speculation of Calgary sniffing around the market and that they might not trust Devin Cooley to be a full-time NHL backup so they’ll probably keep doing that.  I also wonder about Florida.  If Daniil Tarasov winds up being more of a mediocre option, I could see them exploring what’s out there.  With the injuries they have, getting a more proven piece to stabilize the backup games could be crucial.

Breakaway: The 2026 draft is supposed deeper and has more high-end talent. Schaefer and Misa were considered the consensus top picks in 2025. If they were coming out this year, would they be the 2nd and 3rd picks or would they fall farther down? After those two, there was a gap in talent, where would the rest of the top five fall if they were coming out in 2026?

One of the challenges with an exercise like this is that what teams hold those draft picks ultimately does a lot to dictate who goes where.  What’s the player type they’re looking for?  It’s not always a case of Best Player Available (or teams have had some very different opinions on BPAs from the consensus top of the class).  But I’ll give it a shot.

Gavin McKenna goes first and there’s probably not much to explain there.  I do think Matthew Schaefer would go second and I’d say that without factoring in his start with the Islanders.  A young 18 for his draft class, he’s a high-ceiling all situations number one defender.  That will always go high.  Keaton Verhoeff could change that with a big year in college (especially as a righty) but failing that, Schaefer lands ahead of him.

For Michael Misa versus Ivar Stenberg, what’s the need?  If it’s a pure shooter (or a team really wants a center), it’s Misa.  If it’s a setup guy, it’s Stenberg.  I’d lean toward Misa myself so he’d be fourth.  I’d have Anton Frondell next at five, then Stenberg at six, assuming his development goes as planned this season.

Then we go back to centers with Caleb Desnoyers (fourth to Utah) and Ryan Roobroeck, draft-eligible this year.  Today, I’d give the nod to Desnoyers but with this season barely underway, that could easily change.

Brady Martin is the ultimate wild card.  Given his power forward style of play, it’s entirely plausible to me that a team could see this combined group and still pick him fifth.  I could also see him fall out of the top ten and it wouldn’t surprise me.  It all comes down to who has the picks and what their team needs are.  Chances are that he’d still sneak into the back of the top ten with that playoff-profile skillset.

Photo courtesy of ……….