PHR Mailbag

There were several questions about Vladimir Tarasenko and Jack Eichel so they get the focus in this edition of the PHR Mailbag which also features a question about Anaheim’s captain and the Islanders’ summer strategy of keeping as much secret as possible.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next weekend’s mailbag.

Gmm8811: My thoughts on the Tarasenko situation in St. Louis compared to when Brett Hull was a Blue. Both were great goal scorers that didn’t contribute much to their defensive game when needed. When Hull left, he became a much better all-around player. Obviously, Hull was more productive, but it was a different era. If Vlad leaves the Blues, do you think he can elevate that part of his game? If he stays in St. Louis, can he get over the issues he’s brought up? Is he hard-headed enough to say the heck with it and go back to Russia if he doesn’t get his way? Does he have it in him to be a “team” player?

I’m going to go out of order here and go with the last one first.  Anything is possible when it comes to a player changing in a new environment but I wouldn’t suggest that’s a likely outcome here.  It’s not as if Tarasenko is a youngster that’s still developing – he’s 29 with 531 career regular season games under his belt.  Can he improve his play away from the puck?  Sure, especially depending on the system he’s in (assuming he’s moved).  But will it be to the point where it’s a demonstrable performance?  Probably not.

There is no mechanism for him to go back to Russia unless he wants to retire from the NHL and do what Ilya Kovalchuk did where he walked away from his contract (eventually coming back when he was declared a free agent).  Tarasenko is owed $15MM in salary over the next two years.  That’s a lot of money to walk away from if he’s unhappy.  He doesn’t necessarily have to get over his concerns if he stays, he just has to play, collect his money, and hope for a trade down the road.

sam i am: First time on here. Thx for the chats. What are your thoughts/ideas about Tarasenko? It’s past time to take a draft pick and eat some salary, isn’t it? Is there a d-man you think they can acquire AFTER Army knows how much cap space is left? Maybe sign Bozak with it? Thx again for your insight.

There’s a part of me that agrees with you.  At some point, is an exit the best for everyone even if it’s a minimal return?  A move with retention probably does allow them to re-sign Tyler Bozak and at this point, I suspect that’s why he remains unsigned at this point as he’s waiting to see if they can free up some money to re-sign him.  Accordingly, Bozak would basically be part of the return for Tarasenko, not just the draft pick.  I don’t see them looking to add an impact defenseman at this point either, they’ll give players like Niko Mikkola and Jake Walman longer looks while Scott Perunovich could be in the mix at some point as well.

On the other hand, at what point does a nominal return of a pick and Bozak’s return get outweighed by the potential of Tarasenko bouncing back?  If they truly believe that the third time is the charm when it comes to his shoulder surgery (I’m a little leery about that), it then stands to reason that they think he can still play an impact role.  And if that’s the case, the potential on-ice reward is better than what Bozak and a pick will bring, not to mention two years of carrying dead money on the books.

Yes, there’s a mutual desire to get a trade done but that doesn’t mean St. Louis should take whatever the best return is even if it’s a lousy one simply to get Tarasenko out of town.  At some point, the potential upside of Tarasenko rebounding has to count for something and I suspect that’s what’s holding things up.  GM Doug Armstrong doesn’t have to move him even though he wants to.

deeds: Where will Tarasenko end up? Are the Blues stuck with a disgruntled employee?

I think he stays with St. Louis, at least to start the season for the reasons mentioned above.  If his trade value is really so low that all they can do is take a pick and have to eat some money to do it, they might as well keep him and see if he rebounds.  Most teams have used up their cap space at this point so it’s not like it’s going to be considerably harder to trade him in-season if it comes to it; they’ll still have to retain money or take a high-priced contract back either way.  If he bounces back, great.  If he doesn’t, he still might be easier to move as an expiring deal a year from now and a buyout could definitely be in play at that point as well.

Coach Wall: Why all the fuss about Jack Eichel? Any team that pays him $10 million AAV for the next five or six years AND gives Buffalo their asking price is foolish. The guy has a very serious neck issue and may not last one year.

First, to clarify, it’s five years for Eichel before he becomes an unrestricted free agent.  And yes, the neck issue is serious although the fusion surgery that the Sabres are pushing for is one that players have had and returned from.  It’s serious but it shouldn’t a career-ender.  The one that Eichel’s camp wants (artificial disc replacement) hasn’t been done on an NHL player before but carries a much shorter recovery time.  When his agents released a statement last month, they claimed he could be ready to start the season.  Even if that isn’t the case now, he might only miss a few games assuming everything goes well.

The reason why there is a lot of fuss is that top centers rarely become available in the prime of their career.  Eichel is a top center in the prime of his career.  He comes with a significant injury but the previous point still stands nonetheless.  That’s why Buffalo GM Kevyn Adams is driving a hard bargain on the trade front.  They don’t have to move him regardless of what the public sentiment is.  The surgery they want would cost him a big chunk of next season but with what they’re planning to run out as a goalie tandem as things currently stand, they might actually view that as a good thing as it’s pretty clear they’re not looking to compete let alone contend.

Should a team pay the premium price tag which still seems to involve four significant young assets?  It’s certainly fair to argue they shouldn’t considering the injury concerns and it’s hard to put conditions in a trade based on a successful operation (but I wouldn’t be shocked if that language is in there at some point).  But Eichel, when healthy, plays at a level that would significantly impact almost every team in the league.  That’s bound to generate plenty of hype.

Gbear: I heard one hockey writer say that Eichel should just get the surgery he wants regardless of what the Sabres recommend, but couldn’t that give the Sabres a legal avenue to try and void Eichel’s contract, let alone cover the costs of the surgery? And might that be the angle Pegula is playing here?

For clarification’s sake, before digging into this, here is the relevant portion of Section 34.4 of the CBA called Second Medical Opinions:

(e) Following the later of: (i) issuance of the Second Medical Opinion; or (ii) issuance of the recommendation on diagnosis or course of treatment by the Third Physician Expert, if any, the team physician shall determine the diagnosis and/or course of treatment (including the timing thereof) after consulting with the Second Medical Opinion Physician and the Third Physician Expert, if any, and giving due consideration to his/her/their recommendation(s).

The second medical opinion is the one that’s saying to do the artificial disc replacement but this rule clearly indicates that Buffalo gets to decide on the course of treatment and they’ve made their preference known.

There is a clause in a standard player’s contract (Section 6) that has a remedy for the team to void a deal if there is a material breach and I’m sure there’s an argument that could be made to say that getting a surgery that has never been performed on an NHL player before without consent from the team constitutes a material breach.

But I don’t think that’s Buffalo’s end game.  If owner Terry Pegula simply wanted out of the contract, wouldn’t he just tell his GM to trade him for whatever the best deal available is and be done with it?  I think Buffalo’s situation basically is they don’t want their star player being the guinea pig for a surgery that has never been performed on an NHL player before.  It doesn’t matter that other athletes have had it; they just don’t want it done to their guy.  They want Eichel to have what they feel is the safer procedure and that he comes back late in the season and resumes being their top forward right away.

Could Eichel force the issue?  Sure, but the consequences could be dire.  I have to think that if it was a more realistic scenario without the risk of his deal being voided, it might have been done already.

JerCanne: On a scale from 1-10 what are the chances Eichel is a Calgary Flame in October?

I’ll give it a two.  Eichel makes a lot of sense for the Flames.  Sean Monahan, Elias Lindholm, and Mikael Backlund are all quality centers but none of them have the top-level upside that a healthy Eichel would bring to the table.  (It briefly appeared that Monahan could but that has waned over the last couple of seasons.)

But while those players are quality pieces, none are really young enough to entice Buffalo unless their main presence is as a salary offset.  The Flames don’t have a particularly robust prospect pool that will make them willing to deal the types of youngsters that Adams and the Sabres are seeking.  Eichel is a good fit on paper for Calgary but I don’t think they have the trade pieces that Buffalo is going to want unless their asking price dips sharply.

JustPete: What do you think of the Ducks new contract with Getzlaf – seems awfully rich to me. Follow up question – are the Ducks in such a position to warrant their lack of free agent activity or should they just fire Bob Murray?

I think it’s a little high but not overly excessive.  A $3MM base salary for a third liner isn’t over the top and given their inactivity, he’s still probably in their top six in which case the price tag is reasonable.  $1.5MM in games played bonuses makes it a little strange as Anaheim doesn’t exactly need the cap flexibility but it could come in handy if those bonuses are hit before the trade deadline if they wind up deciding to move him.  I wouldn’t have given Ryan Getzlaf quite that much but with the cap space they have, if you’re going to overpay someone, it might as well be a franchise icon.

Let’s dig into the lack of free agent activity which starts and ends with Getzlaf.  I have to admit, that surprised me.  I thought they were going to try to add a piece or two to try get back into the mix in the Pacific Division but the lack of movement suggests that Murray is thinking about a longer-term rebuild.  Frankly, that’s not a bad idea but if you’re going to do that, having a head coach in the final year of his contract (with their new AHL bench boss highlighting that as an attraction as Joel Bouchard did last month) seems a little strange as well.

Murray hasn’t had a great last few years, that much is for sure.  But if he has been given the green light to go down this path, he has some job security to do so; ownership likely wouldn’t commit to this plan and then fire him partway through it.  I think he sticks around.

The Mistake of Giving Eugene Melnyk a Liver Transplant: Why do the Islanders wait so long to make their contracts official? What benefit is there for the team, and even more perplexing, what benefit is there for the players?

By keeping as much cap space open as they have, it helped the Islanders hedge against an offer sheet.  While they’re rarely handed out, enough teams are concerned about it to do things to deter against one being issued.  For some of the contracts in place, are there side agreements to amend the term/money depending on what happens?  Your guess is as good as mine on that front.

It also could give them a little bit of extra leverage in trade discussions.  If they want to acquire someone, how much cap space do they have to clear to make that move happen?  If no other teams know what the Isles’ cap situation is like, it can’t be used against them.  For example, another team can’t come back and say that New York’s cap situation is so bad that they have to sell so and so for pennies on the dollar or demand additional compensation to take a player on.  They can’t make that claim because they don’t know how much money the Islanders have or don’t have.

In terms of the benefit for the players, there is none.  But GM Lou Lamoriello has been around long enough to be trusted.  There are handshake deals in place and he’ll live up to them.

Largely, this is Lou just being Lou.  He’s known to have a firm no-leak policy and has walked away from deals before if it became public before being officially announced.  That’s enough to have multiple agents and players keeping quiet at a time where the majority of moves are leaked in advance of being made official.  That’s really quite impressive even if it can be frustrating along the way.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include the upcoming expansion draft, Nathan MacKinnon’s future, some Entry Draft predictions, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s mailbag.

Nha Trang: Crystal Ball #2: Is Ron Francis’ intent in Seattle to emulate Vegas and win now, or to put together a team that’ll contend 2-3 years from now?

I suspect Francis is looking ahead a few years but to be fair, I don’t think the Golden Knights went into the process expecting to make a long playoff run in their first season either.  With who all was left unprotected, Seattle could assemble a roster that could make a real run at a playoff spot but they should be looking to accumulate some picks and prospects more than trying to get into the postseason right away.

The way to do that will be to pick some players that can be flipped for value.  Last time, Vegas took some veteran defensemen that went for late picks which is fine (Seattle will probably do the same with a few picks) but there are some top-six forwards available that other teams will part with quality assets to get.  For example, if Tampa Bay doesn’t pay the high price to entice them to take Tyler Johnson, then take and flip Ondrej Palat who, as a rental, will yield a nice return.  Same with Calgary and Mark Giordano.  I’m sure they’ll get some picks for taking on certain contracts as well but moving one or two of their better selections would be a way to differentiate themselves from Vegas and build for the future.

Shjon: How active and/or successful do you think Francis will be during the free agent interview period between the 18th and 21st?

I suspect they’ll be extremely active in terms of speaking with UFAs.  They’ll talk to dozens of them if they can.  They get an opportunity to learn about a bunch of asking prices and if I were them, I’d try to get a couple of agreements in principle in place without actually selecting that player just to add as many assets as possible.

If you define success by how many they actually sign, I’d say they won’t be successful.  Other than Chris Driedger who is the expected selection with a sign and select agreement, I don’t know if they really need to sign anyone else.  They’ll be successful in terms of knowing more about what the UFA market will look like than any other team.  But if they sign a bunch of players, I wouldn’t call it a success in that they will be giving up the opportunity to add other pieces as well.  Fill out the roster with signed players and RFAs to build up the asset base, then supplement it with free agents at the end of the month.

Y2KAK: Who would be the most realistic player going to Seattle? Oshie? Tyler Johnson?

There aren’t many ‘obvious’ selections to make a list of realistic if not likely picks.  Giordano from the Flames seems like the logical selection as someone that could be flipped but Calgary may want to pay to keep him around.  I’d like to put Vince Dunn as a realistic choice as a young defenseman with some offensive pop that’s under team control for a while but Vladimir Tarasenko has to be tempting in terms of trying to improve his value and then flipping him later.

I’ll go with Driedger just with how long he’s been linked to them but if they decide they want to take Carey Price (I don’t think they will, especially with the injury questions now), even Driedger wouldn’t be a certainty as Seattle may not want to tie up that much money between the pipes.  That’s one of the really intriguing elements of this draft is just how many viable ways Seattle can go here.  Each writer here at PHR will be picking a mock team and I expect there will be plenty of varying opinions.

M34: MacKinnon has publicly stated he would take a “cheaper” deal again next time he is up. At that point in his career, and the MVP-caliber status/production, what is his market value? What kind of “lesser” deal is he willing to sign?  Will it make a difference whether or not Colorado wins a Cup between now and then?

Assuming that Connor McDavid’s $12.5MM remains the top bar as it should be, Nathan MacKinnon’s market value should settle in a little below that in the $11.5MM to $12MM range.  John Tavares is basically the only comparable top center to actually sign recently via unrestricted free agency and he signed for $11MM.  MacKinnon is the better player so $11MM becomes the minimum bar to clear if he gets to the open market.  He’ll be 27 at the time of his free agency (turning 28 before the 2023-24 season starts) and still in the prime of his career so while that’s undoubtedly a high price tag, it’d be justifiable for teams to throw it at him.

A hometown discount is always tough to peg for superstar players.  It’s not as if the player can accept a lower AAV for a longer-term deal like Ryan Nugent-Hopkins did; MacKinnon is getting the max (eight years from Colorado, seven from everyone else).  And even in this cap environment, there will be enough teams willing to throw that type of money at him.  Would he take a million less per year than market value?  Maybe but it’d be hard to see the discount being much more than that.

I don’t think it will make much of a difference if they’ve won the Stanley Cup between now and then.  For me, it’s a question of being contenders.  Is Colorado still going to be a consistent threat in the West two years from now?  If the answer to that question is yes (and it should be), then that’s the bigger priority over already having won one.

The Mistake of Giving Eugene Melnyk a Liver Transplant: It sounds like almost all draft prospects plan to return to their current teams next year. Are there any notable players who would possibly try the NHL or AHL next year? Also, how much of this is COVID-19 related, as this certainly seems higher than normal?

There are usually only a handful of draft picks to make the jump each year, including the top selection; Mike Modano was the last to not go to the NHL right away and that was in 1988.  With this being a lost development year for a lot of prospects, it’s not shocking that some of the expected top picks are planning on staying where they are for another year and in most cases, I think whoever drafts them would be fine with it.  (I think Buffalo would rather Owen Power turn pro right away so we’ll see if they can make that happen assuming he does indeed go number one.)  Generally speaking, a lot of this should be attributed to COVID-19.

As for trying the AHL, I don’t expect any of the European prospects to try that league while most American prospects will be committed to the college route.  Those are the ones that are eligible to go to that league as anyone picked from the CHL is restricted from joining the AHL until they turn 20 or have four years of service time.

rogueraceseries: Thank you for fielding questions! My head-scratcher is this…. What 2021 draft-eligible prospect will make the biggest leap/splash in this year’s draft? Like Seider jumping to #6 two years ago. Conversely, what player do you think will drop the most? Maybe Caufield as an example (he has had the last laugh this playoff run, hasn’t he? #nhlerstud)

Mason McTavish really seems to be flying up the rankings lately.  A few months ago, he seemed to be at the back of the lottery but all of a sudden, a top-five selection doesn’t appear to be out of the question.  I’ll also toss Sebastian Cossa out as a possibility.  Are there teams that value him higher than Jesper Wallstedt?  If so, he could go a fair bit higher than where most would expect (which, at this point, is probably in the late teens/early twenties).  Two Russians in Danill Chayka and Nikita Chibrikov are other candidates.  Some have them in the second round but if there’s a team that’s sold on his upside, they could land in the teens.

As for who drops, my usual picks for this question each year tend to get picked earlier than normal; the crystal ball doesn’t seem to work well for this one.  I’ll go with Aatu Raty.  Once viewed as a possible top-five pick, his value has dropped considerably.  Some have him in the teens but it wouldn’t shock me if he slides closer to the back of the first round.

Cheechoo56: Assuming we are to believe Doug Wilson’s saying the Sharks are retooling and not rebuilding, are there any free agent goalkeepers that make sense in San Jose (given a potential buyout for Martin Jones and their cap situation)?

It’s not a great year for true number one goalies in free agency and that’s what San Jose really needs.  Philipp Grubauer is the top name out there but his career high in games played is 40.  Whether it’s retooling or rebuilding, the Sharks don’t need someone in their 30s already.  Someone with an opportunity to be around for a few years would be preferable.

If it’s not Grubauer, I’d be looking at Linus Ullmark.  Ullmark has struggled to secure the starting role in Buffalo but San Jose’s back end is a whole different animal.  Perhaps a change of scenery gives him a bit of a boost and if that happens, San Jose would have goaltending that probably checks in just above the league average.  They’d take that in a heartbeat.

Adin Hill is going to be part of the equation now as well but I don’t think he’s ready to be a starter yet or even the 1A guy in a platoon.  They’re still going to need a more proven starter and Jones isn’t it.  I’m not convinced Ullmark will be either but that tandem would certainly put them in the right direction.

Rene vandervelden: Who is a better trade target for the Kings, Jack Eichel or Vladimir Tarasenko?

I’ll go with Tarasenko.  The Kings aren’t really in a spot where they should be parting with a bunch of top young talent to try to win now.  I know that’s what their veteran core wants but it’s not the smart move.  Anze Kopitar is already at $10MM and adding another center at that price point may not be the wisest decision which sours me on Eichel as a fit.  I’m not opposed to the idea of them dealing away one of their many young pivots but not for him.

What I like about Tarasenko is that his trade value shouldn’t be all that high.  He wants out, he has had shoulder trouble the last few years, and his contract at $7.5MM is too expensive for most teams to absorb.  The Kings can take on that deal without offsets which gives them a leg up.  Is there a risk to Tarasenko?  Absolutely.  But there’s also the potential for a high reward and at what would appear to be a below-market acquisition cost, there’s a chance for them to upgrade the roster without losing key parts of the future.  That’s the sweet spot I’m looking for if I’m GM Rob Blake.

@FritzLiebich: Are the LA Kings ready to contend or are they 2-3 players away? Who should the Kings target by way of UFA or trade?

There is an opportunity for Los Angeles to be a playoff contender next season but by that, I mean a team that’s in a battle for a Wild Card spot.  That’s not really true contention and it’s why I just advocated against making a big splash on the trade market with Eichel.  But I do like the idea of them trying to add and the Viktor Arvidsson pickup certainly made sense.

I’d be looking for veteran bridge players if I was Blake, players that can upgrade the roster now but also be expendable in a trade if one of their many young prospects is ready for a bigger role.  That means players on short-term contracts unless they’re adding someone that they think could still be a quality contributor a few years from now.

They could go for a free agent but I like the trade route better.  Many teams are looking to dump contracts which means there will be opportunities to add roster upgrades at below-market costs such as Tarasenko above.  Target Tampa Bay as they have several pricey veterans that need to be moved for cap reasons; they can’t command full value.  As an example, Alex Killorn would be another nice addition on the wing.  The Islanders may want to shed some money based on who they left unprotected.  Jordan Eberle’s contract is a bit long for my liking (three more years) but would fill a positional need.  They’re not getting these types of players for free but they won’t be paying a premium either and won’t have to sign someone to a longer-term contract that wouldn’t be advisable based on where they are.  They’d improve the team and not mortgage the future in terms of assets or cap flexibility.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include an underachieving Bruin, some crystal ball predictions, the goalie situation for the Golden Knights, buyout candidates, and much, much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next weekend’s mailbag.

Puckhead83: You’re Don Sweeney. Are you exposing Jake DeBrusk and taking the cap relief, trading him at his lowest value, or making him your reclamation project?

Can I take none of the above?  If I’m Sweeney, I’m leaning towards buying DeBrusk out and taking the cap relief that way.  The structure of his backloaded contract gives Boston a cap credit of $367K in 2021-22 and a charge of $808K in 2022-23; his buyout is only one-third instead of two-thirds because of his age (24).  His qualifying offer in 2022-23 is $4.85MM and even a decent bounce-back season probably isn’t worthy of a tender so making him the reclamation project doesn’t make sense.

I’d leave him unprotected in expansion but I don’t think Seattle would bite.  Jeremy Lauzon is my preferred target from the Bruins, a young and cheap defenseman with some upside and can already handle himself in the NHL.

As for a trade, what’s better for Boston – roughly $4MM in cap space this summer or taking on a similar underperformer in a trade for DeBrusk?  The UFA market is going to be like last fall; there will be bargains to be had.  If I’m Sweeney, I’m making my bet that a UFA signing will be a better fit than the addition of the prototypical change of scenery swap player that I’d get in a swap.

The Duke: Crystal Ball time: Where will Ekman-Larsson and Kessel end up – and what’s Adin Hill’s future hold? Bonus question: who will be Nashville’s backup goalie – and what is Connor Ingram’s status? Thanks!

Oliver Ekman-Larsson: I think he stays in Arizona.  The Coyotes aren’t a team that’s going to want to carry a lot of dead money on the books and with the cap environment being what it is and the year he had, no one is taking on the six years and $8.25MM AAV outright.  There’s a new coach in Andre Tourigny so why not see if the captain can turn things around over selling low and paying him a good chunk of money not to play for them?

Phil Kessel: They’ve already paid most of his contract for next season in the form of a signing bonus and only owe him $800K with Toronto covering the other $200K.  This a budget-conscious team so while I know his name is out there, I don’t think they’re in much of a hurry to move his contract.  If they’re out of it at the deadline, he’ll move then but I think he stays with the Coyotes.

Hill: He should be in the NHL next season, either as Darcy Kuemper’s backup or picked by Seattle in expansion.  Hill has two years before reaching UFA eligibility so he is going to have to establish himself as a legitimate backup between now and then.  He should get that chance starting next year though.

Ingram: Ingram did return to Nashville’s farm team late in the season and still has two years left on his contract with the final year being a one-way pact.  He’s now waiver-eligible and is one of the more intriguing netminders in that situation.  This year was a write-off with everything that happened which could push him out of the mix to be the Predators’ backup but in 2019-20, he was nothing short of dominant.  Is there a team that is willing to give him a chance based on that?  I’m quite interested in seeing how that plays out in the fall.

DirtbagBlues: Can Vegas really afford to keep this goalie tandem? There seems to be no interest in moving either of them, but they could badly use the cap space. Not that this helps them with the cap, but if Vegas doesn’t trade an NHL goalie, could Logan Thompson be moved for a young skater?

They can afford to if they want.  They have probably three or four roster spots to fill (two forwards plus one or two defensemen) and roughly $6MM in cap space.  Go cheap on those slots and there is room to keep both Marc-Andre Fleury and Robin Lehner.  However, they’d be parting ways with Alec Martinez, Mattias Janmark, and potentially Tomas Nosek in the process and taking a step backwards so the question becomes is keeping both the right move to make?

Last year, the asking price to take on Fleury’s deal was high but things have changed since then.  He’s now the reigning Vezina winner which helps his value.  He also now has just one year left on his contract which also helps his value.  With so many other goalies available in free agency, Vegas couldn’t command a significant return but they shouldn’t have to pay to get out of it either.  Meanwhile, with Fleury being 36, they can’t really move Lehner who is the goalie of the near future.  They can make keeping both of them work but there is a definite opportunity cost in doing so.

As for moving Thompson, sure, he could be swapped for a young skater but it would be of the fringe variety.  He has one very good AHL season under his belt but that alone doesn’t give him much trade value.  They’re not going to get someone that could step into the bottom six up front or the third pairing defensively for someone with that small of a track record.  I’d hold onto him and if he has another strong year in Henderson, he’s a cost-effective backup to Lehner in 2022-23.

wreckage: Who is the most likely buyout candidate?

Anthony DeAngelo of the Rangers is the most obvious one.  They’re not going to pay him $5.3MM in salary to sit at home for another year when a buyout cap charge would be less than $1.2MM spread out over two seasons.  Teams aren’t going to trade for him at that salary so that one is pretty much a lock.  I wouldn’t be surprised if Jake Virtanen is in a similar situation.  The off-ice situation is still in play and his play on the ice (five goals and zero assists in 38 games) doesn’t warrant the contract he has.  It’s another one-third buyout with just a $50K cap charge next season and $500K the year after that.  Vancouver can do better with that money.

In terms of veterans, Edmonton’s Mikko Koskinen also seems quite likely.  There is now only one year left on his deal at $4.5MM and that’s way too much money for a backup goalie that can’t be relied on.  Even with a $1.5MM buyout charge for two years, I suspect GM Ken Holland can find a better fit between the pipes for the net $3MM savings for next season.  With some uncertainty with a long-term starting option, they can’t afford to carry more uncertainty at the backup spot either.

I expect a few more buyouts than these but it would be surprising if any of these three aren’t hitting the open market later this month.

@DJ23420117: What are the Wild going to do about Parise? Buyout? Trade w/Kraken? Keep him and make nice?

There is no good answer in this situation.  Let’s get that out of the way first.  The buyout cost – one that would give them some room next season before jumping to $6.3MM, $7.3MM, and $7.3MM – accomplishes next to nothing.  With his AAV being $7.538MM, they can’t even replace him without incurring a higher cap hit than had they just kept him.  In that situation, keeping him makes sense although he’s clearly unhappy with the situation.

A trade with Seattle is nice in theory but what would it cost to get them to take the contract on?  With the market being what it is, we’re probably looking at multiple first-round picks or comparable assets while also locking in the potential for salary cap recapture if he decides to retire early.

Honestly, I think they may be better off just keeping him; I don’t know about the make nice part though.  No one is happy in this scenario either but I wouldn’t want to give up so many future pieces to move him or create a bunch of dead cap space that winds up costing them more money to fill his spot in some of those years than it would be to keep him.  There’s no desirable answer here so for Parise, it’ll be a matter of choosing the least undesirable solution.

Y2KAK: Any chance Buffalo doesn’t go Owen Power?

Nothing is ever 100% certain but the odds they don’t go with Power would be low.  I doubt they’re concerned with him leaning towards staying in college for another year; that wouldn’t scare them off from picking him.  Big, top pairing defenders don’t become available very often and passing on one wouldn’t make much sense.

About the only scenario where I could maybe see them not taking him is if they traded Jack Eichel for a package that really shored up their defense with multiple long-term pieces to the point where they then look at someone like Matthew Beniers to replace Eichel up the middle.  But even that isn’t a very realistic scenario.  I’d be really surprised if Power isn’t a Sabre later this month.

Red Wings: What would it take for the Panthers to get rid of Bobrovsky? Or more realistically Yandle?

To move Sergei Bobrovsky, it would take eating a significant chunk of his $10MM cap hit for the next five seasons.  That’s a lot of money to pay someone not to play for them and as a budget-conscious team, it’s an even bigger hit.  From there, they’d have to take on a deal with at least three years left at a similar price tag as the non-retained portion on Bobrovsky.  Is that worth doing for Florida?  Probably not at this stage.  I’m not expecting him to rebound significantly next season but a small improvement could get him closer to league average.  That, coupled with one less year on his contract a year from now, might make it slightly less difficult to move him.

You’re correct that Keith Yandle is the more realistic trade option.  With only two years left and a $6.35MM cap hit, that’s a lot less of a hit to take on than Bobrovsky.  Yandle can also still contribute offensively although his struggles in his own end are what ultimately led to him being scratched in the playoffs.  The formula to a trade is similar to Bobrovsky – retain a sizable percentage and take a player back making the difference between Yandle’s AAV and the retained portion, creating a cap-neutral trade which will be a key to many moves this summer.  They’ll be losing some offensive punch with such a move but improved defensive zone play would help negate that.

Read more

The Stanley Cup could be awarded this evening and the offseason is already in full swing around the NHL. We’re just a few weeks away from the Seattle Kraken selecting their expansion roster and the 2021 draft class finding out which team will choose them. Free agency will soon follow and teams will start preparing for the 2021-22 season, which is just a few months away thanks to the altered sports calendar.

With that in mind, it’s time to run another edition of the PHR Mailbag. If you missed the last one, it was broken into two pieces. In the first part, Brian La Rose gave his thoughts on Philadelphia’s defense corps, the future of Jack Eichel and Rasmus Ristolainen in Buffalo, and whether or not the Maple Leafs made a mistake when they installed Kyle Dubas as general manager.  In the second, he suggested some teams that may need to complete a side deal with the Kraken, examined some interesting free agent targets, and gave his thoughts on the Dougie Hamilton market.

You can submit a question by using #PHRMailbag on Twitter or by leaving a comment down below.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include San Jose’s expansion situation for their back end, potential side deals and targets for Seattle, Dylan Larkin’s future with Detroit, how to free up cap space for the Islanders, Dougie Hamilton’s trade value, Boston’s drafting, Edmonton’s need for better complementary forwards, Philadelphia’s summer, and Patrik Laine.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s mailbag.

The Mistake of Giving Eugene Melnyk a Liver Transplant: Could Doug Wilson convince Vlasic and Karlsson to waive their NMCs and then protect 8 forwards/0 defensemen?

That’s certainly a creative idea although it would be tricky to do that and stay in compliance with the requirement for having two signed forwards under contract that played 27 games this year or 54 in the past two combined.  When Gavin looked at their expansion situation last week, they were at zero eligible forwards to begin with.  Adding an extra forward to the protected list is going to make fulfilling that particular obligation that much tougher.

But if they can sign enough forwards that qualify to do that, it would definitely be an avenue worth pursuing.  Marc-Edouard Vlasic and Erik Karlsson aren’t getting picked because of their contract and neither is Brent Burns.  That would certainly limit their exposure to either losing Radim Simek, Josef Korenar (as a depth goalie), or a depth forward.  If they can do that, they’d come out of expansion as one of the more fortunate teams in the league.

jdgoat: Who do you think works out a side deal with Seattle? Also, who will be the most expensive players they end up with?

Washington looks like a strong candidate given that they have to keep their cheap goaltending tandem intact.  There’s no way to protect both Ilya Samsonov and Vitek Vanecek and whichever one is unprotected would be tempting for the Kraken so a move will need to be made there.  Tampa Bay is certainly going to try to make a move to entice Seattle to take a pricey contract (Tyler Johnson seems like the speculative fit there).  Calgary could very well wind up leaving Mark Giordano unprotected but it’s hard to imagine they won’t try to find a way to keep their captain around.  If Minnesota can’t find a trade taker for Mathew Dumba in time, they’ll undoubtedly try to make a side deal as well to avoid losing him for nothing.  The same can be said for St. Louis and Vince Dunn.

I think the most expensive player they wind up with may very well come from Philadelphia.  Jakub Voracek ($8.25MM) and James van Riemsdyk ($7MM) could both be unprotected and would jump onto Seattle’s top line right away.  Both commitments are relatively short-term (three years for Voracek, two for van Riemsdyk) so there isn’t much long-term risk here.  I can’t see anyone more expensive than one of those two being selected.

pawtucket: Which UFAs should Seattle go after to compliment the plethora of 3rd line forwards and 5th/6th d-men they get from the expansion draft?

A lot depends on their plans.  Are they looking to win right away or are they eyeing a more gradual buildup which is what most expansion teams wind up going through?  If it’s the former, then they’re going to go after the likes of Dougie Hamilton and Gabriel Landeskog if they get to the open market.  If it’s the latter, however (and I suspect it is), then it’s all about short-term contracts.

Why?  Rental players are always in demand but in this cap environment, not having lingering obligations beyond the current season is even more appealing.  So if I’m GM Ron Francis and thinking more about two or three years from now, I want players that are easy to flip for extra picks or prospects to start building up their system.  They won’t have an AHL team next season but Palm Springs will start in 2022-23 so what’s a good way to start building that team?  By flipping a bunch of rentals at the trade deadline.

Who can still contribute to a team but will likely be stuck taking a one-year deal in free agency?  It’s a long list and that’s where Seattle should be shopping on the open market.

Eaton Harass: Any chance Larkin is available? He’d be a perfect fit for a team like the Avs or Rangers. They definitely have the pieces to get it done.

I don’t think Dylan Larkin is available or should be but I’ll qualify that by noting that I remember writing in a previous mailbag that Anthony Mantha wouldn’t be going anywhere at the deadline and we all know how that turned out.  Teams need capable veteran leadership and while Larkin isn’t exactly a veteran, he’s pretty close to one on this team.  He’s also young enough to be part of that next core which is still probably a few years away.  It’s worth noting that he’s an unrestricted free agent in 2023 and if he gives an indication that he doesn’t want to stay, then yes, move him.  But that feels like a discussion to be had next summer when he’s eligible for a contract extension more than one that needs to happen now.

I’m not sure either Colorado or New York would be a perfect fit either.  If the Avs are able to keep Gabriel Landeskog and Philipp Grubauer (both pending UFAs), they’ll pretty much be capped out re-signing their own talent (which also includes Cale Makar as an RFA).  Is Detroit going to take a return centered around Nazem Kadri for Larkin?  Probably not.  As for the Rangers, Larkin is a good center but is he a true number one?  That’s what they need.  If he’s in that tier that’s slightly below a top center, they already have that in Mika Zibanejad, assuming they’re able to extend him.  Sure, he’d be an upgrade on Ryan Strome on a long-term basis but I feel their top trade chips should be saved for someone that can be more impactful offensively or at least be guaranteed to be around longer than two years, the remaining term of Larkin’s contract.

Joe422: Nobody ever knows what Lou is thinking but the Islanders need to free up cap space to sign their RFA and resign Cizikas. What does Lou do? Trade Nick Leddy? What would he get back? A 2nd and a 3rd round pick? Could you also see Jordan Eberle being left unprotected and Kyle Palmieri be re-signed for less annual $ than Eberle?

Let’s look at that cap situation first.  Per PuckPedia, they have about $75.7MM in commitments to 17 players with, as you noted, Casey Cizikas and Kyle Palmieri among the pending UFAs while Anthony Beauvillier and Ilya Sorokin are among the RFAs.  Even with Johnny Boychuk being eligible for LTIR (allowing them to spend up to $6MM past the cap), you’re absolutely correct in that they need to shed salary.

Leo Komarov and Andrew Ladd look like candidates to be full-season members with AHL Bridgeport, clearing up $1.125MM in space for each of them though those amounts are offset by needing to replace them with someone making close to the minimum.  Still, there’s a few hundred thousand in savings.  Cal Clutterbuck feels like another possible cap casualty, either through waivers or even a buyout.  He plays an important role but he’s way too expensive for that role.  Ross Johnston could also be waived and farmed out with someone making the minimum replacing him, saving $250K.

I expect Cizikas will return at a lower price tag than $3.35MM.  He will be sought after by a lot of teams but most teams can’t pay fourth liners that type of money and that includes the Islanders.  If the offers are near the $2MM mark, he’ll probably stay put.

I don’t see Palmieri sticking around for a couple of reasons.  The first is that I don’t think they’ll leave Eberle unprotected and even if they did, does Seattle find his $5.5MM price tag for three more years appealing?  The second is that I wouldn’t be surprised if Palmieri covets a bigger role than what he had with the Islanders as he was more of a middle-six player than a top-six one (and while both of those involve the second line, I think there’s a distinction between the two).

I agree that Leddy feels like a cap casualty but how strong is his market?  They’d have preferred to trade him instead of Devon Toews a year ago so they can’t expect to get a similar return as they got for Toews for Leddy now.  If there’s going to be an expansion casualty, I think it might be him.  I like Leddy and he’s a serviceable second-pairing defender.  However, this is not a good market to be dumping money and he also is at $5.5MM but just for one more year.  If I’m Seattle, Leddy’s contract is more attractive than Eberle’s if it came to that.  While they’d need to replace him, they should be able to re-sign Adam Pelech and a Leddy replacement for that money (plus Pelech’s previous $1.6MM AAV).

Sorokin looks like a candidate for a bridge deal to keep his cost down and if they go short-term with Beauvillier (even a one-year contract), they can keep the cost manageable.  With the other small cap savings, they should be able to stay cap compliant.

mikedickinson: $8 million seems insane for Hamilton. He looked lost when Slavin was out during the Nashville series. As a Canes fan, what could we expect for compensation? Also, if Dougie leaves, any chance we make a run at Jones, if he’d sign for less than Hamilton?

The one downside to doing what they did by letting his camp talk to teams is that it took away any possibility of doing what they did with Joel Edmundson last fall, flipping his rights to Montreal for a fifth-round pick.  Why trade for exclusive rights when you can already talk to him?  If Hamilton doesn’t really want an eighth year on his contract if the money isn’t as high as he wants, the sign-and-trade isn’t as important either; he can get his seven years from anyone.

I can’t see the return for Hamilton in an extend-and-trade deal being too substantial.  The acquiring team will probably send a contract back to help offset the money and Carolina will be compensated for taking that salary offset on in the form of a draft pick or prospect.  I know that sounds underwhelming but unless Hamilton goes to Carolina and gives them a list of a few teams to choose from, it’s going to be tough to get any sort of bidding war going.  That’s what drives the trade price up and without that element, they don’t have a lot of leverage.

Knowing the emphasis that Carolina puts on their back end, I wouldn’t rule out a run at Seth Jones entirely but that’s an in-division trade for Columbus and I doubt that’s their preference.  But yeah, I think they’d kick the tires at least and someone like Brady Skjei, who has three years left at a reasonable rate for a second-pairing player, could be of some interest to the Blue Jackets.  I suspect they want to send him out West if they can, however.

Read more

There were plenty of questions to get to in this edition of the PHR Mailbag.  Topics include Rick Tocchet’s coaching candidacy, expansion rules, a possible fit for Philadelphia’s back end, Jack Eichel’s future, the coaching search in Buffalo, Toronto’s past GM move, the recent Rasmus Ristolainen to New Jersey rumor, the offseason ahead for Columbus and Calgary, and a Boston free agent scenario.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next weekend’s mailbag.

pitmanrich: What has Rick Tocchet done in his head coaching career to warrant the interviews he’s had so far? (Rangers, Columbus, and Seattle.) His teams regularly miss the playoffs, he’s got an overall losing record, am I missing something? Surely there are more deserving coaches out there.

I am a little surprised that Tocchet has had the interest he has since parting ways with Arizona.  As you note, his track record wasn’t great with Tampa Bay or Arizona; a 178-200-60 record over six seasons with one bubble playoff appearance isn’t inspiring on the surface.

However, his reputation is that of being a good communicator and that is something that teams are showing more and more interest in.  The days of one approach fits all are dwindling fast and in both of his head coaching stints, Tocchet was lauded for how he can relate to players.  The same was said for his time as an assistant which helped him get that opportunity with the Coyotes.

It’s also worth noting that he’s coming from an environment that has leaned heavy on analytics.  Seattle appears to be a team that’s highly investing on that front so someone like Tocchet that is familiar with some of those concepts would be a bit more appealing.  And considering he has now had three interviews with them per Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman (Twitter link), he has to be considered as a legitimate contender for that position.

If you’re a team that’s looking for experience but don’t want one of the ‘old school’ veterans like Mike Babcock, Claude Julien, John Tortorella, or Bruce Boudreau (to name a few), Tocchet is in that next range.  He has a different reputation than those bench bosses but still has a fair bit of experience – six years as a head coach and six more as an assistant.  That’s typically enough to garner some interviews.  If he doesn’t wind up with one of the remaining vacancies, he will undoubtedly come up as a strong candidate to take over a team midseason or next summer as a result.

mz90gu: How many games does an RFA have to play to be ineligible to be picked by the Kraken?

Free agency status doesn’t actually have an impact here.  Any unsigned draft pick or players with two years or less on an NHL contract are exempt while everyone else is eligible.  If you’re thinking about the games played criterion we’ve been citing in our Expansion Primer series, at least two signed forwards and one signed defenseman must have played either 27 games this season or 54 over the past two years combined.

However, players that have been signed for more than two years that haven’t played that many games are still eligible for selection; it doesn’t exempt them.  Teams merely have to expose that many players under contract.  As long as they’ve been under contract for longer than two seasons, restricted free agents are eligible to be picked by the Kraken.

Black Ace57: Is there any way to make a Seth Jones to the Flyers trade work?

It depends on how hesitant Columbus GM Jarmo Kekalainen is on trading a core player within the division.  If he doesn’t want to send a top defender to a division rival, that’s pretty much the end of that idea.  But that’s not very fun for a mailbag answer, is it?

On the surface, Jones isn’t a great fit considering that the Flyers have pretty good depth on the left side.  But it stands to reason that some of that depth would probably need to go the other way.  I don’t see Ivan Provorov being available in this scenario but Travis Sanheim is the type of player that should be of some interest to the Blue Jackets, a young defender with a couple of years of team control left.  That’d be an interesting piece.

I also wonder if they’d be open to moving Morgan Frost who hasn’t pushed his way into a regular role just yet.  A lot depends on if they can get extensions done for Claude Giroux and Sean Couturier; if they got them done early, Frost would potentially be expendable.  With the Blue Jackets’ situation down the middle, Frost would be of some interest.

Is that enough to get a trade done?  Perhaps not but that should be a reasonable starting point.  I suspect that they’re not looking for long-term future talent and instead would prefer guys that are ready now or close to being ready.  A rebuild is on the horizon but I don’t think they plan to go deep enough into one where a first-rounder that’s four or five years away fits the timeline.

We saw Carolina give Dougie Hamilton permission to talk to teams early about a sign-and-trade.  Jones is in a bit of a different situation in that he has one more year left at $5.4MM but since he doesn’t want to entertain an extension, he’s heading for an eventual exit.  If an extended Jones brought a better return, it would be prudent for Kekalainen to at least explore that option.

Busta607: Malkin and a 1st round pick for Eichel?

jeffh: What are the chances of the Ducks landing Eichel? I feel like they have the assets, but will them not being willing to move Zegras or Drysdale remove the possibility?

Also, who do you think the Ducks go for if they don’t land Eichel?

Let’s combine the Eichel questions together.  For the Pittsburgh proposal, there are a couple of hiccups.  The first is that is that they don’t have a first-round pick this year, particularly an early one which seems to be the expectation.  The second is that Evgeni Malkin has a no-move clause and there’s no reason for him to waive it to go to a bottom-feeder in the Eastern Conference.

On top of that, Malkin is only a year away from free agency and turns 35 next month.  Is that what a rebuilding team should be trading their franchise forward for?  Pittsburgh isn’t a great fit for Eichel; he’ll be heading somewhere else.

As for Anaheim, they definitely seem to be in the mix and have the high first-round pick (third overall) that gives them an edge on other potential suitors.  It will be difficult to do it with Jamie Drysdale or Trevor Zegras but that first rounder should yield a similar caliber of player if they’re willing to part with it.  If not, I don’t think they have much of a chance.  There are some other young pieces that should still have some value as a secondary element (Sam Steel, Isac Lundestrom, and Max Jones come to mind) and then some cap ballast (someone like Adam Henrique at $5.825MM).  If that third pick is in play, they have to be considered one of the contenders for Eichel.

As for who else they might go after?  It’s a pretty broad list – basically anyone that can score.  Anaheim needs several top-six upgrades and they’re not in a position to be too selective.  If a top-six player is available, they’ll be inquiring.

sabres3277: At this point, the Sabres coaching search seems to be centered on keeping Don Granato or hiring former Ranger coach David Quinn. Any thoughts on what direction they should take?? It is desperation time in Buffalo.

I don’t think either would necessarily be a bad choice given their situation.  Let’s face it, the Sabres aren’t looking for someone who is magically going to turn things around.  At least, they shouldn’t be.  They’re no closer to becoming contenders than they were years ago.  There are pieces in place but one of them looks like he’s about to be moved and it’s unlikely they’ll want win-now players in return.  What they need is someone that can raise the floor for the group and work on individual skill development.  A few years from now when they’re ready to contend (if all goes well), they’d probably be looking for that win-now coach at the same time.

Granato did a nice job down the stretch but it has to come with the caveat that it came at the end of the year when the games were meaningless.  Quinn, meanwhile, had some good moments with the Rangers but it’s telling that several of their youngsters didn’t progress as much as they would have hoped which is part of the reason they missed the playoffs and he’s on the look for another job.  That might be a bit of a red flag but he had success in college developing young players so that has to be kept in mind as well.  I’d lean towards Granato but I think Quinn would certainly help their program as well.

KAR 120C: When comparing Lou Lamoriello to Kyle Dubas, was it a mistake for Toronto to try new analytics versus old experience?  Considering where the Islanders are and the Leafs are not.

I can’t say it was a huge mistake based on analytics.  Not every team can be built the same way and who knows, a couple of years from now, the tide could have shifted drastically towards skill and they’ll be sitting pretty while the Isles are languishing a bit.

For me, the biggest difference would have been salary cap management.  I can’t see Lamoriello giving any of Toronto’s top-four forwards the contracts they have now, ones that are viewed as more player-friendly.  I think John Tavares wouldn’t have been signed and the savings between that and cheaper short-term contracts for the other three would have given them the cap flexibility to bolster their back end and lengthen out their forward corps.  In hindsight, that might have given them a better shot at playoff success than what they’ve had since then.  To me, that’s a bigger issue than the usage of analytics.

Having said that, it’s also important to keep in mind that other teams were sniffing around Dubas; he wasn’t going to stay an assistant GM for much longer.  Lamoriello’s GM contract was up and he was 75 at the time.  Dubas was 32.  Mark Hunter was also in the mix as well at the time.  From an asset management standpoint, the safer play was to keep the up-and-coming executive which is what they did.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include a prediction of the Stanley Cup winner, Alexandar Georgiev’s future with the Rangers, a thought on Mark Messier in New York, Jack Eichel trade talk, power forward prospects, and an early mock draft.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check for it in last weekend’s mailbag.

lapcheung39: Do you see Tampa Bay will repeat as champion this year; if not, who do you see as a dark horse to win it all?

First, that was quite an entertaining series they had against Florida.  The fact that the Lightning played well against a team that really mixed it up physically bodes well for them, a team that is tacitly viewed as more of a finesse group.  However, even though I see them squeaking by Carolina in the second round, I don’t think they’re the favorite to win the Stanley Cup.

I suspect I’m hardly the only one in this camp but whoever wins the Colorado-Vegas series is my pick to win it all.  Those two teams are in win-now mode with rosters that don’t have many flaws and they know that their best chance is now with the flat cap and pending free agents.  (I know Tampa Bay is in a similar boat as well.)  I have the Avalanche getting through the Golden Knights so they’d be my pick.  I know that’s hardly a dark horse but I don’t think there is one.

CoachWall: Any chance the Rangers include Georgiev in a trade for a center and bring “The King” back to mentor/back up Igor? It would give Henry a way to get a proper send-off before #30 takes its rightful place in the rafters.

Let’s address a quick CBA note here in that there is nothing preventing New York from doing this if they wanted to.  Players that are bought out can sign back with the team that bought them out (Calgary’s Michael Stone being the most recent example).

But even though they can, I don’t think they want to do that, nor should they.  If the inclusion of Georgiev helps land an impact center, that’d be great.  I don’t think he carries enough value to be a key piece of such a trade but in a bigger deal, I could see him being included.

But that doesn’t mean Lundqvist should be the target.  He hasn’t played this season after undergoing open-heart surgery which means he will have gone about 14 months between game action between the bubble and the start of next year.  It’s also important to remember that his numbers in his final season with New York weren’t particularly great and were below average for a backup.

I agree that Igor Shesterkin could benefit from a veteran backup who can help mentor him but the Rangers need someone that’s a little more reliable and doesn’t come with as many question marks in terms of health.  For as talented as Shesterkin is, he has all of 48 career NHL games under his belt and we appear to be heading for an 82-game season in 2021-22.  If I’m GM Chris Drury, I’m looking for someone that I’m comfortable handing 35-40 starts to next season.  It’d make for a fantastic story but I don’t think that Lundqvist can handle that workload at the age of 39, at least to the point of giving them above-average backup goaltending.

The good news is that a lot of the other veteran free agent goalies out there should be able to handle that type of action so if they do move Georgiev this summer, there will be several viable options to turn to.

@flaguy12: Any chance if the Rangers interviewing Mark Messier for their head coaching job?

Is there a chance they’re interviewing Messier?  Sure.  I’d even go as far as saying they’re likely to talk to him considering his comments earlier this month when he said he was “standing by ready to help out” following the firings of Jeff Gorton and John Davidson.  But as a head coach?  I’d be shocked.

Messier dabbled in coaching a decade ago, heading up Canada’s entries into the Deutschland and Spengler Cups.  He also has a couple of stints as an assistant coach with peewee teams.  That’s the extent of his coaching background.  That’s not enough to make him a credible candidate to be an NHL coach, let alone a head coach.

If they do speak with Messier, I wouldn’t be surprised if a role similar to the Senior Advisor post he held a decade ago with the team.  If he had any intention of being in a full-time NHL role somewhere, his name would have popped up for opportunities somewhere over the past several years.  Accordingly, a part-time role makes more sense for him which would be as an advisor or some sort of player development coach.

sabres3277: Do you believe that the Sabres will trade Eichel? If so, what team would be the best landing spot to bring the Sabres the best return? And what kind of return are the Sabres looking at?

It has been a tough stretch in Buffalo for the past several years and to be honest, I don’t see a lot of hope on the horizon for them.  That’s not at all a shot at Jack Eichel either but the supporting cast isn’t good enough and the rotating door of coaches and general managers doesn’t help either.  He’s one more season away from having the ability to veto a move when his no-move clause kicks in.  I don’t get the sense he’s going to be happier with the Sabres a year from now, especially with the current issue of wanting surgery that the team won’t sign off on.  Even with that lingering procedure, it certainly feels as if they have a better shot at getting more for him this summer than next offseason when he can limit the market.  Accordingly, I do believe that Eichel will be on the move.

I don’t know how willing the Kings are to commit to three players making at least $10MM on their payroll when they’re a non-playoff team but on paper, they match up well.  Buffalo needs a top young center in a trade.  Los Angeles has Quinton Byfield, Alex Turcotte, and Gabriel Vilardi as recent first-round picks.  They don’t have extra first-round picks but have extra picks in the next two rounds this summer which makes it a bit easier to part with their top selection.  They also have ample cap space which means they don’t have to match money.  That’s a strong foundation of a deal right there.

The Rangers have been long speculated as a landing spot but their package would have to be based on young defensemen more than a center as part of the reason New York would be in the hunt here is that youngsters like Filip Chytil and Brett Howden haven’t established themselves as top-six fits.  I don’t know if the fit is as good and it’s a deal where money would need to be matched beyond the inclusion of Ryan Strome.  I’ll toss in a dark horse team as well, the Blue Jackets.  If Buffalo really likes one of Joonas Korpisalo or Elvis Merzlikins and that goalie is willing to sign, that could give them their starter for the foreseeable future, a core piece.  They have three first-round picks at their disposal and could add someone like Max Domi to give him another fresh start although they don’t need to match money either.  There are some pieces to work with for an offer there.

I can see this being a four or five-piece package.  A young core player that’s either signed long-term or under team control for four or five years (Eichel has five years left on his deal).  There needs to be a top prospect in there and probably a first-round pick or comparable prospect.  The rest will be taking a player or two back for cap purposes.  That’s a higher price than Ryan O’Reilly but Eichel is in a higher tier.  O’Reilly is quite good but Eichel is a franchise player.  They need to demand a huge return and even in a flat-cap market, they should be able to get it.

Pieters: Which prospects would have the best chance of being the next Brady Tkachuk (i.e., scoring forward that’s not afraid to mix it up)?

That’s a very rare combination to try to match which is part of the reason Tkachuk went as high as he did (fourth overall in 2016).  There frankly hasn’t been one like him since then which makes this rather challenging to answer.

I think players like Matt Boldy (MIN) and Samuel Poulin (PIT) could fit the bill offensively.  Boldy hasn’t had a chance to throw his weight around much in college but I think as he fills out, he’ll have a bigger willingness to get engaged physically.  I’m not sure that means he’ll drop the gloves a ton but there should be a physicality element in time and he should score enough to be in the top six.  Poulin has shown the offensive skill in junior that could translate to the pros but he already is a particularly physical player and undoubtedly will be highly valued by Pittsburgh’s new management team.  If he puts it all together, he could fit that bill.

One other wildcard that comes to mind is Jake Neighbours (STL).  I’m not convinced that his offensive ceiling is as high as Tkachuk’s but he could be a 15-20-goal player that drops the gloves from time to time while being able to mix it up in the corners.

If you’re looking at this and thinking that none of these players are like Tkachuk, you’re right.  They’re not.  But part of what makes Tkachuk or any other power forward of that ilk (think Milan Lucic and Wayne Simmonds in their primes) is that the combination of physicality and offensive skill is so hard to get; they don’t come around often.  There are players with similar offensive games but don’t throw their weight around as much.  There are more players willing to engage in the corners and play rough but lack the offensive upside to play in the top six.  Rarely do you see both in the same player.

Tkachuk may not have the overall offensive upside as some of the others that went behind him in that draft but with everything else he brings to the table, the Sens believed he’d be more valuable.  That belief has been rewarded so far.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include the Department of Player Safety, the possibility of compliance buyouts, a creative Arizona trade idea, teams that could be heading for a sizable shakeup, Nashville’s regular season struggles, Philadelphia’s offseason, and NHL officiating.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next weekend’s mailbag.

pawtucket: How would you fix the Department of Player Safety and its obvious flaws and inconsistencies?

When it comes to its flaws, I’m not sure everyone in the league and the NHL Players Association necessarily sees it that way.  I’m not going to weigh in on the Tom Wilson incident which is what I suspect led to this question aside from noting that the view of general managers who were willing to speak off the record about it was hardly unanimous.  I’m fairly confident the same can be said of the players as well.  If someone wants to see stiffer discipline handed out, there is someone else who likes things the way there are now.  That makes meaningful changes hard to accomplish.

The fine system has largely been ridiculed given its lack of teeth but that’s how both sides (the NHL and NHLPA) seem to want it.  The threshold for levying a fine without a disciplinary hearing is $5K and is collectively bargained (Section 18 for anyone who wants to look up the details).  That’s why most fines have been for that amount; it’s the most they can give without calling a hearing.  It can actually be higher (up to $15K for multiple fines in a 12-month period) but a hearing would have to happen each time.  If they want it to be higher, it needs to be agreed upon in the CBA.  They just extended the CBA and didn’t touch it.  Until a large percentage of players and league executives believe things need to change, they’re not going to change.

As to what I might change?  That’s a hard one as the ideas I have certainly have flaws to them but here they are.  Having an independent party make the decision could be more objective than an NHL employee but that would cost more money and chances are, the league would be more hesitant to refer matters to that independent person which would mean even more of the current system.  Maybe some sort of panel makes a ruling – one with a league representative, an NHLPA representative, and one other party (perhaps a former player).  Each makes their ruling and the suspension or fine becomes the average or median amount of those three.  I’ll admit, that’s not a great system either but in terms of changes that I can think of, those are the ones that come to mind.

Joe422: With so many teams up against the salary cap… is there any chance the league allows a compliance buyout this offseason? And if yes, we know Ladd, Neal, etc will be bought out but what surprise names could we see?

If there was going to be a compliance buyout that was allowed, it would have been last year when teams were caught off guard by the cap flattening out instead of continuing to increase.  Everyone has now had a season to operate under the new system and have signed contracts knowing what the new economic reality is.  And while there are some large-market, cap-strapped teams that would welcome the ability for a cap-exempt buyout, there are others that want to see those teams suffer, for lack of a better term.  I’d be surprised if one was allowed this summer.

But, just for fun, a name that came to mind that might be viewed as a surprise when I saw this question was Florida’s Sergei Bobrovsky.  He has not fared well with the Panthers; a .902 SV% wasn’t what they were expecting when they gave him $10MM a year for seven years.  They have Spencer Knight who is their goalie of the future.  Clearing Bobrovsky’s deal off the books would also allow them to be able to afford to re-sign pending UFA Chris Driedger, bring in a veteran backup/platoon option, and still come out with cap and real dollar savings.  GM Bill Zito isn’t the GM who gave Bobrovsky the contract so there’s no situation where the GM isn’t willing to admit his mistake – it was Dale Tallon who made it.

The Mistake of Giving Eugene Melnyk a Liver Transplant: Could Arizona expose Phil Kessel for the draft, then give up an asset to trade to get him back after the $5MM signing bonus has been paid?

Technically, this is legal, sort of.  In the Vegas draft, teams were allowed to trade back for the players that they lost and a few of those teams went down that road but couldn’t work something out.  However, as Pierre LeBrun of TSN and The Athletic noted back in 2017 (Twitter link), it can’t be part of a pre-arranged transaction.  Assuming that the purpose of this is to have Seattle repay Kessel’s July 1 signing bonus to Arizona (which is how it technically would work), that certainly feels like a pre-arranged transaction.  They’d have to get a little creative as a result.

For a deal to not appear as pre-arranged, some time would need to elapse before Arizona would re-acquire Kessel.  I’m thinking a couple of months or more with the deal coming just before (or during) training camp.  By then, the Coyotes could plausibly argue that they were unable to replace him in free agency or the trade market and having had time to re-assess their team, now believe that they need to bring him back (and would be paying a fairly significant cost to do so).  Is losing a good pick/prospect or two and potentially drawing the ire of the league worth saving $5MM in costs?  Even with their financial situation, I’m not sure they’d see it that way but I like the creative thinking.

MoneyBallJustWorks: What teams if they are eliminated in Round 1 can you see making big changes this offseason?

For example, if Edmonton is eliminated in Round 1, do they shake up their core outside of Leon, Connor and Darnell?

Edmonton certainly seems like the obvious choice to be bolder in their team building.  The forward depth isn’t the greatest which is a by-product of having players like Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl on their roster.  Their defense isn’t elite by any stretch either.  I don’t think they’d move one of McDavid, Draisaitl, or Darnell Nurse but I don’t think there would be many untouchables beyond those three either.  If they go down to Winnipeg with the offense continuing to sputter, GM Ken Holland will have a hard time justifying keeping things the way they are now.

Washington also stands out as a possibility and with them down 3-1 to Boston, them losing also stands out as a possibility.  It has been a weird year for them and it certainly feels like Evgeny Kuznetsov’s time with them could be in jeopardy.  Any time a center of his caliber becomes available, that’s shaking up the core.  If they wind up exposing and losing T.J. Oshie to Seattle as some have speculated, that would be another big change to their core group.

Gbear: Despite getting into the playoffs, the Predators have been awful at shot suppression, shot creation and special teams throughout John Hynes’ tenure as coach. Is merely squeezing into the playoffs reason to allow him to keep his job in Nashville?

Related to that, it would seem that if any team needed to make a play for Jack Eichel, it would be Nashville. Would it not be reasonable for GM Poile to offer up two first-rounders, and any of their prospects not named Tomasino or Farrance for him?

Speaking of a team that could try to shake things up with a first-round exit, Nashville would certainly qualify as well.  They’ve been sputtering for a while now and it’s clear the composition of players they have don’t work in terms of maximizing their individual talents.  A swap of high-priced underachievers is one of the ways that teams can make moves without creating cap problems as long as the deals are similarly priced and the Predators look like a prime candidate to do that.

The hiring of Hynes was a little surprising at the time and frankly was underwhelming as nothing he had done in New Jersey suggested he was a ‘must-hire before anyone else gets a chance to get him’ coach.  But it wouldn’t be fair to just lay it at his feet as the core wasn’t exactly doing much under Peter Laviolette either.  I think it’s more of a roster composition issue than a coaching one at this point.  And for what it’s worth, Hynes has only been behind the bench for 84 regular season games, barely one full season.  Coaches, especially ones that they moved quickly to get like they did, typically get a longer leash than that, playoff success or not.

As for targeting Eichel, sure, they’d be wise to show interest in him.  However, the cost to get a franchise player is going to be considerably higher than a couple of first-round picks that will be near the middle of the round and some prospects that aren’t at the top of their pool.  Eichel will be looked at in more detail next week but if Buffalo isn’t getting elite talent in return, they shouldn’t be moving him.  That package isn’t going to yield elite talent.

Read more