PHR Mailbag

The moves the Blue Jackets made at the trade deadline were the talk around the NHL and are discussed in this edition of the PHR Mailbag as well as Arizona’s recent run, the Seattle expansion draft, Boston’s lineup, Alexander Radulov’s benching, and the current postseason format.

As we’ve done with recent mailbags, questions not answered here will appear in our next mailbag next weekend.

sixfootnineballerina: What do you think the fallout would be like if the Blue Jackets suffer an early exit or miss the postseason entirely after giving up so many future assets and holding onto their pending UFAs?

First things first, I want to comment on GM Jarmo Kekalainen’s strategy in general.  I get the desire to go for it and really respect it, as bad of an idea as I think it was.  As a whole, what they gave up for Matt Duchene and Ryan Dzingel wasn’t over the top by any stretch.  But these moves aren’t going to vault them into Stanley Cup contention so at best, we’re talking about winning a couple of rounds.  I know they haven’t won a playoff series before so that’s worth more to them than most but at the same time, is making it through a couple of rounds going to magically entice Artemi Panarin to re-sign?  Probably not.

As for the fallout from an early exit or missing altogether, Kekalainen likely would be shown the door as would head coach John Tortorella if he isn’t gone already by the end of the year.  If they fall any further in the race, I have to think a late-season coaching change could be in the cards.  They’re all in so why take the cautious route now?

From a long-term perspective, I don’t think it changes their fortunes too drastically though.  Win or lose, they’re probably heading for a soft rebuild unless they wind up being big players in free agency which is something that simply hasn’t happened often in their history.  A good or bad showing probably isn’t changing the view of that team in the eyes of players around the league.  They’ve moved some of their top assets for this run so big offseason moves to replenish their NHL talents aren’t likely in the cards.  Either way, some tough times are probably ahead.

therealscyie: Despite being three points out of a playoff spot right now, do you think if the Coyotes make the playoffs, is it a possibility that Rick Tocchet could be considered for the Jack Adams award? Or is John Cooper and Barry Trotz so far ahead that the third nominee is gonna be Bill Peters?

Considering the injuries they’ve had (both in terms of quantity and the quality of players they’ve missed), he should be considered at the very least if they can get there.  Oddly enough, they’ve been better than they were when some of their players were healthy which is a testament to what Tocchet and his staff have done thus far.

That said, I think this is Trotz’s award to lose.  The Islanders were a popular pick to be in the basement in the Metropolitan Division after their offseason and instead, they find themselves battling for the top spot.  That has to make him the contender even though Cooper’s Lightning have been the class of the league all season long.  Peters will pick up a few votes so as well as Tocchet has done (and he deserves a lot of credit for their recent play), he’s probably not going to be in contention for the award.

pawtucket: What are the rules for the expansion draft – re games played to count towards the ‘needs protection’ list? I’m seeing all these signings from the NCAA and Europe and wondering what will happen if they burn a year this year and the expansion draft in 2 years…

We’re in uncharted waters here with this situation as the Vegas expansion situation didn’t have this long of a timeline to work with.  As a result, there seem to be more questions than answers at this point with some contradictory information out there and not many NHL staffers have spoken on the record so far.

However, earlier this year, Mathias Brunet of La Presse was able to shed some light on the situation after speaking with someone with Montreal’s front office.  While they were discussing Ryan Poehling’s situation in particular (Cale Makar is also in the same boat with regards to timing for signing age for waivers versus actual contract timing – 19 vs 20), it was noted that a player signing an ELC late this season could play ten games without being expansion-eligible.  It was also reported that there was an adjustment to the CBA in anticipation of the Seattle draft and while the specific change isn’t specified in that article, my inclination is that it is a proration of the 40-game rule that is used for the purposes of reaching an accrued season.  They did that back in 2012-13 (Exhibit 16, heading nine of the current CBA) so it’s not unprecedented.

For me, the concern is more with the younger college players than the upcoming college free agent market as even if those players were to become expansion-eligible, if a team wound up losing whoever they signed to Seattle, they’d probably call that a win at this point as it would mean the rest of their team is intact.  As for the European market, unaffiliated players signing to play now would need entry waivers so there shouldn’t be any activity on that front in the weeks to come and anyone that signs after the season would be exempt.

sovietcanuckistanian: Bruins fan here – when David Pastrnak comes back and assuming the Bruins are playing the kind of hockey they have been since he’s been out – do they reunite the ‘Perfection’ Line (to give teams more to plan for in playoffs) or do they try and spread the wealth a little better/more since they are doing well despite his not being around? Thanks in advance.

Boston finds themselves in a pretty good spot right now.  It’s pretty much certain that they know they’re facing Toronto in the first round barring one of those teams going into a very long losing streak (and even then they’d still probably be the two/three seeds).  That makes it the perfect time for trying things.

Everyone knows that when Boston’s top line is together, they’re really good.  Even if they’re apart for a few weeks upon Pastrnak’s return, the chemistry they’ve shown over the last few years is still going to be there if they need to reunite the trio for the postseason.  So what really is there to lose to put him on a different line?

The remaining games for the Bruins over the next month are basically glorified practices with so little at stake.  (Yes, there’s home ice advantage at play but Boston has some wiggle room at the moment.)  It’s the perfect time to see how Pastrnak fares away from his usual linemates in case they need to split the big line up during the playoffs to spread out the scoring.

@Habsfanaticfla: if a player like Radulov misses a team meeting and then sits out a game is he still paid for the game?

Teams can choose to suspend a player without pay for violation of team rules, conduct detrimental to the team, etc so that option is there although the player or the NHLPA could elect to grieve it if they wanted.  That’s not what happened earlier this week in the case of Radulov though.  The Dallas winger was simply made a healthy scratch which is the disciplinary method of choice for teams when it comes to missing or being late for a team meeting for a single instance.  Healthy scratches are still paid their full daily salary.

If it happens more frequently, that’s when a team may elect to do the suspension without pay or fine as that’s a higher step on the disciplinary ladder.  However, most of the time, the public embarrassment of being a healthy scratch for missing a meeting (or being late) is usually enough to curb the issue right then and there.

Mr. Mark: When is the league going to get rid of this ridiculous playoff format? Last year the top two teams in the league, Winnipeg and Nashville had to play in the second round and could happen again this year with Tampa and Boston or Toronto.

I don’t think there’s much appetite from the Board of Governors to make the change.  They discussed plenty at their recent meetings and the playoff format wasn’t among the big topics discussed.  This was largely put in place to reinstate some divisional rivalries and for all of the flaws this current system has (and pitting the top teams against each other early is right up there), it appears to be well on its way to doing just that.

The regular season can sometimes be a drag and under the old system, the divisions didn’t mean a whole lot.  Their hope is that with this system, the rivalries that will develop from frequent postseason matchups will create some better drama during those dog days.

Personally, I’d be pleased with bringing back the old system.  With only two divisions instead of three, there won’t be any instances anymore where a division winner from the weak division gets a higher seed like there was in the past.  Divisional success means something but so should finishing first.  The current system isn’t really rewarding that.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

The trade deadline is over and teams now have to complete the last quarter of the season with no outside help. That means plenty of action for young players on clubs outside the playoff race, and a test of depth for those grinding for a top seed. While the battle for the last few playoff spots rages, some fans will have turned their attention to the upcoming draft and free agency, excited for what to come. Will the big names moved at the deadline re-sign with their new teams? Or will the free agent market be littered with stars looking for big paychecks?

With the deadline behind us and the playoffs not too far away, it’s time to run another mailbag. We’ll be answering as many questions as we can this weekend. You can submit questions by using #PHRMailbag on Twitter or by leaving a comment down below.

If you missed our last mailbag, it came out in two parts given all the questions asked. First Brian tackled everything to do with the Metropolitan Division including predicting Pittsburgh’s movement of Tanner Pearson for some defense help and giving his thoughts on the Micheal Ferland situation. Next, he tackled the rest of the league in a lengthy mailbag that stretches from Erik Karlsson to Jonas Brodin.

Our latest mailbag before the trade deadline takes a look at some of the top rental players still available, what a trio of Atlantic Division teams will be looking to do, a discussion on the emphasis on long-term contracts and whether that trend may soon be changing, and much more.  These are the non-Metropolitan Division questions from our last call for mailbag questions two weeks ago.  For the Metro mailbag, click here.

ThePriceWasRight: Rumors are if he makes it, Calgary and Winnipeg interested in Stone. If either makes this trade are they the cream of the Western crop or does Calgary still have to address its goaltending?

I think Winnipeg is the top team in the West right now so adding Mark Stone would make them the top gun by that much more.  They have several strong wingers and adding a top liner like Stone would make an already potent offense that much stronger.

As for Calgary, getting Stone probably wouldn’t be enough to unseat Winnipeg as their goaltending is still somewhat shaky.  Unfortunately for them, that’s going to be tough to address.  I don’t think Columbus will move Sergei Bobrovsky and while Jimmy Howard would help, he’s not a high-end starter.  No one they’re going to get will be either which makes it hard to call them the top contender.

That said, I don’t think it should stop them from pursuing Stone.  Their attack is very top-heavy and adding Stone would give them a second line that’s capable of lighting the lamp with a lot more regularity.  If you can’t win the traditional way with good goaltending, loading up offensively and trying to win some high-scoring games isn’t a bad way to go.

@Hockeyprospect5: Who should the Flames try to acquire?

Though they won’t be able to land a top-notch starting goaltender, I still think they should look at adding some depth.  I like Keith Kinkaid for them.  I know he isn’t having a great year but he showed last season that he’s capable of getting hot and going on a big run.  That’s all they really need for the time being, someone that can either push one of David Rittich or Mike Smith or provide a short-term boost if he gets on a roll at the right time.

I can see them looking for winger depth as well.  I’d be a little surprised if Stone went there but I could see someone like Gustav Nyquist being of interest to them.  He may not be able to carry a line like Stone but he’s a good two-way player and could still log a lot of minutes for them.  (He’ll also cost a lot less than Stone will.)  They’ve been linked to Mats Zuccarello as of late as well and he’d be a nice addition for their second line.

pitmanrich: Why are top players so keen on 7/8 year contracts? Salary cap is unlikely to go down significantly and top money will always be there for quality players like Karlsson and Stone unless dramatic drop off in production surely no-trade clauses on 3/4 year deal would be better for them plus if the team goes bad quick like the Rangers did easier for them to leave for another contender.

Security means a lot and the players signing the max-term contracts are usually getting significant no-trade/no-move protection anyway (at least in their UFA-eligible years).  If a player is hitting the open market at 27, a max-term deal is going to take them pretty close to retirement.  Waiting three or four years and trying again is going to probably yield a lesser contract for most players.

Let’s look at Karlsson.  Previous speculation was that it’s going to take Drew Doughty money (eight years, $11MM per) to get a deal done.  Let’s give that to Karlsson but on a four-year pact.  That will allow him to hit unrestricted free agency again in July of 2023.  However, he’ll be 33 at that time with four more years of mileage on him.  By then, he probably won’t be as much of an elite skater either.  Even with a higher Upper Limit and a new CBA in place, I’m not sure he’d match $11MM on another deal let alone beat it.  The shorter-term deal probably hurts him.  Mark Stone is a couple of years younger so he’d have more of a chance but assuming he winds up around $9.5MM or more on his next deal, could he beat that four years from now?  I wouldn’t bet on it.

Now, when it comes to RFA players, you’re onto something.  Auston Matthews could have pushed for Connor McDavid money (or more) on an eight-year deal but took five years instead (and still wound up with a really high price tag).  He’ll be hitting unrestricted free agency in the prime of his career and as long as he stays healthy, it’s a fairly safe bet that he’ll be able to beat whatever the AAV could have been on an eight-year post-RFA deal so the shorter-term strategy will work for him.  I expect some of the other top RFAs this summer will pursue a similar route with that in mind and if teams need to compromise on the term to get an AAV more to their liking, they’ll do it.

The shift towards shorter deals is coming but it probably wouldn’t be with the players that are entering unrestricted free agency.  Those players will be opting for the security of one last big payday.

ThePriceWasRight: What do you see happening with Erik Karlsson? Sharks can now start negotiating but may want to focus on the season.

While there hasn’t been any information about any talks being held, I’m pretty sure that the Sharks have a pretty good idea of what it’s going to take to lock him up.  It’s likely that GM Doug Wilson has spoken with Craig Oster, Karlsson’s agent, to determine what the asking price is and the willingness on their end to sign an extension.

In the short-term, whatever that answer may be doesn’t really change much.  Even if for some reason Karlsson decided he wants to go to free agency, San Jose isn’t going to trade him.  They’re all in for this season and given what they paid for him, they’ll stick it out.  (Considering the clause that says they owe Ottawa another first rounder if he’s dealt back in the East, they wouldn’t run the risk of moving him and having that team flip him back in the East either.)

If I had to guess, I’d speculate that they probably are already pretty close to a contract if one isn’t already in place.  Considering he can’t sign an eight-year deal until after the trade deadline passes on Monday, they’ll wait until then at the very least but I think he’ll be staying in San Jose for a long time.

tigers22: Nyquist to Winnipeg for a 1st, Glendening to Toronto for a 3rd, and Howard to San Jose for a future 2nd. If Holland wants to re-sign Nyquist and Howard in the off-season isn’t this the best thing for the Red Wings now and in the future?

Let’s address the second part first.  Yes, the trade and sign option on paper is, at least in theory, the best-case scenario for Detroit.  They get some assets for the players and then get the players back.  It’s the best of both worlds.  However, it’s something that rarely happens.  (Montreal did it with Tomas Plekanec recently but he’s the exception, not the norm.)  If the Red Wings truly want to re-sign them, is the potential trade return worth the risk of not being able to bring them back if they decide they prefer their new team or to test the market?  Most GMs don’t think so which is why they often lock up their guys if they can.

As for the trade ideas, I don’t think Nyquist gets a first-rounder.  There aren’t many available and as well as he has played this season, there are better players than him available that will likely get those top picks.  Glendening to Toronto makes some sense but given the cap situation that the Maple Leafs have, Detroit would either need to retain some salary or take a player back.  Howard to San Jose is a fit on paper but I expect the Sharks will ultimately target a cheaper goaltender (think Ryan Miller or Kinkaid).

Read more

The Metropolitan Division has been tightly contested all season and not surprisingly, there has been plenty of speculation on the trade front.  That was a popular topic among the mailbag questions this week, so much so that the teams in that division get the attention in this edition of the PHR Mailbag.  Questions that were asked but not discussed here will be covered in an extra mailbag column next week.  You can still add your questions here.

grizzled sports vet: Do you see Pittsburgh doing anything else before the deadline? As far as the back end goes, Schultz is returning, but Maatta was placed on the IR. They’ll need defensive depth for a playoff stretch run. Even if Maatta comes back it wouldn’t hurt to have another D-man to spell or even replace Jack Johnson if needed.

I know Jim Rutherford said he’d like to have a quiet trade deadline but let’s face it, he’ll find a way to do something.  Justin Schultz coming off of long-term injury reserve cuts down their cap room but they’ll still have a couple million of full-season space to work with.  At the very least, I can see them looking to upgrade on Chad Ruhwedel in terms of injury depth on the back end.

I wouldn’t be shocked to see him try to do something with winger Tanner Pearson.  His acquisition for pending UFA Carl Hagelin was a risky one given that Pearson has two years left at a pricey $3.75MM AAV after this one.  They were hoping that a change of scenery would help him rebound but it hasn’t happened and he is sliding down the depth chart (he’s a healthy scratch today).  If there’s a team out there that likes him as a middle-six winger, they’d be wise to look to move him.

Will Pittsburgh be as active as they were last year with swinging a unique three-way deal that saw Vegas retain on Derick Brassard with him being on the roster for all of a few minutes?  Probably not.  But Rutherford will be heard from again.

Jaysthoughts: Rutherford has always spun twine into gold. Now what player that doesn’t fit in on another team will be traded for Jack Johnson and hoist the Cup at season’s end?

With four years at $3.25MM per left after this one, the market for Johnson will be very limited.  The AAV isn’t terrible but the term is the big killer here.  (In other words, if he had two years left instead of four, I think there would be a reasonable trade market for him.)

There has been a significant escalation of player salaries at the top end of the market in recent years which has resulted in teams needing to scale back on their spending of mid-tier players.  Johnson can play in the top four when needed but in a perfect world, he’s a third pairing defender.   However, there aren’t many teams left that are able or willing to commit that much money long-term for a third pairing guy.  Instead, they’ll want blueliners making half of that or less to be able to reallocate the savings to a better player.

To be honest, I don’t think Rutherford is necessarily looking to get out from under Johnson’s deal.  The signing was widely panned (and justifiably so given the five-year term) but I’d suggest he has more or less played as they expected.  He’s giving them a little more than 19 minutes a game and while there have been some rocky moments along the way, those weren’t to be unexpected given how his time in Columbus ended.  I don’t think they were expecting a ton more from him, to be honest, so I don’t think he’s at the top of the wish list for the Penguins to trade.

Connorsoxfan: Could Hayes and Zuccarello be moved to the same team? Would someone like Boston who could use a 3rd line center (Hayes), a winger for Krejci (Zuccarello), and some immediate help if Pastrnak is out for a while? What would that return look like?

The idea is certainly interesting but I don’t think there are many teams who could pull that off with the salary cap implications (the two combine for nearly $10MM in a full-season deal and not a lot of contenders can take that on).  Yes, there’s always the potential of getting New York to retain but that will only up the asking price and the cost for a package like this would be steep.  Out of the teams really looking to add, I think Boston and maybe Winnipeg are the only ones that would do this.

Individually, I have both players getting a second rounder plus another piece with the second asset being more significant for Hayes.  If Ottawa takes one or both of their premium rentals off the market, then Hayes may be able to get a first but there are only a handful of those that are going to move.

To get both of them, however, I think the emphasis would shift towards quality over quantity.  A first rounder would need to be in there and instead of a second-round pick, a young roster player would be a target (from Boston, think of Danton Heinen or Matt Grzelcyk and from Winnipeg, someone like Jack Roslovic, players that are a little more established).  Depending on the player going back to New York, there may not be much more than that.

It’s a really interesting idea and one I think GM Jeff Gorton would be wise to try to do but a few of the big names would have to be off the board for this to be palatable.

mikedickinson: Hurricanes are making a run at the playoffs, but can’t afford to lose Ferland for nothing in the offseason. Do you see him moving on at the deadline?

I think the decision on this is probably still a week away.  If Carolina is still in the thick of the playoff race, then yes, I think they’ll hold onto Micheal Ferland and use him as their own rental player.  They have a big stretch coming up with four more games by next weekend and if they struggle, they could be out of it by then as well so GM Don Waddell should play it slow.

As for not being able to afford to lose him for nothing, I agree but only to an extent.  I don’t believe the trade market for him is going to be overly significant.  Again, there are only a handful of first-rounders in play and with all due respect to Ferland (who has played quite well this season), he’s not at the level of the high-end rentals that are in play.  At best, Carolina is foregoing a second rounder and a decent prospect.  While they could certainly benefit from adding more young assets to the system, keeping Ferland for a meaningful playoff push would be good for this core as well (assuming they don’t fall out of the race by next weekend, of course).  If they’re in it, I think they’ll keep him but if not, they’d be wise to ensure they get something for him.

acarneglia: Are the Blue Jackets a buyer and a seller at the deadline? Could Panarin be moved and then bring in someone like Duchene?

ThePriceWasRight: Do the Jackets wait till the very end to decide on Bob and Artemi? They need to know 100% where they are in the playoff picture as well as what prices are as they likely can’t trade Panarin for less than Duchene if he goes.

At this point, I’d almost be inclined to call Plan A being a seller on Artemi Panarin and then flipping those assets (and/or others) for another significant asset (be it Matt Duchene or someone else).  Keeping Panarin long-term looks entirely unrealistic at this point and he’s significant enough of a player that they really can’t lose him for free.

Barring Columbus going on a big losing streak next week, they’re still going to be in the mix so I don’t think they necessarily have to wait.  That said, they’re going to wind up waiting as Ottawa’s top guys are basically holding up the market at this point.  If Duchene and Mark Stone re-sign, that’s going to really up the ante on Panarin as the last one standing but if they’re made available, then flipping Panarin to acquiring one may be at the top of the to-do list.  Until Duchene and Stone decide what they’re doing, the market is at a standstill.

As for Sergei Bobrovsky, if the right deal was there, I think he’d be gone already.  Given the year he’s had, I can’t see Columbus giving him the contract he’s going to be seeking but at the same time, his struggles have hurt his trade value.  I’m leaning towards thinking he’ll stay with the trade return not being enough to justify weakening their playoff chances.

Read more

The trade deadline is now less than two weeks away which means that activity levels around the league are bound to pick up in the coming days.  With the standings continuing to be as tight as they are, it’s going to certainly be interesting to see how that affects the market.  Will teams wait until the last minute to see where they are or will they try to make an earlier move in the hopes that an extra few games from a key acquisition will make the difference?

With that in mind, it’s time to run another mailbag to take your questions on the upcoming trade deadline and other topics from around the NHL. I’ll be answering your queries this coming weekend.  You can submit your question on Twitter by including #PHRMailbag or leave a comment down below.

You can catch up on our last mailbag set by clicking here and here where the topics included reshaping the Oilers, trade options for Detroit, what Calgary should be looking to add by the deadline, the goalie situation in St. Louis, whether Vancouver will buy or sell, and much more.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include deadline targets for Vegas, Calgary, and Boston, the goaltending situations in St. Louis and New Jersey, what Vancouver could look to do in the next month, and more.

This mailbag covers the questions that weren’t addressed last week.  Click here for that article.

Steve Miller: What kind of trade deadline pickups do you expect from Vegas and what do you feel they need?

With nearly $68MM committed to just 12 healthy players for next season (excluding David Clarkson who will again be on LTIR), I don’t think George McPhee has enough financial wiggle room to add someone with term this time around like he did last season.  Accordingly, the focus is going to be on adding expiring contracts.

I think they could stand to add a bit more scoring depth and maybe try to upgrade their third line wings.  Teams with eyes on a long playoff run always want an extra defenseman or two and Vegas wouldn’t be an exception to that train of thought.  I could also see them kicking the tires on an upgrade for Malcolm Subban between the pipes or at the very least, some injury insurance.

From their dealings after the Expansion Draft, Vegas has two extra third rounders plus an extra fifth this year.  Between that and their extra cap space (I could see them trying to be a facilitator like they were with Brassard last year), those will be their best trade chips to play.

ThePriceWasRight: Nobody talks about the Flames but this team looks like it is a dangerous matchup for many teams in the West. What addition(s) do you see them making at the deadline?

I think there are a couple of areas they’d like to target.  The first is getting some goaltending insurance.  David Rittich is playing quite well but he still only has 52 career NHL games under his belt.  It’s not out of the realm of possibility that as teams start to see him more often, they find some weaknesses to exploit.  Mike Smith is supposed to be a stable veteran but this season has not gone well for him and if they’re forced to move him into the number one role if Rittich gets hurt or falters, there’s going to be some trepidation.

As much as they’re the second-best scoring team in the league, I also think they’d like to add some scoring depth.  Most of their offense comes from their top four forwards and while they’re all having career years, a deeper supporting cast would make them even more dangerous for the playoffs while hedging against a team figuring out a way to shut their top trio down.  Basically, they’ll probably want to add a rental player to come in and do the job that James Neal was supposed to fill but hasn’t (just five goals in 49 games).

Paul Heyman: With the Blues yet again within striking distance of a playoff spot, do they add a goalie to slot in either behind Jordan Binnington or add a starter to move Binnington to a backup role?

I don’t think they will and to be honest, I don’t think they should.  St. Louis needs to determine what they have in Binnington.  Is he a part of their future (even if it’s as a backup) or not?  Unless he gets to 28 games played (with at least 30 minutes in each), he qualifies for unrestricted free agency (Group Six status) this summer.  Shuffling him to a number two role doesn’t allow for much evaluation and could very well result in him leaving in July.  Keep him where he is – if he takes the number one spot from Jake Allen and runs with it, terrific.  If he falters and Allen resumes the starting job, then at least they’ll have a better idea about his upside.

While there are some veteran rentals that will likely be available, I don’t see one that’s going to come in and carry the team on a long winning streak.  With that in mind, why part with a future asset to get one?  Unless someone gets hurt or Binnington goes off the proverbial rails in the next few weeks, I suspect the Blues will stick with what they have.

ripaceventura30: With the recent rumors, do you think a deal could be made involving Wayne Simmonds and Cam Talbot with picks coming to Philly? (For the record, I view Talbot’s involvement as more of a salary dump than an asset).

The removal of Peter Chiarelli as GM in Edmonton likely makes this a tough sell but before that, I certainly could have seen them taking a run at Simmonds.  However, I suspect they would have been hesitant to part with their first-round pick to get him which may have made a move like this difficult as that’s the type of return Philadelphia will undoubtedly be seeking at this time.

I actually think the Flyers would be wise to look at Talbot down the stretch.  His trade value isn’t going to be too high and given his age and track record, I think he’s the right fit to partner with Carter Hart for a few years.  If GM Chuck Fletcher can acquire him for a negligible asset, I’d pull the trigger on the move now even though it’s adding a rental player to a non-playoff team.  Give that tandem a couple of months together to see if it’s the right fit.  If it isn’t, it’d be better to know now than after committing a new contract to him.

Mark Black: What does MacKenzie Blackwood’s emergence mean for the New Jersey Devils going forward? Surely the Devils aren’t looking forward to paying Cory Schneider $6 million a season to be a backup or play in a timeshare situation. What happens? Do Kinkaid or Schneider have any trade value this season?

Blackwood has done enough to play himself into their long-term plans.  He’s doing well enough that he should stay up for the rest of the season and be penciled into at least the number two role for 2019-20.  It’s hard to see him maintaining a high-end save percentage the rest of the way but even with a little regression, he could still be a quality backup at the very least.

As for the other two, I think Kinkaid has some trade value.  Unfortunately for New Jersey, given Schneider’s contract, struggles, and injury woes, that’s not something they’ll be able to trade their way out of.  With three years left, a buyout probably isn’t happening so he’s probably the other goalie alongside Blackwood to start next season.

That makes Kinkaid the odd man out.  He has taken a step back this year but his recent track record is still decent.  With a cap hit of just $1.25MM, he’s also one of the cheaper rental goalies out there.  I think there are teams that would view him as an upgrade for their number two spot and given that he has shouldered the bulk of the load this year, there should be some comfort knowing that he can handle a bigger workload if injuries arise.  I don’t think there will be a huge market for his services but a mid-round pick could be a reasonable return.

Read more

The mailbag was quite full this week, so much so that we’re going to run another one next week with some of the questions that aren’t discussed here so if your question wasn’t covered here, watch for it next weekend.  Topics this week include the Oilers, deadline plans for the Red Wings, Rangers, Penguins, and the Capitals, plus the recent struggles of William Nylander and the Maple Leafs.

sixfootnineballerina: If you were in charge of the Oilers and your job wasn’t in jeopardy, what moves would you make to turn the team into a legitimate contender (either now or in the future)?

For starters, I’d give up on the current season.  Can Edmonton sneak into a playoff spot with some additions?  Sure.  Should they mortgage more of their future in order to accomplish that?  I don’t think so which means I’d be going the opposite way Peter Chiarelli appears to be.  That would also mean a coaching change at the end of the year.

Teams are looking for goaltending right now and both Cam Talbot and Mikko Koskinen should have some value.  I’d look to move at least one if not both of them as I’m not sure either is worth committing a long-term deal to.  In the summer, I’d turn to the free agent market.  Sergei Bobrovsky is probably off the table (too expensive) but I think Semyon Varlamov would represent an upgrade over what they’ve had in recent years.  There’s still some volatility in his play but I think he’s a bit under the radar and could be a serviceable starter at a reasonable AAV for a few more years.

The signing bonus-laden structure of Milan Lucic’s deal makes a buyout extremely unrealistic.  Instead, I offer to retain 50% of his contract and take back the cheapest non-bonus-laden bad contract I can get and buy that deal out instead.  I know Lucic has four years left but at a $3MM AAV with the opportunity to offload a bad contract as well, there should be a taker or two and from Edmonton’s perspective, some savings is better than no savings.

In terms of other trades, I’d be open to anything not involving Connor McDavid.  Someone like Ryan Nugent-Hopkins would fetch a sizable return and as things stand, it’s not likely they’ll be able to afford him when his contract is up so they should cash in now while his value is maximized.  Finding ways to add long-term payroll flexibility would be a priority in any move because the one-two punch of McDavid and Leon Draisaitl (given his deal, I don’t think his trade market would be substantial) is pricey no matter how much the cap goes up.

The way free agency has gone lately, the really rich contracts that are bad from the minute they’re signed are decreasing.  As teams give their younger players more money earlier and earlier, the UFA class starts to become more appealing as some good players will eventually get squeezed out.  There can be decent value deals to be had there and the opportunity to play with someone like McDavid is a feather in Edmonton’s cap.

Long story short, sell what you can to free up some long-term cap room and add some young assets to build around McDavid and Draisaitl.  Add another defenseman or two in the draft.  From there, fill some holes on the open market with players that could view Edmonton as an ideal ‘pillow contract’ spot – use McDavid as the marketing tool and there will be takers.  It doesn’t sound pretty and it’s not a quick fix but there isn’t one to be made here.

bucs_fan: Am I crazy to think the Penguins should NOT make a trade? Chemistry seems great right now.

heather_vono: What team is the best fit for Brassard? Because it obviously isn’t the Pens. What’s the potential return?

The idea of keeping the Penguins intact makes some sense.  This is a pretty good group and they’ve had extended playoff success in the past.  If Jim Rutherford decided to stand pat, I think it would certainly be defensible.

But let’s face it.  This is Rutherford we’re talking about here and he likes to bring in fresh blood.  Brassard seems highly likely to go as he’s not fitting in as their third line center.  The problem here is that most of the contending teams would have him in that role as well and if he can’t play that in Pittsburgh, he may not be able to elsewhere.

Still, there should be some interest.  Columbus is known to have inquired and given their situation down the middle, he could be a second liner for them.  If Colorado decides to add a rental, Brassard makes plenty of sense (but if they keep struggling, the odds of them going this route drop).  With Jason Spezza on the wing and Martin Hanzal perpetually injured, there’s a top-six spot for Brassard there for now.  If a team thinks he can play a third line role, Boston, Winnipeg, and Anaheim present as decent fits.  San Jose has kicked the tires as well.

As for a return, it’s going to be more of a help-now package instead of a futures-based one.  They’ll want a center back that can at least somewhat step into Brassard’s role.  In a perfect world, they save a bit of cap room along the way as well.  A draft pick or prospect would balance out the trade and I could see that asset being flipped for a rental player to supplement their depth.

ThePriceWasRight: Do you see the recent Toronto slump resulting in an earlier move by Kyle Dubas?

I don’t think it really moves the needle too much in either direction.  I know Montreal and Buffalo are still within striking distance of a top-three spot in the Atlantic (the Canadiens are tied for third heading into today’s action though everyone in the playoff hunt has games in hand) but I expect Toronto and Boston will be meeting up in the first round as the two and three seeds.  Beyond jockeying for home ice advantage over the Bruins, there isn’t a lot to play for over the next ten weeks or so.  A little dip like this during that stretch wouldn’t concern me too much if I was Dubas.

With that in mind, I don’t think there’s a need for the Maple Leafs to make an early trade.  Their need for help on the back end is well-known and the rough patch they had doesn’t really change that.  At this point, Dubas just needs to wait for the right move.  If it comes now, make it now but if not, I suspect they’ll wait it out as they have the luxury to be patient here.

tigers22: Jimmy Howard to San Jose for two 2’s. Nyquist to Boston for a 1 and 3. Jensen to Edmonton for a 2nd. What are the odds Ken Holland can pull this off?

As a package?  I’d say extremely low.  Let’s look at each of these individually.

The believed asking price for Howard is a first rounder and while I don’t think they’ll get that, I can’t see a team jumping at a pair of seconds either.  One second rounder plus another lesser asset is probably the ceiling here.  On top of that, I still expect him to sign a contract extension between now and the deadline.  He hasn’t exactly hidden his desire to stick around.

As for Gustav Nyquist, it all depends on how many teams are willing to move a number one pick.  If Ottawa can’t re-sign them, Matt Duchene and Mark Stone should yield one in return.  Considering he plays a premium position, Kevin Hayes might as well.  If Jeff Skinner doesn’t sign an extension, does Buffalo move him?  If so, there’s another first rounder gone.  If some of those players re-sign, then perhaps Nyquist becomes part of that top tier of tradeable rentals.  Even at that though, do players with term start to yield firsts instead?  There will probably be one or two of those moves as well.  I like Nyquist but it’s hard to see him bringing back a first from anyone.

Nick Jensen’s an interesting case.  On the one hand, he’s making less than $1MM while averaging over 20 minutes a night.  On the other, he was believed to be available just before the start of the season when it looked like Detroit might have a logjam on the back end.  (Then everyone went and got hurt and that was the end of that idea.)  Does a few good months take his value from negligible to a fairly high draft pick?  I think it’s more likely he falls in the third or fourth round range if he doesn’t re-sign, a scenario I wouldn’t rule out at this point.

Read more

The halfway point of the season has come and gone but aside from a few teams, there hasn’t been a whole lot of separation in the standings as several squads are still within striking distance of a Wild Card spot.  That’s likely going to have an impact on the trade front as we get closer to the February 25th trade deadline as teams decide whether to add a piece or two to try to sneak in or try to sell and help their draft lottery odds.

With that in mind, it’s time to run another mailbag to take your questions on the upcoming trade deadline and other goings-on around the NHL.  I’ll be answering your queries this coming weekend.  You can submit your question on Twitter by including #PHRMailbag or leave a comment down below.

If you need to catch up on our last mailbag which ran in mid-December, you can do so by clicking here.  Topics included who the Blackhawks may be looking to sell, trade targets for Carolina, the situation in St. Louis, and much more.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include the Blackhawks’ struggles, Boston’s trade chips, what the Senators should do in the coming months, what Carolina should be targeting in a trade, Marc-Andre Fleury’s workload, trade speculation involving Alex Pietrangelo and Vladimir Tarasenko, the World Juniors, and Philadelphia’s plans under Chuck Fletcher.

shelteredsoxfan: How much worse do you think it gets for the Blackhawks before it gets better?

@Adam407: It seems like a given that the Blackhawks will be sellers at the deadline and maybe before that. Any idea who they might be able to move and what they could expect to receive in return?

I have a hunch that Stan Bowman hasn’t given up on this core just yet.  They’re going to have some money to spend and there has already been one report (from John Dietz of the Daily Herald) that they’re planning to target winger Artemi Panarin this summer and march themselves back into cap purgatory in the process.  If they do indeed do that, they won’t be anywhere near as bad next season so the short-term pain won’t be prolonged too badly.  Even if they do that though, their days of contention appear to be numbered but a big splash like that could get them a lot closer to the playoff picture.

With that in mind, shipping out expiring contracts will be the name of the game once again.  Marcus Kruger could help someone as a fourth line center and could fetch a mid-round pick.  If someone wants Brandon Davidson for defensive depth, he could probably yield a late pick.  Depending on how Cam Ward plays these next few months, perhaps a contender may want him for injury insurance.

Beyond that, moving out Artem Anisimov and the final two years of his deal will probably be at the top of the priority list.  Doing so would ideally free up some extra room to take that run at Panarin (or another impact player) and emphasize their commitment to Dylan Strome as their number two center.  His value isn’t what it once was but Anisimov is still a capable middle-six player and should be worth a roster player (to help offset some money) plus a good prospect or a second-rounder.

case7187: Why are the B’s finding it so hard to trade for help? They have a lot of good quality youngsters but there seems to be nothing out there.

I don’t think it’s a case of there being nothing out there but rather GM Don Sweeney (rightfully) being very careful.  There’s a reason young roster players aren’t dealt very often.  They’re cap-efficient and there are often differences as to what the trading and acquiring team see his upside as.  Unless the internal valuation on both sides line up, a move isn’t going to happen.

Let’s take Danton Heinen for an example.  What is his level of upside?  Is he a legitimate top-six forward like the one that put up 38 points in the first 48 games last season?  Or is he the player that has notched just 18 points in 67 games (playoffs included) since then?  The Bruins are going to try to sell him as the former but teams are understandably going to be hesitant given his struggles since February.  I doubt there are other teams that value him as highly as Boston goes which makes a trade trickier.

The questions are similar with the likes of Anders Bjork, Jakob Forsbacka Karlsson, and Ryan Donato.  All three have shown legitimate NHL upside.  They’ve also shown that there is a chance that they don’t live up to that upside as their play has been inconsistent so far.  Sweeney’s valuation of his own players is probably higher than those of his managerial counterparts so until something changes (one of those players steps up, the team lowers their expectations on one of them, or injuries force someone’s hand), it’s probably going to take some time for a trade to get done.

ThePriceWasRight: Just when you think things can’t get worse for the Sens, Duchene gets hurt.

Play GM, what should this team be doing in the next 2-3 months? Plenty of moveable pieces, no clear indication or direction what they plan to do (though they’ve clearly sold low on every player they’ve traded since Brassard).

Sell, sell, sell.  Ottawa has done well to hang around the postseason hunt so far but this is not a team that’s going to be a contender.  Their defense corps is a patchwork group at best and I have doubts that they’ll be able to get Matt Duchene and Mark Stone locked up long-term.  They might get one but it’s hard to see them doing what it takes (which would likely include significant signing bonuses) to get both signed.

As you note, they have quite a few players that could be dealt with some value – on top of those two, Ryan Dzingel is an expiring deal and it will be easier to move Zack Smith closer to the deadline than it was when they waived him in the preseason.  If Jean-Gabriel Pageau plays well upon returning, there will be a market for him as well.

The Sens have an opportunity to really restock their prospect and pick cupboards which is even more important considering they don’t have their first-round pick this season.  Even if they hang around a Wild Card spot for a couple more months, the better move long-term is to sell.

acarneglia: With the Hurricanes looking for a top 6 forward, where do they look? Does a guy like Kevin Hayes or Mats Zuccarello make sense from the division rival Rangers? Do they go for an impending FA like Matt Duchene? Do they target a Kings player?

While Hayes and Zuccarello make some sense and would certainly help, I’m not sure a pending unrestricted free agent is the way to go.  I think Carolina is more than one notable forward away from really getting back into the playoff picture and the odds of them getting multiple impact players is probably low.  I think their goal should be to add a younger (or at least someone under team control for a couple of years) option that can be part of the core alongside the likes of Sebastian Aho, Andrei Svechnikov, Martin Necas, and others over picking up some short-term help in a rental.

In a previous mailbag, I suggested Tyler Toffoli as a possible fallback option for Carolina if they weren’t able to land William Nylander.  He’s a little older (26) than I think they’d like but he’s signed through next season and while he’s struggling this year, he does have a track record of production.  Pierre LeBrun of TSN and The Athletic brought up Kasperi Kapanen as someone they’ve discussed internally and that’s more of the type of forward I think they should be trying to get even though the acquisition cost will certainly be higher.

vegasloveforthebills: Fleury is currently on pace for 70 games played. Do you think it’s at least partly because Vegas has lost confidence in Subban, and if so, are they in on a Howard or Anderson?

I don’t think it’s partly because of that reason – I believe it’s primarily because of that reason.  Asking any goalie to play upwards of 70 games is a tough ask nowadays.  Asking a 34-year-old with a substantial injury history isn’t something a team does willingly.  They’re doing it because they feel they have to.

With that in mind, it wouldn’t be the slightest bit surprising to see them try to upgrade on Malcolm Subban between now and the trade deadline.  (I also thought they would have done that last year, for what it’s worth.)  I don’t think Craig Anderson is an ideal target since he has another year left on his deal at $4.75MM and that’s too much for a backup.  Howard could be a target but the asking price appears to be quite high and there is believed to be mutual interest in an extension.

A goalie that I could see being on their radar is Carolina’s Petr Mrazek.  I can’t see them willingly carrying all three goalies the rest of the way and he’s on a manageable $1.5MM deal this season.  He’d represent an upgrade on Subban and if he fared well, he’s young enough (he’ll turn 27 just before the deadline) that he could be a realistic option for them next year and beyond as well.

Read more