PHR Mailbag

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Who do I target in FA?

Ekblad, Marner, Bennett?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include an assessment of the Avalanche, several questions about the Canadiens, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s column while we have one more coming from our most recent call for questions.

Pearlo: Do we have a Colorado team spiraling towards a rebuild? No draft picks in first three rounds of the next draft, a very poor prospect pool, a very inconsistent Necas and a questionably effective Landeskog with no second line capable center in their top six as well as a fair top off after Girard with their defense with only $8MM in cap space to fill holes. Seems to me they are skating on pretty thin ice. What say you?

It’s safe to say you’re not in the glass-full camp.  There will come a time when the Avs need to flip the switch and think about the future.  I don’t think they’re there yet.  After all, they weren’t that far off getting through Dallas in the opening round in a matchup that wouldn’t have happened had it not been for a playoff format that is starting to lose its luster, no matter what the league wants to say.

This is a team that still has one of the top forwards in the league in Nathan MacKinnon.  They have one of the top blueliners in Cale Makar.  Those are two premier building blocks signed for at least the next two years; Makar will need a new contract in 2027 (and, barring injury, that will undoubtedly be setting a new NHL record for defensemen at that time).  When you have those pieces in place, it’s hard to say it’s time to take a step back even though your correct assessment of their pick and prospect cupboard suggests it’s an option that should be considered.

I expect Martin Necas will be better next season.  He’s going to have a lot to play for and a full training camp should help after being brought in midseason.  He won’t produce at the same level as Mikko Rantanen but I think he can produce like a top-liner.  On defense, I wouldn’t be surprised if GM Chris MacFarland looks into moving one of Samuel Girard or Josh Manson which could allow the back end to be reshaped a bit and add some cap space potentially.

A lot is going to hinge on if they can address the second center spot.  Whether that’s re-signing Brock Nelson, finding someone externally, or even giving Necas an extended look there, filling that position would really solidify them having two strong scoring lines.  Even with all the question marks (and I’d put goaltending in there as well), that should be more than enough for them to safely be a playoff team.  There will come a time to rebuild.  I don’t think that’s coming for a while yet though.

SpeakofTheDevils: What does a Devils dream offseason look like? Trades? Free Agency? Etc.

First, getting Luke Hughes signed to a long-term deal.  I know the bridge pact would make things a lot easier for GM Tom Fitzgerald in terms of utilizing cap space but if the team feels he’s the high-end defender it looks like he can be, that’s someone you sign now before it gets a whole lot more expensive after a bridge deal.

I wrestled with putting this in their Offseason Checklist earlier this week but finding a way to offload at least most of Ondrej Palat’s contract would go a long way toward giving them some cap space.  I think they’re at a spot where trading with 50% retention is preferable to a buyout but the latter shouldn’t be ruled out.  Palat’s a serviceable player but that’s one spot they can upgrade.

They need to improve on their third center after a tough year from Erik Haula.  They were believed to be looking for that leading into the trade deadline but they might be able to get that in free agency.  They also could use a fourth-line pivot.

Adding a top-six winger would also be a big help.  For them to barely crack the top 20 in goals scored with the roster they have is a problem.  They’re better than that and a key addition should put them back in the top half.  In an ideal world, they land one of the better wingers available.

On defense, I don’t want to say they have an embarrassment of riches but they have a lot of depth and two promising youngsters in the pipeline in Simon Nemec and Seamus Casey.  Can one of those – maybe Jonas Siegenthaler – be packaged with someone like Haula to add a $6MM or so piece to further add on the wing?

And while we’re at it, a veteran goalie that’s a bit more reliable than Nico Daws would be nice too.

I’m sure you were hoping for some names but with how long that list is and their cap situation (barely $12MM in space per PuckPedia), they’re not going to get to all of those without some other moves being made first and I’d simply be guessing on those which doesn’t add much value to the discussion.  Realistically, if they got half or more of these done, it would be a solid offseason.  The dream one might have to wait at least one more year.

Unclemike1526: Since my other question basically was answered, would you please tell me if you’ve ever read anywhere that Mitch Marner won’t play for a rebuilding club?

If it makes you feel any better, the only assistant coach in Chicago I’d have predicted correctly was Anders Sorensen.  Keeping him around would be a good reward for coming up and struggling through the rest of this season so I felt confident about that.  I’d have been hypothesizing Jeff Blashill going after some assistants he had with Detroit had that situation not largely been finalized by last weekend.

As for Marner, I’ve not seen anything credible that says he wouldn’t play for a rebuilding club.  At this point, it feels like his intention is going to be that he’s going to go to the open market and see what’s out there.  If you’re taking that approach, you’re probably not going to rule out a bunch of options off the bat by saying he won’t go to a rebuilding club.

What is Marner’s priority?  Is it to go to a contender?  Not a lot of those have the type of money that he’ll be commanding.  Beyond re-signing with Toronto, Carolina would and, well, that’s about it.  Vegas is being suggested as a speculative link but that would require a lot of money being moved out first although their penchant for big swings means it can’t be ruled out.

But if his priority is top dollar, it might come from a non-contender.  Chicago should be aiming higher this summer.  Utah has an owner willing to spend, a team on the rise, and a lot of cap space.  Anaheim has a promising young core and the purse strings have been loosened a bit.  Columbus nearly made the playoffs with their group and might want to swing big as well.  There’s a compelling case to be made for any of those teams.

In a perfect world, Marner, or any other top free agent really, would get his cake and eat it too by finding a legitimate contender that has a lot of cap space.  He’ll have to figure out what level of importance to place on either of those options.  He has another month to do so before anything probably truly gets ruled out.

frozenaquatic: The NHL has about 10 Kershaws through history. Marner, Matthews, Panarin, Hellebuyck now. Historically, Yashin, Rick Nash, Todd Bertuzzi, Joe Thornton — even Marcel Dionne — were known to disappear come May. Stammer was accused of being a regular-season merchant for a while, but busted the reputation during the Covid Cup Dynasty. What do you think it takes to coach a guy to play with more intensity, take hits, block shots, not make east-west passes, go to the net, and find shooting lanes — to do the things necessary to play good playoff hockey? Who would even want Marner at $12 – 14 million if he has this reputation?

I don’t think there’s a coach out there who’s going to drastically change Marner’s style of play.  Over 700 games into his career (regular season and playoffs), he is who he is at this point.  If there wasn’t a material change under a coach with a tougher reputation in Craig Berube, I don’t think there’s necessarily a coach out there who is going to make him change the way he plays to do the things you listed on a full-time basis.

But what Marner is at this stage of his career is still a really good player.  He’s a premier playmaker, is pretty consistent offensively year-to-year, and his defensive game often goes under the radar.  There’s a reason he’s being projected to sign a record-breaking contract and that’s because of all of the positives he brings to the table.  The playoff performance doesn’t help his cause but it doesn’t materially cripple his value either.

As for who would want him?  The list of who wouldn’t is probably longer than the list of who would.  I expect any team that has that much money to at least kick the tires with probably six to eight teams making him their top target.  Players of his skill level are rarely available ‘for free’ on the open market.  His playoff reputation won’t be scaring many teams off.  Those teams’ coaches will be saying that they can make it work with Marner being exactly who he is.

Jaysen: Let’s say every player is available. What are your top 3 targets for 2C position if you are Kent Hughes? And what do you think is the value of Logan Mailloux in a trade? Not really overly impressed with him but I do know that defensemen take longer to develop.

Finally, Fowler seems like the real deal. I expect Dobes to back up Montembeault this year but next year? If Fowler develops the way he is supposed to, what do you do? Trade Dobes? Or do you go for the big decision and trade Montembeault do let Dobes and Fowler tend the twine??

The qualifier that everyone is available makes this a little unrealistic but I’ll play along and give you a couple more than three.  Anaheim’s Mason McTavish fits the age of Montreal’s core group and feels like someone they’d acquire and then sign long-term.  I don’t see the Ducks moving him though.  I’d throw Quinton Byfield (Los Angeles) and Matty Beniers (Seattle) in there as well but again, I don’t see them being available.  Maybe Barrett Hayton in Utah if they wound up taking a big swing at adding a center in free agency but that’s from a guarantee.  If Florida re-signs Sam Bennett and Aaron Ekblad and makes Anton Lundell available, he’d be on the list too but that’s three ifs.  The key elements are they’re young, have upside, and several years of team control or contract remaining.  But there’s a reason they’re so hard to come by.

Mailloux is a hard player to evaluate.  He’s still very raw and underdeveloped after his OHL career consisted of just 75 games or barely a single season so he’s behind on the development curve, so to speak.  Offensively, he can probably play at the NHL level now.  Defensively, he has shown flashes of being NHL-level there but at other times, he has struggled.  That’s not uncommon for young blueliners as you note but that type of inconsistency will give some teams pause.

As a young, right-shot blueliner with enough raw skills to play in the top four, there’s a lot to like.  But with how things have gone to this point, there will be some who shy away or come in low with offers knowing there’s some risk in acquiring him.  Other teams will probably feel that their coaches can get those fundamentals in place more frequently, making him a top-four option.  His trade value revolves around how he’s perceived.  If it’s a team that is hesitant, they’re probably going no higher than a second-round pick.  If it’s the latter category, a first-round value isn’t off the table.  I don’t think Mailloux is the centerpiece of a big trade this summer but if they find a team that believes in the upside, he could be a key component of one.

Goalie coaches have said in the past that they generally want a goalie to get at least 100 starts in the AHL.  I’ve seen some say 150.  Jacob Fowler is at all of eight at the moment.  Accordingly, I don’t think he’s even in the equation for full-time NHL duty for at least two more years at which time Sam Montembeault’s deal is up.  To be honest, I’m not even fully certain that Jakub Dobes is the full-time backup in Montreal next season as he’s only at 65 AHL games.  I could see Montreal signing a veteran third-stringer and then calling that goalie up periodically to give Dobes some games in Laval and a higher workload than he’d get as the permanent backup in Montreal.  If all goes well, they’ll have to make room for Fowler eventually but they’re probably not giving that serious thought for another 24 months or so.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the mailbag include predictions for the three remaining head coaching vacancies around the NHL, Connor Hellebuyck’s playoff struggles, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in one of our next two mailbag columns.

yeasties: Just for funsies, predict who gets hired for the remaining head coach openings?

Let’s jump right in with a tough one, shall we?  There are three remaining openings after Jeff Blashill got the nod in Chicago: Boston, Seattle, and Pittsburgh.  Here are my picks for those three spots.

Bruins: I’ll go with Marco Sturm for them.  While internal options Joe Sacco and Jay Leach are believed to be in the mix still, can they really justify promoting from within after suggesting their intention is to get back to the playoffs next season?  Sturm has plenty of familiarity with the market after spending a lot of time there as a player which might appeal to management and ownership and he has been in the mix for a few top jobs now with experience as an NHL assistant and an AHL head coach.  He’s bound to get one soon and I think it might be here.

Kraken: The sense was that they were waiting for a candidate or two which tells me that Mitch Love may have been on their radar.  After Spencer Carbery did well as a first-time coach in Washington, it stands to reason that one of his assistants would get poached relatively quickly.  While I doubt management will come out and say this, this feels like a spot where they need to do a bit of a reset.  Getting a bit younger and taking a step back feels like a good opening for a first-time NHL head coach to allow him some time to get his feet wet without a lot of pressure.

Penguins: It wasn’t that long ago that Jay Woodcroft was viewed as one of the up-and-coming coaches before he got a short stint in Edmonton where a poor start last season cost him his job.  He has lots of experience working with younger players and at some point, Pittsburgh has to start getting younger.  On the flip side, he also has experience working in a win-now environment which, for better or for worse, appears to the fine line that they’re trying to walk, remaining competitive while getting younger.  A coach with some experience in both worlds like Woodcroft makes some sense here so I’ll go with him.

Schwa: Curious on your cup pick from the Final 4.

It’s hard not to go with Florida here.  The way they came back against Toronto and the way they’ve started against Carolina has been quite impressive.  The way that series is going, they could be in line for a bit of an extended break if it ends quickly which would be critical for a veteran-laden team who went all the way last season.  That would put them in a great spot to start.

My pick to come out of the West is Dallas but that’s not going to be a short series.  After needing 13 games to get this far and likely six or seven in this one, I’m a bit concerned that they might be a bit too worn down by the end of it.  And if Edmonton makes it a repeat of last year’s Final, their goaltending is even more erratic than it was a year ago with more inconsistent special teams.  It’s not that neither team couldn’t win but for me, the Panthers are the current favorite.

PyramidHeadcrab: So, what’s the deal with Connor Hellebuyck? If we look at advanced stats of the team around him, is it truly a case of an elite goalie consistently collapsing in the playoffs? Or is it the defense around him?

It’s absolutely stunning to see the Jets go from winning the Presidents’ Trophy to seeing Hellebuyck post the worst numbers of any goaltender in the playoffs – an unacceptable 0.866 save% (and it was worse than that at various points).

And I guess the follow-up question is… Where does the team go from here? Is this something that can be corrected?

I think there are two parts to it.  One is that the recent road struggles are in his head.  And it’s really only the road games that are the issue.  His home save percentage in the playoffs was .913 and while a pair of shutouts boosted that, those were his last two home games against a tough Dallas team.  I don’t want to take the easy way out and say it’s the yips but that’s a roadblock he’s going to have to get over and generally, the only way to do that is to keep throwing him out there in those situations.  And really, as their sure-fire starter, they’re going to keep doing that.  With the contract he has and not a particularly deep goalie pool of prospects, he will continue to be Winnipeg’s starter for the long haul.  This playoff run doesn’t change that.

The other factor at play that hurts here is game planning.  The book on Hellebuyck is that he’s more prone to be beat when he has to go side to side, suggesting more cross-ice play is the way to go.  If you’re a team playing Winnipeg in game 46 of the regular season, you’re aware of the scouting report but if you don’t play that way, you’re not going to overhaul your strategy for a random game in January.  But if you’re playing them in a best-of-seven series, you’re going to make some changes to try to maximize that particular weakness.  And that has happened for the last couple of years now.  The fix there is goalie coach Wade Flaherty coming up with some adjustments to help Hellebuyck improve in those situations or at least mitigate that weakness.  Considering how long he has been in the league for, I think the latter is more realistic than the former of those two options.

I have a hard time pinning a lot of this on the defense aside from perhaps not making adjustments of their own to take away some of the cross-ice options.  But they only allowed 23 shots per game in the playoffs which, while it’s a bit simplistic, is a number any team would be happy with.  I think Hellebuyck can get past this but there will definitely be question marks for his next playoff run.

The Duke: Lightning Round!

Is Merilainen Ottawa’s backup next season – and eventual #1?
More goals: Gauthier or Carlsson.
Is Snuggerud Top-6 and #1 PP unit?
Is Levshunov or Korchinski Chicago’s PPQB?
Levi’s short- and long-term future?

1) With Ottawa locking in with Linus Ullmark on a long-term pricey deal, it makes sense that the Sens would look to go with a low-cost backup.  That should give Leevi Merilainen the edge but with all of 14 NHL games under his belt, I think they’re going to want an insurance policy.  I could see them going after a lower-tier backup that could push for the backup spot or be on standby in the minors if Merilainen struggles.  Something sort of along the lines of what Buffalo tried to do this year with James Reimer although that didn’t work quite as planned.

2) Short-term, probably Cutter Gauthier.  But if Leo Carlsson’s training wheels eventually comes off and gets into that top-line role, he could be a 35-40-goal player if all went well.  I don’t see Gauthier reaching that level on an annual basis.

3) If all goes well, that should be the outcome for Jimmy Snuggerud.  He got a bit of time in those spots in the playoffs but I wouldn’t expect him to be a fixture in those spots next season as he’ll likely be moved up and down the lineup at times.

4) Out of the two, I’d say Artyom Levshunov since Kevin Korchinski didn’t exactly have a great season and I could see him back in Rockford, to be honest.  With how well Sam Rinzel played down the stretch, he probably will get a shot in that role as well.

5) I think it’s hard for Buffalo to call Devon Levi their starter of the future but I could still see him being viewed internally as a goalie of the future for him.  Whether that’s as a backup or platoon piece remains to be seen.  If it were up to me, he’d play in Rochester next season with Buffalo getting a more proven backup.  But if they need cap space to fill other holes, Levi could start next season as the backup once again.

FeeltheThunder: I’m quite curious about Tampa’s offseason plans. GM Julien BriseBois stated about a week ago that the organization is still debriefing on their offseason plans. However, the belief is they need to boost their bottom-six with more secondary scoring and some additional grit. Furthermore, there is speculation they also need to possibly upgrade their 3rd defensive unit. I’m wondering (and have some ideas) who they should look into or go after in FA whether it’s UFAs or even RFAs in retooling these areas to certain degrees as I would like to hear your thoughts?

Also, with Jeff Blashill leaving as an assistant, does this potentially open the door for Derek Lalonde to return who many Tampa fans want back on the staff?

One last thing, Tampa needs to move Conor Sheary which would give them an additional $2MM in cap space as that $2MM that could be used elsewhere, wouldn’t you agree?

Let’s answer these out of order as the last two are pretty quick.  I agree that they could better use Sheary’s $2MM but he also has negative trade value at this point.  They will have to attach an asset to clear his contract outright and is that better than waiving and burying him in the minors again, clearing $1.15MM off the books?  It depends on what they have in mind for adding to their roster.  As for Lalonde, it’s certainly a possibility if he wants to go back to that role.  But if he wants to be a head coach again, he could opt to stay on the sidelines and be available for any in-season openings, something that wouldn’t be an option if he were an assistant coach somewhere.

Tampa Bay has less than $6MM in cap space to work with, per PuckPedia.  With that, they have a forward or two to add or re-sign and probably at least one defenseman.  That doesn’t leave a lot of flexibility to work with although Gage Goncalves shouldn’t cost too much to re-sign.  Basically, they want to find someone who can fill Sheary’s spot better than Sheary and I agree, helping the third pairing would be ideal.  They’re going to have to aim low to do those things though with their lack of space.

I don’t see them targeting any restricted free agents as they lack the draft capital to go after some of the better options via an offer sheet while diluting their cupboards to fill a depth role doesn’t make a lot of sense when they can probably get a similar UFA to fill the spot where the only cost is money.

Some of the trade deadline candidates I suggested for them before make some sense here.  Luke Kunin won’t score a lot but gives them some positional versatility.  Joel Armia plays a good possession game that would fit on the third line and might only cost a bit more than Sheary.  I think Justin Danforth would be someone they’d like, a player who can play all three forward spots and can cover different roles in the lineup when needed.  When cap space is limited, flexibility becomes a lot more appealing.

For defensemen, assuming that Nick Perbix prices himself out of town, I think they’ll look at a short-term veteran on a one-year deal where they can get creative with bonuses to lower the 2025-26 charge.  Ryan Suter signed a contract like that this summer and might be willing to again.  If they want a right-shot option, Jeff Petry in a limited role could fit.  Jan Rutta, a familiar name for Tampa fans, could be open to a return to the role he had a few years ago.

In a perfect world, they bank some in-season cap space so out of that $5.8MM or so that they have, they might only spend $4.5MM this summer.  With a few players needing to be paid from that, they’re going to be bargain hunting for each role they’re trying to fill.

frozenaquatic: What do you think about this idea that the Panthers are franchise killers? They run roughshod over teams who have no answer for their combination of grit, compete, execution, and opportunism. I’m not a fan, but I’m in awe of how they dismantle teams and expose their flaws — with the Canes it looks like they’re being patient, goading them into taking penalties, and using their size advantage. If they win again this year, would you consider them a dynasty, or do they need one more championship?

Do you think they’ll try and retain Bennett? It seems like Ekblad is out the door, and I think he’s definitely a huge part of their imposing backend. Lastly, what do you think about the talk of them being “dirty,” “headhunting,” and Paul Maurice basically being a bounty coach (obviously not explicitly)?

Back-to-back championships would be impressive but that’s not enough to qualify as a dynasty.  They’d need at least a third in a short period of time to get into that discussion.  I also wouldn’t call them franchise killers.  They’re a well-balanced team with few weaknesses and a deeper roster than it might seem at first glance.  That, coupled with above-average physicality, makes them a tough team to beat but they’re far from unbeatable.  Toronto gave them a good run in five of their seven matchups, at least and had they not fallen apart in one of those, we could easily be seeing a Maple Leafs-Hurricanes matchup here.

I do expect them to try to keep Sam Bennett and I do think he’ll re-sign close to the start of free agency.  He won’t get top dollar from them but their no state tax situation should allow Florida to get close enough where it makes sense for him to stay.  I agree that Aaron Ekblad is likely gone; I think the move they made to get Seth Jones was his preemptive replacement while getting the benefit of having both for this playoff run.

I don’t think they’re necessarily a head-hunting team but they know where the line is and step over it from time to time.  I wouldn’t put Maurice in that category though.  He encourages his teams to be physical but that alone isn’t enough to put that particular qualifier on him.  But his roster has some players who, again, will go over that line at times but I feel that’s of their own volition, not from a sense of expectation from the coach that it needs to happen.

Photo courtesy of James Carey Lauder-Imagn Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include the possibility of San Jose moving their top pick this year, offseason planning for the Blues, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s column.

gowings2008: What are the Red Wings offseason plans? Trade and draft targets? Will they shed some bad contracts? Seems after today that the players expect more from management than what they’ve gotten recently.

I have to think it’s going to be more of the same from Detroit this summer.  They’re going to operate as if they’re trying to make the playoffs which will have them looking to add multiple veterans, just as they did last year.  With GM Steve Yzerman generally believing in a longer-term development path, I’d be surprised if they’re penciling in a bunch of their top youngsters on the NHL roster next season.  More likely is that most of them start in Grand Rapids.

I don’t see them being particularly active on the trade front in terms of trying to trade for impact talent, short of trying to find a change of scenery trade for someone like Vladimir Tarasenko, a move that would likely see them getting a similarly-priced underachiever coming back the other way.  I’ve said before that I think there’s a trade option out there for Ben Chiarot in a similar type of swap and if they wanted to retain money, I suspect they could get a better return than expected.  The only bad contract I think they’ll shed would be Justin Holl; he’s the only true buyout candidate I think they have.

While you didn’t ask about free agent targets, I expect they’ll be in on pretty much every top-four defenseman that actually gets to the open market but that list is getting pretty small as it is.  Up front, I suspect they’ll look at the top center options available but those will probably price themselves out of what Detroit can afford, sending them toward wingers.  For some reason, Nikolaj Ehlers stands out as a target, someone who can add some secondary scoring.  Like Yzerman said in his presser this week, I expect them to get something done with Patrick Kane to keep him around as well.

Draft-wise, they sit 12th right now heading into next week’s lottery.  Assuming they stay there, defenseman Radim Mrtka feels like someone they’d consider.  Roger McQueen could be a candidate to slide given his injuries while Carter Bear could go in that range as well.

tucsontoro1: Lots of chatter about San Jose moving their #1 draft pick if they win the lottery. Seems counter-productive to a rebuild??

It feels like we get this type of chatter more regularly now but a lot of it is just that, chatter.  It’s fun to dream up scenarios about a team trading for the number one selection but the reality is that it doesn’t happen very often.  More recently, the last time it happened was 2003 and that was a trade-down from one to three.  In theory, the Sharks could do that, land an asset of some note, and still get a high-quality prospect.  While their prospect pool has certainly improved, it’s still not the deepest given how bare the cupboards were when GM Mike Grier took over.  In the right scenario, a move like that would be defensible.

I suspect that’s not the context you were asking with though; I imagine you were talking about trading the pick outright.  Generally speaking, that would run counter to a rebuild but it depends on who you were getting in return.  If San Jose could get a high pick from the last couple of drafts that’s established already that fits in with the age group of their young core that’s willing to sign a max-term deal when their current contract is up, it could make some sense.  Having said that, I’m not sure there’s a player like that available which is why a move is unlikely to happen.  And in terms of trading that pick for a more established star with only a few years of control remaining, that wouldn’t make sense for a team like the Sharks that’s still a few years away from contention.

vincent k. mcmahon: Looking at the Blues FA’s this year (Faksa, Suter, MacEachern), do you see them potentially bringing any of the three back or moving on from all three?

Also, is there anyone you see the Blues potentially buying out (Faulk, Leddy, Joseph, etc)?

I think at the right price point, they’d be interested in keeping Radek Faksa and Ryan Suter.  Faksa has been overpaid these last few years as his offense never came around but he’s consistently above-average on faceoffs, has good size, and can kill penalties.  If he took something around half his current price tag of $3.25MM, that might work.  As for Suter, he’s still a serviceable depth defender and accepted something with a base salary of the minimum last summer with some bonuses.  Something with that structure could be appealing again.  Perhaps not on the opening day of free agency but as most of the options come off the board, that’s something they could pivot back to depending on what else happens.

Before looking at the buyout question, let’s look at their cap situation.  As things stand, they have around $6MM in cap space, per PuckPedia, with Joel Hofer needing a new contract as an RFA.  Beyond that, they already have enough players signed to ice a full team.  A two-year bridge deal around the $2.5MM range for Hofer sounds about right so let’s give them $3MM in cap room, assuming Torey Krug is able to return next season.  Otherwise, he’d be LTIR-eligible again, opening up some extra wiggle room.  With that money, they don’t necessarily have to do anything to create more space.

With two years left on his contract, I think there would be a trade market for Justin Faulk this summer.  The UFA crop is weak and considering he’s a right-shot option, there should be teams willing to accept a small premium on the cap hit ($6.5MM) in exchange for a shorter-term agreement.  His full no-trade clause goes away in July so I don’t think a buyout is going to be needed if they want to move him.

I’d put Nick Leddy in the maybe column.  He only has one year left and they can drop the cap hit from $4MM to $2MM with a buyout next season while adding a $1MM charge in 2026-27.  He has struggled since returning from injury so he’s definitely on an above-market rate.  On the other hand, if they waived him and sent him down, he’d carry a $2.85MM cap charge next year with no hit the following year.  Is it worth taking $1MM in dead cap charges in 2026-27 to save $850K next season?  Maybe.

As for Mathieu Joseph, he’s also in the maybe column.  He hasn’t exactly provided much value on his contract ($2.95MM through next season) after being acquired from Ottawa.  A buyout would save $2.2MM next season and add a $1.1MM dead cap charge in in 2026-27 so the same question with Leddy largely applies here as well.  After receiving a third-round pick to take on his contract last summer, I wonder if they could try to make a similar move and clear the full money that way.  With more money in the system and a higher spending floor, I think we’ll see a few more of those moves in the coming weeks.

I’ll give you one other buyout option, Alexandre Texier.  He’ll be 25 so it’s only a one-third cost, not two-thirds.  If management feels it just didn’t work out, they could buy him out and save $1.75MM in space for next season while taking on a $350K dead cap charge in 2026-27.  If they want to open up a roster spot and a bit of room, that might be the easiest route to take.

Schwa: Predictions for NYR this offseason…

– Option on 1st round pick?

– Notable UFA/RFA decisions?

– Can the team retool, or do they need to rebuild? If the latter, will they?

Thanks!

There were a few other questions originally but they’ve either been covered recently or have been answered as Chris Drury will remain as GM while they wasted little time deciding their coaching situation, letting go of Peter Laviolette and bringing in Mike Sullivan as their new bench boss.

As a refresher, the Rangers moved their 2025 first-round pick as part of the J.T. Miller trade, a selection that was flipped to Pittsburgh soon after.  However, the conditions on that pick say that if it falls within the top 13, New York can keep it and move their 2026 pick instead, albeit unprotected.  It currently falls at #11 heading into the lottery so it’s locked into a top-13 position.  My inclination is that Drury assesses that this is a playoff-bound team next season and keeps the pick, thinking that next year’s could land somewhere in the 20s.  It’s not without its risks given that many felt this was a playoff team this year but the hiring of Sullivan suggests they’re all-in on pushing forward with this core group.

In terms of free agents, there isn’t much of note with their UFAs.  The two they have with NHL experience are Nicolas Aube-Kubel and Calvin de Haan and it’s fair to assume neither will return.  K’Andre Miller and William Cuylle are the key RFA’s.  Miller likely winds up with a short-term deal and with New York’s cap situation, they’ll be pushing for a short-term bridge for Cuylle.  Adam Edstrom and Matt Rempe should re-sign for cheap while it wouldn’t shock me if Arthur Kaliyev is non-tendered.  I’m leaning toward guessing that Zachary Jones gets a qualifying offer but his arbitration eligibility and desire to play more could have them going in an opposite direction.

The Sullivan hiring means they’re not interested in rebuilding.  The good news is that this team can retool.  I don’t think they’re as bad as their record was this year.  If they brought this team back exactly as it was with a quality coach like Sullivan behind the bench, I’d probably pick them as a playoff team.  They’re not going to be able to do much given their cap situation but they might not have to either.  Chris Kreider could be a trade option to move to open up some flexibility and change up one top-six piece but I think this roster won’t have too many changes come opening night in October.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include Winnipeg’s attractiveness to potential free agents, the Quinn Hughes situation in Vancouver following comments from management, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, we’ll have one more mailbag next weekend so watch for it there.

Cla23: With the recent signings by the Jets of Alex Iafallo and Neal Pionk and long-term contracts to their star players, will this year FA‘s think hmmm, maybe Winnipeg has something I don’t know about or will it always be a hard no?

If the extensions to Connor Hellebuyck and Mark Scheifele didn’t materially improve Winnipeg’s perception among free agents, I’m not sure new deals for Iafallo and Pionk (or Vladislav Namestnikov who also re-signed somewhat recently) will move the needle all that much.  When a player is an unrestricted free agent with plenty of suitors, they’re generally not going to go to a small-market team with a fairly high tax rate unless there’s a specific opportunity they’re pursuing.  That’s not a shot at Winnipeg but rather a reality that some smaller-market teams face.  Especially this year with a big jump in the cap putting more money in the market than usual.

But one of those specific opportunities I just mentioned is winning.  If the Jets have a long and successful playoff run, that will go a long way toward bolstering their standing among free agents.  Lots of players want to win and if there’s an opportunity with a legitimate contender, it will be a more coveted spot even in a smaller market.  That’s what’s going to materially improve their standing as a free agent destination.

One thing that these extensions should do is give GM Kevin Cheveldayoff more confidence when it comes to acquiring rental players they want to re-sign.  While they haven’t kept them all over the years, it hasn’t exactly been a mass exodus of talent either.  While players could be reticent about the market when they’re acquired, enough of them decide to stay which should make Cheveldayoff feel more optimistic about the prospect of keeping them around should the opportunity present itself to acquire someone on an expiring or short-term contract.

frozenaquatic: Of the lottery teams trending up, who has laid the groundwork for future success? Calgary has Wolf, but relying too much on a keeper isn’t a recipe for success (Coronato looks great though), and are in reality a trending-down older team that happens to have a great keeper and a top D-man in Andersson. The Flyers are the opposite, and could build around Michkov, but their D is suspect, and they forever seem a good goalie away from being decent. Utah is pretty well-rounded, but got bit by the injury bug, and may need an upgrade in goal. The Wings have some nice pieces, but seem snakebitten, and who knows if the Sabres will ever make the playoffs again. My vote would be split between the Ducks and the Jackets — both have potential — though for the Jackets going into ’26 with Jet Greaves, hot as he was down the stretch, as the best option net feels a bit scary.

Long term, I’m more bullish on Utah than it appears you are.  They’re reasonably well-rounded now with an improved core crop and have one of the deeper prospect pools in the NHL, including Michael Hrabal, one of the better goalie prospects out there if Karel Vejmelka isn’t the long-term starter.  They also still have a surplus of future picks to try to trade from to add to their core plus ample cap space (more than $22MM this summer per PuckPedia), a clean long-term cap situation, and an owner that appears to be willing to spend.  That’s a team that feels like they’re poised to be on the rise in the near future with a deep enough system to sustain it for a little while.  And for how long they’ve struggled, it better be sustainable for a while to justify the years of pain.

If Anaheim’s young core forwards can live up to expectations, they have the chance to be a longer-term contender as well.  But whoever takes over as head coach is going to need to find a way to get more offensively out of those players.  Otherwise, things might start to stagnate.  Columbus is in solid shape as well but I feel like they’re a team that punched a bit higher than expected which might put expectations a bit too high.  They need to sort out their goaltending to really take a step forward and while Greaves could be part of the solution, he profiles as more of a backup than a starter.

Since you noted trending up, that takes some of the bottom teams out of the equation and some disappointing underachievers so Utah would be my top pick for this question.  Quickly touching on the other teams you listed, I agree that Dustin Wolf masked over some of Calgary’s deficiencies that will need to be addressed still while Philadelphia’s long-standing goalie trouble keeps me from being super bullish on their future.  Buffalo has to get it right one day but whether they can sustain it after losing this much is still in question and I’m not sure Detroit is trending up but rather treading water.  There’s a nucleus to work with but until that young nucleus gets a lot better or they bring in better veterans to elevate the floor, they look destined to remain in the middle for a while yet.

SoCalADRL: Zegras, Zelly, Pastujov, 2025 1st, 2026 1st for Pasta. Who says no?

With a no-move clause, David Pastrnak probably says no.  There’s no reason to think he’d want to leave Boston, especially to go to a team that hasn’t been good for a while.  Yes, as noted above, Anaheim is in solid shape from a long-term roster perspective but until they actually start winning, they’re not going to be the most appealing of teams for players to go to, especially ones who completely control their fate in a trade.  This is the type of move that Anaheim GM Pat Verbeek might be looking to make, bringing in someone to anchor their attack but Pastrnak would likely nix it, ending the thought quickly.

The Bruins also probably say no as well.  CEO Charlie Jacobs spoke this week about getting back to the playoffs next season, throwing any idea of a rebuild (even the short-term one I thought they might do) out the window.  So making a declaration like that and then trading your franchise forward for a package comprised primarily of future or still-developing assets wouldn’t make much sense.

I should also note that packages like this rarely actually work in trades.  While there is definitely some quality young talent in there (plus a fairly high draft pick this year), the Ducks aren’t going to get an elite or franchise-type of forward for it; quantity rarely yields a high-quality player in a swap.  That probably doesn’t change with this package.

SpeakOfTheDevils: I’M NOT SAYING THEY NEED TO GO THIS ROUTE BUT…What does a Quinn Hughes to New Jersey mock trade look like to you?

In case you missed it this week, Canucks president Jim Rutherford indicated that defenseman Quinn Hughes would like to play with his brothers one day.  Can I just say that I appreciate Rutherford’s all-too-rare candor?  It’s fun to have something meaty like this to ponder without it just being a pie-in-the-sky idea.

I know he’d love to walk back that comment as it has brought forth all sorts of speculation but I understand what he was trying to say in that they’re going to offer Hughes a bunch of money but lots of brothers desire to play on the same team and with Quinn being the first to reach UFA status, he could try to force his way there if he really wanted to do so.  For one, I think it’s largely overblown, especially if the brothers are able to play on the same teams internationally in best-on-best play, scratching that particular itch.

Call me crazy but the trade that makes the most sense to me is one that sends Luke Hughes the other way as the centerpiece.  New Jersey will need to offload a lot of money to afford a Quinn extension that will be in the double-digits in AAV.  I don’t see the Canucks wanting Dougie Hamilton as a key part of the return and I’m not sure carrying him plus Quinn and Luke is necessarily a good thing from a defensive standpoint or even a cap standpoint.  From there, the timing would then dictate the adds.  If it was now with Quinn only having two years of control left, it might be close to a one-for-one swap.  But if it’s a year later when Quinn can be extended, that probably means more has to come from the Devils.

It’s a fun hypothetical exercise but there’s only one way I see the three brothers playing together as a result of a trade and even it’s iffy at best.  That’s if Quinn goes to Vancouver management next summer and says no matter what, he’s signing with New Jersey.  But even then, Quinn doesn’t have any trade protection in his contract and the Canucks could look to get a strong return for a one-year rental over what would be more of a salvage trade where they look to get something in return for someone they’d lose for nothing.  But would the Devils pay the top value to ensure they got him?  Probably not which is why I said even this idea is iffy at best.

FearTheWilson: Since when can you use a Coach’s Challenge for a puck over the glass penalty? And will the NHL ever leave goal reviews strictly up to the War Room? Imo any decisions after the original call on the ice should fall on the War Room.

Challenging puck over glass is a new rule for this season.  The relevant section from the NHL Rulebook is 38.2 (d) which reads as follows:

Penalty situations for “Delaying the game – puck over the glass” – When a minor penalty for delaying the game has been assessed under Rule 63.2 (iii) for shooting or batting the puck out of play from the defending zone. This will only apply to delay of game penalties when the shot/batted puck is determined to have subsequently deflected off a player, stick, glass or boards, etc., and not a judgment call. No challenge can be issued for a non-call, in other words, no challenge is to be considered when the On-Ice Officials deem that it was not a violation of Rule 63.2 (iii). A challenge can only be used to rescind a penalty, not to have one assessed. In the event of a failed challenge, an additional minor penalty (or double-minor penalty, as appropriate) will be assessed (in addition to the existing delay of game penalty).

(Rule 63.2 (iii), if you’re wondering, is the one that establishes the minor penalty for the puck-over-glass infraction.)

With it only being challengeable to take a penalty off the board and not put one on, it’s fortunately something we haven’t seen too often.  I don’t mind that it’s an option as sometimes, the officials conferring can get it wrong so for something that’s supposed to be black-and-white, the reviews shouldn’t take long so I’m okay with it.

As for goal reviews being made by the War Room, I like the sentiment of the idea in that it takes some responsibility away from the on-ice official and makes it more of an independent decision.  But sometimes the on-ice official had the best angle and might be able to contribute something or fill in a blank that helps determine the final call.  If they still have that input, it’s not necessarily a War Room decision then.  And if you take away that input and have no communication between the War Room and the on-ice officials, you’re not necessarily getting the full picture which brings a fairness question into play.  I think this is why we don’t see it that way now and probably won’t any time soon.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include the state of Detroit’s back end, the potential for a Florida winger to be offer-sheeted, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our last two mailbag columns.

letsgonats: Q I asked in the goalie trade market (or lack thereof)- Do teams ever try to poach AHL talent stuck behind NHL goalies that are set for a while/unmovable contract? I know the Sharks got Askarov from the Predators but are there other examples? You note the goalie FA market is very weak so does it have to be a creative trade? Anyone from KHL that could come over? Zach Fucale?

There aren’t really other recent examples of a trade like Yaroslav Askarov’s.  First, it’s rare that a first-round goalie gets moved that soon after being drafted.  It’s similarly rare that a deal will effectively cough up two first-round assets to get a goalie given that until recently, goalies didn’t generally yield that much of a return.

But in terms of a team trying to poach an AHL goalie, that’s a little more common for varying reasons.  With Boston having Jeremy Swayman and Linus Ullmark, Calgary came in and made a move to get Daniel Vladar who, to that point, had primarily played in the minors.  Joey Daccord was an AHLer with Ottawa, got picked in expansion by Seattle, and is now their starter.  Others have been claimed off waivers (Anton Forsberg, Eric Comrie, and Spencer Martin among the relatively recent pickups) that would also qualify simply as a team wanting to take a look at a goalie who they think could become a second-stringer.

I don’t anticipate the trade market for goalies being overly busy simply because there aren’t a lot of teams who are going to be looking for a netminder.  This might be the summer that John Gibson moves and with a $6.4MM price tag, making that work could qualify as having to get creative, I suppose?  But looking at the top goalies in the AHL this year, I don’t see a lot of options that teams are going to view as a possibility as a viable backup that they’re going to want to trade for.  One or two could be viewed as a waiver claim but that’s about it.

In terms of international goalies, sure, Fucale could look to come back.  A while back there was even some speculation about the possibility.  But is there a team where he could be the sure-fire backup?  Unless it’s a team like Tampa Bay sticking with insisting their backup makes the minimum salary, probably not.  As for other KHL goalies who could come over, Denis Kostin could be one to keep an eye on.  He’s a late bloomer (he’s already 29) but was one of the top netminders in that league this season.  Perhaps that gets him a look?

rule78.1: You’re Steve Yzerman. You have Chiarot/Gustafsson/Holl under contract for next year at over $10M, and little chance of making the playoffs this season. You have let go of Hronek/Walman/Maatta/Gostisbehere.

Do you stay with what you got or do you try and unload a couple of contracts and work to improve your defense for next season?

Patience has been one of Yzerman’s hallmarks but I don’t think he can be patient this summer.  The top teams in the Atlantic Division are still going to be strong, Ottawa has taken a step forward this year, and even Montreal might have passed them in terms of playoff readiness, an outcome few would have expected coming into the season.  They’re going to need to do something to shore up their roster and the back end is a good place to start.

But how much do they really have to subtract from that defense group in order to add to it?  They have nearly $23MM in cap room for next season, per PuckPedia, with Patrick Kane being the only UFA of note.  They easily have enough space to re-sign or replace him, add another forward, and still have something left to spend on the back end without necessarily having to shed any money.

Let’s look at Erik Gustafsson first.  If they bought out the final year of his contract, they’d have a $667K cap hit for two years.  But if they just waived and assigned him to the minors, they’d carry a cap charge of $825K next season and nothing after that.  For a difference of roughly $158K next season, they might as well hold onto him, assuming they can’t find a taker for him.

As for Ben Chiarot, I think in the right role, he can still be useful for this team.  That role isn’t playing 21 minutes a night, however.  I also think that with 50% retention, he could yield a small asset in a trade.  My inclination would be to keep him, however, as their left-side depth is awfully thin and even if a lefty is brought in to play big minutes, I feel that he’d be better served being overpaid in a limited role over them moving him.

Justin Holl, on the other hand, feels like a legitimate buyout candidate.  He’d have a $1.133MM cap charge for two years while if he was in the minors as he was to start this season, it’d be $2.225MM.  For a million in savings to help this team win now (well, next season), that could be money well spent.  Alternatively, those savings could be used on Axel Sandin-Pellikka if he’s deemed ready for a full-time role.  That might not be their preferred route but there should be a bit more desperation coming from Detroit next season.

Red Wings: How worried should the Panthers be about a team throwing an offer sheet to Samoskevich? He has played really well this year, and the Panthers will be tight with the cap depending on whether they re-sign Ekblad and/or Bennett.

I’ve said before that I don’t think offer sheets are going to be overly prevalent this summer.  The big jump in the salary cap means that most teams will have a bigger cushion to try to match.  But if there are going to be offer sheets, I think it will be on short-term bridge deals similar to what St. Louis did for Dylan Holloway and Philip Broberg.  And yes, Samoskevich falls into that class of player.

You can never say never and Florida would be a reasonable team to try to target, especially if they re-sign both key UFAs.  I don’t think they will, mind you, but one (Sam Bennett would be my guess) is doable.  That would leave them with probably around $10MM or so to work with and four or five players to sign.  If they went cheap with the end-of-roster pieces, they’d be well-positioned to match most offers in the first-round pick and third-round pick compensation range (more than $4.58MM to $6.87MM last summer; those will be higher this time).  And to be honest, I don’t think there’s a team willing to go that high for him.

As long as Florida doesn’t do like Edmonton did last summer and spend their way into forcing a lowball offer, they should be safe with Samoskevich.  Florida is pretty good at taking care of its young players over time and Samoskevich and his camp should see that.  He’s probably heading for a bridge deal but a long-term pact after that should happen if things go well.  But if the Panthers spend their way into making a cheap one-year offer, then perhaps someone might try to jump in at the high end of the second-round compensation range ($4.58MM last year, a bit higher this summer) to see if that’ll do it.  I expect GM Bill Zito will leave himself some wiggle room to hedge against that happening, however.

DevilShark: Any ideas on good LW UFA or trade targets for the Devils this offseason? Much talk about C depth but outside Bratt LW scoring is just about non-existent…

Nikolaj Ehlers is the top free agent option out there should he not work out an extension with the Jets.  The 29-year-old has been injury-prone over his career but has surpassed the 20-goal mark in eight of his ten NHL seasons despite largely playing on the second line.  With Jesper Bratt on that top unit, Ehlers could conceivably play the same role with New Jersey that he has in Winnipeg, providing some reason for optimism that he could be a very good fit.

Unfortunately, pickings get slim after that.  I don’t think Taylor Hall is a viable option for them (and it seems like he’s likely to re-sign in Carolina anyway).  There are some third-line pieces out there but if you’re looking for more of a needle-mover, you’re going to have to take a gamble on someone.

Two names come to mind in that category.  The first is Colorado’s Jonathan Drouin.  When healthy, he has been an impactful player for them.  But is that because he has turned a corner or because everyone puts up points with Nathan MacKinnon?  His market wasn’t the greatest last summer, resulting in him opting to re-sign and now with the injuries he’s had this year, I can’t see things drastically changing, barring a stellar playoff run.  If the Devils think he can be a top-six piece away from MacKinnon, he should be gettable.  The other is Andrei Kuzmenko.  Yes, things didn’t go well for him in his second year in Vancouver or with Calgary this season but since being moved the first time, he has six goals and nine assists in 22 games, solid secondary scoring numbers.  With how things have gone the last couple of years, he’s likely only going to want another short-term deal which could make him a low-risk addition with a bit of upside.

On the trade front, the first name that comes to mind doesn’t seem likely.  We know Chris Kreider’s name had been out there in trade talks for a while and he’d be a decent fit for New Jersey.  But would the Rangers send him to one of their top rivals (assuming the Devils aren’t on his partial no-trade list)?  I could see the Devils being among the teams kicking the tires on Trevor Zegras with an eye on making him a winger but the acquisition price will be fairly steep.  I’ll give you an under-the-radar option as well, Toronto’s Nick Robertson.  He’s a decent scorer in limited minutes but hasn’t been able to crack a full-time spot in a lineup slot that suits his skill set.  He still doesn’t seem like a long-term fit for them so if Tom Fitzgerald wants to try a smaller-scale move, he’s someone I’d keep an eye on.

sovietcanuckistanian: Do the Bruins continue the (arguably long overdue) retool next year? It seems they need to find – at a minimum – a middle-pairing defender; middle-six scoring depth; and whether Sacco is the right voice behind the bench. Sweeney has been very hit-and-miss with free agent signings… so naturally as a Bruins fan, I’m skeptical they will achieve what they want by the moves made this year. Your insight and opinions are always appreciated.

The trade deadline teardown in Boston didn’t feel like a short-term retool with an eye on building back up over the offseason.  This was a team that looked like they were a few players away before they started to sell and now they’re even more players away.  While they have ample cap space – more than $28MM, per PuckPedia – they have half a roster to spend that money on, meaning that they don’t have the ability to add several pricey impact pieces via free agency or trade.  Accordingly, aiming for a quick turnaround doesn’t make sense.

That said, I don’t anticipate that management and ownership have the appetite for a longer-term, larger-scale rebuild either.  I think it was notable that some of their pickups at the deadline were players that were NHL-ready or close to it (such as Marat Khusnutdinov and Fraser Minten); they might only need a year or two to become contributors.  In a perfect world, they fill some of that middle-six scoring depth you referenced.

That’s more the timeline I think they’re aiming for, take a step back for a couple of years, replenish the prospect pool, and make their salary cap situation a little cleaner so that they’ll be better positioned to try to make some splashes and add back some pieces.  Given the state of their prospect pool pre-deadline, there’s a case to be made that a longer-term rebuild is needed but I just don’t see them willingly committing to that.

On your other points, I don’t think they’ll do much defensively this summer.  Charlie McAvoy, Hampus Lindholm, and Nikita Zadorov aren’t going anywhere.  Andrew Peeke has another year left and Mason Lohrei is sure to be re-signed.  That’s five spots filled right there and I could even see them keeping Henri Jokiharju at the right price.  That’s a good enough short-term nucleus if the intention is to take a step back for next season.  If there’s a long-term piece they like that wants to come to a losing team for a bit, maybe they try to make a splash in free agency but that feels a bit early for where they are.

As for Joe Sacco, I’d be surprised if the interim tag was lifted and he became the full-fledged head coach but returning as a lead assistant is definitely possible.  But seeing just how poorly they’re playing since the deadline suggests to me that they’re going to want a new voice in there.

Photo courtesy of Terrance Lee-Imagn Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include an assessment of Kyle Davidson as GM of the Blackhawks, the backup goalie situation in St. Louis, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our last mailbag while we have one more coming from our most recent call for questions as well.

Unclemike1526: What is your evaluation of Kyle Davidson? I think he’s done a fine job of acquiring talent while taking some shots at veterans to try and catch lightning in a bottle to maybe make the playoffs. None of those contracts are bad enough to block anybody important. Moving off Jones and Mrazek was a stroke of genius IMO. This seems to be the year where some serious talent arrives at the end and they move up. Moore, Rinzel, Thompson should be here soon. However, where he has been lacking is picking the right coach to blend the young and the old. If his next coach pick fails, is he in trouble? I feel this is a crucial decision for him AND the team. Your thoughts? Thanks as always.

I’m not sure about their veteran additions being geared toward trying to catch lightning in a bottle for a playoff push.  I think it was more culture additions – especially in the 2023 summer – and then last summer, trying to add pieces to raise the floor of their forward group and push some younger players into bigger roles in Rockford.  I don’t have a problem with that strategy either, although some of the short-term contracts are pretty steep overpays.  Granted, with their cap space, they can easily afford it.

Circling back to the first part of the question, I think the macro-level view is positive.  Davidson has brought in several quality prospects and landed what they hope is a franchise player in Connor Bedard.  Their cap situation is about as clean as anyone’s and they have plenty of draft picks to fill the cupboards moving forward.  That’s all great.

Looking at the micro-level view, it’s not as great.  Some good deadline dealing aside, some of the veterans brought in haven’t had the desired impact in terms of raising the floor and insulating the young talent.  This year has been ugly from a win-loss perspective and in some cases, a development perspective which is the last thing you want in a rebuilding year.  It hasn’t mattered who’s coaching this group, neither Luke Richardson nor Anders Sorensen could get enough out of them.  While the longer-term objectives are getting hit (a high draft pick this June, development at lower levels for the younger prospects), how this season has gone takes a bit of the shine off the longer-term positives.

The general belief is that GMs get three coaches and then things start to get shaky.  And in this case, whoever is hired to coach next season would be number three.  But with Sorensen being an interim in-season promotion, I don’t think that will count against Davidson.  Most coaching targets aren’t available midseason so you do what you can with who you have and go from there.  So, in my mind, whoever is coaching next season will be the second hire.  As long as Chicago starts to show some more progress under that bench boss next season, I think Davidson will be fine for a little while yet.

Zakis: Read that some Hawks fans want Bedard run out of town due to regression and some silly penalties recently. First, what are they thinking? And two, in the nonzero chance they think about moving him (0%), what would the return look like?

I was baffled seeing some trying to correlate a couple of misconduct penalties to a desire to leave when it comes to Connor Bedard.  And it’s more baffling to think some would want him run out of town already; I can’t come up with a logical reason for someone to have that mindset.  He’s still a junior-aged player, anchoring a team that frankly isn’t very good.  If you look back at some of the teenagers who had strong second seasons, their supporting cast was a lot better than Bedard has had.

Saying that doesn’t absolve him from any blame by any stretch either.  I expected he’d take a step forward development-wise this season and he hasn’t.  But I still think he’s going to be a legitimate star center in this league and those are players you don’t give up on early when things aren’t going well.  And that’s why he’s obviously not getting dealt.

But since you’re asking about the hypothetical scenario that he is, a lot would depend on if the reset button is being pushed.  If so, then the return is more futures or prospect-based.  (Think a recent top-five center, one or two other first-rounders, and a quality prospect or two for good measure.)  But if the intention is to accelerate things, then you’re looking at maybe an established top-line center with plenty of team control remaining, plus some other younger NHL-level upgrades.  I’m being purposefully vague here as I can’t think of a single established young center who would fit that part of the return that another team would want to move so it doesn’t really matter what the other pieces would be if the core one isn’t there.  Either way, it’s clearly not happening.

Gmm8811: In your mind, has Joel Hofer done enough to warrant a two-year extension or has Colten Ellis overtaken him? If Hofer gets offer sheeted, does Armstrong take the draft pick?

Hofer has absolutely done enough to warrant another contract.  He has certainly established himself as a legitimate second-string option and there’s a case to be made he should be playing more than he has.  It’s worth noting that he’s three years away from unrestricted free agency so a two-year deal would still make him a restricted free agent at the end, albeit one that puts him a year away from hitting the open market.  If they’re not ready to commit a long-term deal to him, that term makes sense with an AAV approaching the $3MM range.

The offer sheet is interesting in theory.  It’s not a great UFA market for goaltenders so if there’s a team that thinks Husso could be a better long-term option, then an offer sheet would make sense.  Again, that’s really only in theory.  Let’s look at last year’s offer sheet thresholds, numbers that will only be higher this summer.  I can’t see the Blues letting him walk for a second-round pick so that means the offer would need to be higher than at least $4.58MM (which is probably closer to $4.8MM or so this summer) to get them to balk.  Is there a team that would him that much on a five-year deal or less?  (Anything more than that and the compensation cranks up further with the maximum divisor being five.)  I like Hofer but I don’t think there’s a team willing to pay that much money plus a first-round pick and a third-rounder to get his services.

As for Ellis, this is his fourth professional season and the only one in which he hasn’t spent extended time in the ECHL.  He’s having a nice year with AHL Springfield for sure but I doubt he’s done enough to make St. Louis management think he’s ready for full-time second-string duty with them.  I suspect their plan is to have him as the starter for the Thunderbirds next season pending waivers.

Jakeattack: In your opinion, how much job security does Brunette have with Nashville? Last season, multiple players hit new career highs. This season? Well, everyone knows how this season has gone for multiple reasons.

GBear: Apart from GM Trotz being buddies with Andrew Brunette, can you see any way that Bruno doesn’t get fired at the end of this season?

It certainly has been an ugly year in Nashville, hasn’t it?  Even if you expected that the team wouldn’t be as good as the group that went on a massive point streak to go from dead in the water to playoff spot, the thought was that some of their key additions over the summer – Steven Stamkos, Jonathan Marchessault, and Brady Skjei – would at least be enough to offset that, keeping them squarely in the playoff mix.  Instead, they’ve already been mathematically eliminated (only one of three teams with that fate) and finishing 30th overall is the probable outcome at this point.

Here’s the question that I’m pondering.  Last year was a year where everything went right in the second half and this season has been one where pretty much nothing has gone right.  Can that happen two years in a row or are we likely to see a bounce-back from several players?  I’m inclined to think it’s the latter which could work in Brunette’s favor.

Brunette is only in his third season as an NHL head coach but even with how things have gone this season, his teams have played to a .587 points percentage which is among the higher numbers among NHL coaches.  Looking at it from afar, if Trotz believes in Brunette’s limited track record and thinks that things can’t go so poorly again next year, I could see a scenario where he stays.

There’s also the matter of his contract, which has two years plus an option remaining on it.  If Trotz thinks that next season could be another transition type of year where they might not be a playoff contender, the inclination may be to give him another year to see how things go and avoid having two pay two head coaches for two years.  And if things don’t go well early next season, they could easily pivot and make the move at that time.

Do I think that Brunette should feel quite secure in his job for next season?  No; any time that things go that badly, a coach can’t feel too secure in his future.  But honestly, I wouldn’t be shocked if he is back behind the bench next season.

PyramidHeadcrab: What are some notable examples of players that have gone from so-so to nearly elite after being traded to the right team?

I feel like we’ve seen a few examples in recent years, but it’s always fun to think a 3rd liner from Pittsburgh could become a playoff-defining top-liner on, say, Calgary.

I can think of a couple via the trade route but more from other routes.  On the trade side, Chandler Stephenson went from a fourth-line depth piece in Washington to a two-time 60-plus-point player in Vegas and while he probably won’t get there this season with Seattle, he’s on pace to surpass 50 at least.  The other is Sam Bennett.  With Calgary, he showed some flashes of being an impactful power forward but by the end of his time there, he was a third-line winger with a point total in the 20s.  Meanwhile, in Florida, Bennett is now a full-time top-six center, notching at least 40 points a season, and is about to become one of the most sought-after players on the open market in July should a pricey extension not be reached by then.

Florida also comes to mind about some of the other routes as well.  Carter Verhaeghe was a fourth liner in Tampa Bay, went to the Panthers in free agency, and has a pair of 70-point seasons under his belt since then while becoming a top-six fixture as well.  Going back a few years, Marchessault followed a similar path, going from a fourth liner with the Lightning to a 30-goal guy in Florida before being moved to Vegas where he produced even more.  If we look at waivers, Gustav Forsling couldn’t crack Carolina’s roster, was claimed off waivers (by Florida, yet again), and has become an all-situations top-pairing player.  (If you’re looking for a reason why the Panthers are a consistent contender, finding these under-the-radar gems is a huge part of that.)  It looks like Dylan Holloway (offer sheet) should be part of this category as well after going from being a depth piece with Edmonton to a top-50 scorer in St. Louis.

frozenaquatic: Can a coach be fired in the middle of a game? Asking for Laviolette.

I don’t think there’s anything in the rules that says it can’t happen.  If a player can be traded mid-game (as Jakob Pelletier was not long ago, for example), a team could make an in-game coaching change.  But I wouldn’t expect to see that happen.  As for Peter Laviolette’s future with the Rangers, that’ll probably be decided on at the end of the season; it’d be surprising (though not unprecedented) for a team still in the playoff mix to make a coaching change this late in the year.

Photo courtesy of Jeff Curry-Imagn Images.