PHR Mailbag

There were plenty of Central Division questions for the mailbag so we’ll give that division the focus here.  The rest of the questions will be split into two more segments to run between now and next weekend.

Gmm8811: Thoughts on Doug Armstrong being a buyer or seller before the trade deadline? I don’t think he really has anything to offer that would be of interest to other teams. Scandella, Vrana, and Kapanen could probably be had for a minimal return. I’m also not opposed to Perunovich or Saad being moved. Any type of minor league assets or reserve list players would be acceptable. I don’t think the Blues will make the playoffs this year, so maybe a few tweaks to increase the depth might be useful for next year.

St. Louis is right in the think of the Wild Card race and unless they lose every game between now and the deadline, they’ll probably be right in the race on deadline day.  Having said that, this is not a team that anyone is going to call a contender so going big on adding doesn’t make sense.  And while they might want to sell, they don’t have much when it comes to rental players to move.

Marco Scandella might get a late-round pick with max retention.  Kasperi Kapanen might as well since he can kill penalties which gives him some fourth-line utility in the playoffs.  I’m not sure there’s a market for Jakub Vrana though.  One rental you didn’t mention was Sammy Blais.  I know he’s having a rough year but he’s a fourth liner who can hold his own at five-on-five and provide a lot of physicality.  Teams will be looking to add that and at $1MM, he’s on a contract most teams can afford.  Of the pending UFAs, he might have the most value.  I don’t think the return for Scott Perunovich would be high enough to justify moving him so I think he stays put.

Brandon Saad might be a tough sell with two more years left at $4.5MM.  He’s not on a bad contract but that’s a tough one for teams to fit in and St. Louis isn’t going to want to retain on him.  Unless it’s a player-for-player move, I suspect he stays put.  Pavel Buchnevich will be the big fish if Armstrong decides to sell and aim for missing the playoffs next year.  At $5.8MM, he’s pricey but he’s the type of impact top-six addition that is in short supply and high demand.

Money will be tight for St. Louis once Justin Faulk comes off LTIR so they’re in a spot where if they want to add, they also need to subtract.  It wouldn’t shock me if they moved Scandella with retention for a pick and then flipped that pick or one close to it elsewhere to maintain their depth so that if they do make the playoffs, they’ll have some options.

WilfPaiement: Marc-Andre Fleury was clobbered again on Tuesday night against Winnipeg and yet we keep hearing that a few likely playoff teams are showing interest. My question is who? And why? Fleury is toast and he won’t make any team better in the playoffs!!!!

I don’t think teams are necessarily showing interest in Fleury as someone they’d want to use a whole lot in the postseason.  But here’s a player who has several long playoff games under his belt (with three Stanley Cups), has plenty of postseason playing experience, and is known for being good in the room.  If I’m looking to add a piece that can either be an upgrade on my current backup or someone who can handle some extra games down the stretch and be an off-ice contributor as well, Fleury makes some sense.

Is that a particularly exciting profile of a player?  Not really.  Would Minnesota get a lot for him?  Probably not.  But if a team has a bit of money left or a need to try to do something between the pipes but doesn’t want to pay a high price, there’s a fit with Fleury.  Colorado makes some sense if they’re just looking for a stopgap backup upgrade but some work would need to be done to make the money work.

However, would Fleury want to go somewhere to be the designated bench door opener for the postseason?  There’s a lot of speculation that if that’s the role that a contender is envisioning for him, he might just opt to remain with his family in Minnesota and play out the season; it’s not as if they’re out of the playoff hunt by any stretch.  Teams know they’re not getting the Fleury of a decade ago but there’s a small set of circumstances where he might be the right fit if he’s willing to accept that role.  At this point, it doesn’t seem as if that will be the case.

wsendall: Any chance Arizona would listen to offers on Clayton Keller? He has a full no-trade that kicks in next year and Arizona still seems like they’re several years away and has tons of organizational uncertainty. He’s already asked some questions about the team’s direction and the possibility of having a frustrated star player in a year or two with a full no-trade wouldn’t be ideal. It would take a king’s ransom, but his value may never be higher prior to his no-trade kicking in.

I don’t think the Coyotes are at a point where they can unilaterally not listen to offers for anyone but I doubt GM Bill Armstrong has any inclination about dealing Keller away.  At 25, he’s the right age to be a ‘veteran’ in this rebuild and at $7.15MM through 2027-28, he’s at a pretty good price point for someone who’s near a point per game.  You’re absolutely correct that it would need to be a king’s ransom for it to even be considered but those types of deals are usually easier to make in the summer than at this point of the season.

Keller may justifiably have some questions about the state of this long-term rebuild.  However, I think the worst of it is over and it might very well be this offseason where the switch flips and Armstrong gets aggressive using his draft capital to try to add some core pieces, similar to the Sean Durzi acquisition last summer.  If that happens and they’re in the thick of the Wild Card race next season – not an unrealistic goal to set given where they are – then I expect some of that frustration might dissipate as he sees the proverbial light at the end of the tunnel.  I expect Keller sticks around for the long haul and certainly through the next two weeks.

DevilShark: What do you think Saros would cost? Both trade value and his next contract. Which teams can feasibly afford both?

Goalies are so hard to figure out on the trade value front.  I’d like to think Nashville could get a first-round pick and a quality young player for Saros since he has another year left at a team-friendly $5MM.  They probably would have to take back a salary or two as well which could theoretically then be flipped if need be.  That’s a lot for a netminder especially relative to some of the past deals for goalies but Saros is a top-end one so the return should be high.

Extension-wise, I’d have to think he’d look at Connor Hellebuyck’s seven-year, $59.5MM extension as a target.  Granted, he doesn’t have quite the accolades that Hellebuyck does but he’s also a little younger so there is a bit less risk when you look at it that way.  I don’t think he gets quite to an $8.5MM AAV but it could check in close to that unless next season resembles this one numbers-wise.  In that scenario, the next deal would start with a seven.

As for who could afford both, that’s a tough one.  I think New Jersey could although they’d need to move out Vitek Vanecek to make the money work for next year.  Buffalo can afford both but if they’re confident that Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen and Devon Levi can be a winning tandem down the road, they don’t necessarily have the need to make a move like this.  If Detroit isn’t sold on Sebastian Cossa’s upside, they’d be an under-the-radar team that could afford to make that type of trade and they have the cap space that they could carry Ville Husso as a very expensive backup for a year.

I’d like to put Ottawa on this list as they’ve been trying everything they can to put together a quality goalie tandem short of actually acquiring a proven netminder.  In my mind, Saros could be a real difference-maker for them and they certainly have the prospect capital (or even some younger roster players) to make a move.  But they can’t make the money work this season unless they move out Joonas Korpisalo and with his contract and performance, that’s not likely happening.  Basically, there’s a reason the Devils have been the speculative fit for Saros as they might be the only realistic team that could add him now and have the ability to extend him later.

Read more

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include Buffalo’s disappointing first half of the season, Patrick Kane’s future with Detroit, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s column.

YzerPlan19: What happened to the Buffalo Sabres?! Did the lofty expectations for this season crush them?

I was certainly among those who had Buffalo at least being in the playoff mix this season.  I had them being in a close battle for a Wild Card spot and they currently sit 10 points out which isn’t exactly a close battle.  They’ve certainly underachieved.

I’m not sure it’s the lofty expectations (being a possible playoff team isn’t exactly a huge bar to clear) that have hurt them.  Instead, I think it’s the byproduct of an overly young roster with veterans who haven’t been able to step up to cover for the youngsters’ inconsistency.

When you look at the young talent they have, the tendency is to look at the year they just had and expect that they’ll be able to improve on it.  Thus, several core players each take a step or two forward and there are a bunch of internal gains that move them up in the standings.  It’s great in theory but in hindsight, expecting all of those players to take a leap forward was probably asking too much.

Not to single out the goaltending but hopes were quite high for Devon Levi based on how he finished last season.  But we’re talking about a stretch of barely two weeks.  Expecting him to stay at that level just might have been too much, too soon for him.  Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen has been inconsistent which is to be expected for a young goalie while Eric Comrie couldn’t pick up the slack which is why he cleared waivers earlier this season.  Improved goaltending was a big reason for the higher expectations but the hopes were too high, too fast.

Similar statements could be made for several forwards as well, particularly Tage Thompson, Dylan Cozens, and even Alex Tuch to a lesser extent.  The hope was they’d maintain or beat their production from last season but they’ve all taken a step back.  Kyle Okposo and Victor Olofsson aren’t picking up the slack either, unfortunately.  If a couple of the youngsters are producing like they were last year, they probably have a few more wins and are at least in a realistic battle for a Wild Card spot in the stretch run.

I still think there’s a pretty good core here for Buffalo to work with.  The goaltending should get better as Levi and Luukkonen get more seasoned.  Bounce-back performances from some forwards can definitely happen as well.  I think they’ll be in good shape in the long run but it appears their playoff drought is going to last a little longer.

Millville Meteor: Adam Henrique is having a good season. I expect the Ducks to trade him. What kind of return can we expect for him?

Anaheim GM Pat Verbeek must be thrilled at the way things have played out.  Calgary moved Elias Lindholm earlier than expected, pushing Henrique up a rung on the talent list.  Lindholm’s removal from the market then boosted Sean Monahan’s market, resulting in Montreal pulling the trigger on a trade early.  Now Henrique is the top rental option available.  That can only help his market.

Having said that, I’m skeptical that the Ducks will be able to get a first-round pick like the Flames and Canadiens did in their moves.  Henrique’s numbers are quite comparable to the other two but Lindholm has the stronger reputation while Monahan’s contract is much more affordable.  With Henrique making $5.825MM, that’s a price tag that few teams can afford, let alone few contending teams.  They’re going to need retention and quite likely a second team to retain another chunk which could dilute the return Anaheim gets.  I’ll say he fetches the Ducks a second-round pick and maybe a lesser asset (a late-round pick, a fringe prospect, or salary ballast) while the acquiring team will flip a fourth-rounder to whoever retains the second chunk.

rule78.1: Regarding Patrick Kane, the Red Wings, and the trade deadline. Keep him or trade him? If a trade is made, what expected return would the Red Wings receive?

First things first, he needs to show he’s healthy.  He didn’t make it back before the All-Star break as they hoped he might be able to so he needs to clear any lingering doubts about his health.  And with what he’s coming back from with his hip surgery, any injury is going to give teams some hesitance.

As of today, Detroit sits tied for the top Wild Card spot with Toronto.  All things considered, that’s a bit better than I expected.  It’s particularly impressive considering the spotty goaltending they had early in the year, resulting in third-stringer Alex Lyon taking over the number one job and running with it.  Unless their place in the standings craters over the next month, I’d be inclined to hold onto Kane.  Yes, there’s a risk of missing the playoffs and potentially losing him for nothing but it’s not like they gave up anything to get him.  And with the Red Wings not being in any sort of meaningful playoff race since 2016, there’s some inherent value in just keeping their group together and giving their younger players a taste of a tight stretch run.

But if they were to move him, the return isn’t going to be quite as high as it was a year ago when he yielded a second and a fourth-round pick to Chicago (plus a third to Arizona for retaining another 25%).  He’s having a good year but we’re talking about a 19-game sample size, lingering issues about his hip in his first post-surgery campaign, and a lower-body issue that has cost him three weeks already.  Accordingly, I could see a second-rounder on its own being the ceiling for what Kane would bring back in return if Detroit decided to trade him.

Black Ace57: Who do you think on the Flyers is likely to get traded now? Atkinson? Walker? I’ve heard with Seeler that they want to see if they can agree on an extension. Do you think there’s a chance Frost still gets traded after the rumors earlier?

Sean Walker certainly seems like a good bet to be dealt.  He’s having a nice bounce-back year after his playing time getting limited with Los Angeles and at $2.65MM, his contract is affordable, particularly if Philadelphia pays it down.  The fact he’s a right-shot defender certainly helps as he might be the most coveted option once Chris Tanev is moved.  For someone who was acquired at least in part as salary ballast, the Flyers are well-positioned to get some value for him.  If a team wants extra depth, maybe there’s a late-round pick somewhere for Marc Staal as well.  And if Nick Seeler signs an extension – it seems like they’re trying to hammer one out – then he’s off the list of options to trade.

I doubt there’s a strong market for Cam Atkinson.  He has been decent this season coming back from neck surgery that cost him an entire season but it’s that injury and the fact he has a $5.875MM AAV through next season that will scare teams off now.  In the summer, if Philadelphia is willing to pay down the contract and take a light return, then there should be a small market at least.  One forward to keep an eye on is Scott Laughton.  With the center market being so light, if GM Daniel Briere decides to make him available, he could command a quality return with two years left after this one at a below-market $3MM price tag.

Morgan Frost feels like he could be an offseason trade more than an in-season one at this point.  A trade involving him might be a player-player swap of players that are of a similar age or team control.  It might be more appealing to rebuilding teams but they generally aren’t looking to do those moves until the summer.

SpeakOfTheDevils: Assuming Ruff is fired after the season, who will be the next coach of the Devils???

First, I’m not certain that Lindy Ruff is going anywhere.  Extending a coach to a multi-year deal and then firing him soon after doesn’t happen a lot (periodically, but not often).  How much of New Jersey’s struggles are coaching-related compared to their injuries (Jack Hughes, Dougie Hamilton, Nico Hischier, and Timo Meier have all missed double-digit games)?  And is it the fault of the head coach when the goaltending falls off the proverbial cliff?  I’m not absolving Ruff of any responsibility here but certainly all the blame can’t be laid at his feet either.

But I’ll play along with the premise.  If Ruff is gone, I don’t think GM Tom Fitzgerald will be looking for a first-time head coach; this is a team built to win now.  If we look at who’s out there with some NHL head coaching experience, Craig Berube comes to mind as someone who might try to get this Devils team to play a bit more structured.  I also could see them turning to Jay Woodcroft who had lots of early success with Edmonton and could bring a newer approach after having a long-term veteran in Ruff.  Those are who I’d lean towards predicting if Ruff is let go but again, I’m not sure that scenario is going to happen just yet.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Topics in this edition of the mailbag include players who have overachieved and underachieved relative to expected production, an updated look at the Calder Trophy race, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in next weekend’s column.

rpoabr: How do you solve the Kings?

This is a hard one.  I’m a proponent of roster shakeups over coaching changes but doing anything of consequence with this group is going to be difficult.  Of their current healthy top six forwards in terms of cap hit, they probably aren’t moving any of them (or can’t, in Pierre-Luc Dubois’ case with his struggles; they wouldn’t get full value if they moved him now).  Viktor Arvidsson’s value is down since he hasn’t played this season so he’s not being traded.  They only have two other ones making more than $1MM and both of them are under $2MM.  That makes it hard to salary match and they’re in a spot where they need to do so.

On the back end, maybe there’s a shakeup move with Vladislav Gavrikov whose shorter-term deal could make a player-for-player swap more palatable.  With the right team, perhaps that frees up a bit of money to take a run at another upgrade.  But Drew Doughty and Michael Anderson are on long-term pacts and moving the underappreciated Matt Roy probably isn’t going to help.  From there, the options make $1MM or less so again, money matching is difficult.  Meanwhile, I’m not going to pick on the goaltending, it’s doing well enough under the circumstances.

So, if a Gavrikov trade isn’t palatable, there are three options.  Tweak the depth players (try some different fourth liners, for example, to see if one provides a spark as they did with Alex Turcotte yesterday), do nothing, or make a coaching change.  Option one doesn’t move the needle much so that isn’t going to solve anything.  Anyone who reads these knows how much I don’t enjoy speculating about a coaching change but if you’re of the mindset that this roster needs a shakeup, that’s the one card they can play right now.  Until Arvidsson gets back, it might be the only card they can play.

Personally, I don’t think the Kings were as good as they were early nor do I think they’re as bad as they are now.  They’re somewhere in the middle as a mid-tier playoff team.  That’s basically where I pegged them heading into the season so I’m not really inclined to say they should make a change but if GM Rob Blake decides that something needs to change, that might be the move to make.

PyramidHeadcrab: Who would you say is the most snake-bit player of the season thus far? That is to say, whose underlying stats suggest they should be putting up more points, but are struggling to do so? Inversely, who is the biggest over-performer?

Florida’s Matthew Tkachuk has been at or near the top of this leaderboard all season long but he’s a point-per-game player so it’s hard to call him truly snake-bit.  I’m instead going to go with John Tavares in Toronto.  Even with his goal yesterday (which snapped a long pointless streak), he’s marked at -13.8 goals above shooting talent, per MoneyPuck.  If we pick the simpler stat, his expected goals mark is 27 and he has 13.  Shooting percentage-wise, he’s at 7.5% this year versus nearly 13% for his career.  If he’s at his expected goals mark, he’s over a point per game and Toronto is probably battling Florida for second in the division over being in a dogfight for a Wild Card spot.  The recent struggles have led some to think Tavares is in a steep decline but I’m not sure that’s truly the case.

On the flip side, if we look at the player with the most goals above shooting talent, it’s Sam Reinhart (+8.8).  But even if you took those from his goal total, he’s still a point-per-game player so it’s not fair to call him the biggest overachiever.  Instead, I’ll go with the one who’s fourth on that list, Chicago’s Jason Dickinson.  He’s +8.3 in that category.  He has 15 goals on the season.  You don’t need to be a math major to see that he’s basically scoring twice as much as the numbers suggest he should.  If we look at shooting percentage, he’s at 19%, well beyond anything he has put up before.  Considering that he came into the season without a single doubt-digit goal total to his name, I think it’s fair to suggest that he has been an over-performer.

Emoney123: Is Samuel Ersson in the ROY conversation?

Schwa: Would also be interested in a larger look at Calder for this year. With Bedard’s injury – is he still the favorite? Or how do you assess the race at this point?

When this question was first posted, I didn’t think he’d have any sort of chance of being in the discussion.  However, with Carter Hart being among those to take an indefinite leave of absence in recent days, it’s Ersson’s net to run with for the second half.  If he goes on a hot streak and the Flyers hang onto a top-three spot in the Metropolitan and complete the improbable playoff run, that might get him onto a few writers’ ballots toward the back.  But in terms of being a contender for Rookie of the Year?  I think that will be a stretch unless he single-handedly wins them a bunch of games and drags them into the playoffs.

Right now, I’d still peg Connor Bedard as the favorite for the Calder Trophy.  He’s expected to miss about another four weeks so he still has a chance of getting 60-plus games in.  I think that will be enough to stay on the top of most ballots since he should come away with the most points despite playing with a pretty weak group of wingers.

Bedard also benefits from the big market effect, something that isn’t the case for Minnesota’s Brock Faber.  There’s an increasingly viable argument to make that the blueliner should be the Calder winner; first-year blueliners aren’t supposed to take over as a team’s top rearguard and play 25 minutes a night but that’s what he’s doing.  I think it has largely gone under the radar which will hurt him at voting time.

In a previous mailbag, I had Adam Fantilli as the potential third-place finisher.  That still wouldn’t shock me but I’d give Luke Hughes the edge now.  Dougie Hamilton’s long-term injury has given Hughes a chance to play a bigger (more offensive role) and the production and confidence are both on an upward trajectory.  That said, there’s still a big gap between him and Faber.

HockeyBoz: Did the Red Wings get it right with Lalonde instead of Lambert? Detroit had them one and two, I believe, on their hiring list.

Shocked to see Lambert axed so soon. Islanders have always been a defense-first-type team.

I’m going to respond to the second part first.  I was also surprised to see Lane Lambert go that quickly.  I know they haven’t been playing particularly well lately but in Lambert’s defense, the Isles don’t exactly have a high-end lineup and they’ve been banged up on the back end.  GM Lou Lamoriello might think that’s the case based on the long-term contracts he handed out over the summer but in my book, this is a bubble team playing like a bubble team and they’re on the bubble in the playoff picture.  We’ll see if Patrick Roy (another surprising hire) can change their fortunes around but I still expect to see them either just in or just out of a Wild Card spot.

From Detroit’s perspective, if Derek Lalonde and Lambert were the top two choices, then yes, I think GM Steve Yzerman got it right.  They’re another bubble team but some of their youngsters have progressed nicely under Lalonde’s tutelage which bodes well for the long term.  With some steady goaltending, they could be a playoff team and that’s an outcome I wasn’t expecting heading into the season.  Lalonde should get some credit if that happens.  Would Lambert have gotten more from this group?  It’s hard to say but given that he couldn’t elevate the Isles beyond a bubble team, I can’t sit here and say he’d have done better with Detroit.  In that case, I’ll say Lalonde was the right choice.

Gmm8811: Seems like the Hockey Canada sex scandal has been swept under the rug. Has there been any current news?

wreckage: Repercussions of players involved in the TC scandal? I believe in second chances and believe these young men should be given a second chance on their careers, but does the NHL try and set a precedent and ban their eligibility? I think if they’re found guilty, in a court of law, they most definitely should pay the consequences and if rehabilitated should be given the opportunity to re-establish their careers in the league. Will any be given a chance to resume their careers in your opinion, or are they all likely KHL-bound at best?

Since this question came out, there certainly has been some news on this front.  The London Police Service announced they anticipate that they will hold a press conference on February 5th and will share further details at that time.  Previous reporting has indicated that five players have been told to surrender to the police in London by an unspecified time.  In terms of what is 100% certain, that’s about all that can be said.  More will be known and can safely be discussed after the anticipated announcement.

As for the possible repercussions, it’s still a bit early to speculate.  Will it actually get to court?  Will there be a settlement beforehand where they plead to a lesser charge to avoid going to court?  Will some players do one option and some do the other?  That will go a long way toward determining if the player will have another NHL opportunity or when it may come, not to mention the potential suspension coming from the league that would take the decision out of the teams’ hands in the short term.  I want to see what the end result is before making any sort of prediction on whether there will be another NHL opportunity (and when it might come) or if the league attempts to set a new precedent from a disciplinary standpoint.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Let’s start off the new year with a mailbag.  Topics in this edition include an assessment of Calgary’s top trade chips, what Chicago could be looking to do over the coming months, and much more.

Cla23: Is it just me or are there more players on or heading to IR than previously; if yes, why?

Devil Shark: Can you do a team comparison of injuries? Most specifically games lost to top six forwards or top two D? Interested to see if anyone had been as unlucky as NJD…

Using NHL Injury Viz’s Injury Frequency chart, it looks like fewer players are injured now than a year ago by about 10-15 per league game.  Meanwhile, when comparing this season to the average over the past two decades, it has been pretty close, either slightly above or slightly below.  So from a games-missed standpoint, it doesn’t feel like there are more injured players than usual.

But there’s a bit of a difference between what you’re asking and what that link measures.  I don’t think there are that many more players landing on IR but some teams are known to get creative with their placements.  That can be done for roster or cap management purposes.  If a player lands on IR, they only have to miss seven days and it’s from the date of the injury, not the day of the placement.  So even if they’ve missed a couple of games, they can backdate a placement to get a replacement up for sometimes even just a single contest.  That’s an option that quite a few teams utilize.

Meanwhile, some teams are starting to use LTIR a bit more frequently.  That can be used if a player will miss 10 games and 24 days; we’ve seen a few placements this year where the player is back after just missing the minimum number of days.  But for teams near the Upper Limit of the salary cap, the LTIR placement gives them some much-needed relief so that is starting to be used a bit more often now with so many teams tight to the cap.

As for a team comparison, NHL Injury Viz has some tools for that as well so let’s use that although it doesn’t break down top-six forwards and top-pairing defensemen.  From a cap hit perspective, San Jose has had the biggest impact; Logan Couture skews that one quite a bit.  Vegas is right up there thanks to Robin Lehner; Max Pacioretty skews Washington’s number somewhat as well as does Gabriel Landeskog in Colorado.  Next are Columbus whose list of injuries is long and quite significant, followed by Anaheim and Montreal, teams who are in varying degrees of a rebuild.  Then it’s New Jersey so at a minimum, they’d be right up there for bad luck from an injury standpoint.

wreckage: Realistic returns for the Flames’ big three chips? I listen to Flames radio and follow a couple of their other sites and it seems all their fans are expecting close to, if not a 1st plus for each and all of them. They seem to value Lindholm as a 1C based on his one above-average season two years ago with Gaudreau and Tkachuk on his wings. Every other year is closer to 65 points. Tanev is a great defender who often gets injured and if they hang on, he could be hurt again. And Hanifin is good, but expiring… Are any really worth a 1st+ or is that wishful thinking?

I don’t think Calgary would get a first-rounder for all three but two of them seem quite likely

Elias Lindholm doesn’t have to be a true number one center to fetch a first-round pick at the trade deadline.  Look at Ryan O’Reilly a year ago, he was under half a point per game with St. Louis and still landed a first-round pick.  Lindholm is producing at a better rate than that, is well above average at the faceoff dot, and plays in all situations.  If Calgary is willing to retain 50%, they can get that contract to under $2.5MM pro-rated which should be affordable for several contenders without moving much of consequence the other way in terms of matching money.  He’s probably going to be the best middleman available if the Flames ultimately turn around and sell.  If I’m being honest, I don’t see how he doesn’t bring at least a first-round pick back; it’s how much more comes with it.

As for Chris Tanev, this is the one I agree with you on.  With his injury history, I can see teams being hesitant to move a first-rounder, even though he’s an expiring deal that can be paid down to $2.25MM while being a right-shot player, by far the most coveted side.  There are even recent comparables (David Savard in 2021, Ben Chiarot in 2022) that suggest a shutdown defender on a paid-down expiring contract could fetch a first-rounder plus something else.  But the injury risk drops it to a second-rounder and something else.

Then there’s Noah Hanifin.  Here’s a top-pairing player that can fit in with any contender and is also under $2.5MM with 50% retention.  He’d probably be the best blueliner that moves, assuming he moves.  If you’re the best defenseman available, you’re probably getting moved for a first-rounder.  And if you’re like me and think he’ll move in a sign-and-trade, there’s no doubt at least one of those picks will be part of the sizable package going to Calgary.  Whoever gets him is likely then out on Tanev, which will hurt Tanev’s market a bit in the end.

YzerPlan19: Does the Flames’ recent success change the course of things? Do they still try to pony up $ to keep this group? Is it the FAs that are contributing factors to the success or the kids? Is the success sustainable or should they continue on in rebuild mode anyway? Do we have to wait until the trade deadline to see where they are in the standings before any moves/signings materialize?

I don’t think we’re at a point where a few weeks should be determining their course of direction.  Generally speaking, that’s probably not a wise course of action either way.

I thought Calgary was going to be pretty good this year.  Lots went wrong last season but they still have a decent roster on paper.  But they can’t score enough to truly contend; adding a piece up front would certainly help but I don’t think they’d be more than a mid-tier team anyway.  If I’m GM Craig Conroy, am I ponying up a bunch of money to lock in a core that probably isn’t good enough to contend?  If one of Lindholm or Hanifin wants to take a team-friendly deal, sure, I’d make that move.  But I don’t think that’s happening.

Adding Connor Zary has certainly helped so he deserves some credit but for the most part, I’d pin their recent improvement on the backs of the veterans (not necessarily just the pending free agents either).  Zary has given them a bit more offensive depth but they’re still among the lower-scoring teams.

Can they hang around where they are?  Probably.  They’re more or less a bubble team and if they play around .500 hockey, they can stay in that area.  But again, holding steady probably isn’t the best approach for them to be taking.

Unclemike1526: What additions do you see the Hawks making by the trade deadline? With Hall on LTIR and Tyler Johnson and Mrazek likely out the door that leaves the Hawks with a lot of Cap space money. They need more draft picks like I need hemorrhoids, But I would rather see them add some NHL-ready talent to add to the pool. Nazar should be here one day after Michigan is out of the Frozen Four but most of the Hawks’ top talent is still a couple of years away. Commesso might get some run after Mrazek is gone or if he gets hurt but I think some decent ready talent might be available. Thoughts? And no, Campbell is a hearty No Thanks.

The Blackhawks have plenty of cap space before the possibility of moving out some of their rentals.  But why would a team that’s bottoming out in an effort to land another high draft pick acquire players that will make them more competitive in the short term, hindering their efforts to finish at the bottom of the standings?  That seems a bit counter-productive in my books.

You may not want to see them add more draft picks but over the next couple of months, that’s what they should be doing.  If there’s a market for Tyler Johnson and Petr Mrazek, it’d likely be a draft pick return.  If they take on a contract or act as a third-party facilitator to help another team make a deal, it’d be a draft pick coming their way.

If you want them to flip the switch and go for it, that’s an offseason decision.  At that time, they have what should be another high draft pick to go with Connor Bedard and then they can use their collection of draft picks and prospects to look for some more win-now pieces, or at least prospects that are a bit closer to being NHL-ready.  I think there’s a good chance that will be their strategy but it’s one that has to be executed after the season, not now.

As for signing Frank Nazar after his college season ends, that makes sense.  That gets him a taste of the NHL before a potential spot with the US squad at the Worlds; if he signs and burns the first year of his deal this season, he’d be ineligible to go to Rockford.  As for getting Drew Commesso some NHL looks, I’d like to see him fare a bit better with the IceHogs first.  Throwing him to the wolves on what’s likely to be an even weaker team after the trade deadline comes with some risks and I think their preference would be to let Arvid Soderblom get the bulk of the work down the stretch to help further assess if he’s in their future plans.

Johnny Z: Would the Hawks make a bid for Laine? Seems like CBJ would settle for a bit less to get his salary off the books and the Hawks have ample cap space.

Patrik Laine has been a popular speculative trade candidate although I’m not sure I agree that Columbus would be willing to move him at a discount to get his salary off the books.  Yes, things have not gone well this season from both an injury and production standpoint but he’s also a year removed from nearly averaging a point per game after averaging a point per game the year before.  Does one bad season mean they should want to sell low on a player who has been one of their top performers before that?  I don’t think that’s the right course of action for them to take.

If I’m GM Jarmo Kekalainen and I want to clear salary, I’d be focusing on moving some of the lower-cost overpayments, players like Andrew Peeke and Adam Boqvist, for example.  They may not get a great return straight up but if clearing money is the main goal, selling low on one of them makes more sense than selling low on one of their top liners.

Having said that, someone like Laine would make some sense for Chicago, after the season of course.  An overpriced contract where they could get in a trade for below market value like they did with Taylor Hall would be a nice bridge addition to allow some of their younger prospects ample time to get established in the pros.  I don’t think Laine specifically will be one of those players but you’re on the right track with what type of trade candidate might be viable for the Blackhawks.

PyramidHeadcrab: Looking at advanced stats and yadda yadda, which current “winning” team is most likely to fall off in the New Year? It’s sure been an experience watching Anaheim drop from near the top of the Pacific to the bottom of the league already!

Full disclosure, I don’t know my advanced stats as well as I should but here goes nothing using stats from MoneyPuck heading into Sunday’s action.  For me, the answer is Vancouver.

Let’s talk about PDO, the sum of a team’s shooting and save percentages at five-on-five.  The league average is 100.  Good teams can be in the 101-102 range without it being too concerning.  The Canucks, meanwhile, check in at 104.73.  For context, there are only three other teams above 102 and none of them are at 103.  Vancouver is far and away ahead of the pack.  Buoyed by a shooting percentage of 12% (well above the league average), this tells me they’re due for some regression.

Now let’s look at Expected Goals For and Against based on shot quality and location.  Vancouver has scored 18.56 goals above their expected rate, the second-best rate in the league.  It’s good for them that the shots are going in but this is another one that seems unsustainable.  From a Goals Against standpoint, they’ve allowed 15.26 fewer than expected.  I think there’s a bit of credence to this one being a bit sustainable as their tandem of Thatcher Demko and Casey DeSmith gives them quality goaltending each night.  They should be on the happy side of this ledger although down 15 goals allowed in this category might be tough to sustain.

If we add those two numbers up, Vancouver has a Goal Differential Above Expected at 33.82 (in just 36 games played).  For context, the only other NHL team above 16 in this category is Winnipeg (28.77), the next highest team in PDO.  (If you’re looking for who’d be next on my list based on advanced stats, it’d be them.)  The Canucks are a good team but I don’t think they’re quite this good and I expected some sort of slide back in the second half.  They should still be a playoff squad but I doubt they’ll still be atop the Pacific Division at the end of the regular season.

WilfPaiement: When did NHL officials stop calling games by the rulebook and start calling games based on the score/situation? And why does the league think it’s okay that officials can now manipulate the outcome easily, especially with the new revenue stream that is gambling?

Officiating in the heat of the moment can be frustrating at times, especially if you’re a fan of the team who isn’t getting the benefit of the call.  We’ve all been there.

I’m going to be a bit picky here with the first part.  If officials called everything to the letter of the rulebook, the majority of the games would be played at three-on-three for the overwhelming majority of the time with more players in the penalty box than on the bench.  No one wants to see that.  There are tons of smaller infractions (a hook here, a late bump on the boards a half-second after the puck went by there) that go uncalled but are technically penalties based on the rulebook and that’s a situational judgment call right there, the score notwithstanding.  There is always going to be some level of game management from officials; there’s just no way around it.

Now, as to officiating based on the score?  I don’t have any empirical data to show one way or the other that says it’s happening more or less than before.  Personally, I haven’t seen it as much this season as I feel like I’ve seen in the past.  Sure, there’s the odd questionable call (or non-call) in a late-game situation but again, when you’re already operating on some level of game management for determining what infractions are worth calling (and which of the many smaller ones won’t), that’s going to happen.

I’ve yet to see any evidence that the league thinks score manipulation is okay but there’s not a lot they can do.  It’s not as if they can arbitrarily fire every official who they think has done it and I’m pretty sure officials are cautioned about not doing this at multiple times per season.  I also don’t think there’s a ton of this happening so maybe I’m not the best one to answer this question.  From a gambling standpoint, it’s not like gamblers of other professional sports don’t have the same issue; there’s subjectivity and human error everywhere.  The best thing I can say is that if bettors feel this is subjectively happening, factor that belief into what bets are and aren’t made.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include Alex Ovechkin’s chase to 895 goals, the potential viability of Edmonton moving Jack Campbell, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our mailbag from over the weekend.  We’ll also run one this weekend from the most recent callout for questions.

rule78.1: Based on what you have seen this year, does Ovechkin ever pass Gretzky?

As we sit here today, Ovechkin is at 828 goals, 66 behind Wayne Gretzky; he obviously needs 67 to pass him.  This year has been ugly for Ovechkin and Washington’s offense although they’re holding onto a Wild Card spot, albeit ever so slightly.

I can’t see Ovechkin’s scoring struggles carrying on for the entire season.  He’s at six in 31 games, a 16-goal pace.  I think he at least hits 20 by the time the year ends.  Let’s pick a completely random number and say he winds up at 23 and that the Caps find their scoring touch to an extent.  Now the gap is 49 to tie, 50 to beat him.

Ovechkin has two years left on his contract.  Could he average 25 goals per year in that stretch?  I wouldn’t put it past him even if it looks like he’s slowing down.

But let’s say he comes up a bit short following the 2025-26 campaign.  If he’s within, say, 10 goals of Gretzky at that point, I have to think Ovechkin is going to want to give it one more go to try to get the record.  I’m sure Washington would be more than happy to bring him back for that attempt, even though he’d be 41; the marketing alone could make it worthwhile if he gets there.  If not them, there would be other teams who certainly would be willing to give him that shot.

I know Ovechkin has struggled this season but I still think he’ll get the goal record eventually.

SkidRowe: Could the Bruins acquire Elias Lindholm in exchange for Hampus Lindholm and a Lindholm to be named later?

It’s too bad that Par Lindholm is no longer on Boston’s reserve list, we could have thrown him in there for good measure.

Calgary’s Lindholm is a fantastic fit for the Bruins.  There’s no doubt about that.  He’d help fill the role that Patrice Bergeron filled for many years which would fill arguably the biggest hole in their lineup right now.

The problem is that this probably isn’t the type of move the Flames should be looking to make.  This is a treading water type of trade and would probably need to be made in conjunction with them moving Noah Hanifin for a young center.  If they can pull this combo off and ownership provides a directive to not rebuild, maybe a package highlighted by the two Lindholms could work.  That’s a couple of big ifs, however.

The idea of Boston adding Lindholm down the middle has been raised a lot going back to the summer but the same problem exists now as it did then.  They don’t have many high picks in the near future to deal from and their prospect pool isn’t the deepest.  The emergence of Matthew Poitras perhaps makes him more appealing than he might have been a few months ago but if GM Craig Conroy winds up starting a rebuild, I still think he’d be aiming for a higher-ceiling piece.

aka.nda: How can the Oilers trade Campbell? With the cap going up, is a buyout not feasible?

Let’s look at the buyout cost first as that’s going to play a role in any trade possibility as well.  The total cost in actual dollars would be $9MM with a $10.5MM cumulative cap charge that would be spread out as follows:

2024-25: $1.1MM
2025-26: $2.3MM
2026-27: $2.6MM
2027-28: $1.5MM
2028-29: $1.5MM
2029-30: $1.5MM

(The variation in the first three seasons of the cap charge is due to the frontloaded structure of the contract.)

Jack Campbell is having a horrific season, no doubt about that.  His trade value is most definitely on the negative side and it’s going to take a significant incentive to offload in its entirety.  If you’re the acquiring team, you’re probably not taking on Campbell with the idea of trying to rehab his value and get him going again.  That means you’re probably taking on a $9MM cash payout and dead cap money into the next decade.  A first-round pick or a good prospect probably isn’t enough to justify taking that on.

Is it possible that Edmonton can move Campbell?  Sure, but it doesn’t seem likely.  Their best bet might be taking back a similarly high-priced underachieving contract but given their salary cap challenges, that’s a move that’s a lot easier said than done.

Now, is a buyout feasible for Edmonton?  Fundamentally, the idea of a six-year dead cap charge is something I’d usually say no to but I think an exception could be made here.

If the Oilers are confident in Stuart Skinner being the starter, could Edmonton get a suitable backup for less than Campbell’s $5MM cap charge minus the buyout cost?  Next season, they absolutely could with a bit of money left over which would be crucial given how tight their books are.  For 2025-26 and 2026-27, it’s still possible although there probably wouldn’t be any savings left over.  But if you can get someone who can play better than Campbell has, it’s still a net gain.

Three additional years at $1.5MM on the books will sting down the road but Edmonton is certainly a win-now team.  A Campbell buyout could help them on that front so the short-term gain is arguably worth the longer-term pain.

Emoney123: Tortorella for Coach of the Year! Has this team turned the corner enough to use some draft capital to add in an attempt for some playoff wins or hold the course in the rebuild since they have two first-round picks [their own and Florida’s] and two second-round picks [Columbus and LA Kings] and Michkov, Gauthier, and Bonk in the system?

Right now, John Tortorella has to be right up there for the Jack Adams Award as Coach of the Year.  The Flyers have been a lot more competitive than probably just about anyone expected.  But with around 50 games left in the season for most teams (give or take a few), there’s still a long way to go.  I’m not convinced they’re going to still be in a playoff spot two months from now let alone at the end of the year which probably will be what decides if Tortorella gets the award or not.

This is not a core group that’s a player or two away from doing damage in the playoffs so moving away some of their top draft capital for win-now options doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.  I still think the likelier scenario is that they wind up selling by March 8th, not buying.  And if they do hang in the mix and want to add, I’d want to see them moving later-round picks for specific role players in the hopes of giving their young core pieces some meaningful games without giving up much of consequence.

The only way I’d advocate for trading one of those draft picks is if they were getting someone in the 19-22-year-old range with high value.  That fits their current younger core and if the player is a few years post-draft, it could help speed up the rebuild.  But they’re very much still in the rebuild so moving those picks for veteran win-now pieces is not a move GM Daniel Briere should be considering.

Read more

With plenty of questions submitted, we’re going to split the mailbag into three this time with the bonus edition running during the holiday break in the NHL calendar.  Topics in this edition include who New Jersey should try to target for a goalie upgrade, Vancouver’s surprisingly strong first couple of months, and more.

gowings2008: The Red Wings clearly need to address their goaltending and could probably use another solid d-man or two. What are some options that Yzerman could reasonably explore to address those issues? It looks like Jonatan Berggren is available for trade, he could maybe be a key piece heading in the other direction in a trade.

I’m going to answer these out of order.  Let’s talk about Berggren first.  He’s a decent young player but if he’s the key piece of a trade proposal, they’re probably not getting a needle-moving veteran in return.  That’s not to say he doesn’t have value but I’m not sure he’d be more valuable in an offer than a first-round pick.  He’d get Detroit a decent veteran but it’d be more of a secondary addition, maybe a fourth or fifth defender using your wish list.  Personally, I think they’d be better off playing him in the NHL and seeing if there’s another level he can get to.

As for the goaltending, I agree that it can be upgraded on but I don’t know how many assets they want to spend doing so.  I’m going to touch on this in another question in a bit more detail but the goalie market isn’t the strongest right now.  Yzerman could make a move for one of the few options out there but there’s no guarantee that player will come in from a different system and be materially better.  A few points on a save percentage compared to Ville Husso is definitely doable but is that the big difference-maker in the playoffs if they can get there?

To that end, the idea of making the blueline better makes a lot of sense in theory; a better back end could fix some of Husso’s struggles between the pipes.  But here’s the problem.  Beyond Shayne Gostisbehere (who they’re probably not moving), the rest of their veteran blueliners are all signed beyond this season.  That probably takes the Red Wings out of the rental market for defensemen as a lot of sellers won’t want to take a contract with term back for an expiring; they’d rather have the cap space.  Jeff Petry might have a bit of value somewhere being below $2.4MM but Detroit can’t pay down that deal any further.  Maybe flip him and then go for a rental?  But even then, there’s trade protection that could complicate that idea.

But since you’re asking for some specific players, let’s look at other blueliners with term where Detroit could try to send a veteran back as a salary offset and then a key future asset or two.  San Jose’s Mario Ferraro comes to mind as someone who could be an upgrade while his salary is around what some of the veterans they would need to move make.  If Pittsburgh wants to shake up their secondary core, Marcus Pettersson could be a target as well.  Bigger scale, I could see them sniffing around the idea of a sign-and-trade with Noah Hanifin although the acquisition cost would be a lot higher obviously.  With Simon Edvinsson now up, it wouldn’t shock me if he gets a look to see if he can help stabilize things.

Black Ace57: What do the Flyers do? Even with their success this year should they be buyers considering they are still trying to rebuild? Do they stand pat? Even with their winning do they trade off pieces?

For the next month or two, they should stand pat.  I don’t think this is a team that’s going to hold onto a playoff spot for too long so spending assets to try to cling to a postseason position doesn’t make much sense.  At the same time, you don’t want to sell early either as there’s a lot of value in getting their younger players experience playing in a meaningful (for now, at least) playoff push.

Closer to the trade deadline in March, I’d deal from their defensive depth.  We know Sean Walker and Nick Seeler are getting plenty of interest already and Marc Staal played a regular role for Florida through their playoff run last season so there might be a market for him.  Clearing them off the roster will open up some more consistent playing time for the likes of Yegor Zamula and Ronnie Attard, among others.  If they’re willing to pay down a decent chunk of Cam Atkinson’s deal, I could see there being a bit of interest in him as well.  There’s nothing wrong with stockpiling some extra picks at this point in the process.

They’re also going to need to decide what to do with Morgan Frost.  Right now, I think he still has some real trade value as young centers are always going to pique the interest of rebuilding teams.  A player-for-player swap, getting someone who is a similar age with multiple years of team control, would make sense.  But the longer he’s in and out of the lineup, the more his value decreases.  I still think he can be a capable secondary contributor so I’m not saying move him now but they would be wise to make a decision on him regarding if he’s expendable or part of the plan sooner rather than later.

SpeakOfTheDevils: Who is the answer in net for the Devils???

Salary cap aside, I’d say John Gibson.  I think playing behind a much better team with win-now expectations will get him back to being at least a little above average for the next couple of seasons.  With New Jersey in a win-now window, that fits.  Of course, the salary cap does play a big factor here and the fact he’s signed through 2026-27 at $6.4MM per season can’t be overlooked.  With over $67MM in commitments for next season already per CapFriendly, adding another big ticket on their books will certainly complicate things.  Of course, some of that can be offset in the short term by sending Vitek Vanecek and his $3.4MM AAV through 2024-25 the other way.

The problem here for New Jersey is one I alluded to earlier.  In a season where good goaltending is hard to find, those who have it aren’t going to want to move it.  Accordingly, the goalie market simply isn’t that deep in terms of who’s available.  Jake Allen is a perfectly serviceable veteran.  Is a perfectly serviceable veteran what they need right now?  Probably not; I think they need more of an impact piece.

But who is that impact piece?  Most of the netminders speculated to be available are of the depth variety.  Daniel Vladar probably isn’t a difference-maker.  If Detroit moved one of their three, James Reimer isn’t the solution.  Spencer Martin could be had but he’s no better than what they have now.  Maybe Karel Vejmelka moves the needle enough but the asking price is going to be rather high as someone with an above-average save percentage and a pretty good contract, one that carries a $2.725MM through the end of next season.  Barring a huge return, the Coyotes have minimal incentive to move him, especially since they’re in a playoff spot at the moment.

Plan A for New Jersey is that Vanecek turns things around and Akira Schmid goes back to his 2022-23 form and that’s the answer in net, one that doesn’t require doing much.  But if they want an impact netminder that could make a difference, I think Gibson is who they have to go after.  It’ll take a salary offset (Vanecek) going the other way.  It might even require compensating Anaheim for three-plus years of some level of retention so it won’t be easy.  But if that’s what they need, it’s a move they need to find a way to make.

blues1967: Is Vancouver for real? I’m not a Canucks fan, but I’ve been impressed with their play. They are overdue for some success, as is Buffalo.

I don’t quite know what to make of the Canucks.  They weren’t as bad a team as they were from last season so some improvement was reasonable to expect.  But to be among the top teams in the league more than two months into the season?  I’m not sure that was expected and I’m not sold that it’s entirely sustainable.

Brock Boeser is scoring at a torrid clip, one that’s entirely unsustainable at around 25%.  They have two other forwards over 20% in a league where the average is generally around 8%.  J.T. Miller is nearly at 20%, well above his career average.  This is a good offense but not the best attack in the league.  I keep expecting them to slip a bit in that regard and suspect it will happen at some point.

One element that does give me some confidence with regards to staying power is their goaltending.  Thatcher Demko is back to being a high-level netminder and he has the ability to stay at that level or at least close to it.  I’m not sure Casey DeSmith can maintain a .920 SV% but he’s an above-average backup who gives Vancouver a chance to win pretty much every game.

I’m ready to call them a playoff team but are they a contender?  I wouldn’t go that far just yet as I think their offense is due to take a step or two back at some point in the second half of the season.

Read more

The upcoming holiday roster freeze is a built-in demarcation line as we cross into the second trimester of the regular season. Teams have a clearer picture of where they stand, leading some to make significant changes to their coaching staff while others invest more resources in exploring the trade market.

As we prepare to turn the calendar to 2024 and start hearing some pre-deadline trade rumors in earnest, it’s good timing for another edition of the PHR Mailbag. In part one of our last edition, our Brian La Rose examined how the Blue Jackets front office could navigate another disappointing season and potential moves for the Oilers. Part two investigated just what’s been going on with the Wild’s roller-coaster season and how the Flames can shift more responsibility to their incoming wave of young talent.

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

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include Minnesota’s tough start to the season, discussion on if there’s a path for Calgary to retool instead of rebuild, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in our mailbag from three weeks ago (apologies for the delay in getting this back half posted).

jacl: What’s happened to Jason Robertson? It seems that you don’t hear his name called during a game at all. You never hear his name called in big situations this year. Am I expecting too much from him this year after his last couple of years?

Expectations should rightfully be quite high for Robertson.  You don’t fluke into back-to-back 40-plus-goal seasons which is what he has done the last couple of years.  Now, he finished tied for sixth in NHL scoring last year which is a lot harder to repeat, especially on a Dallas team that has a fair bit of balance offensively.  If you were expecting 40 goals again from him, I think that would be fair.  If you were hoping for another jump in points, then I’d suggest you might have aimed too high.

Robertson has been a bit quiet this year but he’s still hovering around the point-per-game mark.  His shooting percentage is still above the NHL average but is a bit below his career average.  If you’re looking for a reason for optimism, another percent or two on that front as the season progresses could still give him a shot at a 40-goal pace.

I Wander Off: Dear all-knowing and wise mailbag answer person.

Is it just me or is Murphy’s Law in effect for the Wild this year?

I.e. we all know about the cap struggles but it just seems like every pass, shot, hit, block, blocked shot, or save somehow someway always doesn’t seem to A) connect for a goal or B) goes right into the back of the net.

Sincerely, a diehard Minnesota Wild fan and frustrated State of Hockey resident.

Things certainly look a little better now following the recent coaching change at least.  Yes, they’ve had some misfortune but there were some risks heading into the season.

Filip Gustavsson had a great year last season.  No question about that.  But before that, he was struggling to establish himself at the NHL level.  They had no choice but to re-sign him but there was always going to be the risk that he went back to his previous form which is what has happened so far.  I think he’ll get better but luck or no luck, they’re not going to have the same level of goaltending as a year ago.  Marc-Andre Fleury just turned 39 and had to slow down at some point.  Again, I think he can be better but perhaps he’s not a quality platoon piece anymore.  There was always going to be some risk between the pipes as a result so it’s not just Murphy’s Law on that front.

They also didn’t do much to upgrade their offense over the summer.  (Yes, their cap situation played a big role in that.)  But they had a mediocre attack last year so them being near the bottom of the league on that front wasn’t entirely unforeseeable either.  Matt Boldy struggling stung and Kirill Kaprizov got off to a slow start which didn’t help things but this is where the lack of depth hurt them.

For me, Minnesota is a bubble team.  I don’t think they’re as bad as their record but they’re also probably not a 103-point group either.  Is that all Murphy’s Law?  Maybe a bit but after getting some best-case results last season, it could also be things normalizing a bit.

Zakis: What was GMBG thinking with the Hartman, Mats, and Foligno extensions?

Also, what are the chances the Wild sign Kirill to another extension, and what would that look like with the cap purportedly going up?

And why won’t the Wild play their highly touted youngsters?

When GM Bill Guerin signed Ryan Hartman, Mats Zuccarello, and Marcus Foligno to new deals, it was a case of GM believing in his core group a little too much.  Remove any possibility of in-season uncertainty and just get them done.  He thought this was a 103-point squad once again and with that logic, getting some important veterans locked up made a lot of sense.  Of course, the mistake was believing that last season was repeatable and possibly even built upon.

Having said that, I’m not going to pile on too much.  I have no issue with the Zuccarello signing from a value perspective.  Hartman’s, in a vacuum, is defensible if you think he can get back to his form from a couple of years ago.  Even if he’s in the 40-45-point range, it’s not bad and he’s a center, a spot they don’t have much depth at.  So I can’t criticize those a ton.  Foligno’s on the other hand, that one felt like an immediate overpayment.

A lot can happen between now and the time that Kaprizov is even eligible to sign an extension which isn’t until July 2025.  If they’re in contention and use the cap room created by the high buyout costs going away, I think there’s a reasonable chance he’d consider it.  I’ll say 40% for now as testing the market could be tempting.  I’m not as bullish on the revenue projections as the NHL is in its public proclamations (attendance is down in quite a few buildings and a lot of teams are facing reduced regional TV rights which will hurt HRR) but maybe the trailing years in the lag formula (which is how the cap will be set moving forward) are stronger than I think.  At this point, I think Kaprizov would be targeting something above Artemi Panarin’s $11.643MM AAV, assuming he remains a top-end player.  Let’s say $12.25MM for, well, as many years as he’s willing to sign for.

As for not playing the highly-touted youngsters, I don’t see that.  Marco Rossi is playing top-six minutes most nights.  Brock Faber is over 23 minutes a night on the back end.  Boldy is a regular in the top six.  Liam Ohgren and Danila Yurov are under contract overseas and aren’t quite NHL-ready.  Carson Lambos is just getting his feet wet in the pros and counting on a 21-year-old goalie in Jesper Wallstedt would be highly risky.  The ones that aren’t playing are either not available or not quite ready.  There are concerns that I have with this roster but not playing the top youngsters isn’t on that list.  Their time is coming soon but not yet.

kyzr: How could Calgary avoid a total teardown and retool to be competitive? If Hanifin and/or Tanev are moved, who could the Flames trade for to be the replacement? Thanks!

This is a scenario that doesn’t come up too often anymore as player-for-player shakeup moves don’t happen too often.  The fact that both players are pending unrestricted free agents doesn’t help either as these types of swaps typically involve pieces that are either signed or at least under club control for a while.  That can be managed by allowing early extension discussions though and, in Hanifin’s case, perhaps a sign-and-trade to allow for the eighth year.

I suppose the other way would be to move the veterans for future assets and then flip those or other future pieces for win-now help.  But even that doesn’t happen.  Generally, when teams are in the middle, they’re either loading up or selling off, not making moves to try to hang around the middle.

But I’ll play along.  The Islanders feel like a team that could do something like this with Noah Hanifin with someone like Alexander Romanov being part of the return.  Romanov is hovering around the 22-minute mark for ice time, a career high and could slot into Calgary’s top four.  I could see the Blues having interest in something like that with one of their $6.5MM blueliners (likely Torey Krug) being involved but that might not be a good idea for the Flames.  Maybe Seattle with Jamie Oleksiak coming back who has another year left?

The problem for Calgary or really any team entertaining a scenario like this is that the teams that want a player like Hanifin or Chris Tanev don’t want to subtract anyone of consequence from their roster.  They want to add that extra piece or two, not make more of a lateral swap which is what your idea entails.  If the Flames wind up moving those two – and I think they will – I suspect it will be more of a traditional seller type of move, not a half-in, half-out type of approach.

Ripper Magoo: How many goalies would you give a 7 x 7 contract to?

This is a tough one that really made me think.  There aren’t many goalies who are safe bets to have seven straight above-average seasons which means there’s a case to be made that none of them should get one.  But there are a handful I think I’d take the chance on.

Jake Oettinger (DAL) – He’s already in the top ten at least for goalies and a seven-year deal in July would bring him to 32, more than young enough to still play at a top level.  I think the Stars would love to get him at this price but it’s going to cost more than that when his deal is up for real in 2025 when he’ll be an RFA with arbitration rights.

Igor Shesterkin (NYR) – If he was a free agent this summer, seven years takes him to his age-35 season.  Lots of goalies are still going strong at that age.  He’s a high-end netminder that’s young enough to build around.

Ilya Sorokin (NYI) – There would be a bit more risk here as he’s a year older than Shesterkin but his track record is big enough to show me that he’ll be a high-end starter for at least most of that deal.  Plus, that’d be an upgrade on his current contract.

The other one I’ve flip-flopped on is Boston’s Jeremy Swayman.  The track record isn’t there yet but at the same time, if the Bruins wanted to sign him to a long-term deal this summer, I think the asking price would be in this range so I have to seriously consider him for this scenario.  I know Connor Hellebuyck just got more than that but I’d be leery at seven years at this price point with the workload he has carried over the years.

Read more