Pro Hockey Rumors Originals

Topics in this edition of the mailbag include Tampa Bay’s spot in the Atlantic, worst case odds for Detroit in the draft lottery, Henrik Lundqvist’s future, the backup situation for the Blues, Kyle Dubas’ tenure with Toronto, and a projection for the Flyers in the postseason.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back for it in last weekend’s mailbag.

mydadleftme: Any chance you think the Lightning are avoiding first place so they don’t have to match up against the Blue Jackets again? Is it actually safer for them to play the Maple Leafs?

I wouldn’t say Tampa Bay was actively trying to avoid reaching the top spot in the Atlantic Division to avoid being matched up with Columbus again.  A big factor for them not them contending with Boston is their cold start to the season.  It wasn’t until mid-December that they started to find their form and in doing so, they left a lot of points on the table.  Let’s also give the Bruins some credit – they’ve earned their spot atop the standings.

I’ll touch more on Toronto later but I don’t think they’d be the easier matchup compared to a Wild Card team from the Metropolitan such as Columbus.  The Maple Leafs, when they’re on their game, have the firepower to keep pace with the Lightning.  The Blue Jackets or Hurricanes don’t.  Sure, Toronto may not be built for the postseason based on a general lack of physicality on the roster aside from a few players but Tampa Bay is somewhat of a finesse team as well which mitigates that concern somewhat.  If this winds up being the matchup (depending on if and when the games resume and if the playoff structure will be the same), it certainly won’t be an easy one.

tigers22: If the lottery takes a turn for the worse and the Red Wings get passed by three teams and select fourth, do you believe they will take a look at the top goalie prospect or trade down to collect more picks for this rebuild?

This is a really interesting question.  Detroit certainly needs goaltending in a big way and their depth at all levels isn’t great.  (Having said that, I think Keith Petruzzelli has at least a bit of upside.)  But, I don’t think Yaroslav Askarov is worth the number four pick.  The Red Wings could plausibly trade down and still get him closer to the back end of the top ten which would be the best of both worlds for your worst case scenario.

But is that the right way to go?  I’m not so sure.

It is quite risky to draft for need that early in the draft and with goaltenders, they usually take a lot longer than position players to get to the NHL level.  Chances are that players like blueliner Jamie Drysdale or winger Lucas Raymond would make an impact much sooner than Askarov would.

There’s also the distinct possibility that by the time that Askarov is ready to play in the NHL, Detroit’s goaltending need would be solved.  They have plenty of cap room to work with this summer so they’re going to be going after players like Jacob Markstrom, Robin Lehner, and Braden Holtby if they make it to the open market.  If they commit to one of them as their long-term starter, the need for Askarov would be lessened.  Of course, the draft falls before free agency so it’s not as if GM Steve Yzerman will know who his likely new starter will be by then.  If they did want Askarov though if this particular scenario occurs, they should be able to trade down for him.

met man: Now that Lundqvist has been demoted to third string, do you think he will consider retirement? I love the guy, but his time seems to have passed.

I think that would be Plan A for the Rangers at this point as it would avoid another season of the awkwardness that has seen Lundqvist play all of five games over the last two months (two of those coming in relief).  If he was to voluntarily retire, everyone would walk away and the goalie controversy would be over.

But why would the 38-year-old want to do that voluntarily?  While his contract was frontloaded, he’s still owed $5.5MM in salary for next season (which includes a $1MM signing bonus).  He has made a lot of money in his career but $5.5MM is $5.5MM.  Yes, Roberto Luongo walked away with some money left on the table but the total money owing to him over the final three years that were left on his deal is far less than Lundqvist’s salary so the situations are far from the same.

At this point, a trade is unlikely.  He doesn’t want to leave and with an $8.5MM cap hit, no one’s going to want him at that price tag.  That leaves two options – carry three goalies again or go for the buyout.  The former isn’t appealing as their cap space will be limited by the time they re-sign their other free agents and the latter isn’t appealing either as it involves paying a franchise legend to go away.  But it’s the lesser of two evils at that point.  If that happens, then Lundqvist can decide if he wants to try somewhere else or walk away and essentially retire as a Ranger (or close to it).  Doing it that way makes him a lot more money than if he was to retire following the season.

vincent k. mcmahon: If the Blues move Jake Allen this summer, would Ville Husso be Jordan Binnington’s backup or would they look at the FA market?

I would say it almost has to be Husso in that scenario.  They already have nearly $74MM in commitments to 17 players on the current roster for next season and that doesn’t include Alex Pietrangelo who they certainly want to re-sign.  It’ll take all of their remaining room and then some (perhaps Allen being moved) to get him signed so it’s unlikely they’ll be able to afford to turn to free agency to pay for a backup.  That market has gone up considerably the last few years with good second stringers getting more than $3MM per year.  That’s well out of the price range for St. Louis.

Back at the end of January, GM Doug Armstrong gave Husso a two-year, one-way extension worth $750K which gives him some cost certainty at that position.  If he remains in the minors next year, he’s an affordable injury recall and if he’s the backup, he’ll give the Blues some much needed financial flexibility.  There’s a risk going with Husso as Binnington’s backup but it’s one that is justified to take.

jimmertee: Does Dubas still have a job after an early Leafs playoff exit?

General managers don’t have anywhere near as short a shelf life as head coaches do.  It takes time for them to execute their vision for the roster and even longer to see if it’s the right approach or if tweaks or needed.  While Dubas has been with Toronto since 2014, he has only been in the GM chair for two seasons.  That’s not a lot of time to execute and evaluate his strategy.

Rightfully or not, he has gone all in on the big four up front which is going to leave a lot of positions in flux every year in terms of roster turnover while decisions will eventually have to be made regarding core players in Morgan Rielly and Frederik Andersen and how they can afford to keep or replace them.  Brendan Shanahan signed off on Dubas going the way he did with building his team.  Now he needs to let his GM navigate the salary cap challenges associated with those decisions.  I’m sure they’ve foreseen the challenges ahead long before they committed to this approach so there’s likely a plan in place already.

As for the potential for an early playoff exit, it’s certainly possible considering how much of an up and down team they were in the weeks leading up to the pause in the schedule.  At their worst, they could be swept pretty easily.  But when they’re on, they can play with the best of them.  If the standings hold and it’s a usual playoff format, they’d get Tampa Bay and I think they match up relatively well with them so a quick out would be far from a guarantee.  It’d be one of the tighter series in the entire first round.  But no matter how that plays out, Dubas should still be calling the shots for the foreseeable future.

Darkside830: How far will the Flyers go?

I’m not sold on Philadelphia just yet.  Time and time again, they’ve had hot streaks which have been immediately followed by lengthy winless droughts which give back most of what they gained in the standings.  Perhaps this layoff will be beneficial to them in that respect.

But how well will their scoring by committee approach work in the postseason?  Vegas showed two years ago that it’s doable but plenty of other times, top talent has helped push teams over the top.  The Flyers have a lot of quality players but their top talent isn’t at the level of some of the other teams in the division that they’ll need to push through in the postseason.

I’m also leery about trusting young goaltending in the playoffs.  Let’s give Carter Hart plenty of credit.  He has navigated the early trials and tribulations of the NHL rather well for someone that won’t turn 22 until the summer.  But this will be his first crack at the postseason and over the years, some top young goalies have faltered in their first test.  (Some have thrived too but it’s a question mark nonetheless.)

A month ago, I’d have had a hard time thinking they’d win a round.  I think that’s doable now.  But I still can’t see them getting past Washington in the second round, even if they happen to leapfrog them in the standings and get home ice advantage for that series.  Even if that was to occur, it’d still be a pretty successful season for the Flyers after missing the playoffs last season.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include Mika Zibanejad, the AHL affiliation shuffle, David Pastrnak’s chances of leading the league in goals, Carolina’s potential Stadium Series opponent, Montreal’s offseason activity, and Joe Thornton.  If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next week’s mailbag.

MoneyBallJustWorks: I know it could be recency bias but is Mika Zibanejad one of the most underrated players in the NHL?

A five-goal game will certainly change his underrated status in a hurry.  I don’t think I’d go as far as calling him one of the most underrated in the league but he has certainly flown under the radar for a while.  (At least until this past Thursday.)

Part of the season is that up until recently, Zibanejad has been someone that hasn’t necessarily lived up to his draft billing on the offensive side of things.  He was a sixth overall pick of Ottawa but he has only reached the 50-point mark three times in his career (and one of those saw him get 51).  That lack of offensive progression was part of the reason the Senators sold him fairly low with Derick Brassard being the focal point of the return.

That deal looks quite serendipitous now for the Rangers but he even had a slow start there over his first couple of seasons.  Yes, his production jumped last year but in those circumstances, the question is always if that was just a fluke or a sign of things to come?  It’s looking like the latter and as such, his days of being underrated are likely coming to an end.

He’s still signed for two more years after this one at a $5.35MM AAV which is suddenly looking like quite the bargain for New York.  Given the continued demand for top centers, he’s going to be well-positioned to get a huge raise if he makes it to the open market in 2022 at the age of 29.

lennyleonardseye: What are St Louis’ options when it comes to finding a new AHL affiliate? Can they get it done soon or will they have to share a team again like they did in 17-18? What happens to the 5-year contract they had? Why does Vegas keep snatching up the Blues’ AHL teams?

The Blues decided to answer this one for me as they announced on Friday that they’ve signed a five-year affiliation agreement with Springfield which continues the seemingly annual game of affiliation musical chairs.  According to AHL reporter Mark Divver, Carolina (Charlotte) may join in on the fun as well.

With about a dozen teams still being independently owned (the rest are owned by NHL teams directly), there is the potential for this type of movement with some regularity.  The opportunity to get a team that’s closer to the parent franchise is always tempting while other times, the NHL team will want more of a say when it comes to stocking the roster with non-NHL-affiliated players.  (That one likely had a role in Vegas taking over in Chicago, a move that also made some sense given that they didn’t have a full complement of players to start.)  Vegas bought San Antonio’s franchise which supersedes the agreement they had with St. Louis.

If the Blues want some longer-term security, purchasing a team directly would be the way to go.  If they don’t want to do that, then they run the risk of this happening.  If nothing else, a five-year deal is a decent consolation prize at the very least.  (Unless another NHL team comes in and buys them, of course.)

mydadleftme: Do you think Pastrnak loses his lead in goals?? He’s held on for what seems like the whole season. Also, do you see him keeping this 50 goal a season thing up for a while and maybe touches 60 one season?

It’s going to be a tight race, that’s for sure.  Heading into today’s action, Pastrnak is tied with Alex Ovechkin for the lead with 47 with Auston Matthews just behind at 46.  (Leon Draisaitl is in the mix as well with 43.)  So it’s certainly quite possible (if not likely) he loses the lead at some point.  Having said that, I think he can get the title as long as Boston doesn’t start resting players down the stretch and with the lead they have in the Atlantic Division, that’s certainly a possibility.

While scoring is up a bit compared to a few years ago, it’s extremely tough to do so with any kind of long-term regularity.  Ovechkin, easily the best goal scorer of this generation, has only managed to hit the 50-goal mark in three consecutive seasons before dipping under that mark.  Boston’s top line is dominant, no doubt, so a repeat performance next year is certainly a possibility (assuming he stays healthy and gets there this season, of course).  But no, I’m not going to predict a lengthy run of 50-goal campaigns for him or anyone, really.  We’ve seen one 60-goal guy over the last decade (Steven Stamkos) and even Ovechkin has only gotten there once.  A lot has to break right to get there and I’m not prepared to put Pastrnak at that threshold just yet.

acarneglia: Who do you think Carolina will play in their Stadium Series game next season?

If I was picking the opponent for an outdoor game, I’d focus on the three Rs.

Rivalry: This one would normally come into play but I don’t think it does here as the Hurricanes don’t have any true rivals.  They’re still a relatively young franchise in terms of their time in Carolina and with minimal playoff appearances lately, they haven’t developed many that way either.  This one gets a lower priority than it would for most as a result.

Relevance: There’s a reason you seldom see out of conference matchups in these events.  While outdoor games can be a spectacle in themselves, the league is still going to want this to be a meaningful game.  A random Western opponent doesn’t have the same relevance in terms of the standings as an in-division or in-conference game would.  So I’d lean towards an Eastern opponent.

Ratings: Carolina has certainly been one of the more interesting teams in the league over the last couple of years.  But is that enough for them to be the focal point to draw ratings for this game?  Probably not.  Instead, the rights holder (NBC) will probably want a larger market team to be involved to help up the ratings.  Yes, that means Pittsburgh and Washington jump to the top of the list and perhaps New York (the Rangers, not the Islanders) as well.

If Carolina makes the playoffs this season, it wouldn’t shock me if they wind up getting Washington in the first round.  If that happens, I’d lean towards them getting the nod in a postseason rematch (the rivalry factor).  If not, I’d classify any one of those three Metropolitan teams as early favorites.

goosr: What is the Canadiens’ biggest move in the offseason?

I’ve been flip-flopping on this for a bit now.  With how disappointing a season that Montreal has had, it’s certainly reasonable to think that GM Marc Bergevin would be willing to take a big swing on his roster.  They’re hosting the draft which presents an opportunity to make a splash as well.

And yet, I can just as easily see a scenario where they basically do next to nothing this summer.  They’re expected to sign Alexander Romanov and Bergevin has all but said he’ll be on the NHL roster next season.  They’ll probably sign a new backup goalie.  But based on the confidence that Bergevin seems to have in this roster, he might think that those moves would be enough, coupled with some better luck on the injury front and the continued development of some of their young players.  (Jesperi Kotkaniemi taking a big step would certainly help in this regard.)

While I wouldn’t be shocked if they make a substantial trade, at this point, I think their biggest move this offseason may come from internal extensions.  Jeff Petry, Brendan Gallagher, and Tomas Tatar (even Phillip Danault potentially) are all looking at big contracts and they’re eligible for extensions in July.  Their biggest splash could very well be simply getting one or more of them signed to a big money, long-term extension.

The way that Montreal’s roster is structured, I think they’re a year away from really changing the core.  In the 2021 summer, they have three NHL forwards under contract in Jonathan Drouin, Paul Byron, and Nick Suzuki.  A couple (Kotkaniemi and Artturi Lehkonen) will be restricted free agents.  That number should increase when Max Domi (who would be my darkhorse candidate for a trade given Montreal’s young center depth) re-signs this summer and if some of the UFAs sign early but still, that’s a lot of roster spots up for grabs and they’re not all going to be filled internally.

If the opportunity comes to strike around the draft, maybe they do something of consequence but Bergevin’s faith in their roster and the way their contracts are staggered suggests to me the bigger changes may still be another season away.

ironcity341: If the Sharks would buy out Thornton, would he be eligible for the playoffs if he signed with a new team?

A quick point of clarification to start, buyouts happen in the offseason, not in-season.  The only way a player gets out of his contract once the calendar turns to September is via a contract termination.  Although Thornton conveyed his disappointment about not being dealt to a Stanley Cup contender, that’s not going to happen.

Even if it did, Thornton wouldn’t be eligible to play in the playoffs anyway.  For a player to be postseason eligible, they have to be on the Reserve List for that time when the trade deadline hits.  It’s not like the NBA where players can be bought out after the trade deadline and free agents can be playoff eligible as long as they sign by the end of the regular season (and weren’t waived or bought out after March 1st).  Whatever team they’re on when the clock strikes 2 PM CST on trade deadline is the only one they can play in the playoffs for.  It’s San Jose or bust for Thornton and given that they’re not making the playoffs this season, he’ll have to play for another year to get another crack at the postseason.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

The NHL trade deadline has passed and there are only a handful of games left in the regular season. Teams have fine tuned their rosters for a postseason run, or are looking forward to the draft lottery and offseason frenzy. Who are the real contenders for the Stanley Cup? Which deadline rentals will pay off? Who is best positioned to take a big step in their rebuild?

With those questions and many more in mind, it’s time to run our post-deadline mailbag. You can submit a question by using #PHRMailbag on Twitter or by leaving a comment down below. Make sure to get your questions in early and we’ll try to get through as many of them as possible when the mailbag runs on the weekend.

If you missed our pre-deadline mailbag, it was split into two parts you can read here and here. In the first, Brian tackled questions about the expansion draft, Jesse Puljujarvi’s future and Shea Weber’s health. The second took on the question of chemistry in a locker room, the Rangers’ goaltending situation and potential player holdouts in the future.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include the impact of prior chemistry affecting player evaluations, plenty of talk about the Rangers, how the inability to renegotiate contracts could result in more bridge deals down the road, and Detroit’s challenging situation surrounding Andreas Athanasiou.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check for it in last weekend’s mailbag.

sovietcanuckistanian: How much stock do you (or anyone in a front office I guess) put in chemistry amongst players in/at the minors level transitioning to the pros? I ask, because, I watched MacKinnon and Drouin play together in Halifax (QMJHL). The year they won the Memorial Cup, they had Martin Frk on their line (he seems to be doing okay for himself as part of the Kings AHL squad – but languishing a little at sticking with NHL opportunities). Would the Habs or Avs (or any team that has players that have juniors chemistry) target a player like that as an inexpensive deadline pickup? Or am I putting too much stock in such things? – Thanks for your insight.

To use Frk specifically as an example, both Montreal and Colorado have had ample opportunities to pick him up over recent seasons considering the frequency that he has found himself on the waiver wire.  At the very least, those two teams don’t seem to think it’s much of a factor.  Personally, I’m inclined to agree.

While players on the fringes of an NHL spot can sometimes turn around and lock down a full-time role, it’s rarely high in the lineup.  Chances are that the player you’re trying to find that chemistry with is higher in the lineup.  You’d have to be a team that’s well out of contention early on in order to have the willingness to put that fringe player in a key role for an extended period of time to see if the chemistry can be rekindled.  There typically aren’t many teams out of it early enough to do so.

In a lot of instances, a lot of time has elapsed between their junior success and the present day.  Look at Frk – his big year with Nathan MacKinnon and Jonathan Drouin was back in 2012-13, seven seasons ago.  All three players have had a multitude of linemates since then; lots has changed so teams aren’t realistically going to expect them to pick up where they left off after so much time has passed.

This isn’t to say that it’s entirely meaningless.  I think it’s something that could be used on the checklist when evaluating potential additions.  Having the potential – minute as it may be in some circumstances – is something that is a plus.  But in most cases, past chemistry from the junior level with a current player on the team shouldn’t be a significant factor in determining whether or not to bring a particular player onboard.

met man: Are the Ranger Russian goalies exempt from the upcoming expansion draft?  What are the criteria for exposure?

The league has already confirmed that they will use the same rules as they did for the Vegas draft.  That means that players on the first or second year of their entry-level contracts (or have two years or less of NHL experience) will be exempt.  This works out perfectly for the Rangers.

While Igor Shesterkin has plenty of professional experience, the NHL doesn’t view his time in the KHL as professional experience.  He’ll be wrapping up the second and final year of his entry-level deal so he is exempt.  Alexandar Georgiev will be eligible for selection but he’s certain to be the one that’s protected.  Henrik Lundqvist, if not bought out this summer, will be weeks away from unrestricted free agency so he’ll be left unprotected.  At this point, their biggest concern when it comes to the Seattle draft and goaltending will be finding someone to leave unprotected since at least one netminder under contract has to be left exposed.

It’ll be a great summer for veteran AHL  goalies this summer as two-year deals should be handed out to quite a few of them in order to satisfy that particular requirement.  Expect the Rangers to be one of the teams giving out that particular contract to someone.

pitmanrich: Has age finally caught up with Henrik Lundqvist or is it David Quinn/Lindy Ruff’s defensive system which regularly gives up 40+ shots per night to blame for his dramatic decline over last 18 months? Can he rebound and help the Rangers make the playoffs next year or is he a backup goalie nowadays?

I think it’s age more than anything else.  This season notwithstanding, Lundqvist has basically been New York’s undisputed starter for the better part of the last 14 years.  He had a pretty big workload in Sweden before coming to North America too.  He has had a great career but it is clearly soon coming to an end.  I think his days of being a number one, regardless of whose system is in place, are pretty much numbered.

Given how well he has played over his career, I certainly wouldn’t write him off entirely as a factor for next year as a backup goalie…if he’s still around.  With their pending salary cap issues, it’s certainly a possibility that the Rangers decide to buy out the final year of his deal which would save them $3MM on next year’s salary cap.  Considering he’ll likely still be the third-stringer if they hold onto Shesterkin and Georgiev, that may not be the worst idea either even though it would add $1.5MM onto the books for 2021-22.

CoachWall: I have read rumors that the Rangers are listening on Brady Skjei, which makes sense. He is a big ticket item and hasn’t lived up to the hype. What are you hearing?

Knowing the cap crunch that’s coming with Georgiev, Ryan Strome, and Anthony DeAngelo needing new deals (and perhaps fitting in Chris Kreider as well if an extension is worked out), GM Jeff Gorton is certainly going to be exploring all of his cost-cutting options and by default, that’s going to be Skjei.  His name has been in speculation going back to when he signed his six-year, $31.5MM deal but I don’t think there’s a move coming with him.

If they want to free up money, they can attach a draft pick or prospect to try to get out of (or reduce) Marc Staal or Brendan Smith’s contract.  As mentioned earlier, a buyout on Lundqvist gives them some wiggle room.  With due respect to those players, that frees up the money without taking away from the core like a Skjei trade would.

The Rangers don’t really have a replacement that’s ready in their system to take his place either.  While it’s possible (if not probable) that they’d receive a young defender as part of any trade return, they’re making a weak spot even weaker with a Skjei trade.  They’re looking to come out of their rebuild so moving him would set that back a bit.

Having said that, with the trade market favoring the sellers and players with term (Skjei has four years left after this one) drawing a lot of interest, perhaps there’s a deal out there that’s too good to be true for him.  But if they don’t get that, he’s probably not going anywhere.

MoneyBallJustWorks: Do you ever see players in the league eventually following basketball and NFL players in holding out for trades or new contracts if underpaid? Players like MacKinnon and Pastrnak certainly deserve more but seems like hockey players just are content to ride out the bad contract.

They probably aren’t content to ride out their below-market deal but they don’t have a choice.  Unlike the NFL, contract renegotiations aren’t legal in the CBA.  It’s part of the reason that I think we’ll start to see a few more short-term bridge contracts in the years to come.  While some players are okay with the extra security that comes with a long-term deal that sets them up for life, others certainly want to maximize their compensation and wouldn’t want to run the risk of being in a situation like this.

For what it’s worth, contract renegotiations are quite rare in the NBA; the trade requests in that league often pertain to other reasons (lack of playing time, a more desirable market, etc).  Hoops Rumors’ Glossary contains an overview of the very specific criteria required for a renegotiation to occur in the NBA.

tigers22: Red Wings trade AA to St Louis for a 2020 2nd round pick, 2021 1st, and a conditional 2023 2nd (1st rounder if Blues repeat as cup champions. Sound good?

It sounds great for Detroit but the Blues wouldn’t have any interest in that.  For starters, they don’t have the cap space to make a deal work (even with Jay Bouwmeester on LTIR) and considering the disastrous season that Athanasiou is having, that would be a significant overpay.  Last summer when he was coming off his 30-goal season, a first-rounder and another piece would have been about right in terms of trade value.  Now, they might be hard-pressed to get the second-rounder on its own (and St. Louis no longer has their 2020 second-rounder which wasn’t the case when this question was posed).

To say this year has been a disaster for him would be a huge understatement.  He just managed to reach the 10-goal mark this week and while plus/minus isn’t as big of a deal as it once was, being -45 in 46 games is ghastly.  It’s already in the bottom-30 among forwards in NHL history and if he keeps up this particular pace, he’d be within striking distance of the all-time low among NHL forwards (Washington’s Tommy Williams in 1974-75 had a -69 rating).

This presents a bit of a conundrum for GM Steve Yzerman.  Selling low is never ideal but Yzerman will need to decide if he’s part of their long-term core.  If so, then they need to get a long-term deal done this summer.  If not, Athanasiou would be wise to take a one-year pact which would put him within striking distance of UFA eligibility.  That won’t help his value either.  He’s an intriguing change of scenery candidate and, quite frankly, may benefit from it but when is the right time to pull the trigger on a trade?  It certainly isn’t going to be an easy call to make.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include how Shea Weber’s injury will affect Montreal’s deadline plans, where Chris Kreider could wind up, expansion discussion, the chances of RFA winger Jesse Puljujarvi being moved by the deadline, and how active (or inactive) the Flyers may be over the next week.

If your question doesn’t appear here, watch for it in next weekend’s mailbag.

bigdaddyt: What’s the chances that Weber is done for season/career? And what does Montreal do in response to either?

Since this question was posed, the Canadiens received an update on Weber’s status after he met with the specialist that performed his surgery back in 2018.  The prognosis was largely positive as they announced he’ll miss four-to-six weeks with an ankle sprain.  So it’s certainly not a career-ender which was being floated out there and if Montreal does manage to claw their way back into the playoff hunt, he’ll be back at some point.  (I’m not counting on that happening so I wouldn’t be surprised if they ultimately just shut him down for the season.)

As for what it does for Montreal’s plans, probably not a whole lot.  Jeff Petry’s name is out there but since the Canadiens have no intention of committing to a larger-scale rebuild, they didn’t have a lot of incentive to move him before this happened.  I thought Christian Folin, a right-shot defender, could be moved to a contending team looking for depth but given Montreal’s shallow right-side depth which extends to the minors, that isn’t as much of a guarantee now.  They’re certainly not going to turn around and trade for a right-shot replacement though.  Cale Fleury may get another look at some point as well.

Weber’s injury undoubtedly hurts the Canadiens but in the grand scheme of things, it really shouldn’t affect their plans moving forward on the trade front.

acarneglia: Where does Kreider end up and what do the Rangers get for him? How about Georgiev?

Given their trade history and the fact that the Bruins are known to be quite interested in Kreider, they’re a popular speculative destination for him.  I wouldn’t be shocked if he landed there either.  But I’m going in a different direction here.

The Avalanche have a short window to try to win before players like Cale Makar and Gabriel Landeskog need new, pricier contracts.  (Philipp Grubauer is also up at that time so if they go for a more proven goalie at that time, that’s another big cost on the horizon.)  They’re probably not going to land a legitimate goaltending upgrade so why not improve their strong spot instead?  They were in on Taylor Hall to an extent so they’re not against going for a rental like Kreider is.

New York isn’t necessarily just looking for picks and young prospects.  Given where they are in the rebuild, young NHL-ready players are going to be in the asking price.  Colorado has a couple of those that could move in a deal like this in Tyson Jost and Vladislav Kamenev.  They’re also in a pretty safe spot in the playoffs and have a quality prospect pool so moving their first-rounder shouldn’t be much of a concern.  I’ll toss out two scenarios here – if Jost is involved, it’s him and the first-round pick and that’s plenty.  If Kamenev is the player involved with the first-rounder, then I think there’s a lower pick involved (or comparable prospect).  Something like a 2021 fourth-rounder that upgrades to a third if he re-signs or the Avs reach the Western Conference Final.

As for Alexandar Georgiev, I don’t think he’s going anywhere now that Toronto made their move for Jack Campbell instead.  The market for goalies is typically soft at this time of year and with the Maple Leafs out of the mix, that’s one less potential suitor for his services already.  I don’t think there’s enough demand for New York to land a strong return and there’s no point in taking less than they want to merely get a deal done.  Get to the offseason with the three goalies and then reassess the situation at that time.

M34: With the expansion draft looming, one would have to think that teams need to be mindful of their assets versus their protection rights.

What does a team like Colorado do regarding a contract like Erik Johnson’s? He has a full NMC, but certainly the Avalanche do not want to be forced to use a protection slot on him. Is a buyout a realistic option or do they have to try and convince him to waive the NMC? Of course they would have to take a minimal return, probably retain salary, etc, in a trade scenario.

Also, what other players fall in a similar category?

Considering probably 30% or more of most rosters will change between now and Seattle’s draft in 2021, I’m not sure teams are really worried about that just yet.  Pittsburgh just went and added someone that they’ll need to protect in Jason Zucker but I suspect that didn’t give GM Jim Rutherford any pause before he decided to pull the trigger on the deal.  I expect that it will start to be a bit more of a consideration at June when a good chunk of the summer trading happens but until rosters are set closer to September and the free agents are all gobbled up, it’s not going to necessarily be at the forefront.

With regards to Johnson’s case, I don’t think they need to worry about that situation just yet (there’s a good chance their back end will look a bit different next June than it does now) but let’s dive into it.  They can ask him to waive it to allow him to be left unprotected.  That happened several times with the Vegas draft and that’s how Marc-Andre Fleury got to the Golden Knights even though he had a no-move clause in his deal.  A buyout would also be a possibility and would result in a $2MM cap charge (and payment) for four seasons presuming the move came in 2021.  Is that worth guaranteeing a protection spot for someone else?  Perhaps.  Given who needs new deals that summer to begin with, it’s an option that is going to be considered regardless of expansion and would be weighed against the potential for paying down the contract in a trade.

Other players that could be in that type of situation (bad contract needing protection) include Milan Lucic, Bobby Ryan, Brandon Dubinsky, Brent Seabrook, and Marc Staal.  Those are all among the 60 players with no-move clauses at that time.  But with another summer spending spree on the horizon, that list will undoubtedly grow between now and then.

@SnoopMinnis: Chances Oilers trade Puljujarvi at the deadline? Him and a draft pick for Spencer Knight seems like it makes sense for both teams. Panthers replace Hoffman or Dadonov next year with Jesse, they got BOB for 6yrs more, so Oil get future number 1 SG.

I’d peg the odds of Edmonton trading Puljujarvi as pretty low.  Yes, the restricted free agent is having a nice season in the SM-liiga but I don’t think he has really increased his trade value there.  If what teams were willing to pay for him months ago wasn’t enough then, it probably isn’t enough now unless the deal is of the minor variety.  In terms of standalone value, the best case scenario for Edmonton would be a second-round pick and that typically doesn’t get you more than a rental player on deadline day.  Is that enough to entice Ken Holland to move him?  Probably not.

As for the trade proposal, unless that draft pick is a lottery selection, I don’t think Florida would be interested.  One of the worst kept secrets in hockey last year was their expected pursuit of Sergei Bobrovsky so their selection of Knight was made with that in mind.  The timeline works in terms of a transition.  Knight should spend three years at Boston College, plus a year or two as the starter in the minors to get more reps in.  By the time he gets to the NHL, Bobrovsky will be more of a platoon option by then anyway.  Knight isn’t a luxury in that sense.  He’s the successor for the Panthers’ high-priced netminder and it doesn’t make much sense for them to deal him for a draft pick and a player that has struggled at the NHL level so far.

I also wouldn’t put Puljujarvi as a capable replacement for one of Mike Hoffman or Evgenii Dadonov.  Florida certainly won’t be able to re-sign both of them but there is a substantial drop-off between one of them and Puljujarvi, a player who had a lot of chances in a top-six role with Edmonton and couldn’t produce.  Whoever winds up with Puljujarvi (and at this point, re-signing with the Oilers is probably the best option for him even if he doesn’t want to go back), is going to be looking at him as more of a depth piece with the hopes that he can out-produce those expectations, not a top-six option that’s going to be counted on for 20 goals when he didn’t score that many over parts of three seasons in Edmonton.

mydadleftme: Do you think the Flyers can move anyone, or at least accomplish bad contract swaps. Lots of things suggest Gostisbehere would be traded but I cannot imagine moving that contract would be that easy.

I don’t expect a whole lot from Philadelphia between now and the trade deadline.  They’d like to add but with only a couple million in full-season cap room, that doesn’t allow for much more than a depth acquisition unless the other team is retaining close to the maximum 50%.  Nolan Patrick appears to be getting closer to a return as well so that should be a bit of an upgrade in itself once he’s up to speed.

I don’t think Shayne Gostisbehere gets moved but my reasoning is different than yours.  His knee is still bothering him after surgery and that’s going to give interested teams some pause.  With the potential that a knee injury has to affect his mobility, teams are going to want to see him in action and get some conclusive evidence as to how the surgery affects his game.  They’re not going to get that between now and February 24th.

His contract (which has three years left at $4.5MM after this one) doesn’t seem all that bad to me.  Yes, he’s two years removed from his 65-point season but he doesn’t need to produce at that level to justify that price tag.  A year ago, he had 37 points which is a decent return on that deal.  Looking at it that way, this is his only real down season.  That shouldn’t be enough to scare teams away entirely on its own.  If Gostisbehere can return this year and show that there are no ill effects from the surgery, there’s a move to be made but it will have to wait until the offseason at the earliest.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.