Pro Hockey Rumors Originals

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Photo courtesy of Terrance Lee-Imagn Images.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Photo courtesy of Jeff Curry-Imagn Images.

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include a look at what has been a busy season for the Rangers on the trade front and what’s potentially to come, assessing Calgary’s notable trade from earlier in the year, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in one of our next two columns.

Cla23: If the playoffs started today which teams are Paper Tigers?

Assuming we’re not talking about the Wild Card teams, let’s look at the ones whose spots are more secure.  In the East, I don’t trust the Metropolitan Division outside of Washington (and even then, with it being their first real playoff run in a while, an upset wouldn’t shock me).  Carolina’s underlying numbers are always strong but they typically struggle to score in the postseason and are a weaker team on that front compared to the past.  I think they’ll get by New Jersey whose injuries are probably going to be too much to overcome but as a perceived contender in past years, the Hurricanes won’t get over the hump.  I could see any of the top three teams in the Atlantic coming out of that division so I can’t nitpick on them too much.

Out West, I still have some doubts about Winnipeg.  Connor Hellebuyck is a great goalie but teams have figured him out in the playoffs the last couple of times.  They still don’t have a true second center which is probably going to hurt as well.  On paper, I think they’re a weaker team than Dallas and Colorado and the Jets will have to go through one of them.  A long run for Winnipeg would be great for that market and core group but I’d be surprised if it happened.  In the Pacific, I’m leery about Edmonton’s chances of making it out of the division let alone the conference again.  I think they’ll get past Los Angeles assuming that matchup holds but their goaltending remains a big question mark, as does the secondary scoring.  Can their top group carry them again?  Sure.  Will they?  I’m not so sure about that.

The Duke: Is Devon Levi an AHL lifer?

Things certainly haven’t gone great for Levi this season.  Originally expected to see a lot of time with Buffalo and maybe a bit of time with AHL Rochester to get a few more games in, it instead has been the exact opposite.  Levi has a 4.12 GAA with a .872 SV% in nine appearances with the Sabres this season which played a big role in them going and reclaiming James Reimer from Anaheim early in the year.  That brings his overall NHL numbers to a 3.29 GAA and a .894 SV% in 39 games.  It’s certainly fair to say that things haven’t gone as planned for him so far.

But there is some reason for optimism with Levi still.  His numbers with AHL Rochester last year were stellar.  His numbers this season are reasonably close (a little lower of a GAA and SV%) and are still well above league average.  Yes, he’s playing behind a more veteran-laden team down there that’s good defensively but that tells me he can still bring something to the table.  People have been saying this for year but one day, Buffalo is going to be good again.  A lot will come from their core young blueliners getting better which just takes time and reps.  In a year or two when they’re better, it wouldn’t shock me if Levi performs a lot better for the Sabres.

Levi is still 23 and when you consider his first pro season was only a handful of games, it’s really only his second full professional campaign.  Goalies generally have a longer and more gradual development curve; Levi only has 59 AHL games under his belt so far when lots of good prospects get double that.  There’s still up to two years of waiver exemption left (though that will end once he gets into 21 more NHL games) so there’s still a fair bit of time for him to improve.

If it was me in charge, I’d be looking for another one-year stopgap option between the pipes to back up Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen.  Levi needs plenty of playing time and giving him that behind a defense that’s still going through some growing pains might do more damage development-wise.  A year or two from now, both he and Buffalo’s back end will be more ready and I expect he’ll fare better at that time.  Levi might not be their long-term starter of the future but I still think he’s going to be at least a capable NHL netminder down the road.

Schwa: Curious to hear your thoughts on Chris Drury’s attempts to ‘retool’ the NYR roster. I think he certainly blew up the locker room chemistry, but obviously cleared some bad contracts that he inherited.

– Do you see Kreider and maybe Mika (if he waives trade protection) moving out this summer? Seems to further prioritize cap at risk of further damage to the room? What kind of trade value do you see here – or is this an attach an asset to rid the contract?

– Also, thoughts on the D extensions, I feel Borgen has been better than expected, while Urho and Soucy seem to maybe block some AHL prospects/Zac Jones. Is K’Andre going to see an extension as well? Perhaps price dependent?

The ruthlessness that Drury showed unloading those bad contracts (Barclay Goodrow and Jacob Trouba) was something we rarely see.  It accomplished the objective of getting them off the books without any lingering effects which was good but it’s also ruffled some feathers, so to speak.  It wouldn’t shock me if that has played a role in some of their struggles, especially in the first half of the season but that’s obviously impossible to quantify.

The return for Trouba was pretty light but with freeing up the cap space being the key objective, it looks better in that lens.  The Kaapo Kakko trade was pretty underwhelming but getting someone that’s going to turn into a long-term piece makes that look a little better.  I didn’t mind the J.T. Miller trade from a value perspective although being a buyer with where they were in the standings is a bit odd.  But when the opportunity presents itself to get an impact player, you can’t turn it down thinking it’s just not the right time.  The return for Ryan Lindgren felt a tad light but if Juuso Parssinen turns into a decent piece, that can still be turned around.  I liked the Reilly Smith return a lot while the Carson Soucy trade was a bit of a head-scratcher.  All in all, it’s kind of a mixed bag.  Lots of change, a definite turn in the types of players they added, and in the end, they’re still largely mediocre.

Chris Kreider has two years left on his contract after this one with a $6.5MM AAV.  He’s not having a particularly good year but barring injury, he’ll pot 20 goals once again and we all know his scoring prowess from the previous few seasons.  Someone’s going to think a change of scenery can spark him.  Considering that he can play with a bit of an edge still, I think there’s a Trouba-like market for him.  Someone will take the contract on and New York could get a small something in return while getting out of the entirety of the deal.  But if they wanted to pay that down for a couple of years, I think they could get a decent prospect for Kreider’s services.  They won’t need to attach an asset to move him.

As for Mika Zibanejad, that one’s a tougher call.  He has three years at $8.5MM per season left which is a bit of a bigger ticket to take on, especially with his production dipping considerably as well.  That third year is the hard part as we saw with Trouba that teams will take on two for cheap.  But it’s not a deep center market in free agency and there will be teams who miss out.  Would one take themselves out of the mix early to take on Zibanejad for next to nothing?  I think a few might.  But Zibanejad has the hammer here with a no-move clause that takes doing what they did with Goodrow off the table.  If he limits his market to only a handful of teams that aren’t the best of fits, New York might have to retain some money, attach an asset, or take a multi-year deal in return to balance the money.  The path to move him will be trickier.

As for the defense extensions and acquisitions, that’s a mixed bag.  I like Will Borgen but I don’t like five years at $4.5MM per season for him.  With the year he’s having, I can’t see him beating that if he went to free agency.  He’s a useful player in the right role and good righties are hard to get but that extension seemed like too much, too soon.  Urho Vaakanainen for two years at $1.55MM also feels a little high for someone who is more of a reserve or depth player but it’s not terrible.  And adding Soucy gives them a pricey third-pairing option that cuts into money they will need to re-sign K’Andre Miller this summer.  I do expect him to get a one-year deal around his $4.646MM qualifying offer as his trade market will be weakened after a rough year.  He’s two years away from UFA eligibility so a bounce-back showing in 2025-26 could net him the long-term agreement it looked like he’d be landing not that long ago.

uvmfiji: Frost/Farabee trade. Woof.

So, let’s check in on the two newest Flames, shall we?  The results, well, haven’t been pretty.  Frost has two goals and four assists in 18 games while Farabee has three goals and two helpers in that same stretch.  For players who have shown themselves to have some offensive upside in the past (Farabee is only a year removed from tallying 50 points while Frost had over 40 points the last two years before this), it’s fair to say that Calgary was hoping they’d be able to contribute more than they have so far.

The fit with how Ryan Huska has the Flames playing is a bit of a question mark.  Calgary is a team that plays low-event hockey with lots of attention to detail on defense and positioning.  With a roster that isn’t the most talented on paper, that makes sense too.  But those two players weren’t exactly known for that with the Flyers so now they’re trying to learn a new system and play a little differently than they were before.  Accordingly, some early struggles may be disappointing but they’re also understandable.

I’d still do that trade from Calgary’s standpoint without hesitation today.  Yes, there’s risk in three more years at $5MM for Farabee but they have plenty of cap space with the Upper Limit rising quickly and if he can get back to his 2023-24 form, they’ll make out quite well.  Frost has another RFA year left and probably gets a short-term deal that buys a season or two of eligibility at a price tag that isn’t going to be a drag on anything the Flames want to do in the short term.  To get that for a pricey rental whose standalone value was quite limited (Andrei Kuzmenko), a player who cleared waivers at the beginning of the year (Jakob Pelletier), and a second-round pick, that’s still solid work from an asset accumulation perspective.  Meanwhile, we’ll see what the Flyers have planned for that extra cap space this summer.

Unclemike1526: What are the realistic odds that the Blackhawks can get Kantserov to come over from Russia next year? Asking for whoever the Hawks hire for a coach next year.

The realistic odds here would be slim to nil.  Roman Kantserov is signed through next season with Metallurg Magnitogorsk of the KHL.  Unlike most international federations, there isn’t a transfer agreement between the NHL and Russia so it’s not as if Chicago can sign Kantserov to an entry-level deal that supersedes the KHL one and pay a prescribed fee.

Now, if Metallurg was to release Kantserov early, then he could go and sign with the Blackhawks.  But he’s their second-leading scorer despite missing 21 games due to injury; he has 13 goals and 25 assists through 47 outings.  Knowing that, what would be their motivation to release him early?

Players can buy their way out of a contract but NHL teams aren’t able to contribute to that while Kantserov is obviously capped at what he can earn on an entry-level pact with Chicago so it’s not like the Blackhawks could up his offer high enough to cover the buyout that way.  So this doesn’t seem like a viable option either.  Maybe they work out something that says if he doesn’t make the NHL roster, he has to go back to the KHL (a European Assignment Clause); that’s about the only semi-realistic option there is.  But again, what incentive does Metallurg have to agree to that?

Realistically speaking, the earliest the Blackhawks will probably see Kantserov is the 2026-27 season.  KHL contracts now expire at the end of May and with all due respect to Chicago’s fans, I don’t think there’s much of a chance they’ll be playing into June in 2026.  More patience will be needed before he can come to North America.

Photo courtesy of Kim Klement Neitzel-Imagn Images.

It has been a busy last month or so around the hockey world.  The 4 Nations Face-Off came and went with plenty of success while the trade deadline featured several swaps of note with some teams willing to significantly shake up their rosters.  Now, the stretch run is upon us with several close battles shaping up for a playoff spot.

With all that in mind, it’s a good time to open up the mailbag once again.  Our last call for questions yielded enough for three separate columns.  The first focused primarily on the 4 Nations tournament as well as Kevyn Adams’ future as the GM in Buffalo.  Among the topics in the second were offer sheets and plenty of trade deadline talk.  Meanwhile, the third included a discussion on Chicago’s goaltending situation (which has since been simplified a bit), the old Tagging Rule, and more.

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.