PHR Mailbag: Keller, Salary Cap, Free Agents, Josi, Konecny, Draft, Rulebook

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include a discussion about the impending spending frenzy, Roman Josi’s future in Nashville, next week’s draft, and more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s mailbag.  We also have one more to run from the most recent call for questions so it might be in there too.

jason830: Is Clayton Keller an option for the Blackhawks to trade for if he is available? Also, would pick 19 plus some prospects entice the Coyotes to trade him?

It’s fair to wonder if Arizona might be inclined to move Keller.  GM Bill Armstrong has said previously that he envisions the team being about halfway through the rebuild.  In other words, they’re a few years away from trying to contend.  Keller has five years left on his contract so three more non-playoff seasons would mean they’d be holding onto him for two years of hopeful contention.  Logically, you could sway me on moving him for someone that better fits their timeline.

That said, they wouldn’t be looking for draft picks to trade for him.  If they were, I expect they’d be aiming considerably higher.  Remember the Alex DeBrincat move from the draft last year?  I fully expect they’d be asking for more than that if they were moving Keller.

Chicago isn’t at the point yet where it’s time for them to start moving draft picks and trying to contend.  That’s the time for them to go after someone like Keller.  Arizona, meanwhile, is probably looking for players more than picks so I don’t think there’s a mutual fit for a trade.

NSco1996: Do you think the NHL will address the LTIR/No Salary Cap loophole to add better quality/more expensive depth at the deadline for the future playoffs? As a Blackhawks fan, it more notably seemed to have started with them in 2015 with Kane, 2021 Kucherov and Stamkos, 2023 Mark Stone. All three teams added good quality depth that they otherwise couldn’t afford with their high-price star not counting against the cap.

First, this isn’t just an NHL decision.  The salary cap and the rules that pertain to it are collectively bargained between the league and the NHLPA so any changes would need joint approval.  At first glance, I don’t think this a topic that’s going to be remotely near the top of the list for new Executive Director Marty Walsh to look at.  Frankly, I don’t think they’re upset about the loophole either as it allows players to go to a Cup contender that wouldn’t be able to otherwise which some would be quite happy about.

I also don’t think there’s much of an appetite from the teams to do something about it.  Yes, it’s a tiny loophole (which isn’t so small now as it has been exploited enough that you can drive an 18-wheeler through it) but at a time when many teams are cap-strapped, they’re probably not going to want to close something that they might need to rely on depending how their injury situation goes.  So if the league isn’t getting pushed to look at it and the NHLPA isn’t inclined to change it, it’s not going to get addressed.

For fun, though, let’s say they’re open to the idea.  How do you do it?  Do you put a rule in that says if a player is on LTIR after the trade deadline, they have to miss a certain number of playoff games?  That might seem like the easiest way to do it but what about the player who legitimately suffers a two-month injury right before the trade deadline, lining them up for a first-round return?  Such a rule might help eliminate some of the more overt exploitation but it might punish the teams who are legitimately in that situation with a valid injury timeline that matches the start of the postseason.  That probably isn’t going to get the support from NHL teams at the least.  As far as fixing it goes, it’s easier said than done.

WilfPaiement: Why do GMs continue to be their own worst enemy when it comes to a player’s worth? The latest example would potentially be Tyler Bertuzzi who reportedly is looking for term and $7 million a season.  His resume thus far tells me he would be 3 at 3 at best.  Anything after that is just plain dumb!!!!! Don Waddell recently stated he’s not against bringing back Pacioretty, just ridiculous. What kind of bad money will they throw at Toews and Kane?

This is pretty commonplace around professional sports.  Managers want to improve their team and when you have the same teams bidding for the same impact players, dumb moves are going to happen.  Add that to the expectation of a higher salary cap in the near future and it’s a guarantee that there are bad signings on their way next weekend.

As for Bertuzzi, your valuation of him would actually represent a cut in pay compared to what he has made in the past three seasons.  That’s probably not going to happen.  Yes, injuries are a valid concern and that will probably prevent him from getting what he’s asking.  But he’s asking for a contract that’s high enough to justify him not seeing what’s on the open market (where he’ll be one of the more sought-after players, no less).  He’s not taking himself off the free agent list for an underpayment; he might not even do it for a fair-market deal.  I don’t think there’s any chance he gets $7MM and I’m skeptical that he gets max term.  But right now, why not see if Boston is willing to play ball on one of those ends?  There isn’t much risk to doing so.

I have no problem with Waddell saying he’d be open to bringing back Max Pacioretty.  He didn’t say he’s open to bringing him back at $7MM again, just that they won’t close the door.  If Pacioretty winds up signing a one-year, bonus-laden contract, Carolina is a team that makes a lot of sense for him with the short-term cap space they have before so many regulars are up heading into 2023-24.  For the right price, that might be worth pursuing.

I don’t expect Toews to get a big-ticket contract.  If he decides to play next season, I think it will be a situational choice, one that allows him to play closer to home or try to chase one more Stanley Cup.  Those situations lend themselves toward a cheaper contract.  As for Kane, we’re in the middle of finalizing our upcoming Top 50 UFA list and while I won’t spoil the final number, I suspect you’ll find it above the value you think he should get.

GBear: If the Preds are going in a rebuild phase, doesn’t it make sense to move Josi? He’ll be on the downside of his career once the team becomes above average again, so why waste his prime years in a rebuild when you could get a huge return for him now?

Not every rebuild has to be a strip-it-down one with an extended buildup after that.  Going the route of trading Roman Josi would be the Predators tearing it down and starting a long-term rebuild.  Is that really what Barry Trotz signed up for when he takes over as GM next weekend?  I don’t know about that.  I’m not even certain that today’s trade is a sign in that direction; they might just be opening up flexibility to make a splash on the trade front at their hometown draft.

I’m also not convinced that the return would be as high as you might think it would be.  Look at San Jose and Erik Karlsson.  They’re the same age (born one day apart), are the top-scoring blueliners from the last two seasons, and are on long-term contracts.  And yet, what is the scuttlebutt around Karlsson?  To move him, the Sharks will need to retain a significant chunk of the deal and probably settle for an underwhelming return.

Yes, Karlsson makes roughly $2.5MM more but Josi has one more year left on his contract which doesn’t help his trade value.  If Nashville was going to consider seriously moving him, they’d be asked to retain a sizable chunk.  Even at $2MM per, that’s $10MM they’re paying for him not to play for the Preds.  Are they going to want to do that and tie up another retention slot long-term?  I’m not sure about that.  Even if they were, I think they’d get better offers than San Jose is for Karlsson but this is not a cap environment to move big money for big value.

If you’re moving big-ticket contracts right now, the cap space is a big part of the return, likely bigger than the asset value you’re getting back.  And if that’s all you’re going to get for Josi, holding onto him might be the smarter play.  There are only so many teams that can afford to be in on Karlsson and when goes, that list will get even smaller.  Accordingly, this might not be the best spot to move him.

Schwa: With speculation of Konecny being moved by Flyers, and it seeming like they are willing to retain salary, could you see the Rangers making an offer here/the teams working out an in-division move? Konecny plays a scrappy two-way game and is a solidified top-6 RW. Seems to fit Rangers’ needs if he can be had for the right price. 1st and a prospect for Konecny with 30% retained by PHI? Thanks!

I don’t think Philadelphia is in a spot to turn down better offers just to avoid moving him to a division rival, especially if they’re looking to bottom out for the remaining term of Travis Konecny’s contract.  If the Rangers were to make an offer and it was the best one, they’d do it.

Having said that, I’m not sure that New York would make a legitimate offer for him.  They have around $11.7MM to work with right now, per CapFriendly.  With that, they need to re-sign Alexis Lafreniere and K’Andre Miller, sign a backup goalie, and probably another defenseman and at least three more forwards.  As it is, they probably need to try to offload Barclay Goodrow just to accomplish that, let alone add Konecny, even at a reduced rate.  (And no, putting Goodrow into the trade won’t solve that problem as the Rangers would need to incentivize the Flyers to take that deal on.)

As for your proposal, it depends on the prospect.  From Philadelphia’s perspective, if they’re retaining 30% for two years, it better be an ‘A’ player, one of New York’s best.  Otherwise, they’re probably going to pass on an offer like that in search of a stronger one.

mhaftman7: Who falls the furthest in the draft? Who is taken early?

I’m going to assume this question pertains to who falls and goes early relative to their recent rankings.  Otherwise, the top few picks are pretty well known and I might have a better chance at picking lottery numbers than guessing who the final few picks will be.

For who goes earlier than expected, Swedish defenseman Tom Willander comes to mind.  Several of the rankings (which can be seen by clicking his profile link) have him around the 20s.  I wouldn’t be shocked if he’s the second defenseman off the board in the 10-13 range.  Then there’s Danish middleman Oscar Fisker Molgaard.  Many rankings have him in the middle of the second round but he turned some heads last month at the World Championship.  Even though he didn’t put up any points, he didn’t look out of place either.  It wouldn’t shock me to see him go in the 20s.

As for the fallers, I’ll stick to first-round options.  Russian blueliner Dmitri Simashev seems like a candidate for this category.  Some rankings have him as a top-ten prospect but with the extra uncertainty surrounding players from Russia, he could slide to the back of the first round if not out of the round altogether.  (Mikhail Gulyayev is another candidate in that situation.)  Then there’s Eduard Sale.  The Czech winger came into the season as a possible top-five selection but things have gone the wrong way since then.  Some rankings have him in the late lottery but it wouldn’t surprise me if he’s within the final ten picks of the round.

aka.nda: So, what’s the current status of throwing rats and water bottles onto the ice, rules-wise? I kinda dig the rats after the game or maybe on an actual hat trick, but isn’t it “banned” during the game? I agree with Eddie about the water bottles.

Let’s look at the Rulebook, section 63.5:

In the event that objects are thrown on the ice that interfere with the progress of the game, the Referee shall blow the whistle and stop the play and the puck shall be faced-off at a face-off spot in the zone nearest to the spot where play is stopped. When objects are thrown on the ice during a stoppage in play, including after the scoring of a goal, the Referee shall have announced over the public address system that any further occurrences will result in a bench minor penalty being assessed to the home Team. Articles thrown onto the ice following a special occasion (i.e. hat trick) will not result in a bench minor penalty being assessed. Refer also to Rule 53.7 when spectator interference occurs during a breakaway.

Officially, it’s not really banned, just not encouraged.  They’ll blow the whistle and issue a warning from there and only if it’s repeated could it result in a penalty.  I’ve seen the warning be issued before but I can’t recall ever seeing a penalty called for it.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.