PHR Mailbag: GM And Coach Candidates, Krebs, Free Agents, Ducks, Kings, CBA

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include some possible new options for head coaches and GMs, Anaheim’s disappointing summer, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s column.

Gmm8811: GM’s on the hot seat…Blake, Lamoriello, Yzerman. Coaches on the hot seat…Richardson, Lalonde, Huska.

Who’s the up-and-comers to replace them?

Let’s start with the general managers.  Mathieu Darche has been a finalist a few times now and has been in Tampa Bay’s front office for the last five years while increasing job duties along the way so he should be on that list.  One name that hasn’t gotten a lot of attention that could fit in this range is Paul Krepelka, his age (56) notwithstanding.  He has spent the last four years in Florida’s front office and was a long-time player agent before that.  We’ve seen a few former agents take on GM jobs so he could be a candidate to be the next one to do so.  Another one that isn’t necessarily a younger up-and-comer is Ryan Martin who has been an AGM in the NHL since 2010.  At some point, he might get a chance.  And as for Lou Lamoriello’s potential replacement when the time comes, that might stay in the family with Chris Lamoriello, a long-time executive with both the Islanders and Devils, seeming like a viable candidate with his father perhaps moving into an advisory role at the time.

On the coaching side, I’d first question the placements of Luke Richardson and Ryan Huska on the hot seat.  As long as Chicago fares a little better this season, I think Richardson is safe and with Calgary heading into a rebuild, a coaching change this quickly seems unlikely.

That aside, Jay Leach has been on the radar for a few years now and has interviewed a few times for the top job.  I don’t think it’s going to be too much longer before he gets that opportunity.  Marco Sturm was a finalist in San Jose and while teams will be hesitant when it comes to hiring an international head coach, the fact that Sturm has coached in North America for the last six years helps.  Seth Appert has been working his way up the coaching ladder in various leagues and will get his first NHL action as an assistant this season in Buffalo.  That might be the last box to check before he gets a chance to run an NHL bench in the next year or two.

Jaysen: Vegas bought low on Holtz and bet they could unlock some of his upside. Being a Habs fan, Montreal did have some degree of success with “reclamation” projects. I’m a big fan of Dylan Holloway and Peyton Krebs. Thoughts on how both players would fit into the Habs lineup, and the price to get them? Thanks.

So, as I was going through the questions last weekend, I thought to myself that pushing this question by a week was safe.  I wasn’t expecting Holloway’s situation to have any sort of activity until sometime in September.  Whoops…  With Holloway off the table one way or the other now (there’s a one-year trade moratorium coming from the date of Edmonton’s decision to match the offer sheet from St. Louis or not), let’s focus on Krebs instead.

While I get the idea of trying to add a younger piece as they’ve done the last two years, to be honest, I don’t necessarily see a great fit for Krebs in Montreal, at least in the role he has filled with Buffalo.  They have Christian Dvorak and Jake Evans in the fold on expiring deals this season that should fill the third- and fourth-line spots and while Dvorak probably isn’t being brought back after that, Evans could be extended at the right price.  Alex Newhook is still around and fared well down the middle down the stretch last season while Kirby Dach is back after missing all but four periods of last season; they’re likely going to deploy him down the middle on the second line behind Nick Suzuki.

Meanwhile, Owen Beck might be a prospect that forces his way onto the roster somewhat quickly while Oliver Kapanen is expected to get a look at training camp as well (but has to return to Sweden if he doesn’t make the team).  That’s quite a few bottom-six options and I don’t think anyone is realistically expecting Krebs to play higher than that in the lineup.  Where does he fit in on the depth chart then?  I suppose they could push Dvorak to the wing and keep Krebs at center but Montreal has a lot of pricey bottom-six pieces; adding to that group only complicates things further.

Here’s the other challenge.  Buffalo has no motivation to sell low on Krebs.  They have ample cap space and at 23, he’s young enough to fit in with their core group.  His next contract is going to be a low-cost bridge deal so they can afford to continue to be patient; sometimes, centers take a longer time to develop.  For perspective, I don’t think they’d move him for a second-round pick.  And if I’m Montreal, I’m not sure I’d move one of their first-round selections with the year he just had.  The Sabres’ price tag in a trade is going to be higher than what any other team could justify paying coming off a down season.  With that in mind, I don’t see a trade coming at this point.  Maybe midseason if injuries strike and if he struggles out of the gate again, then perhaps the asking price comes down to a more palatable point.

Schwa: Out of the top UFA names left – where do you see everyone landing? Are we expecting PTOs, waiting for training camp to start to shake out? Anyone heading to Europe?

I’m going to assume you mean ‘top’ as a relative term here as there frankly aren’t any true ‘top’ unrestricted free agents left.  At this point in the game, we’re looking at depth players, many of whom are going to be going the PTO route over the next four weeks.  But a handful might land a guaranteed deal so let’s make some predictions on those.

Kevin Shattenkirk – Edmonton – One way or another, the Oilers are losing a defenseman.  Whether it’s Philip Broberg to St. Louis from the offer sheet or moving out one (or both) of Cody Ceci and Brett Kulak to afford matching the offer sheet.  Either way, they’re going to need a low-cost depth replacement.  Shattenkirk plays the side they’re not as deep at, can still handle a regular third-pairing role, and plays an offensive style that complements the way Edmonton plays.

Kailer Yamamoto – Colorado – The Avs can’t afford much more than minimum-salaried players at this point but while I think Yamamoto could make a bit more going elsewhere, I could see him changing strategies and looking for a spot where he can better showcase himself in a winning environment over chasing top dollar.  It worked for Jonathan Drouin last year and Yamamoto could look to follow that path.

Tyson Barrie – Boston – The Bruins can’t do much until Jeremy Swayman signs but having Barrie be the type of role player that Shattenkirk was for them last season wouldn’t hurt.  There are question marks with Andrew Peeke after a tough season last year while Barrie could anchor the second power play wave behind Charlie McAvoy, lessening the load on Hampus Lindholm a little bit.

Players like Tony DeAngelo and Sammy Blais have been linked to the KHL although deals there haven’t materialized yet.  Probably a couple of others will ultimately determine their best fit for the upcoming season might be playing a big role somewhere overseas over the low-chance PTO route.  I could see some of the veterans (Max Pacioretty, Blake Wheeler, and Kyle Okposo, for example) retiring if they don’t get a guaranteed contract with a team they’re comfortable with going to.  As for most of the rest, they’ll probably have to work their way up from a tryout.

jminn: What the heck is going on in Anaheim? They seem to have failed at their desired offseason plans. Besides having a year under the belts of some decent prospects and a few new assistants, what other positive qualities are there to tout?

After landing a top-six winger (Alex Killorn) and a top-four blueliner (Radko Gudas) in free agency last year, it certainly sounded like the Ducks were going to try to do so again this time around.  And with due respect to Robby Fabbri and Brian Dumoulin (both added via trade), you’re right, they didn’t add those desired pieces.

The best thing they have going for them is their young core.  With Leo Carlsson, Mason McTavish, and Cutter Gauthier, they have three potentially high-end pieces 20 or younger that are expected to play key roles this season.  They have high hopes for blueliners like Pavel Mintyukov and Olen Zellweger, among others, as well.  (And that’s not even getting into a player like Troy Terry, a key veteran in the short and long term.)  Those are a lot of building blocks for the future.  It comes with growing pains and they’re heading for plenty more of them this season but that’s the big positive right now if you’re a Ducks fan.

I’ll also add the fact that they didn’t move Trevor Zegras as a positive.  While I question his long-term fit with the roster being what it projects to be in the near future, his trade value was far from being at its highest.  I expect him to rebound somewhat and boost that value in the process so if you’re looking for something to potentially look forward to for the upcoming season, there’s that as well.

I’ll be curious to see if Anaheim is able to leverage its considerable cap space (more than $21MM per PuckPedia).  While I’m sure there are budgetary elements in play here, I’m not convinced that the roster they have today is the same that they go into the season with; I could see them taking on another short-term veteran.  That won’t raise the ceiling for this group but it probably won’t hurt them either.

bigalval: What do you make of the Kings’ offseason? Can they make the playoffs in a tough conference? I think Rob Blake has done a terrible job as GM, your thoughts on the Kings?

I’m not a big fan of what Los Angeles has done this summer.  I don’t mind the Pierre-Luc Dubois for Darcy Kuemper swap from the standpoint of getting out of a bad contract while upgrading between the pipes.  (In a more defensive environment, I think Kuemper will bounce back pretty well.)  Of course, when assessing Blake as a whole, the other part of that trade (what they gave up to get him) has to be considered and, well, that makes it look a whole lot worse.

As for their other moves, Warren Foegele’s money is about right with how he played last season.  I’m skeptical he has another 40-point season in him but it’s a short-term agreement (three years) at least so that one’s okay.  Joel Edmundson’s four-year deal worth $3.85MM per season, on the other hand, was one of the worst contracts handed out in free agency.  When healthy, he’s a good blueliner.  But he has a long track record of back trouble; he only has one season where he came close to playing every game (and that was in 2020-21 when he played 55 of 56 contests).  That’s a contract that will hurt them in a hurry.  Meanwhile, the Quinton Byfield contract only gained them one more year of club control.  While it kept the cap hit more affordable, I wonder if a true bridge deal might have made more sense since they’re only getting the one extra year at that price.

Meanwhile, I think they can still make the playoffs.  They’re in a division with three teams that are going to be near the bottom of the league in the standings while Seattle is still a bit of a question mark.  If you’re going into a season as a safe bet to be top four in the division, you have a good chance at being a playoff team.  They’re not contenders by any stretch but they’re a Wild Card-caliber team once again.

That last sentence ties in well with my evaluation of Blake.  He has done well building a group that can get to the playoffs.  But getting to them and getting through them are two different things.  And I don’t think he has done well enough in the second part of that.  I don’t see the true upside to make them a contender and they’re way too good to bottom out and rebuild.  They’re pretty close to being a perpetual mid-ranked team.  If the objective is to get two or three home playoff gates, he has done well on that front lately.  But if the goal is to have a group that can go deep in the postseason, I don’t feel Blake has put together a group (or enough future flexibility) to make that happen.

Black Ace57: In the next CBA do you think the league will consider proposing any solutions to the advantage US teams in states without a state income tax are enjoying with contracts or anything to address the fact that it seems more and more Canadian teams are at a disadvantage attracting talent?

I think it’s a topic they’re quietly already looking at.  But don’t interpret that as a yes to the question.  It’s one thing to have some ideas but it’s another to have one that enough teams are going to be happy with.

And what is it based on?  Taxation levels vary from year to year between some states and provinces.  In theory, a system tied to that could see a team potentially have to move a player out that they can no longer afford due to a change in taxation laws in their jurisdiction.  And some would argue that tax levels aren’t the best measuring stick but rather the cost of living in each city.  There’s a whole other can of worms with trying to tie something to that.  Then you add in complications of seven teams having a good chunk of their revenues coming in a different currency and the variability that brings into play as well.  I’m not against the idea but in my mind, I can’t come up with a solution that doesn’t have about half a dozen holes that can easily be poked through it.

And as we all know, teams will look to find some sort of loophole or way to challenge or outright circumvent any rule that’s put in.  I remember when LTIR came into play that it was being hailed by some as this near-foolproof solution.  We all know how long it took before loopholes were found in that.  Putting in a rule that can be manipulated isn’t going to be a real solve so it needs to be pretty ironclad.  I don’t see that happening.

The other factor is that as it’s a CBA element, it needs to be ratified by players and owners.  Anything that takes away an advantage from certain teams isn’t going to be viewed favorably by those teams while some of the players won’t like the advantage being taken away either.  At the ownership level in particular, they need a two-thirds majority on the CBA, or 22 of 32 teams saying yes.  So even if a real fix can be determined, it only takes 11 teams saying no to take it off the table.

Never say never but I don’t see anything significant happening on this front in the next CBA.

I wander off: I’m curious to know if non-compete orders and union fees are involved in pro contracts and if so, how do those work in a state like here in Minnesota where it’s illegal to charge a non-union member union fees and non-competes are also illegal now.

Since I know the NHL does have their form of a union in the NHLPA.

Let me preface this by saying I’m not 100% sure of these answers.  But to the best of my knowledge, all NHL players are required to pay union dues and are part of the association upon recall.  Per the NHLPA’s site, the required union due is $30 per day.  There’s also the PHPA, who represents AHL and ECHL players.  Reading through an old copy of the ECHL CBA (current agreements from the PHPA are not public), a player joining the PHPA is optional while daily/annual dues are not publicized.

As for contracts, it’s a different situation compared to most people.  Players are on fixed-term contracts and at the completion of those deals, they are completely free; there is no non-compete.  For a lot of everyday people, their employment is continuous, not for a specified term.  Those employment arrangements may have non-compete or other clauses like that (non-solicitation of clients, for example), for a specific period, the enforceability of which is getting a little harder now.  But it’s not the same type of employment arrangement as a hockey player which makes it hard to compare.

Having looked through the standard 12-page contract, the closest I can find to any sort of non-compete language is section 2C which reads (emphasis is mine) that “The Player further agrees to give his best services to the Club and to play hockey only for the Club unless his SPC is Assigned, Loaned or terminated by the Club.”  Basically, you can’t play for another organization while under contract to a team unless that team loans or trades the player or terminates the contract (through buyout or mutual termination).  But when that contract expires, they’re free and clear from the old organization.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.