PHR Mailbag: Bounce-Back Seasons, McDavid, Breakout Player, Flames, Bedard, Demidov, No-Move Clauses

Topics in this edition of the PHR Mailbag include what type of point production could be expected from Connor Bedard this season, which teams could be interested in Calgary’s veterans, and much more.  If your question doesn’t appear here, check back in last weekend’s mailbag.

frozenaquatic: This is a question about expectations, both low and high: Who has a bigger bounce-back season, Matthew Beniers or Trevor Zegras? How do Leo Carlsson and Adam Fantilli stack up in their sophomore campaigns? And what do we really expect out of Pierre-Luc Dubois for the Caps in terms of production (what’s your prediction for goals and points)?

DigbyGuy: I would add Dylan Cozens to the bounce-back season question.

1) Between Beniers, Zegras, and Cozens, I’d go with Cozens.  The Ducks had a dreadful showing offensively last year and didn’t add anyone of consequence to help their roster.  Yes, there will be some improvement from their young core – including Zegras – but a bounce-back year for him might be staying healthy and getting to 55 points.  I think Beniers can beat his rookie-season numbers although I’m not expecting a huge jump past that.  I’d put him in the 60-65-point range.  Cozens has already gotten there before and I expect the Sabres to be more consistent offensively so I’d slot him a few points ahead of Beniers.

2) I’m concerned about the offensive situation in Columbus.  More specifically, the lack thereof.  The Blue Jackets have a very weak attack as things stand and even if Fantilli plays a big role, a big point total is unlikely.  I could see him around 50-55 points.  Anaheim’s situation, as I noted above, isn’t particularly good either but I’d put theirs ahead.  Add to that Carlsson likely playing on the front line (Fantilli probably starts behind Sean Monahan, their big offseason signing) and I think Carlsson lands around 60-65 points.

3) I think Dubois will primarily line up on the second line which is going to put his playing time pretty close (maybe slightly better) than it was with the Kings last season.  He’s also now on a team that doesn’t have quite as much offensive depth.  That should give Dubois enough runway to be more productive than he was a year ago but I wouldn’t put him at the level he was at with Winnipeg.  I think he’ll wind up somewhere around 22 goals and 53 points.

drew ford: There’s social media banter about Connor McDavid playing out his Oiler contract and signing back home in Toronto. Do you think this is a possibility?

Two years out from McDavid’s free agency, anything is technically a possibility at this point.  If things go entirely off the rails this season, he could very well decide that he wants to see what it’s like to play somewhere else and yes, his hometown team could theoretically be one of those options.  But the odds of that happening have to be quite low.

For starters, Edmonton is widely expected to be a contender this season and just inked Leon Draisaitl to a record-setting contract, declining to match two offer sheets to ensure enough money was available to do so.  This is a team that is squarely focused on winning now.  When you’re in an environment like that and having the type of success he has had, why leave?  If they were embarking on a rebuild, that’s one thing but there’s no indication they’ll be in that situation for the foreseeable future.

The other challenge the Maple Leafs would have is affording him.  Yes, Mitch Marner and John Tavares are on expiring contracts and if they were only replaced (or retained) on one-year deals, they could keep enough flexibility to be able to afford McDavid should he actually hit the open market in 2026.  I don’t see that happening so I’m skeptical they’d be able to afford the $16MM or more it’s probably going to take to sign him.  But again, it’s highly unlikely he makes it that far anyway.  Never say never to a hypothetical free agent situation two years out but let’s just say this is something I don’t expect to happen.

Nha Trang: Time for my annual question: who’s the guy who comes out of nowhere to be a major impact player this season?

Evidently, I’m getting worse at this each season.  The first time this question came up, I had Tage Thompson in his breakout year.  Then I went with Taylor Raddysh for 2022-23 and while he managed 20 goals, that wasn’t the same level of a breakout.  Morgan Geekie was my pick last season and although he had a career year with 39 points in 76 games, that’s not a true breakout.  (I did get a reasonable return on one of my two longshot picks though with Michael Carcone getting a 21-goal campaign after just having six career NHL tallies heading into the year.)

For 2022-23, I put in a self-imposed criterion that a player couldn’t be in the top 300 in scoring.  Otherwise, that player wouldn’t exactly be coming out of nowhere.  I’ll continue to stick with that despite it making this question a bit more challenging.

My initial thought to this question is Montreal’s Kirby Dach.  He’s coming off yet another injury-riddled campaign but he showed some positive signs when healthy in his first season with the Canadiens.  He also now has an intriguing winger in Patrik Laine.  If the two of them can stay healthy (and that’s a big if on both fronts), it’s not out of the realm of possibility that Dach could push for 60 points which would be a new personal best by a pretty big margin.  That’s not quite a Thompson-like leap but it would certainly flip the script on him being an underwhelming top-three pick to an impact player.

Jaysen: I’m not an expert by any means but I can sense that the Flames are about to enter a full-scale rebuild, even though they might not say it. Kadri has been rumored to be available. But that Huberdeau contract is nearly impossible to move. I’d keep Weegar, for now.

What are your top three destinations for both Kadri and Huberdeau, and what would be the best trade return for both players that could benefit the Flames? And for Huberdeau, let’s propose a return where the Flames retain and one where they don’t.

DigbyGuy: I would add Rasmus Andersson to this as well.

I’m going to cover Jonathan Huberdeau first as the answer here is pretty quick.  With him making $10.5MM through 2030-31 and coming off two seasons with a point total in the 50s, there isn’t one viable trade option for him let alone three.  That contract might be the worst in the league.  Could there be a fit with maximum retention?  Possibly but the return wouldn’t be anywhere near enough to justify the $36.75MM in actual money they’d have to pay Huberdeau not to play for them; ownership probably isn’t signing off on that type of move either.  Maybe there would be an option three or four years from now when the term isn’t as bad but right now, that’s not a movable contract.

Nazem Kadri, on the other hand, has a viable trade market should GM Craig Conroy choose to pursue it.  At $7MM for four years, it’s a bit pricey for a second liner but there’s always high demand for a center.  Winnipeg comes to mind as a good fit as they’ve been looking for a consistent second center behind Mark Scheifele for a while.  Minnesota would be another fit although they’d need to wait until next season to do it (or Calgary would really have to pay down the cost) to make it work within their current cap situation.  But they’re another team that hasn’t had a consistent number two option for a while.

For a third team, I’d put Chicago which might seem strange at first glance given the prospect depth they have down the middle.  But those prospects might be a couple more years away and at that point, Kadri becomes a high-end third option, one they can afford since they’ll have so many players and prospects on likely below-market contracts.  But as they look to get through their rebuild, they will need some capable veterans.

As for a hypothetical trade scenario, there are way too many elements to consider here.  Can they retain?  If so, how much?  Can they take money back?  If so, how much?  How full-scale of a rebuild are they going for?  That determines the preferred type of assets to acquire (draft picks, junior-aged prospects, or pieces close to contributing now.)  Each answer to each question would modify the trade proposal and that’s too many variables to get through in a piece like this for three separate teams.  The short answer is that if it’s a full-scale rebuild (and I’m not convinced it is), get the best combination of assets possible regardless of whether they’re near-ready pieces or ones that are five or six years away.  You can always find short-term stopgaps (bridge players as I call them sometimes) to fill out a roster or hold a spot to allow a prospect to develop properly so Conroy shouldn’t restrict himself to looking for specific types of assets.

Onto Andersson now.  If Calgary decides to move him, I imagine Conroy would get a call from about 15 general managers in about 15 minutes.  The contract is more than manageable ($4.55MM for a top-pairing player for only two years) and he’s a right-shot player to boot, the side that’s always in high demand.  The best way to answer this is as follows.  If you’re wondering about teams who might be interested, look at the standings on March 1st.  Pretty much any team within five points of a playoff spot at that time would be calling unless they’re a team already well-stocked on the back end.  Dallas and Nashville come to mind in particular; no, I wasn’t cherry-picking Central Division teams as landing spots on purpose, it just worked out that way.

bottlesup: With Bedard getting a year of experience under his belt and much more veteran support around him, is it possible to think he can hit a point per game this year?

Yeah, I’d say that’s a more than reasonable goal to try to achieve.  He wasn’t that far off the mark last season with 61 points in 68 games.  With the return of Taylor Hall (who missed all of last season) and the additions of Tyler Bertuzzi and Teuvo Teravainen, he’s going to have wingers who are much better fits to play on the top line and should be better at finishing some of Bedard’s passes.  If he stays healthy, 90 points is where I’d peg Bedard’s point total at for the upcoming season.

@3rdWorldGhost: I don’t understand why people are saying that Demidov is better than Michkov. I’m a @CanadiensMTL fan, but let’s be real, Demidov (I’m a fan) played great in the MHL, Michkov starred in the K. Very different levels of competition there. So, is this just media-driven?

I don’t think it’s media-driven at all.  We’re talking about two highly-skilled Russian prospects who were originally projected to be top two or three picks that slid on draft day taken just one year apart.  One went fifth, one went seventh.  They’re close enough that they’re going to be compared and some will have one ahead of the other.

One of the challenges with comparing the two is indeed quality of competition as you noted.  SKA St. Petersburg elected to loan Matvei Michkov to KHL Sochi, giving him a chance to play big minutes for a team that simply wasn’t very good.  That same organization felt that they were better off demoting Ivan Demidov down two levels to the MHL last season, a move that really didn’t make much sense then or now.  Just because Michkov lit it up doesn’t mean that Demidov wouldn’t have had he been afforded the same opportunity.  It doesn’t mean Demidov would have been as successful either but it does make it a lot harder to compare the two based on quality of competition.  Michkov having KHL success gives him some points in the comparison but it’s not the primary ranking factor either.

In the scouting world, it comes down to tools.  Frankly, both players have a vast and well-rounded toolkit of skills which is why they’re so highly touted.  Some scouts probably prefer Michkov, some think Demidov, who’s a year younger, will ultimately have the better skills.  It’s all in the eyes of the scout.  I wouldn’t read too much into a ranking pinning one ahead of the other; I’d say the general consensus is that the two are rated almost equally.

Jakeattack: I might be misunderstanding this, but what is the reasoning behind a player having both an NMC and a modified no-trade clause? Case in point, PuckPedia says that for Jonathan Marchessault.

In cases like this, think of the NMC as a NWC – a no-waivers clause.  If a player has a full no-move clause and nothing else, it’s a catch-all that prevents a trade or waiver placement without consent.  But if a player only has partial trade protection as Marchessault does, the addition of the no-move is merely to prevent a waiver placement.  This is actually fairly common around the league, especially for teams that are a bit stingier with how they hand out trade protection as Nashville is.

Photo courtesy of USA Today Sports Images.