Say what you will about the current NHL playoff system — and there’s a lot not to like about it — but it did provide some intriguing races to the finish line, both in terms of the teams that qualified for the postseason and the matchups we’ll get in the opening round. The top two wild cards were especially intriguing. In the East, the Tampa Bay Lightning have a playoff pedigree, while in the West, the Nashville Predators made an unexpected run to the Stanley Cup Final as a No. 8 seed in 2017, the same as Florida did a year ago.
Last year served notice that making the playoffs and seizing the momentum of an 11th-hour push can produce unexpected results. Florida finished 43 points behind Boston before upsetting the Bruins in the opening round.
Similarly, the New York Rangers and Carolina Hurricanes feel like heavy favorites against the Washington Capitals and New York Islanders, respectively, especially since the Islanders managed only 29 regulation wins all season. Twenty-nine! In 82 games. Buffalo, New Jersey and Pittsburgh all had more.
Maybe Patrick Roy is a miracle worker, after all. Can they pull off an upset? History says yes, of course. That’s why they play the games.
Still…
Carolina, nicely settled into second spot in the Metro, looks as dangerous as they’ve ever been. Sometimes, a team that knocks on the door as often as the Hurricanes have finally crashes through. It’s easy to forget that Carolina’s start to this season was as rocky as Edmonton’s; its identity was missing in the early stages of the season. But with Freddie Andersen sharp in his return and Petr Kochetkov looking like a viable 1B if Andersen gets injured, they’ve looked like the more traditional, well-oiled Rod Brind’Amour machine.
Those of us who embrace chaos would have loved to have seen the Penguins overtake the Islanders to grab that third spot, which would have given Jake Guentzel an opportunity to face his former team in the opening round. Delicious, if it had materialized! Sorry it didn’t. Seeing Sidney Crosby on the sideline for the second year in a row just doesn’t feel right.
Right now, with the regular season over, the league is neatly divided in half. On Saturday, the playoffs begin, with 16 teams all thinking that — in an age of parity — they can win. The other 16 are already plotting strategies for what happens next.
The Sabres, a team that should have been better this season but again couldn’t get it together, have a critical decision to make: who to bring in to replace Don Granato as their next coach. Someone with Todd McLellan’s pedigree? With Dean Evason’s? McLellan’s ability to take the Los Angeles Kings out of their rebuild and get them competitive might make him an attractive option. He can bring structure. It’s why he’ll probably be at the top of more than one team’s list to interview, once the coaching carousel begins to spin.
Just as teams are asking important questions internally, readers also pose these questions, frequently.
The intricacies of team-building seem endlessly fascinating to them — and, in many ways, have almost trumped the results of the actual games.
Moreover, the questions that cross my desk aren’t always related just to the teams preparing their postmortems in the days to come. They’re even focused on the teams that still have a chance to win the Stanley Cup, presumably because the playoff field will be sliced in half two weeks from now.
So, for example, one very sensible query related to Elias Lindholm and his future, after he landed with the Vancouver Canucks in a trade with Calgary this season. The question was: Can you see a world in which the Lindholm contract expectations exceed what GMs are willing to offer, thus causing him to sign a one-year deal, similar to John Klingberg’s with Anaheim?
The short answer is, yes, that could happen, but a lot will depend on if Lindholm can/will adjust his expectations — because they’re almost certainly going to have to drop.
But, briefly, the background that led to the query in the first place.
Back when Klingberg’s contract with Dallas was expiring, and he was one of the NHL’s most productive defensemen, the Stars tried all season to get him signed and the two sides just couldn’t come up with a number that worked for both.
Ultimately, Klingberg thought he could get more on the open market because traditionally, talented defensemen who (at that point) were playing No. 1 minutes usually struck it rich on the open market. Never mind that there were also flaws in Klingberg’s overall game, that teams in recent years were a little more reticent to wildly overspend, and that when he didn’t hit the financial home run he expected, he bet on himself by signing short-term in Anaheim and hoping to elevate his worth next year.
It didn’t happen. Instead, the bottom fell out of Klingberg’s game. When he signed another short-term contract with Toronto this past summer, it was clear the dream of the long-term, big-money deal was gone. He bet on himself — and lost.
So, back to Lindholm. Before trading him to Vancouver, Calgary worked earnestly to get him to sign an extension. The sense was that he just wasn’t willing to budge off his ask, which was around the Bo Horvat number of eight years at $8.5 million per season. In the end, they couldn’t hash it out.
As with Klingberg before him, Lindholm turned down guaranteed money by placing a bet on himself.
Presumably, the question is coming up now because Lindholm hasn’t done anything in Vancouver to suggest any team would commit Horvat-like money and term to him.
In fairness, it’s easy to understand why Lindholm wants to get paid. Overall, he’s returned value on his last contract — six years, $29.1 million, a $4.85 million AAV, which he signed with Calgary soon after he got there in a trade with Carolina.
If teams were convinced the real Lindholm was the one who tied for 27th in league scoring, with 82 points in 82 games, during the 2021-22 season, playing mostly with Johnny Gaudreau and Matthew Tkachuk, there would almost certainly be some suitors prepared to meet his asking price.
The problem is, the rest of the time, Lindholm hasn’t been nearly that productive. Even if you might like his overall game, and his work in the faceoff circle, that’s a pricey add for a player who turns 30 this year and projects as maybe a 60-to-65-point scorer. And the problem for Lindholm in accepting a short-term deal is: What if it goes wrong, or even starts slowly, the way it has in Vancouver with Lindholm? Does that — Klingberg-ish — drop the number even further?
The X-factor in all this is team need and the fact that top-six centers so rarely hit the open market as free agents.
If a team badly needs what Lindholm can offer — and we’re talking Boston here, and maybe Columbus and a few others — and that creates a bidding war, well, then maybe he gets his payday this summer after all.
And, of course, for any rental or recent add, a lot of goodwill can be salvaged with a strong playoff, because teams will always pay a premium for a player who produces when the games matter the most.
So, there are a lot of asterisks, moving parts and what-ifs still at play here. But unless Vancouver is celebrating with the Stanley Cup in two months, you can probably put the Lindholm sweepstakes at or near the top of any list of fascinating offseason storylines to monitor.
Hurricane watch
Let’s circle back to where we started, with the Hurricanes, because another reader wanted a prediction about Guentzel’s future in Carolina — and wondered if he would re-sign there and, if not, who he might sign up with.
It’s another juicy topic for a completely different reason — because Guentzel’s adjustment to Carolina has been the opposite of Lindholm’s in Vancouver. It’s been about as seamless as it could get. Remember, Guentzel was officially still injured (recovering from a broken finger) but was pretty much ready to go by the time Carolina scooped him up for what seemed like a bargain-basement price from Pittsburgh at the deadline.
Carolina has long been looking for one more true finisher around the net to take some of the pressure off Sebastien Aho. Guentzel has been all that and more — 25 points in 17 games is an astonishing pace. Guentzel may be the most productive trade-deadline acquisition in NHL regular-season history.
Like Lindholm, Guentzel signed his most recent contract in 2018.
Like Lindholm, he’s probably outplayed it — it was five years at $6 million per season.
Carolina is in an enviable position, cap-wise, compared to many of the other legit contenders, with only $5.4 million total tied in goaltending for next year (with Freddie Andersen and Pyotr Kochetkov both signed). Seth Jarvis is having a breakout season, and he’s a restricted free agent, so that’ll be an intriguing negotiation. A year ago, they were prepared to pay Dmitri Orlov $7.75 million, but that was only on a two-year commitment.
Would they give Guentzel both the dollars and term he would need to get the deal done? I think yes. Ultimately, if Guentzel goes to market and creates a bidding war, someone might be willing to pay more than Carolina might. But the risk then is, the next stop isn’t nearly as good a fit as the current one. The problem is, most of us like to believe past practice often dictates how a team will operate in the future.
Jake Guentzel has enjoyed an excellent transition to Carolina. (Bob DeChiara / USA Today)
It’s why not everybody was willing to believe the Hurricanes would bid on Guentzel — because historically, they haven’t wanted to give up value for a rental. Then they did, shifting organizational course.
Presumably, they had it in their minds that if the fit was as good as it’s turning out to be, they would find a way to get an extension done. Obviously, the picture will be a lot clearer in two months, when we see if the 2024 edition of the Hurricanes can do what previous editions were unable to do: raise the Stanley Cup. If they’re celebrating in June, and if Guentzel is a big part of the reason why they’re celebrating, this looks like a long-term fit.
The Dubois conundrum
Then there was this question, about Pierre-Luc Dubois, from a reader who wondered why the Kings traded for him in the first place and noted: “He seems to lack the heart you need to be successful. I read a rumor that Boston was ready to trade Ullmark for him — is that true? I can’t believe Don Sweeney would do that. What do you think of Ullmark to Jersey for Nico Hischier?”
First off, when L.A. acquired Dubois last summer, I thought the Kings were the perfect landing spot for him.
So, wrong right away.
He wasn’t happy in Columbus. He wasn’t happy in Winnipeg. But how could he not be happy in L.A.? A good team, with great structure, that can’t be pushed around, with leadership from Anze Kopitar and Drew Doughty and one possible flaw: iffy goaltending.
The Kings had two lines that were thriving: Kopitar with Adrian Kempe and Quinton Byfield, and Phillip Danault with Trevor Moore and Victor Arvidsson. The thought was they needed to get somebody to play with Kevin Fiala, who’d been playing mostly on the third line up until this year but was a key piece on the power play. On paper, it made sense.
On paper, it added up.
The problem is, as we always like to say, the game is played on the ice. Fiala and Dubois just didn’t mesh. Whether it was style or personality, they couldn’t make it work. The dilemma for the now former coach of the Kings, Todd McLellan, was: Do you stick with what isn’t working, or do you try to change it up? Fiala eventually found a home on Danault’s line, when Arvidsson was injured, but it left Dubois with a couple of inexperienced wingers.
Dubois had a recent uptick in his play, which coincided with Danault’s five-game injury absence. Danault is now back. The Kings initially tried to play a more up-tempo style under the new coach Jim Hiller, but that didn’t work at all, so now they’re back focusing on McLellan’s 1-3-1 system and they seem to be playing better.
My faith in Dubois is wavering, verging on completely gone, but that doesn’t mean NHL teams, such as the Bruins, necessarily agree. When he’s engaged, he can be a force, physically and otherwise.
Ullmark for Dubois was apparently discussed. My sense is it’s the sort of trade conversation that can be revisited in the summer, when both teams know how 2023-24 ultimately turned out.
PL Dubois hasn’t worked out the way the Kings hoped last offseason. (Gary A. Vasquez / USA Today)
As for Ullmark to New Jersey for Hischier, I mean, the answer is a flat no.
Ullmark doesn’t have nearly that value. Hischier looks like an untouchable — in many ways, a young Kopitar. You’d be lucky to get Alexander Holtz for Ullmark in a trade with New Jersey. In the end, Ullmark might be fine going to L.A., provided the Kings extend his contract, which can’t happen until after July 1. He’s got a year left at $5 million.
Habs alert
And finally, someone offered up a “who says no: trade suggestion that I just had to address, in which the Kings would send Dubois (and retain $1 million in salary) to Montreal in exchange for Brendan Gallagher and Josh Anderson.
I’m answering this, in part, because I had a similar thought involving Calgary’s Jonathan Huberdeau and the possibility that Montreal would take on Huberdeau’s $10.5 million annual salary, with about $2 million retained, for Gallagher and Anderson, who are also overpaid and seem to have their best hockey behind them.
If Calgary hadn’t signed Huberdeau to that massive extension soon after acquiring him, the thought was Montreal would be in their bidding for his rights when he became a UFA. Of course, interest in Huberdeau was much higher when he was coming off a 115-point season rather than the disappointing 55-point season he put up a year ago. Even though the perception is that Huberdeau’s play this year has improved, the reality is, with 52 points going into Thursday’s finale versus San Jose, he was likely going to finish with even fewer points this year compared to last.
All three contracts are as ugly as they come. Gallagher is 31 and has three more years after this at $6.5 million. Anderson is 29 and has three more years after this at $5.5 million. Injuries have probably damaged them going forward, though both have been relatively healthy this year.
Healthy but not productive, Gallagher had a decent finish in the last couple of weeks to get to 31 points in 77 games. He averages just under 14 minutes per night. Anderson, meanwhile, got to 20 points in 78 games while playing approximately 15 1/2 minutes a night. It’s a lot of money and term for essentially two bottom-six forwards who do have some useful intangibles, especially as it relates to leadership and physical play.
So, not entirely without value.
Huberdeau, meanwhile remains an excellent passer, and even as his confidence has flagged, he is well-liked and respected by his teammates. This is crucial. If he was aloof and me-centric, he’d be impossible to move. He’d fit in Montreal, and there is a part of me that suspects playing for coach Martin St. Louis would be a good thing for him. The problem is simply the contract. It’s easy to forget, but this is only Year 1 of that eight-year deal. Huberdeau played his first season in Calgary in the final year of his Florida contract.
So, seven more years at $10.5 million. He’s 30. He turns 31 in June. Even with some money retained, it’s an overwhelming dollar figure and term.
I used to think some contracts were untradeable, and then L.A. found a way of ditching Cal Peterson, and both Nashville and Colorado found a way of moving on from Ryan Johansen, so I no longer believe that.
Where there’s a will, sometimes there’s a way.
But it will take two bold GMs willing to roll the dice on a deal that could backfire on each in a meaningful way. And unless one of the GMs is Philadelphia’s Daniel Briere, I don’t see a lot of others with the backbone to try it.
(Top photo of Elias Lindholm: Jeff Vinnick / NHLI via Getty Images)
