The Athletic Hockey Show - Are the Red Wings at rock bottom?

Episode Date: October 5, 2026

The Detroit Red Wings, once the NHL’s model franchise, now find themselves in a precarious position with captain Dylan Larkin sidelined due to injury, and awaiting a requested trade out of Hockeytown, and with defenseman Simon Edvinsson back in Sweden awaiting a new contract. The guys discuss the latest out of Detroit and break down how their troubles could have been avoided in the offseason. Plus, reaction to Alex Ovechkin’s final season announcement, an uneven start for the Oilers, how Sasha Barkov’s potentially longterm injury will impact the Panthers and the Eastern Conference, and commissioner Gary Bettman saying the league could tweak no-trade clauses if issues continue to arise.Hosts: Max Bultman and Mark LazerusWith: Jesse GrangerExecutive Producer: Chris FlanneryProducer: Chris FlanneryWatch full episodes on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@theathletichockeyshowSubscribe to The Athletic: https://theathletic.com/hockeyshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Hockey Show. Hey, everybody, Max Bulbin here alongside the athletics, Mark Lazarus and Jesse Granger for another episode of The Athletic Hockey Show. A newsy day to discuss here. Before we do, I want to remind everybody to subscribe to the athletic hockey show on YouTube at YouTube.com slash at the athletic hockey show. You can find all of our shows there, including the live ones we're doing this season. Next one of those will be on Thursday, 3 p.m. Eastern time. But guys, we got a lot to get into. As we're recording this just moments ago, I don't know that this is a shocking news,

but confirmation that it is indeed Alexander Ovechkin's final season in the NHL. The Capitol is posting a video of him announcing that to his teammates. We've got some drama in Detroit. We've got a very, I don't know what to call the Edmonton Oilers here, but we're going to get to that in a little bit here. It's been a, I guess, hot start. They're in first place in the Pacific Division, but the way they've gotten there gives us quite a bit to talk about. But let's start in my neck of the woods here because every day now I wake up and wonder what

fresh hell awaits the Detroit Red Wings. This weekend, it took multiple forms. They're, oh, and two, they are getting sell the team chance at both of their home game so far. Dylan Larkin obviously got booed. We knew that one was coming. But the shocker was it was Elliot Friedman's report Saturday night about Simon Edmondson. He says that Edvinson now prefers a trade. I will say, I've talked to, I've reached out to people on all sides of this and nobody's really commenting right now on this. As a Friday, the Red Wings have said their priority is to sign Simon Edvinson. As we sit here Monday morning, I have no reason to think that that's any different.

I still think the Red Wings are going to make plenty of efforts here to sign Simon Edvinson. But it's just one thing after another right now, guys, on the Red Wings. Dumb it down for me, Max. What is the real holdup here? Do the Red Wings think they're going to hardball him into some super team-friendly contract? I mean, Tristan Lunoz just signed for six years at 7.2 million after 14 games. Louis Crevier just got four by four.

Zeeve Boyum got like nine and a half million over eight years on just potential alone. Like what does Detroit think they're going to ring out of this guy that's going to make them special and different? I don't know. And I think that the situation, if you treat it as just a negotiation and a vacuum like all these other ones, it's missing a lot of the meat behind this, right? Because the real problem, as I see it is, negotiations are complicated. And that's why teams spend their entire summers going to. through them. The Red Wing spent virtually none of their summer going through this because they spent it all looking for a general manager that they didn't decide to fire until July 15th, right?

And so that to me is kind of, you can't tell this story without going that far back. The Red Wing's didn't name Sean Horcoff interim general manager until two days before training camp started. So Simon Edmondson hadn't been negotiating this deal at all. And then you get to camp and he shows up without a contract, which I thought was pretty remarkable. Like, I don't know that many guys in the league are taking that step. And so, when he was there, that immediately signals to me this is going to be a simple negotiation. I wonder if the Red Wings thought it was going to be a simple negotiation on similar grounds. But obviously, it doesn't get done through the entire preseason. I kind of felt like at any given day, I mean,

I've had the pre-write of that story ready for. Actually, I've had it ready for months, but certainly since camp started, it's been updated and refreshed plenty. And it just wasn't coming. And then one day, Edvenson's locker is gone. The next day you see him pop up back in Sweden. Clearly, there's a frustration at the fact that it didn't get done. What I wonder is, and I think you're right to point out, Las, that like the way contracts are going, it certainly probably is startling. And I think the number probably changes over the course of like, if Detroit was in the back of their mind through the summer, kind of had a ballpark idea of what it is. It's very reasonable that that number could have changed multiple times, especially the later the summer gone, as we saw some of these big dollar

contracts get signed. Zeev Bouillon at $9.38 million, that's not. territory that we would see for guys who have as little track record with as, you know, moderate, modest of production as Eve Bueyam has had so far, even though we think he's going to be awesome. And that's just the new mold. That's what teams are doing. Same deal. Luno, a more extreme example of that, right? You're getting over $7 million for a guy who's played 14 games and I believe one career goal at the time he signed it. You can understand how that would warp the market. And so I think market factors are a part of it for sure. And I just think the timeline for Detroit is the biggest thing I keep going back to is they, they put themselves.

in this spot by wasting the second half of their summer that they should have been spending clearly solving this issue. We haven't seen the market changed this drastically in a long time. And it just feels like the earlier you sign a guy, the better the deal is going to be. Now, there are going to be mistakes made. But that's a player evaluation mistake, not a like market mistake. If you, if you end up signing a bad player who turns out to not be a good player, then it's going to be bad no matter when you signed it. But it just seems right now, especially like the Tristan Linot contract is wild. But if you wait a year, you're probably going to end up paying him more if he's good.

Like if you if you misjudge the talent, okay. But if these contracts are going up so quickly that it just seems like every GM that has waited on any deal has made a mistake. And that's just the way it feels. I've been racking my brain on this because I'm trying to like get inside. I always try to be very fair here. I'm trying to get inside the head of both sides. Like, what could there? Can you guys think of a big long-term contract out of ELC that has aged that badly?

Like, what's the worst case scenario here? Elias Patterson, right? 11.6. And I think that's market rate already, two years into it. And he's playing like it's so far to start the season here. But I think everybody wants that Nathan McKinnon contract, right? Where you sign a guy when he's still on the come-up and then he turns, he goes supernova, like in the first year of a seven-year contract.

I mean, Nathan McKinnon, when the Avalanche won the cut, up, he was making like $6 million a year. Like that's the dream, right? That's what every team is trying to accomplish here. They're trying to sign. It used to be you had to win when guys were on entry-level contracts. You had to maximize that window. Like a team like San Jose would be going out and going all in this year to try to maximize

that before they had to pay him. Now that the cap is a lot more flexible, there's a lot more room involved, it's about getting a really good contract. Doesn't be an entry-level contract. But if you can get a guy under market value while the cap is skyrocketing, you can do what Montreal did. which is get everybody locked up before things blow up, then you're sitting pretty and looking for,

and looking to win at that moment. That's what these teams are trying to do right now. But that's what I'm saying is that's what's mystifying about all this, right? Is it like when Lane Hudson signed his contract? Yeah, I think we thought that was like a fine number, but it wasn't viewed as some steal of a contract. That was definitely viewed as like, yeah, Lane got his money. And now, like, a year, is it a year later?

Are we only one year? Yeah, that's, that is a steel of a contract. So what I'm saying is like you might, it might be an uncomfortable number to, It might be 10, 10 and a half, 11 million dollars that I know seems gargantuan because that's 2 to 2 and a half million more than more at cider makes. But when the cap's $127 million, you're going to look back and be like, whew, good thing you got that guy locked up when you did because now it would have been 14, right? Like the cap growth environment, and I know that we're always only one real bad break away, but those bad breaks, like, I don't think you're getting another COVID stoppage where all the money into the gate stops for like a year. the way the cap is growing right now, and maybe the RSNs are a part of this, I just don't,

I'm struggling to rack my mind and find a example of a long-term deal out of ELC that aged badly. Like one of the ones that I used as a cautionary tale in the past was Josh Norris because he was so injury-prone. It's $8 million. Like, they traded that guy for Dylan Cousins. Like, it's fine. It's absolutely fine. It's par value for the player that he has, if not decent value for the player that he can be

if he's in the lineup. I can't find flops of this nature. Well, that's his thing. And we're such a long way removed now from terrible contracts being these huge albatrosses around teams next. You know, the Parisian-Sooter deals in Minnesota. Brent Seabrook in Chicago, Seth Jones in Chicago. Like these contracts, even if they're bad contracts, they won't kill you anymore.

You're not going to get sunk by one of these deals because the guys that are getting 18 to 20 million, they can't miss. They have already earned that. These guys that are getting like 8 to 12 million right now, Even if they're not great, even if they're just mediocre, if they're second pairing defensemen, if they're middle six forwards, you can withstand that now. You can survive that. This is the going rate. And teams playing a hardball and risk pushing a guy out, like a Simon Evanston, if you're playing such hardball that he might, and we, you know, we don't know.

But if he might want out, that's not worth it to save $500,000, $1.5 million. Take the hit. You can absorb it so much easier now than you could have. These GMs got to get out of the flat cap error. They're going to get out that mindset. And the key is that we're talking about young guys with runway here, right? When you talk about Phrisay and Souter, I still think those contracts can go bad. I think there's still going to be giant UFA bombs for guys that you sign when they're 29 right before they go off a cliff.

But these guys that are coming out at ELC, they're 22, 23, 24 years old. There's runway head. I think Simon Edvinson has not hit his stride yet, right? I think there's more offense in his game than he's shown yet. And I think he's going to be, you know, I'm not saying he's going to be like a number one defenseman. but I think he's got a very good chance to be a good number two, number three player. And you're saving so much elsewhere. And it's so hard to find six foot six guys that move and defend and can take the minutes that he can.

That I just think it's a hard one for me to understand why this is where the line is. The going rate for a number two or three defense. And right now is $8 to $10 million. That's just the reality. You have to accept that. Yes, that's right. So we'll see where it goes. I mean, I do think, like I said, I think the Red Wings,

remain kind of committed to trying to sign him. And going into the weekend, Sean Horcoff said as much. Obviously, that's Friday, and then this happened Saturday, but we will see where this goes. There's clearly bad blood building up over this, though. There's clearly going, even if he does sign, there's a hurdle to overcome, there's a trust, all that stuff. That's right.

This just all seems so unnecessary. It does come back to what you said, Max, that the Red Wings completely wasted their summer. They didn't get work done when you're supposed to get work done. This could have dragged out in August, and nobody would have bad an eyelash. We're in October and he's in another continent. Right.

It's a problem. Adam Fantilli dragged into training camp just like Edvinson did, right? And he didn't show up to begin with. But yet had all this kind of buildup. There was, I don't know. I'm repeating myself, but it's baffling to me. To me, like the bigger picture of this, it's, I think it's kind of a cautionary tale of like, it's not that everybody wants out of Detroit.

That's certainly not the case. This is, it's not Winnipeg. But this is a franchise that like, players used to trip over themselves to want to play for because of the history, because their original six, because it's Hockey Town. And I guess I would just say that this shows you what a longer than you expected rebuild can do to a franchise that used to be one of the premier destinations and can be one of the premier destinations very quickly if they start winning. But it just shows you that how important winning is and how a little extended rebuild that

took a little longer than you thought, all of a sudden, we're seeing the caps. who's the hometown guy wanting out of Detroit, and it's just nobody wants to play. Like nobody is tripping over themselves to play for the Red Wings, the way it used to be. Well, who were the model franchise, the model franchise of the 2000s was the Detroit Red Wings, the model franchise of the 2010s was the Chicago Blackhawks.

Neither of them has done squat in a decade now. This is what happens when you do a full-blown tear down. Nothing is guaranteed. It does not always work. No, not at all. All right, let's go to the Edmonton Oilers here now, because they are a team that I think, had a big spotlight on them coming in, and I think the spotlight has stayed right on them through the early going.

They're somehow at the top of the Western Conference here, mainly on kind of games played. But they're 2-0-1. They have gotten a point in every game here. The way they got there, I think I never would have seen coming for my Babcock team, right? The deficit to Vancouver, they come back but still lose in overtime. Then they play a 9-7 game against the Canucks right after that. They do beat Seattle 1-0. I think that's much more like what I expected Mike Babcock to try to take this team into when he got there.

Maybe that's a sign, but it's also the Seattle Cracken. Jesse, what do you make of this Edmonton team three games in? It's early. I'm not saying Mike Babcock was ever going to wave a magic wand and do everything overnight. But it's been about the strangest way for them to get to a 2-0-1 start that I could have imagined. Yeah, Mike Babcock had that great one-liner. He walked up to the podium after the win over Seattle when they gave up. a goal and he's like, didn't give up a touchdown. It's like you said, not how we expected this

tenure to begin. But it's, to me, what I take away is the defending is atrocious for the Oilers. It's obviously the first two games against Vancouver that I just watched Vegas play Vancouver last night and pretty unfreatening team. At least that's how they looked against the Golden Knights. And you watched them against the Oilers and you would have thought it's the most explosive offensive team and all of hockey because they didn't defend well. And then even the Seattle game that they win 3-1, Devin Levi had five or six, like grade A, 10 bell saves that that game could have been very high scoring also because they're just not defending well.

And everyone loves to talk about the goaltending. The goaltending is obviously an issue. Tristan Jari had an atrocious start to the season. Devin Levi had one good game and one not so good game, the one where you give up six in Vancouver. But to me, I mean, an elite goalie, can overcome that, but they clearly don't have that. They are going to need to help these goalies in order to be a good team. And right now, the defending, that's what I, that, the team defending, not just the defense. I'm talking the way there, the gaps are all screwed up in the

neutral zone because the forwards aren't applying back pressure so that when team, the defensemen have to back off because they have no choice. So then when a guy gets into the blue line, he can just stop and has all day to wait for the trailers and make plays. It's like, there's just no resistance when you watch the way the Oilers are defending teams. There's no resistance. It seems like teams have so many options to do whatever they want. And with an aging Tristan Jari and a goalie who's never really done this before in Devin Levi, who has potential, you are asking for trouble if you're going to defend that way. Well, far, far be it for me to defend Mike Babcock here, but this is a byproduct of such a short training camp in preseason,

right? I mean, when you have a new coach and you got some new players and, you know, you got a team that has work to do, there's no time to do that work. These teams practice me five or six times. all training camp, and they had to be short. They weren't like these three-a-day type practices because you had a conservative energy because there was a game right around the corner. And you only had your NHL team play maybe one, maybe two games. October hanky, hockey is always super, super janky, right? It's always messy.

We always see some of these high-scoring games. But when camp is this much shorter, you know, October hockey looks like September hockey, which was that Oilers 9 to 7 game, right? So I think the Oilers were set up to failure. I'm sitting here, watch. I just came back from the Blackhawks opening road trip. It looks like they've never played hockey in their lives defensively. They had no idea what to do in the defensive zone.

And when you have a bunch of young players and new faces that don't get time to work out the kinks, this is what it looks like. So that's part of it. But you're absolutely right. Like the defense is so bad. And this is what makes Edmonton's goaltending situation so frustrating if you're an Oilers fan, right? Because, you know, Stan Bowman's pointing to how, look how good Tristan Jari was when he was with the Penguins last year early in the year. And then, you know, we just need him to get back to that.

Well, it's really hard to play like that behind these Oilers. reason that he was like plus five GSAX in Pittsburgh and like minus 10 in Edmonton. It's really hard to play behind the Oilers, which makes having guys like, you know, this laundry list of mediocre goalies, Jack Campbell and Calvin Pickard and Connor Ingram and Tristan Jari, a broken Freddie Anderson. This is GM malpractice to keep putting these guys behind this defense. You either need to fix the defense or you need to get an elite goalie that can mask a lot of this and they just have done neither of that in Edmonton.

Can an elite goalie, you know, can that be the solution? Is it that simple? Absolutely. I feel like even the best goalies in the world if you're giving up odd man rushes like that. An elite goalie wins that game 9 to 4, 9 to 3, 9 to 7. The Oilers are going to score. They've got McDavid and Dryson. They are going to score.

You don't need a shutout every night. This isn't a torterellage. No, you don't need to shut out every night. A really good goalie can save what? What would Jesse? What was Jari in that? first game, he was minus four goal saved in one game. He was absolutely brutal. His five hole is as bad as I've ever seen an NHL goal. He's like he can't keep his stick in the right position.

He's opening his five hole when guys move laterally. It's brutal. I will say this. I don't think a goalie's going to come in and make the Oilers the Jennings trophy winner. No. I feel like it's Groundhog Day because I was, I swear to God, it was this exact time of year. I was saying if I was the Oilers, I would be trying to pry UC Soros away from the National Predators. Here I am a year a year later, and I still think that they should be trying to pry UC Soros away. I watch him play behind a bad defense every night in Nashville, and he keeps him in it. Now, I will say, Devin Levi against Seattle gave me a little bit of reason to hope that maybe he can be better than, he can be the best goalie they've had. I mean, Stuart, Seattle has a very

No offense at all. They did the other night against Edmonton, though. And everybody will against Edmonton because they can't defend. Well, that's my point. But to me, they need a goalie who can skate. And that's why I keep saying UC Saros, because the way they defend, the way they play is so up and down, back and forth. It's so fast. It's a fast brand of hockey, which is good when you have the puck.

It's bad when you don't have the puck because, but they need a goalie who can keep up with the play. And I just feel like Tristan Jari can't. Like it just seems like he's behind the play. He's chasing it. So even when he does make the save, it's like even he doesn't feel good about it until the puck hits him. Whereas Levi, okay,

I talked to a bunch of AHA goalie coaches that have seen him a bunch prior to the season. And they all told me like one of the issues is one goal turns into two, turns into three, turns into four. We saw that against Vancouver. However, he is a great skater and a good athlete. And in that Seattle game, and I know Seattle doesn't look dangerous, but they do against the oilers.

And he looked like he was keeping up with the play with his skating. And to me, it's like, okay, that's, that is check. That's the biggest box they need checked out of the goalies. Can he physically keep up with the play? And I think Levi can. Now, will he make the save? He's going to be in the right spot. Will he make the save?

We'll see. I'm not overly optimistic that he's going to come in and be the answer. But I, there are little, if you're an oilers fan out there, I will tell you, there were little things that I saw in that game where I was like, maybe that's the guy. and they should absolutely be giving him every chance to be the guy. This should not be a 50-50 rotation with Jari and Levi. Levi can't play every game,

but they should be, they should be doing everything they can to say, you are our guy, prove that you're not. They definitely need a better goal. That's not what I'm trying to say, but I said this about Babcock, too. I feel like we're still talking about how to fix like the 20, 23, 2024, 2025 Edmonton Oilers for the 2026-27 Oilers,

like makeup, right? Like the goalie and the coach might have been the difference in those teams. And I think that goalie and coaching will improve this team. But I don't see the depth on this Oilers roster to get there.

And look, they're 2-0 and 1, so maybe I'm wrong, but they've done it against Vancouver and Seattle. I don't think that a goalie alone solves the problem of the depth of this team.

I just, I'm not there. Yeah, they play two of the five worst teams in the league over these first three games. Let's dial it back a little bit. Let's see what happens when they play,

you know, Vegas or a Dallas or a Minnesota. A team that's going to stop them from scoring nine goals, right? And granted, they beat Seattle 1-0. But like, I think a team that's going to lock them to three, sorry, three-one. I think a team that's going to lock them down is not going to have a problem scoring three, four goals against this team, even with a good goalie in net because they're leaky.

And I think if they're still going to lose a lot of four-two games that way, three-one games, three-two games, things like that, right? And that's my concern on the Oilers. Goalie would help. Of course. They have a terrible goaltending situation and have for years.

But I just don't know that it's enough. I just keep hearing people talk about the Oilers like they're still Stanley Cup contenders. How? I mean, yes, Leon Drysidal has won a series

on his own and Connor McDavid has won a series on his own. That's why, I guess. But I don't know how anybody could look at this team. Look at this bottom six. Look at this back end and look at this goalting situation

and think this is any... San Jose might finish ahead of them in the pie. I'm not even that high on the sharks like most people are. Like, this is not a good hockey team. This is the most top heavy team I've ever seen in my life. This is two phenomenal All-World Hall of Fame players dragging a team into the fight every day. And you can't win like that.

They are missing Hyman and Nugent Hopkins right now, which is, I mean, that's probably the like third and fourth best players of the team. That's true. This is not the full version, but I totally agree with everything you guys are saying that this team certainly doesn't look like one of the best teams in the Western Conference or in the NHL right now. and there's a lot of ground that they have to make up, and it's hard to see how they're going to make it up defensively. Like I just mentioned those two guys, like, they're going to be good and Hyman's going to score some goals, but like New Jeune Hopkins is a solid 200 foot player,

but they aren't like coming in to like turn this team into a shutdown. Like it's the defense is very concerning. And I agree with Mark that I think Anaheim, San Jose have both looked very impressive. I know they lost to the Rangers last night, but I thought Utah has looked like they've taken like to me, Utah looks like they have tiered up. They are last year, they were clearly not in the tier of Colorado, Minnesota, and Dallas, but they were a good team.

This year, I think they're absolutely in that tier with those teams in the central. And it's like all these teams in the West are getting better. And the Oilers appear to be slipping down the pecking order for sure. Although not all the teams in the Pacific. So they have that going for them. Like, I was looking at their upcoming schedule and there's still plenty of these games that look like kind of cupcakes because they get to live in the Pacific. I am curious to see them play San Jose.

and they have a couple against Utah on tap that I think will be real good measuring stick-type games. Let's take a break right there. We'll be right back. All right, we're back. And like I said, off the top, Alexander Ovechkin makes it official, and the capitals make it official this morning that it is his last season. I don't think anybody's surprised by this news. But, Laz, what was your reaction seeing it?

I was surprised he actually said it because he's been so wishy-washy about over the years that, you know, I guess he wanted to avoid a situation like last year. My mind went to a place you expect my mind to go to, frankly. I keep thinking of like, remember when Derek Jeter retired, and every single stadium he went to in that last year, he would be feted at the pitcher's mound, they'd give him gifts, all these things, and what a great player, what a great guy.

Alex Ovechkin's one of the biggest stars in the history of the game. He's the greatest goal score in the history of the game. This is a monster, monster name that generally speaking is quite popular, but a couple weeks ago he shows up in a prehist. pro-Putn group ad. There's a lot of heat around him right now. He is not, he's kind of ducking the questions on it and, you know, kind of getting all

mealy-mouthed with his answers. I'm wondering if teams are going to maybe not do the whole farewell tour thing just to avoid any kind of, you know, optics that their fan base is going to turn on. This is a big deal. He's in any, if not for any of that, he would be getting that. And I'm wondering if the league is going to kind of just, you know, give him a little like, you know, show him on the Jumbotron at the first TV timeout and say, congrats to Alex Ovechkin on a great career and that's it.

Right. I agree with you because I think that if you, if the question was, will fans care? I think the answer is probably no. Like there will be some that care, but you're not going to, he's not going to step into an arena and get a bunch of booze because of everything that's happening. No, he would have been the case for years because this has been his thing for years. Right, right. So I, but, but the people who are deciding the, the PR staff and the intertons,

team in the arena that is deciding what kind of presentation are we going to put on here that are thinking about these types of things way more than the average hockey fan that shows up to a hockey game is there definitely is a question of what they will what what lengths they'll go or not go just because of the the sidebar conversation around the greatest score of all time is it worth it to them to make a big show of loving this guy like where's the what's the what's the cost analysis of doing that right now that's the PR thought Well, what will happen is it's going to be dictated by whoever the first teams that have to decide that are. Right.

So there's some divisional opponents in there. So, like, their next road game is at Carolina. And then I think that is actually the last time they go to Carolina this year. And Carolina, because they played them early in the season as well. So I guess Carolina gets to kind of set the tone on that. And then I think other teams are going to kind of follow the lead. There's a lot of home games for the Washington Capitals early in this season. October 29th at Nashville.

You could argue that, like, the Carolina one might even be too tight of a turnaround. But the early teams are going to set the tone on this. And I think that my guess is there's going to be some that will do it no matter what. Well, you think about what the penguins did at the end of last season where the games didn't matter. And Sidney Crosby sat out a home game to rest so that he could honor Alex Ovechkin by playing in the game in D.C. Like, that's how high in esteem this guy is held in the hockey world. But, you know, it's a discussion that comes up with him every few years.

His Instagram photo for years has been him with Vladimir Putin. And then he goes and he appears in this ad. it's just brought it back fresh and I wonder if players are going to show more deference to him than teams are. It could be, but I think there's some players where the, there's some teams where the players, you know, they're going to do as they think their players would do. So Pittsburgh is one of the teams that I was thinking of where I said some teams. I also wonder about Tampa with some of the big Russian players they have there. And like, does Tampa, you know, see fit to do something for Ovechkin?

But my guess is it probably won't be universal. I don't know. Washington's last game of the season is in Philadelphia. and that's a really welcoming fan base that just loves to show love for the opposing players. So I can't wait for that. They better make the playoffs. Let's just put it that way.

Do you think that knowing it's the Ovechkin farewell season? Like this Washington Capitol, there have been seasons in the past where like Ovechkin storylines have been the only interesting thing. This is not one of them. Like this Washington Capitals team. No, but he is beloved within that locker room

and these guys are going to want to send him out on a high. I think it's just one more feather in Washington's cap that, all right, not only are we pretty good and we had this great offseason and we've got a great goalie, we've got to play for this guy. In that room, he is revered and worshipped. So they'll definitely be playing for him. Is that why he did it? Is that why he is, I mean, that's a reason to tell everyone, like the announcement, we saw it, the Capitals tweeted out, and it is a video in the locker room and Spencer Carberry, who's one of the most clever coaches, I'd say in the right now. You talk to the guy. It's like, this guy is brilliant. He introduces Alex Ovechkin to the team and has him do the, give the speech. Wouldn't be the worst idea to the team of destiny. We don't really talk about that this time of year. But once the playoffs get here, that's a phrase that gets thrown around a lot. Giving players a reason to believe that this is their year. I don't think it's the worst idea for the worst reason to announce it now. Well, for so many years, Ovechkin was the only purpose of the franchise, was just getting him the goals record.

right? Now that he's got the goals record, you've got to use him some other way. So here's your, your little extra motivation. And I think it does, you know, Ovechkin doesn't want to go and answer this question every city he goes to. Now that he comes out and says, this is my last year, people, you know, reporters, when he goes to Toronto, when he goes to him, wherever he goes, people will be asking him about his career retrospective, not, is this your last season? And I think that lends itself to better coverage. I don't think that's why he's doing it. But it's nice not to be asked that question everywhere you go. Yeah. Yeah, there's still a kind of a side show element to the farewell tour, but I think it is preferable to the uncertainty question,

to the uncertainty. Like, what is this going to be? And having all your teammates have to answer that one for a full year. Because like I said, none of us are surprised by this. I think we would have all said, yeah, it's got to be his last year. But getting it out there, getting out of the way, I think does something for the capitals. I did want to mention one on more thing with you guys here on the news side of things. And it's the Alexander Barkov situation here.

So he goes on LTIR. We still don't know the exact length of his injury. And this is a brutal one because coming into the year, I think so many of us, certainly me, were excited about the Florida Panthers. We're excited to watch them and really thought that they could return to the mountaintop this year with as deep of a team as they have. And certainly Alexander Barkhov at the top of it is a defining player. We're speaking a little bit unlimited information here. But what do you make of kind of where the Florida Panthers stand right now with the uncertainty around Barkoff last? I don't, I mean, the Panthers are still a very good team,

but we saw what happened when you take out that number one center. The dominoes kind of fall all around it. I just feel terrible for Barkov. I mean, I talked to him last month before the season started, and something he said really stuck with me, the way he phrased it. You know, I asked him, how hard is it to just sit out and watch a whole season like that and not be able to play? He says, it was hard, obviously, to be out, blah, blah, blah, blah.

It was just hard not to live life as a hockey player for the Florida Panthers. I think we underrate how these guys' identity is so wrapped up in their jobs. And a lot of people outside of hockey are like that too. You're just you are your job. But especially when you're an athlete, your whole life is about being that guy. And when you spend 10, 11 months not being that guy, you have like these existential questions about what am I? Who am I? What am I doing with my life?

And for him to come work his way all the way back and then two games into the season get injured again, I'm just gutted for the guy. Yeah, it's brutal. And like, it's not just the, like, the big picture questions, but just not being on the road with the guys. Like, that's just what they do. I cover the Golden Knights who, I don't know if anyone listening out there knows, but there's quite a few injuries on this team. And that's basically what everyone says to me when I talk to him is like, yeah, the injury sucks. Like the rehab is brutal. But the worst thing is not being on the road with the guys. I'm just at home, like just hanging out, doing nothing. That's, they feel like, like you said, their identity is tied to being a hockey player. They feel like I'm, I'm, I'm using. useless right now. I'm doing nothing. I'm not doing what I've been doing my entire life. And it is, it's brutal for Barkov. It's brutal for the Panthers. We don't know how long he's going to be out. But if he doesn't come back, it's like, to me, that completely changes the landscape of the entire Eastern Conference. Like, that is a team that they may still be a playoff team, but they are not what we have all been kind of expecting them to be this whole offseason, which is a wagon that no one wants to play. I know it's, or they went to California. They didn't

look like the same team. That game against Carolina opening night, they were smothering. They were smothering. The hurricanes who get 50 shots a game against everyone could not get a shot on goal against that team. Barcov goes down in California. They lose an overtime to the sharks. They go down to Anaheim. They lose an overtime to Anaheim. But it wasn't just the losses. It was they did not look the same. They were not this smothering defensive team. And it's like one player doesn't sound like a lot. But it's he is he's not just the physical like shut down what he does physically, he is the conscious of conscience of that team. Like, yes.

When, when you have a couple bad shifts, it's, I want Barcov on the bench telling everyone what they need to be turned around. And this isn't a shot at Matthew Kachuk, but he's not the one I want doing that. It's Barcov. Barcov is the one I want doing that. And it's just not, the team is not the same without him. And it really makes you think, like, you know, we're always focused on points and we're voting for the Hart trophy.

The Treats Bergeron should have gotten MVP votes throughout his career. And Alexander Barcov is the same way. is as important to his team as McDavid is to the Oilers as McKinnon is to the avalanche as Celebrini is to the sharks. He might not be a 130 point guy, but he is irreplaceable, absolutely irreplaceable. Nobody can do what he can do. And guys like that deserve more heart consideration. And maybe if and when Barkow comes back, we'll start looking to him more in that light in seeing what his value was in his absence. It's interesting because I've kind of felt for a while. The Selke Trophy is the best defensive

forward. And I think, you know, you could award that to like third and fourth liners if you wanted to because those are often kind of your shutdown core penalty killing guys. But I think we kind of vote on the Selkie in a way that seems like we're actually kind of voting on the most valuable forward, right, in the league, right? And I know that it's different, right? Nathan McKinnan, Connor McDavid, those are the best players in the world. But I do feel like when we look at Alexander Barkov and Patrice Bergeron and guys that, like you can say about Nick Suzuki last year who won the Selkie with 100 points. In a way, that vote, at least the way that I feel like the award has kind of evolved, I think in a way, we're all kind of implicitly saying like, this guy is the most important forward on his team or the most important forward to his team in the league, right? And again, if you take out Nathan McKinnon from the Avalanche lineup, they've got other guys that can score. They still got Cal McCarr. They've got Marty Natchez.

They've got Gabe Landis God. There's a lot of talent there. But when you take away one of those guys, those two-way lynch pins, everything falls apart. The entire lineup crumbles around them. It's the Jonathan Taves versus Patrick Kane MVP debate. Taves was always the irreplaceable Blackhawk. When Kane got hurt, other guys could step up and score, but nobody could do what Taves could do. Those guys deserve more respect, I think, around the league.

And by the way, I think McKinnon could still get in that Selky conversation, too, right? The way we're talking about, this is not to slander the guys who are winning the MVP's. Headlined at this podcast, Max Boltman thinks Nathan McKinnon is one-way talented. No, you said that. I'm telling. But the cane, Taves comparison, I think, is a little more along the lines of what I'm getting at, where, like, Nikita Kuturov is one of the maybe the best offensive player in the world, at least top two or three with McKinnon and McDavid.

But I think implicitly, we see that Alexander Barkov's absence is devastating in a way that Kutrov's would be two, but maybe not quite in the same manner. Interesting that the players have been voting for guys like Kuturov, though, more in their. It is. MVP award, too, with the Lester Pearson. So it's, it's, you know, they look at, they're not looking at Alexander Barkoff or Patrice Bergeron as top five guys either. So it's not just, it's interesting. It's just something I've noticed in the way that that that award has gone, because I often find at the end of the year, I look at the Selkie and I'm like, yeah, that's the guy you can't live without. Wait, so what's the MVP again, right? It's just kind of

a yearly ritual for me. All right, let's take a break right there. We're going to come back. We're going to talk about something a little bit bigger picture in the week. All right, we are back. And before we close today, I just want to talk about. something that Pierre LeBron wrote today about Gary Betman's comments last week on the no trade clauses. And Betman's comments guys here were I don't think that ought to step with what the conversation in the public has been this summer. As we've seen some of these trade requests go public for players who have no trade clauses and then are requesting a trade and also wielding this no trade clause to kind of steer it, right?

And what Gary Betman basically said last week was that that's not what they were intended for. They were intended as kind of a way for the players who are signing a long-term deal, maybe taking a hometown discount to have some security that in taking that deal, they know they're actually going to get to be in that hometown and stay there. I don't think that's all that controversial. But what he said was if it becomes a problem, and he also said one off season is not constitute a problem, but if it becomes a problem, it may be something they have to look at with the NHLPA. And there was a loud response from the NHLPA and from agents and even from some players. about the comments that Betman made. And so I just wanted to get your guys read on this because I'm one hand, I do totally understand where Betman is coming from with this.

And I think he's broadly correct that it's not the way that they were intended. But I also don't know that I think that constitutes a change, right? Like how many times have we seen teams see something in the CBA and use it in a way that maybe wasn't how it was intended? And it certainly doesn't seem to be a massive problem that they're doing it that way. Well, I mean, what Betman said and what Bill Daley said about a month. ago is factually true. If they wanted to address this, they would have to talk to the PA about it in a collective bargaining situation. That's just the way the process works.

So like, that's not inflammatory. Here's the thing. They're not going to get anywhere with it because the players don't mind this. The players don't care. The players aren't even mad. Like the Red Wings might not love that Dylan Larkin asked out, but the players understand. Same with Connor Hellebuck. Marseifle is still buddies with Connor Hellebuck. He's not mad at him. He's standing by him. He's disappointed. But this is what Connor Hallibuck has earned. He earned this, he negotiated this, and he doesn't want to be there. He has the right to move on. The players, to a man, think that this is fine.

And that, you know, would they love to see these guys be open to getting traded to more than just one or two teams to allow their teams, their current teams, a chance to recoup something? Sure. But nobody on the player's side thinks this is a problem. So even if the owners had a problem with it, it's going to go nowhere. These are, this is a completely self-inflicted situation by owners and Gns. and not to pile on Stan Bowman today, but Stan Bowman started all this in the mid-2010s when he started giving out no-movement clauses like candy

to mediocre third-liners. Now it's just part of the negotiation. If you're a good player, you just get a no-movement clause. You need to ask for it. It's just included. It's baked in. So for now, for owners or GMs to be like, hey, whoa, whoa, whoa, we got to put the horse back in the barn.

You let you open the door in the first place. You don't get to complain about it. one of the key quotes I thought in here's story was J.P. Barry, one of the biggest agents in the NHL saying these no trade clauses are purchased. And like that's, you're mentioning like they're using them as a tool in negotiation. That's because that's how they keep the money down. I mean, and again, we keep going back to the flat, the effects of the flat cap era. And I do believe that that's probably the biggest reason that half the players in the league have no movement clauses is because when the cap was flat and GMs were just looking for any way to sign these players and not hit that threshold, they're like, okay, well, how about instead of $8 million a year, you get $7 million a year and we give you a no movement clause?

These aren't cheap purchases. These are millions of dollars that these players, in most cases, I mean, I guess in the case of a third liner, it might not be. But in the case of the star players who are kind of wielding these no movement clauses as weapons to get to whatever team they want right now, they paid millions and millions. of dollars for them, that they would have otherwise gotten if they didn't have this in their contract. So for owners and GMs to then say, you know what, I think we should, we don't want you to use them that way. We want you to use them the way that we want you to use them is kind of bull crap. I thought it was interesting that Ron Hainesie, who's the assistant executive director of the PA, said he thinks that they are working exactly as intended. And so maybe that does imply that like for the players, this was always maybe part of the, yeah, this is a perfectly

acceptable thing. It's not necessarily how I've understood the, I think the goal is so that you can't be surprised and caught off guard as opposed to I want to go here and this is the only place I'm willing to go, but I also want out. That is not how I've kind of always understood it, but maybe the players would disagree with that. And this is the reason why these things evolve, right? And the way player tactics and negotiating tactics evolve, the players aren't mad about their teammates doing this because they know it could be them one day. Yes. So nobody's going to want to give back on this. And I'll even push back on what J.P. Barry said about these being purchased. I think that is the case on the big ticket guys.

But GMs are just careless about this. Again, I'll go back to freaking Edmont and Stan Bowman one more time. He signed Jason Dickinson and Connor Murphy to five-year, $5 million a year contracts this summer, right? Connor Murphy is 33 years old and has a chronic issue with his pelvis bone where he is injured a lot because of it. He's dealing with a chronic thing. Jason Dickinson got hurt every three weeks over the last two years. It's just, he's had horrible luck. He gave them both no movement clauses.

They were paid a lot. These are third line and second pairing guys for five years, five million. There was absolutely no reason to give them no movement clauses. It's just what GMs do now. So you can't complain about it when you're the ones giving them out when they're really not smart. They're not wise from a strictly Machiavellian, pragmatic, dogmatic, whatever you want to call it, GM standpoint. these are bad. No movement clauses are bad for you. And you're giving them to players who really probably shouldn't have them. And the management sometimes kind of makes sure, and maybe not

literally says it in their name, but there's times where players get shamed for wielding their no trade clause, right? I mean, I don't know that Colton Perrako got shamed per se, but I think the fact that we knew he was blocking that trade to Buffalo last year was not particularly fair to Colton Perrako, who is a cornerstone piece of the St. Louis Blues. And they never ended up actually trading him. You know, so that he wanted to stay. That's what I'm saying. That's how I view the. But I'm saying, like, if you're a fan and you're like, are you thinking, yes, he wanted to stay, he believes in us, or damn it, he's hindering our progress.

He's not letting us do what we need to do. So you're screwed either way as a player. If you use it or you don't use it, everyone's mad at you, right? Like, oh, he's selfish. Like, screw you. If you're up a player, give me all the control I can have because everyone is out to get me. Every team treats me like I'm chattel and is just trading me and uprooting me. Screw you.

Give me what I got. and I'm not going to give it up. And you guys mentioned it, but it's like how many things in the CBA have executives and like there are people on staffs that this is your job is like find loopholes for us to find ways to manipulate these rules in our favor. And I have no problem with it. Like it's this is a competitive. This is a billion dollar industry that is competitive that you're trying to win.

And if the teams are going to do it, then the players and their agents should also be doing, should be trying to find a way to make every rule work more in the favor of their client. And if them determining where they're going to be traded isn't the exact intent of how they came up with it, well, then you should have written it in the rule. Like, that's what we always say. When a team finds a loophole in the CBA, it's like, well, they should have written it differently. Well, it's the same thing for the players and their agents. I do think it's unrightable, unenforceable to do what I think Mattman is talking about here. If you say, oh, if you request a trade, then you immediately waive your no trade clause.

Players will just stop actually requesting a trade. they will walk right up to whatever that line is. And that'll be quite quit. Right? Yeah. Well, whatever it might be. But I do have kind of a proposal for how I think if they want to do address this. And it doesn't sound like the PA has any interest in addressing it, to be honest.

Barry's comments in particular, I think we're really speaking to that, Jesse, to your point. But if it was ever something to be addressed, this would be my pitch. And I want to see what you guys think of this. Players get a no trade clause. And to whatever degree they have the, like, number, if it's a full, it's a full. but teams and players can either work out either at the time of the deal or at the time a request is being made to waive it for a financial compensation for it. And if it's a three-team list, maybe those three teams you still get the bonus, but it's guaranteed versus the other teams. Maybe it's a higher tier of a bonus of like a one-time payout.

Like if you trade your no trade clause, you get a million dollars. That's how much we want to make this deal. Or you get $2 million. Or, hey, you have a list that says if you have to go to Winnipeg, you get $4 million or whatever, right? I think that there could be a financial structure in place that could at least make the players feel whole. Because if the idea in particular is that you took less money on the contract because you were signing this long-term deal with this franchise, well, then get it back. And I think that that would be the pathway. I think it's interesting.

I think most players would value their control over an extra. Like, these guys have a lot of money. And a million or $2 isn't going to make a huge difference to them. Well, they could still control. The owners will never go for it because they will not introduce outside money. money to this system. This is a closed-loop system of revenue. And if you start introducing external money that you can just throw on top of it, you open the door to all kinds of Pandora's Box from a GAs and owner's standpoint. I don't think they'd ever go for it. It's an interesting idea, but I don't

think the owners would ever allow it. Yeah, the league doesn't allow like contract restructures and it's along the same line. So it's something like that. Would you like, would you like, would you like, would you like to see the NHL do something? Like that could alleviate a lot of these issues. You hear this from fans all the time. And even like, you know, when players know, when players know they have a bad And they even feel bad of it. I've talked to guys that have been like, look, this is my contract. I can't do anything about it. Would you like to see the NHL allow contract restructuring mid-contract?

Or make it keep it all guaranteed? I think keeping it guaranteed protects kind of everybody in a way. I mean, I guess it doesn't really protect the owners. But in some ways it does. Because you see in the NFL, like if a guy's not happy with his contract with a year or two, then you get a holdout. And we don't really get holdouts in the NHL. Like we get contract disputes that spill in when a guy doesn't have a deal.

but by definition, that's not a holdout, right? You get holdouts when a guy has a contract and doesn't want to report because he wants a better deal. And I think that would, you know, a restructure would kind of open the door to that in the NHL and it would open the door to pressure on a player to restructure his contract that the team signed over to him. So that part I'm not into, and I think you're probably right that what my idea is a Pandora's box to that. From a player's standpoint, the only appeal of being able to restructure your contract is you can facilitate a trade that way. If you really want out and you want to go to a team that just doesn't have the money to fit you, you can say, I'd rather win than make my money. I will restructure. Like, that's where it opens up some kind of wiggle room there.

But again, this is a closed loop system that works. The NHL likes it this way. It's 50-50 revenue split. You know exactly how much money is in the bucket. And they do not want to start, you know, chiseling away at that. Bradded Sott basically did that last year, though, right? Like the Blues were going to send him to the H. And he said instead of going to the H.L.

How about we just mutually agree to destroy my contract? We'll tear it up. And then he went and signed with Vegas and was in the NHL and got to play all the way to the Stanley Cup final. So like there are other ways to do like specifically what you were talking about. But it's it's way more complicated that is in the NFL where they can just say, how about let's just redo this thing. Yeah. And you have to make it through waivers. I just think that like a bonus is a little different than like a restructure.

But you're probably right that they just don't want to introduce it. I could just see the logic. And you see with MLB even, like, if you, if you cut a guy early, like, sometimes you have like an early out and you can say, okay, we're not going to actually, we had an option on this deal. You're supposed to make $12 million, but we're going to cut you. But as a result of cutting you, we are going to give you $2 million. And there's something like to that that I just feel like there should be some kind of mechanism

like that. I don't know how much the listeners care about this, but I'm curious, do you guys, would you guys as people who cover hockey? because the way we cover hockey and the way we cover transactions and the trade deadline and free agency, it's so concrete. Like we can literally say this team cannot afford this player, therefore they're not going after him. In the NFL, that's like nonsense because the way they can, we'll just, we'll just restructure four contracts. The New Orleans Saints have been doing it for years. What do you mean? Like money is not a real thing in the NFL. We will just restructure every contract we have to. So that the team building aspect is only what do we need.

the money is basically not in the conversation, whereas in the NHL, it's everything. Like, that is the entire conversation around the trade deadline for every contender is how can they fit these guys in? What can they fit? What's better? Well, the thing is with the NFL, for it's certainly better what the NHL has because the money is guaranteed. Whatever you sign for, you're going to get every penny of that. In the NFL, you sign a $400 million contract. You might see $30 million of it. Like, that's just the way it is. So that's why I don't think we're going to see real change. I think the players, sure, they don't love a salary cap, but this system is good for them. Their money is locked in and guaranteed. And for GMs and owners, even if you think, you don't really

hear a lot of complaining coming about these skyrocketing salaries because it's a closed system. They're getting the money, so they have to give up the money. Like, their, Leo Carlson is making $18 million because the NHL is making a crap ton of money. So I don't, there's not really a lot of, you know, unhappiness around the league. There's, there's fan frustration with the trade man's and I fully understand that. Nobody wants to see their guys ask out. But the players are happy with this system more than they've ever been because the captain's going up.

And GMs and owners, this was the system they lost an entire season to get. And it's worked for them. The league's never been more competitively balanced. And, you know, we'll see as internal salary caps start, you know, entering the equation here. But everybody's generally happy with the way the system works. So that's why the last CBA was basically like, you know, rubber stamp. And you're going to see that for a while here because the system works.

Hockey's cap more than any others is designed in a way that prevents owners from ever being pressured to spend more than X dollar, right? In baseball, there's no cap. There is luxury taxes, but if you want to spend, spend, baby, spent, right? The NBA, yeah, they're going to tax you. You can go into the second apron, but you can do it, right? You're going to pay all these taxes. And you will hear fans pressuring their teams. Oh, what, are you scared of the second apron?

We can win a championship. The NHL never has to take, their owners never. have to take that kind of pressure as a result of their hard cap. And I think that's by design. Seriously, no, I've talked to a couple of GMs lately. Nobody's unhappy. They're like, this is, I ask you, wow, contracts are huge. It's like, yeah, well, we got the money now. This is, this is what it was designed to do. So, like, nobody is really unhappy with the system. Two guys demanding trades or three guys, if you count Kachuk, four, if you count Quinn Hughes. Nobody's, that's, that's a drop in the bucket, man. Everybody's making a lot of money and everyone's doing great.

That's right. All right. Let's end. it there. Good show today, guys. That's going to do it for us on this episode of the athletic hockey show. Sean, Sean and Frankie have you covered on Wednesday. And I'll be back, like I said, for a live show on Thursday at 3 p.m. Eastern. We'll talk to you soon.