The Hockey PDOcast - Episode 181: The Calm Before the Free Agency Storm

Episode Date: June 30, 2017

Jonathan Willis joins the show to discuss Connor McDavid's new contract and how much tougher it makes it to win when you're paying one player that much money (0:53), pushing your chips in and trying to go for it during his last cheap season (6:13), and what Leon Draisaitl is worth to the Oilers and why that makes him a prime offer sheet candidate (10:22). Then we preview this summer's free agent class by sifting through the available forwards, (26:01), defensemen (52:02), and goalies (1:08:42).  Every episode of the podcast is available on iTunes, Soundcloud, Google Play, and Stitcher. Make sure to subscribe to the show so that you don’t miss out on any new episodes as they’re released. All ratings and reviews are also greatly appreciated. Thanks for listening! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices If you'd like to gain access to the two extra shows we're doing each week this season, you can subscribe to our Patreon page here: www.patreon.com/thehockeypdocast/membership If you'd like to participate in the conversation and join the community we're building over on Discord, you can do so by signing up for the Hockey PDOcast's server here: https://discord.gg/a2QGRpJc84 The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the hosts and guests and do not necessarily reflect the position of Rogers Media Inc. or any affiliate.

Are you ready for the most ridiculous internet sports show you have ever seen? Welcome to React, home of the most outrageous and hilarious videos the web has to offer. So join me, Rocky Theos, and my co-host, Raiders Pro Bowl defensive end, Max Crosby, as we invite your favorite athletes, celebrities, influencers, entertainers in for an episode of games, laughs, and of course the funniest reactions to the wildest web clips out there. Catch React on YouTube, and that is React, R-E-A-X-X. Don't miss it. This podcast episode is brought to you by Coors Light.

These days, everything is go, go, go. It's nonstop hustle all the time. Work, friends, family, expect you to be on 24-7? Well, sometimes you just need to reach for a Coors Light because it's made to chill. Coors Light is cold-loggered, cold-filtered, and cold-packaged. It's as crisp and refreshing as the Colorado Rockies. It is literally made to chill. Coors Light is the one I choose when I need to unwind.

So when you want to hit reset, reach for the beer that's made to chill. Get Coors Light and the new look delivered straight to your door with Drizzly or Instacart. Celebrate responsibly. Coors Brewing Company, Golden Colorado. Regressing to the mean since 2015, it's the Hockey PEDEOCast with your host, Dmitri Filipovich. Welcome to the HockeyPedioCast. My name is Dimitri Filipovich.

naming me is a familiar face, a familiar voice. Jonathan, what's going on, man? Hey, Demetri, just getting set for a free agency like everybody else, I think. Have you gotten any sleep since the last time we had you on last week? I have, you know, it gets a little bit easier with each passing day. So, yeah, I'm eager to do this and feeling on a curve relatively rested. That's all we can ask for. So we're going to get to, we've got a fun little free agency preview plan.

later in the show. But I thought a good place for us to start this discussion would be to look at the Edmonton Oilers a little bit because I think that they're at a really interesting crossroads here as a franchise this summer. And they've obviously been making a bunch of noise over the past week or so with various moves they made and money they've been spending. And, you know, the McDavid deal is on the one hand, it's like the most like stone cold lock, no-brainer decision possible where it's like whatever this guy was.

wants he can have considering he's a 20-year-old reigning Art Ross and a Hart trophy winner and is arguably the best player in the world already and figures to somehow get even better than he was last season, which is a scary proposition for everyone else. But at the same time, for the Oilers, it does present them with a unique set of circumstances that they're going to have to account for. And I'm just sort of, I don't know, like, what do you think about the deal you signed and the position they're in kind of the summer and looking ahead to next year and beyond? Well, for the deal he signed, I always go back to the chart,

and we've probably everybody listening has seen this chart of expected value of draft picks. And, you know, the line is really high at number one, drop sharp to number two, but still really high, drop sharp to number three, but still really high. And those sharp drops continue all the way, and then it settles into almost a flat line through the second, third, fourth, fifth rounds and so on. And what that shows us is that talent distribution, it's not a linear process. You know, you don't take a small step down from number one to number two, a small step from number two to number three. The better a player is, the rarer he is, and guys at the far, far end of that curve are incredibly hard to find. And there's two of them in the NHL,

and frankly, you pay them anything, and they're probably going to be underpaid. If they paid Connor McDavid $15 million. I would bet you he does more to help them win than just about anything else

they could do with that $15 million. But you're right, it does create a difficult situation. And I think the way to navigate it has been exemplified

by Pittsburgh and to a lesser extent Chicago in that you fill in, you do have to bring in some cheap talent to pop them on the wings.

Maybe it's a bargain bin free agent. Maybe it's a young player coming up. But you have have to find a couple of guys for under two million bucks who can who can play roles uh with a player like that and just be and just be competent complimentary players and if you can do that then you can keep the team intact and it's it's not that onerous a problem yeah i think for the oilers here

also another another win is the fact that they got him for the eight years and not you know a shorter term i like that from their perspective but like here's the thing and you and you just alluded to this it's I believe that this type of contract isn't necessarily, you know, all of us instantly just a roadblock that's going to get in your way of becoming a Stanley Cup champion as a team, but you do really need to optimize how you're utilizing the remaining cap space around him and you can't afford any of these poison pill deals. And I think that, you know, people were writing this at the time,

but right now it's really going to start bearing out and showing the problem that it is. And it's, they should have seen this coming, right? If you have any foresight in planning out what the next handful of years are going to look for you, they should have seen the fact that, you know, Dreisadel and McDavid are coming up and they're going to have to dramatically increase how much they're paying them. And all of a sudden, like a Luchage contract, for example, just becomes so much tougher to deal with. And I don't know, maybe they just weren't looking that far ahead. Maybe they were, at last summer, they were thinking, listen, like, we would just take being competent at this point based on where this franchise has been. So just getting to there is all of a sudden a big win for us and we'll deal with the consequences later.

But now they're going to all of a sudden have to start dealing with those consequences. I don't know that they weren't looking ahead. I just think that they thought Milan Luchich was a much better player than he ended up being for them in year one. And in fairness to them, like Luchich had a historically bad year for him at even strength. Like he made up for it to some degree by being a power play guy, which doesn't necessarily move the ball for your team, but makes your players individual point totals look a lot better. I think where they really made a mistake with Loo Cheach was in doing something that a bunch of teams did,

which was loading up signing bonuses. Now, as most of your listeners are going to know, you can't buy out sign. Well, you can buy out signing bonuses, but you don't save any money. You still have to pay them 100%. So it's not worth doing. And that's what happened with Toronto with David Clarkson,

because he had all these signing bonuses down the line. They couldn't buy them out when you know, he cratered in year one. So if you look at New York with Andrew Ladd or or Buffalo with Kyle Okposo or Vancouver with Louis Erickson, any of these guys, you cannot buy them out or it's, it's almost cost prohibitive to buy them out. The same is true of Luchech. So they didn't leave themselves with any wiggle room at all in the event that, you know, Lu Cheech faded as he entered his 30s, which is something that a lot of players do. And that could cost them. I just think, you know, it's too early to write Luchich off entirely.

But if his first year continues, then it's going to be a very bad situation, Fred. Yeah. Well, okay, so if you're them, you know, there's two ways you can kind of approach this coming season. There's obviously the school of thought of you still have McDavid for that one more cheap year and you really need to go for it and try and see what you can do with that money. And if that's the case, then swapping everly for Strom is kind of a, it's tough to reconcile. But then you could also make the argument of, you can kind of see this coming. And what we just talked about with the foresight, you want to get ahead of it and try

and plan for those differences so you're not scrambling next summer. What do you think about that dilemma for them in terms of how you'd approach it? I found that a little bit frustrating covering them, actually, because Peter Shirelli, the course he's outlined publicly and so far the course he's followed in his moves has been one of incremental growth. It's a very traditional, very old school GM approach. You know, we've got these young guys. There's no need to rush.

We've got lots of time. And I would argue it's one that's a little bit outdated in a salary cap landscape. Like I don't think that approach works really well. In a salary cap landscape, like Luchich in terms of what he does to help you win, is infinitely, well, not infinitely, but lots more valuable at $4 million a year than he will be at $12 or 13. and to me I think this was an off-season where there was a need for some urgency where they could have and you're right about when you think about Strome and Everleigh like there's no reason to make that you can defer that deal a year and I think it was Cam Thompson who's some people who remember from the irreverent oil fans blog which was the pioneering analytics blog

pointed out that one of the things Chicago's done really well is they haven't done preemptive strikes to solve their salary cap situation they've kept the best team together that they can and then when they've gotten to trouble they've been able to move guys out and i think there's a very strong case that edmonton should have done that this year that they shouldn't have been planning this you know really slow build but uh that's what they've done well i think there is this um idea that's been floated around about how you know they have a lot of sort of not necessarily uncertainty but they have a lot of moving pieces where you're not sure how they're going to develop or what they're going to look like in bigger roles you know in terms of maybe on the back end with darn owners and Matt Benning or this and that.

And so there's this idea that they're going to enter the season with this team and they're going to see how it goes. And then as the year progresses and especially towards the trade deadline, they could be one of the more sort of noteworthy teams to keep an eye on because that urgency could come into play. And they could all of a sudden be in the market for rentals. But obviously, you know, we see sometimes how it works in terms of supply and demand of the trade deadline. and you don't want to be the sucker that's paying exorbitant prices. So I don't know, I don't think there's necessarily any right answer, but it's going to be really intriguing to see as the year goes along

if some of these guys don't pan out or play the way that they were hoping they'd progress, whether all of a sudden they do start feeling that urgency that they haven't really shown at this point. Well, and it's, there's a couple of things wrong with that approach, and one of them as you highlighted, is that guys cost a lot more at the trade deadline than they do in the summer. The other thing that I would really highlight is being a problem with that approach is Andre Sakara. Like that guy was an incredible, incredibly important part of their blue line last year.

He did a lot of everything. He made Chris Russell look like a $4 million defenseman. Or he helped Chris Russell look like $4 million defenseman anyway. And he's going to be gone for probably the first half of next year. And that's a massive piece. Like he plays power play, he plays penalty kill, he plays even strength and tough minutes at even strength. So that piece is gone. And he's going to be there later in the year.

but you're not going to have them out of the gate. So if there's a time where you need a guy, it's going to be right away. And Edmonton, too, didn't have any really significant injuries last year. If they get hit with one or two in October, November, then I think Peter Shirelli will look back at the summer as a missed opportunity because he could have shored up the team's depth and brought in some contingency plans.

And right now, their safety net is a bunch of navies. well and the big elephant in a room that we've sort of kind of we've thrown in his name but we haven't actually dove into it and I think it's a good time to do so is is the leon-drecytled dilemma for them which is man there's so many angles to hit this from so uh what do you peter shirelli publicly coming out and saying that he'd match any type of predatory deal like i i sort of get the perspective of you know you're making the player you're showing the player how much he means to you you and you're sort of just saving face with your fan base in front of the media. And I get all of that. But like from a competitive advantage perspective, it really doesn't seem to make a lot of sense unless you really are just incredibly confident with,

you know, the NHL's sort of deep-rooted problem with RFAs and offer sheets and the collusion involved between the GMs where there's basically this sort of, you know, handshake agreement that we won't mess with your guys if you don't mess with ours. and I guess that's just what his line of thinking was when he came out and made those comments about matching dry-sad, any potential dry-sider offer sheets. Well, there's almost a script for these things, isn't there? Like, okay, pick your young RFA player whose entry-level contract has just expired.

He's a significant part of the team. His GM always gets the question, well, what about an offer sheet? And the GM always says, don't even try it. We'll match any offer sheet. And then the offer sheet never comes. It's like you can write the script every year. It never seems to vary. I don't think that we'll match any offer sheet,

so don't even try it is a particularly intelligent stance. I also don't think you ever really pay for it because, I mean, realistically, these things just do not happen very often. Yeah. Well, I mean, we saw it last summer, like if teams were willing to get creative there and potentially overstep your balance.

And with guys like Kuturav and Hamas Linholm, I mean, their teams weren't in the, in the greatest cap positions to all of a sudden be matching any type of big money offers you for them. And, you know, this summer there's the dry saddle with Edmonton. And obviously in Washington, you got like Kuznetsov and to be true or love. And they'd be pretty hard pressed to match those types of offers. But it's frustrating from a fans perspective, right? Because I feel like the league would be so much more fun in terms of activity and drama.

if this stuff was a realistic option and I feel like we'd see uh it would just be fun to to talk about and dissect and and there'd definitely be more movement and instead it just the if you're an rfa you're you're basically screwed because you have very very little leverage and the team that drafted you is pretty much in the driver's seat for for many many years yeah it's um it requires some some creativity on the part of the restricted free agent for sure and I think the cases where we've seen, well, like, Ryan O'Reilly is, is the one case I can think of where we've seen something happen. And he actually, you know, went to Russia to get to get things moving. So if you're, if you're a restricted free agent, you're willing to do that, then I think you can

do some stuff. But, you know, if you're going to play in the NHL, you're, you're in a bat, you're stuck. Like, unless you're willing to play hardball, you're stuck. Yeah, yeah. Okay. So, Dr. Dreis Seidel, I want to nail down, um, you're stuck. Um, I'm, I'm, I want to nail down, um, um, a realistic expectation for him because it's it's so tough to evaluate him as a player right now because even though you know we've seen enough of a sample size now to know that he's incredibly productive and especially in the postseason he started off slow against the sharks and there was there was rumblings and maybe he was under the weather and dealing with a flu and he was critical of his own performance and then he really broke out and looked like a dominant center

and I thought he showed a lot as the series against the ducks went along where they separated him from McDavid and put him on his own, on his own down the middle on the second line. And he looked perfectly fine doing so. And that's kind of something that I wanted to see from them all year. And I still wonder if that is ultimately his final destination. Like, well, like, where, let's rehash this conversation about where you're at in terms of, do you think that moving forward for the Oilers, it makes the most sense to,

if you do give him a big contract here this summer to put him down the middle and that all of a sudden potentially makes Ryan Nugent Hopkins in the $6 million of slightly more expendable if you do need to free up some money? Or do you think that you just sort of keep him attached to McDavid's wing and just have like one of the best lines and hockey going with those two? Well, Todd McClellan has a track record with this and he likes to load up his top lines. He's not one of these coaches that really likes the diversified approach

to the forward attack, or at least he hasn't really in the past. He uses it sometimes, but he mostly stays away from it. I think, I think you saw in the playoffs, the value of having these guys on separate lines. To me, I don't want to say it's a no-brainer because it sounds like I'm talking down about a coach, but I look at what Joel Quenville's done in Chicago. I look at what Mike Sullivan and his predecessors have done in Pittsburgh. And to me, it's just, it just seems obvious that these guys, are so much more, if you have two elite talents,

and I'm not sure that Drysidal is an elite talent, he's very good, obviously, but with that caveat aside, if you do have two of these guys and you can put them on two different lines and each of them act as a tent pole on those lines, it makes matchups incredibly difficult. It makes getting defense parings out against them

incredibly difficult. I think it's a big part of the reason that Pittsburgh has the last two cups, and Chicago has three Stanley Cups in six years. It's something that Edmonton avoided doing all year. And now as a result, they're going into the summer negotiating with a player who not only is quite productive on his own, but spent pretty much all of the year having his totals inflated playing on Connor McDavid's right wing. It didn't make sense to me from a tactical standpoint.

It really never made sense to me from a salary standpoint. And I think the question now, you know, notwithstanding his games against the Ducks, which was a very short period of time, is we don't actually know how good Leon Driesidal is going to be if he's anchoring his own line. Like there seems to be this unspoken assumption that, or well, sometimes even a spoken assumption that he's going to be Evgeny Malkin. And that's a really high bar. And I'm not at all sure that he gets there. He's a good player for sure. But is he a great player? We don't know.

Yes, and that's the frustrating part here because I feel like, you know, if they'd spent most of the year playing Joyce Idol on his own line and he was still this productive, like I don't feel like his financial value or his asking price would have risen that much. Whereas now all of a sudden, like if we knew that he could, you know, single-handedly drive his own line like that and all of a sudden you do have a Crosby-Malkin situation, yeah, of course, give a. that nine, nine and a half million or whatever per season that he could potentially be asking for it's kind of a no-brainer because all of a sudden you have two dominant elite lines and you just fill in the rest around them but you can't it's that's a tough pill to swallow to give that much money to a guy who potentially might just be Connor McDavid's winger when we've seen what you know guys like Maroon or or you know probably see like a cajula and you can just kind of insert whoever for very cheap and all of a sudden they'll probably be much more

productive just because of how good McDavid is so just in terms of optimizing your assets and trying to squeeze every buck out of it. That's the frustrating part from their perspective. Well, and we touched on this with McDavid, but going forward, Edmonton will have to make some tough choices with the salary cap. And if you have dry-sidal stapled to McDavid in making, even if he's only making $7 million a year on his next contract,

which I would argue looking at his numbers is probably a more reasonable outcome than something in the $9 million range, whatever the players ask is. I think $7 million like Godreau, like Jose Copatar, is probably more realistic. But if you're spending $7 million on him and $12, $13 million on McDavid, and you've got those guys on one line, that really doesn't leave you much money for the rest of your forward units. Yeah. So, I mean, it seems silly to even sort of like armatured GM or fantasy book,

teams Drey Seidel would be interesting on as an office you candidate because it just seems so unlikely. But I mean, just from a value perspective, like if you were a team that had cap space and thought you'd be pretty good, so you're not worried about those picks all of a sudden, you know, being at the top of the draft, like that 9.8 per year where you're only giving up the,

I think like the two first, the second and a third. Like that doesn't seem like that steep of a price for, a player that could potentially be a dominant number one center for you if that's really what you believed he was right like it seems like there's so many teams out there that an offer sheet would make sense for but i guess we just have to assume that they're not going to do it because they don't want to break that code well it the problem is unless you're giving up the four first round picks i don't think they're like i think edmonton matches without hesitation right so you think Edmonton could

pallet it would be palatable for them to spend like what $23 million on McDavid and Dreisettel combined at this point Chicago spends 21 million bucks on Taves and Kane I don't think it's ideal

but I just I don't think there's any question that that's what they would do Yeah But so if you're another team why I guess I know I know the answer to this But like I would if I was another Western Conference team or let's say the sharks as a Pacific Division rival,

I would be worried about letting the Oilers off the hook here and having them save money on Dreis Idol. And if you really do believe that, I would instantly sign Leon to, because it's clear that, you know, based on comments we heard from him, that he values himself and he has every right to as a player trying to make his money

that he believes he should get that higher salary range. Like, if the sharks sign him to that 9.8, that just seems like a very savvy, thing from a competitive advantage perspective from them to all of a sudden. All right, if the Oilers really want to keep both of them, they're going to have to pay for it, and then they're going to have to make some tough decisions elsewhere. And maybe all of a sudden they will have to trade Ryan Nuget Hopkins for cheap future assets or something, and that'll make their team worse in the long run.

So it's a tough spot, but boy, I would love to see something happen there. Yeah, it's funny. I don't understand why we don't see more of this. I think you can make an offer sheet with the twin objective that if you get the guy, you're better off, and if you don't get the guy, you're sticking a spoke in the wheel of a divisional rival. And the thing is, it's not even inflationary. Like, it's inflationary for players coming into their second contract, but with linkage, you're paying the same amount of total money regardless.

It just alters the financial distribution from older players to younger players a little bit. So I don't really see the downside. particularly if you're, you know, like hypothetically we're talking San Jose. San Jose is not a team that has a bunch of big name restricted free agents coming up. So they don't even have, you know, this worry about retaliation. But for whatever reason, we don't see it. It's fun to play around with, but it's pretty academic because it just never happens. Yeah, yeah.

It's disappointing, man. I'd love to see something that happened there. Okay, let's talk about guys who will actually sign deals with different teams then. and start our July 1st, Free Agent Bonanza, kind of much like we did last year. And I think that the neatest way to accomplish that because there's so much happening and there's so many names to discuss

is to sort of, we'll go position by position and we'll maybe categorize them based on whether we think, you know, some intriguing flyers are shopping for the bargain bin, some red flag players for teams to stay away from that I think are going to be too pricey. And then some good buys where, you know, there's a sense that we'll match

of team and player that just makes sense for both parties. And I guess before we start with the names, we should point out that it's generally, I think we both are in agreement that it's not, blowing a bunch of money on the big names in the first day of free agency is generally not the most prudent way of doing business. It seems like teams typically wind up regretting those decisions.

Well, we can avoid that this year. There aren't any big names. Yes, well, I mean, Carl Olsner and his agent, I'm sure, would beg to differ. Yes. The problem with free agency, and it's funny because, you know, we're just talking about McDavid and this idea that it's very difficult to get elite talent and you can pay a lot for elite talent. The problem with unrestricted free agency is all these guys are old, basically. You'll get a few that are under 27 because of unique circumstances, and 27's a massive improvement on the old age of 31. But even so,

by the time you get at these guys, most of them are past their prime and you're paying for their declining years. And when you have to offer a six or seven year deal at massive money and with a no move clause and a whole bunch of signing bonuses so that if he does fall down the road, you're still stuck with him. Yeah, it's just the kind of thing that can handcuff your team really fast. Well, and then that's a good point about, like it's really tough to make your team. dramatically better in today's NHL because we see that like generally going through unrestricted free agency is not the best way to do so because you're probably going to wind up paying above what the player is actually worth to try and get them to your lineup and then you

know if offer sheets are off the table so you can't negotiate with other teams RFAs and trades that we've seen some blockbuster ones in the past year or so but generally speaking the NHL doesn't have too many you know one for one straight up impactful hockey trades. All of a sudden, you're left with the draft, and that's all well and good. But at the age you're drafting those players, and with all the uncertainty, that could take like three, four, or five years to actually materialize unless it's a first overall pick.

And then all of a sudden, you get to the crux of the problem for a lot of these teams where it's just really tough to make dramatic changes to your roster if you're kind of fighting an uphill battle. So it can be very frustrating as both a fan and the person running the team, I'm sure. Yeah, absolutely. and it's the NHL's a very conventional league. Like we haven't seen a lot of really innovative things. When you go into free agency,

basically you're just hoping not to overpay too much for a piece that your team really needs or you're shopping around for some of these cheap veterans that are available every year for pennies on the dollar. And that's the one place you can make really good buys, but it's a very inefficient market. and teams don't seem to be interested in shaking up the status quo. Yeah, no, I agree with that.

And so if you look at this class, this is a lot of veterans. And, you know, just on how things work, I'm sure that some of these guys will, you know, teams will wind up talking themselves into them and maybe even giving them an extra year or two on deals than they realistically should just because it's pretty thin and teams get desperate and they have this cash burning a hole in their pocket and they just look around and pick someone and give it to them. But like let's start with the forwards and, you know, beyond a Joe Thornton or an Alex Radulov and even both those guys based on their age, obviously Radulov's only 30 compared to Thornton's 37. But at the same time, you know, you hear about what he's looking for and it might be

something like a six-year deal and all of a sudden it becomes much, less intriguing for a lot of teams. So there's very few guys in this, in this free agent class, especially at Forward, where you can, you know, point them and be and say, well, they're going to be expensive, but I feel confident that it's going to be a good buy for us for a number of years. Like even Radjelaw was amazing last season, but I'm not very confident what he's going to look like even two or three years from now. So it really throws a monkey wrench into things.

Yeah, absolutely. when I sat down to Dimitri assigns homework for these things He's really cruel Only to my most diligent Yes and you're on top of that list So it's only to you really When I sat down to do this

I just looked at the forwards and I went I don't see a single guy That I'd really want to bet heavy money on over time I think Joe Thornton makes a lot of sense If you're contending next year Because he's still such a Such a special play but that's a that's just a short term we're going for the cup this year let's sign this guy sort of move

Radulov I'm scared of because of the term Marty Hansel I like a lot but again you know like the price there you have to wonder about and then you end up with guys like Justin Williams who are very good but we're we're deep into supporting cast type guys now you're you're not going to win a Stanley cup with you know Justin Williams is your number one right wing these days probably just just just given his age and everything. I mean, maybe if your other forwards are good enough and whatever, but you're not talking about a guy who's really driving the results for you. You're talking about good players, but not franchise-changing people.

Yeah. Well, so what do you make of Joel Thornton? Because two years ago, he was remarkable. I believe he was around a point of game, and I think that there was a legitimate case to make for him as being deserving of the Selke trophy just based on how dominant the sharks were whenever he was nice it seemed like they pretty much always had the puck and just weren't giving up any goals and then last year he definitely you know he struggled with a bit of injury with some injuries towards the end of the season in particular

and even as the year was going along um you know he's never been a volume shooter by any means especially with the past handful of years but he was getting to like blow a shot per game territory which was an alarmingly low rate even for his standards. And obviously at age 37 with all the miles he's had, it's conceivable that he could just fall off and it'll be that dramatic and that sudden. But at the same time, you look at his skill set and sort of the puck possession brand of game he plays,

which is so reliant on him just sort of using his frame and size and vision to create. And it seems like even in maybe in a more sheltered role where he's not necessarily having to do as much, he could still be productive for another couple of years. Would you be willing to give him something like a three-year deal, or do you think that's even too rich for your blood? I don't like a three-year deal,

but if I can win a Stanley Cup next year, you know, like you get your name on the Stanley Cup forever, right? So if he's bad in year three, but you win a Stanley Cup in the next two years, maybe that's a tradeoff you're willing to make. When I look at Thornton, I see a guy, and we talk about maybe moving him to a sheltered role. This is a guy who is a 54% differential player, a 54% shot metric player in fairly tough minutes for San Jose last year. And I mean, I know he did it with Joe Pavalski, but even so, those are good results, whatever his personal offensive totals might be.

And I'd argue his personal offensive totals were hurt last year by what was going on with the San Jose power play. but that's a whole different thing to get into. The other thing I'd point out is Joe Thornton has never been a volume shooter, but he hasn't been a particularly fast player for years now. The thing is, his brain is not going to get any worse, and he's always going to be 6'4 and 220 pounds. So when you combine that size and that mind, I'd be okay maybe rolling the dice on him.

If you can get a three-year deal at a good average annual value, and you can win the Stanley Cup this year. Sure. So as a hockey fan, where, what would be the sort of most fun location for him to go to, um, aside from just staying in San Jose.

Like I like him in San Jose. I like the sharks. I think that they've done really well over the past in terms of, um, not overreacting to, to playoff failures and, and keeping things going. And there's definitely an argument for them to sort of turn the chapter

here and maybe look ahead and start thinking about the future. But at the same time, they were still a really good team last year. And with how open the Pacific Division is, you could make the strong argument that they should just kind of roll it back and see where they're at next season. But in terms of like new locations for Thornton, what do you think is sort of the most fun, realistic one for him to land where it would help the team the most? And it would just be just a good story to follow. Well, you kind of ruined things a little bit by demanding that I keep it realistic.

The 2007 Detroit Red Wings. Well, I was going to say, you know, I kind of love this thing that Pittsburgh does where they just keep accumulating all these top offensive players. What do you think about the Rangers? Yeah, I was going to say, obviously, with the departure of Stepan and the cap space they have now, he would make a lot of sense there. they do have that burning hole down the middle. I wonder, does he fit in with the way they want to play? Like, I guess you could make the argument that he'd add a new dynamic for them and also be sort of a great breakout option for them where it's like,

you know, we've talked about how their defense has really gotten the way of that transition game they want to play because they don't have very many guys that can actually complete those tape-to-tap passes through the zone. But maybe you don't worry about that because all of a sudden Thornton is just sagging back and occupying some of that role himself. So I guess it could make sense from that regard. Yeah, I don't know that I'm sold on it just because I'm not sure. Like if I'm New York, I don't know if I want to spend the money on defense or if I want to

spend it on center. And maybe there's more of a case to spend it on defense because you've got Mika Zabanajad and a pretty decent just by committee cast of top nine forwards. The other team that kind of occurred to me and probably makes a little less sense because Eric Stahl had such a great year, but Minnesota's been looking for that top flight center forever.

They're a weird team because they're old in some ways, but they're young in some other ways. I don't know that I hate the idea of him going to Minnesota either. What about the Predators? That's fun.

Yes, I like that a lot, actually. I'd like to, I just, I think, think we're both on the same pageo where it would just be very fun to uh well national has a bit of money to play with and uh and you know mike fisher's a free agent that uh yeah it's kind of an interesting thought and then you can run ryan johanson and uh and uh joe thornton one one two that's that's that defense that's yeah that's pretty fascinating actually yeah i would uh i would look into that i think that would be a fun option um so yeah beyond beyond that and um i don't know is is there anything

interesting for us to say about radjolov like it's all the stuff that we've sort of just uh like drawn out and and and everyone knows where it's like he's gonna help your team a lot next season but the price might be too rich for a lot of teams to to go with i'm sure someone will give it to him whether it's the canadians or someone else but i'm not sure that i would be the one willing to do so well the, I think, okay, so I hate to do this because it happens all the time with Russian players, but is Radulov, like if you're making a six or seven year bet on a player, I think you want to know that he's going to be a guy who isn't going to create problems for you. And if you're making

that kind of term, offering that kind of term to an older player, you want to know that he has the personal commitment to continue to excel. You know, like you can give it to a guy like Yarmir Yager because he's such a fitness nut and, you know, a younger Yarmir Yager, obviously, not Yarmir Yager today. But a guy like Radulov has got such a checkered reputation. I'd probably put him in the steer clear category if he's looking for major term. It's just, it's too much of a risk. You've got to be really desperate for that to make sense for you.

Yeah, I agree with that He's definitely You know, you can make argument He's the most potentially impactful player on this list though In terms of what he could provide to you I mean he was remarkable last year for the Canadians And you just sort of sort of showed all of that Tantilizing ability with the puck control

And how it just looked like it was sort of like Often when defensemen were like just bouncing off him It kind of looked like an older brother just kind of playing keep away With his young with his younger siblings where They just really couldn't do anything to get it away from them and he was sometimes going like one on three and succeeding, and it was remarkable to watch. Yeah, there's kind of a collection of older wingers

that we can lump together here. And maybe, I don't know, just pick your favor from the group. There's, you know, it's the Marlowe, Patrick Sharp, Yermer Yager, Justin Williams, Chris Kunitz, I guess Thomas Vannick. Like, there's a big group of those guys. and that's not even mentioning, you know, the Shane Dones and Jerome McGillows, who I think have much less to offer than those names I just mentioned.

But which one is sort of the name you're keeping a closest eye on in terms of, you know, if he falls in the right place, he could really help move the needle for whatever team he goes to. Well, I like Justin Williams a lot. I don't know. Two guys who didn't mention that I kind of wonder about are Alish Hemsky and Redeem Verbata. I don't know if you count Hempski in that group. He's a little bit younger than some of those guys. But both of those players, to me, are guys who might fly under the radar a little bit.

Like, Patrick, everybody's going to know about Patrick Marlowe. Everybody's, a lot of players, teams are going to chase Patrick Marlowe, whereas, you know, Vervato was playing in Arizona, and Hempski got hurt at the World Cup last year, and those guys might slide under the radar a little bit and provide you with more bang for your buck. I think, and this is maybe a little bit fanboy of me to say this, but Hemsky's the guy I'm really interested in. I've always just loved him as a player. And to me, he's fascinating because he's a guy who can conceivably help you on the power play,

can conceivably play on a scoring line, but can also move to a power versus power or a checking line. And in the right situation, assuming health, I think he could be a very interesting ad. Yeah, I co-assigned that. I think you could probably add even like a year he's ad list, but just the past year and a half he's had are pretty alarming considering he's also 33 years old. But it's very conceivable that on the minimum he could provide value. Yeah, hoodlers in my bargain bin categories.

I didn't want to get to him. Patrick Marlow, though, is actually, he asked me to kind of put together some red flag players and he's definitely on that list. I don't think I'd even consider signing Patrick Marlo. Yeah. Not at the money he's going to get. It seems like the best case scenario for him is him and Thornton just both agreeing to come back to San Jose, I feel like.

And they sort of made it seem not necessarily they're a package deal, but for Thornton at least, it sounds like if Marlowe returns, that could be a big driving force for bringing him back as well. So I guess that'll be something to watch for. Yeah, but even that feels like a coattail situation to me, though. You look at the last three years, Marlowe's on ice Fenwick. is worse than his teams. You look at the last five years and four of them. Every year but this year is on ice goal totals are worse than the team average. And he hasn't been playing with bad players.

Like he's been put in in good situations. He hasn't. I think at this point he's riding on reputation more than anything else. Yeah. I think that's definitely part of say. So there's a like the next tier below these guys. is fascinating because I'm I'm sure that some of these guys will wind up providing value. But it's it's there's a lot of names to sort through and you know maybe maybe Sam Gagne

for example should be put in that tier above based on pay grade because it seems like I don't know like do you think he's going to he's going to really cash in for the for the you know tremendously productive season he had on on Columbus's top power play unit last year because it seems like while he showed that he can be a weapon if used properly, all of a sudden, like one of the reasons why he was so valuable is because he was basically making nothing. And if you all of a sudden start paying him a premium for that, then he becomes much less intriguing an option for me.

Yeah, I feel similarly about Gagne. I just don't think, I think he's a specialist. And that guy can have a lot of value to you, you know like if he's the the right shot trigger man on your power play that that's something that has a lot of value if it makes your power play go but you can't overpay him because he's not a guy who can do everything for you he's not a guy who can play multiple roles you've got to be a team that can cast him in the exact right position and if you are then he can work out for you but you don't want to pay too much money for him yeah um i how proud of you of me of my

I should say, are you that I resisted the urge of bringing up PA Parento on that list of intriguing wingers. It took everything I had every fiber. But if anyone wants my take on PA Parento as a contributor, maybe just go back and listen to any of the previous like 47 shows I've done on this podcast. You know, for a guy who had 13 goals last year, who has outperformed his team's shot metrics, four of the last four years, who's outperformed his team's goal metrics three years. of the last four years. PA Parento is probably a guy you can get for under a million bucks.

And he's going to be useful, yes. Yeah, sort of the, I feel like the trendiest player on this next list is Jordan Whale. It seems like a, and I don't blame him at all, but it seems like every day I open Twitter, I see he's visiting with some new team that's trying to court him this summer. And I'm all for it, especially if they're going to be able to get him for a nice little, you know, cheap price. and all of a sudden he could play his way up your lineup, but we still haven't, you know,

he's succeeded at the HL level, of course, and he looked good in that short cameo towards the end of the season last year with the Flyers, but it seems like the Jordan Wheel hype train could potentially really just get out of control here if some team just feels the need to overpay him just to make sure they land him. Well, the thing about Wheel is he's a right shot.

He's young by free agent standards and that he's only, he's just turned 25. And the thing that's really working for him is that John Marchesso signed with Florida last year. With respect to Wheel, Marchesso had a long track record at the NHL level. He just hadn't got the minutes. He'd really performed well in the situations he'd been placed in, but he had never been given the opportunity to advance. And when Florida gave him that opportunity, he had just a tremendous year. I think Wheel's an interesting player.

I like him a lot. But, you know, he was sheltered in Philly. he had a crazy shooting percentage. He's still a tiny player who, you know, maybe he can make it, maybe won't make it. I like him. I certainly wouldn't be willing to break the bank to sign him. But assuming the contract is sensible, I think he's a very reasonable gamble for any number of teams. And he is, you know, we should say he is turning 26 towards the end of the season.

So it's not like he's this super young guy either where, you know, obviously. Obviously, considering some of the names we've spoken about before, he's definitely a younger option, but he's been around for a while. It just hasn't really been at the NHL level yet. So I would temper my expectations on him. Yeah, absolutely. And I think, you know, if I'm Jordan Wheel, and this is kind of an interesting case study because you probably have two different options.

And an option one would be, you know, cash in now, get as much money as you can, try and get a, you know, I don't know, a two-year deal at 1.1 million or something like that. Or do what a few other players have done and sign a short-term, dirt cheap deal, excuse me, with a really good team. Like, go to Chicago and say, hey, what can you guys do for me? Like, will you put me in a situation? And if you can find a place where you're going to be in a good situation, you know, maybe you can parlay that into more money down the road, and it's better off for you.

I think if I were him, that would be very interesting to me would be a chance to play with some very established high-end players on a dirt cheap cap hit. Yeah, I just betting on yourself. I mean, another guy that could fit that mold would be like a Brandon Perry, for example, right? Like we saw, we've seen throughout his career that he can definitely be a power play weapon and is a good finisher with his shot. So for a team like the Blackhawks, who are obviously familiar with him

since he came up with him, maybe you bring him in dirt cheap and stick him on your power play and maybe he plays fourth line minutes for you you and can definitely provide value based on how little you're paying him. So he'd be another guy that I'd be looking at if that's the role you're trying to fit.

Yeah, I think the difference between Wheel and Puri is there's a chance that Piri can be an even strength guy for you. Like 11 of Wheels 12 points last year came at evens. Peary scored half of his offense on the power play. So one of those guys is definitely just a total specialist and the other guy, you know, might be more than that for you. Yeah. No, I agree. I just think that

we could see some team replicate the type of success the Blue Jackets had with Sam Gagne, for example, last year with Peary, so he'd be interesting. Yeah, that's the one thing working against Peary, though, is he's a left shot and, you know, as a power play guy, that's a lot easier to find. Yep. So I'm very curious to see what someone like a Bo Bennett goes for this summer.

And I was kind of curious to, I was surprised a little bit to see that the devils were willing to let him go. Like that, I mean, it's quite possible that they still wind up retaining him as a UFA. But, you know, he's still only 25. I guess he's turning 26 the year. It goes along. And he definitely has that worrisome injury track record. and he's not a boxcar stats guy by any means, but he showed himself to be a pretty useful sort of maybe third line type

who can help drive the shot differentials a bit and definitely play. And it would seem like an intriguing flyer for some teams to take on, and I'm not sure how he's valued around the league, but it's probably not very highly, I'd imagine. Yeah, I don't mind him. He's as a, it's just a, you know, we're going to, we're going to, take a flyer on this guy and not pay him very much. I think he's very interesting.

The one thing I think that works against him, like you mentioned, he's not a box car guy, but he's also not a particularly high-end points-per-minute guy either. Like, at any point, he's never done it at any point over his career. And I think maybe the, if you're signing him, the upside there is maybe he turns into a useful third-line guy who can spot above that. and I just like he I think he's a reasonable gamble on a cheap contract particularly because he's got a lot of things going for him you know right shot decent size but I don't think he's anything special I mean Jonathan we're shopping in the bargain bin here you can't beggars can't be choosers well this is this is true this is true um okay pick one of these two guys if you were taking a flyer would you and a generic team so you don't have any and in any needs necessarily you just have one roster spot

to fill, would you rather take a flyer on Neil Yakopov or Mikkel Grigorenko? I knew those are going to be, those two guys are going to be. And by the way, how wild is it that those two guys are just available for peanuts to anyone of the league right now? Like, it just really hammers home the point of how we should temper our expectations with prospects and how unpredictable the draft can be. Because if you told people what, like four years ago that this would be the case, it would seem very unlikely just based on how highly they were.

hyped. Well, but it too, it's one of those situations where the 2012 draft class was known to be a little bit weaker. I think the really funny thing about that is how crazy does Philip Forsberg sliding look in retrospectly? Just back crap crazy, right? I think if I had to pick between one of those two, and I'd have an interest in taking a flyer on either of them in the right situation, I think in the Axe case, you need shelter and a right shot center to play with him. The guy I'd take the flyer on his Grigorenko. He is going to be big no matter what. He had actually fairly decent totals last year for Colorado. He had 10 goals. He can do other things for you too. As much as he gets slagged as a sort of a soft perimeter player, he is a guy who can play on

the penalty kill or who has played on the penalty kill who can win face-offs, who can do other things and you know if he ends up being your fourth line center that's not necessarily a total disaster for you whereas with yakopov i think you know yakopov either makes it or he doesn't um with grigorenko there's there's more of a tier of potential options i'm going to buy my tongue here and refrain from making a joke about how mikhil grigrenko might actually be 35 years old at this point you know you know what what kills me about this stuff though is is it's it's kind of taken his gospel in some circles. Like, I've had some very smart people tell me,

oh, yeah, yeah, Griger Enkel's definitely 25, 26, 27. And it's like, well, maybe, but those rumors were never, you know, like it's kind of fun to joke about, well, you made the joke about him and Shane Dohn the other day. Yeah, same Shane Dohn and Jerome Gillan, the 40-year-olds on the trade market, on a phrasia market. Yes, yes, exactly. But it is one of those situations where we are dealing in rumor and conjecture.

Yes, absolutely. Okay. were there any other forwards you want to talk about talking about this class is really bumming me out I feel like there's some interesting names but it's definitely very underwhelming I had three other guys on my list

one is a red flag guy and two is kind of interesting bargain bin guys the red flag guy is Tyler Pitlick he's young he's big he does a lot of different things so I think some people might be interested in him as a you know it's kind of one of these cheap bets his HL numbers have been terrible forever he can never stay healthy

and this is like six years of not being able to stay healthy. I'd still clear of him. Teddy Purcell can't skate really by compared to a lot of NHL players, but he was very productive in the American League last year. He was kind of victim of circumstance in L.A. I thought where they got off to a bad start and he just got flushed and didn't get another look. So I'd be interested in him on maybe a training camp tryout type thing.

But the one guy who actually kind of interests me as a guy who you can plug and play is maybe Brian Flynn. we've seen a lot of teams go to these specialty fourth lines that play a ton of defensive zone minutes Montreal is one of those teams that's done that Flynn's a right shot play center you can play wing he can play the penalty kill he's he's 28 years old he's not going to be expensive to me if you're looking for just a depth guy and you're not hoping for you know a massive return you're not he's not really a gamble but i think he's a safe bet to cheaply fill an important specialty role with your team Yeah, I agree.

I'll be able to see where he lands. Okay, defenseman. I actually think this is a more, I guess it's not a more interesting group. There's some names for us to talk about here, and a lot of them are, a lot of them are of the red flag variety. So the pretty obvious cream of the crop, right? Whereas with the forwards, there wasn't like a T.J. O'Shee, for example, if he hadn't resigned with the capitals, probably would have been. the biggest name on the list here on the defensemen there's the you know there's Kevin Shannkerk and then there's everyone else and he's been linked I think Carl

Alzner's agent might object to that assertion Demetri we will we'll get to Carl Alznor you just wait um yeah so with Kevin Shaddenkirk like you know there's been all the connections drawn between him and the Rangers and it definitely seemed like a logical fit but now I wonder with the fact that they resigned Brennan and smith for a reasonably pricey deal in the four four million dollar range and the fact that you know they do have that hole down the middle and joe thornton might be intensely appealing for them maybe they go that direction so i don't know like would you do you think kevin shatterkerk on the rangers still makes the most sense or would you like if you went to the lightning for example

i know that he sort of balked at the idea before or at least signing with him long term if he's changed his mind at all on that like that would be a very interesting fit yeah i'd love them in tapabay um i think the thing with new york is and and and i did where brendan smith i don't think even enters into it is who plays on the right side in new york like dan gerardy's been playing with ryan mcdona forever despite being you know a very bad fit for that role and i think in large part it's because new york doesn't really have a lot of good right shooting options um you know Kevin Klein might retire. There isn't much there.

So I think Chatton Kirk still makes a lot of sense for the Rangers. Yeah, he would definitely fill a lot of their needs, and he would help he'd be a big part of that high-octean offense for them. And I'd like to see that. I mean, both with him and the lightning. I wonder, I mean, it makes sense for, it's always tough to tell a player what to do with their money, and when you were looking at a big long-term payday

that's going to provide financial security for you for years to come and pretty much your entire life, it's tough to pass that up because obviously injuries and can happen at any point and the circumstances can change. But at the same time, man, if he was willing to take a one-year deal with Edmonton Oilers at a very high rate for that one season, that would be a fascinating fit as well. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Well, what I really wanted the Oilers to do at the deadline if I'd been in their shoes was to consider

targeting him as a rental piece just to see what the team could do with that kind of moving ability on the back end, which is something they don't really have, certainly not at Chatton Kirk level. I don't know that Edmonton, like I don't think it makes a lot of sense. If I'm Chatt and Kirk and I'm looking at a one-year deal with some club, I don't think I look at Edmonton, though. Who would you look at? Do you have a team in mind?

Well, not really, because I'd been thinking of him as signing a long-term deal. Right. So I had a- What he'll probably do. I mean, he's looking at a very big money, big-term deal that's going to set him up for the rest of his life. Yeah. And that seems like the logical fit for him. Okay, so the stayaways, man, this is a long.

list of guys. Is this where we get to Carl Alsner? Yes, and I'm not I'm not even going to, you know, talk about the, uh, the obvious names. I think that like a Carl Alzner, for example, seems like it could be obvious, but at the same time, um, I, I feel like he's going to get a deal that we're all going to shake our heads at, right? Like, it seems like someone is going to talk themselves into giving him both term and money. It might not necessarily be, uh, enormous money, but it's going to be like a really good second pairing guy and I think that's going to be a big mistake based on the trajectory of his career and what he's shown what he showed as recently his last season.

Well, I think Altsner is a great example of, and not because he's a bad player because he's not a bad player. I think he's a great example of the kind of contracts that teams get themselves in trouble within free agency. So he is basically a pure defensive defenseman, which is always a bit of a reference. flag because those guys traditionally have not aged well. The NHL seems to be moving away from those guys.

He's passable in a tough minutes role, which makes him very appealing because you can go, well, you know, we've got this right shot puck mover, and if we had it, Olsner, they could be our matchup pairing. And you might be right for a year or two, but he's going to be 29 early next year. If you sign him to a five or six-year deal, you're paying him into his 30s for a player type

that is becoming less and less effective in the NHM. he's not a guy with great underlying numbers. I think you can make some allowances for him based on situation. But the thing is, the key thing is that there just aren't a lot of other options on the blue line. So if you need a shutdown defenseman really bad, you can go and sign Carl Wallsner into a big ticket deal for a lot of years, even though he's a supporting guy. And to me, that's where teams really get in trouble is where they identify a good, competent, support. according role player, and they pay him like he's a difference maker. And, and Olsner, to me, is just the best possible candidate for that treatment in this

draft class, or in this free agent class. Yep. No, I agree with that. I mean, Dan Girardi, wow. He's only going to get a one-year deal, right? Yeah, probably. One year or too long, in my opinion. I think the thing is where you might get in trouble is if somebody does what

what Philly did with Vincent Lacaville and they go well you know we can sign this guy for two or three years at a cut rate right now that's that's where you might really get in trouble with Gerardi yeah yeah for sure um I think the two more sort of practical uh stayaways from our perspective are Michael Stone and Dimitri Kulikov because they're at the age where it's not as obvious that there's stayaways right like you could it seems like people are high on michaelstone i mean just based on the fact that the flames like he was their big trade deadline acquisition and they felt comfortable with him filling their defensive need and it clearly showed that was not the case and i feel like someone is going to talk to themselves into giving him like a three-year deal or something

at a moderate rate and i think that'll be a mistake because i really he hasn't really shown us anything uh away from mcman larsen to make us believe that he's going to be even like a that he's going to be a defenseman that can sort of keep his head above water unless he's really being used in the most optimal way possible. Where are you at with Michael Stone? Yeah, I think Michael Stone's lowercase Carl Alsner in terms of situations. You made the great point that he hasn't done a lot away from Ekman-Larsen. He's played with really good players in Arizona, and he hasn't been that good.

But what really makes him dangerous is if you need a right-shot defenseman, obviously only a few teams are going to really be in on Kevin Chatton Kirk. A lot of teams are going to think Cody Franzen isn't worth looking at. And once you cross those two guys off the list, Michael Stone's kind of all that's left. And you go, well, you know, maybe he's not that great, but he's competent. And we're going to pay a little bit of a premium because he's a right shot D. And he's a free agent, blah, blah, blah.

But the problem is, like, I think Michael Stone's probably a third pair defenseman. Yeah. And I think he's going to be viewed and paid as more than that. I think that's what the mistake lies. What about Kulakov? Because the reason why I think a team could really talk themselves into him is because it sounds like his back was really a detriment or an issue for him last season. And if you think that he's healthy,

it seems like his stock was much higher before this disastrous season in Buffalo. So if you think he's going to, if your perception of him is going to revert back to that form, then it seems like he'd be someone just based on. on how few sort of options in his age range that they're available. It seems like someone could talk themselves into him, but I'm pretty skeptical on him being anything more than like a sort of what you just described Michael Stone as basically. I think the thing that might be a saving grace with Gulikov is I don't think teams,

I don't think there are a lot of teams that are going to be able to talk themselves into paying big money over multiple years for a guy coming off that kind of. of injury. Back problems are famously chronic recurring. I'm speaking in general generalities here, not with regard to Kulikov specifically, but I think that might scare some teams away. And to me, if you give him a one or two year show me deal, I don't mind him. In addition to the injuries last year, he played with Ristolinen and Bogosian and Buffalo,

and those are both bad fits for different reasons. I don't know that I don't know that he necessarily will be just a third-bearer defenseman. He might end up being a number four guy if you put him in the right situation. And this is the thing is these are all relative to expectations.

If you're paying Kulikov over term, yeah, stay away from him. But I just, with that injury history, I don't think teams are going to be able to convince themselves to do that. Yeah, that's fair. Yeah, so I've got a list here of sort of

good buys. And like, I think Brian Campbell is a great buy. The thing is, I don't, like, we haven't really heard much about like where, what he's looking for and where he'd be willing to play because it was pretty clear that last year, for example, he took way below what he could have probably gotten elsewhere just to play in Chicago, right? So I'm not sure, given his age and how much money he's made throughout his career, like what, what his ideal situation is.

So that kind of makes it tough to. pick a team that would be a logical landing spot for him. Yeah, I think he makes a lot more sense for a team like Edmonton than Kevin Shatton, just because he can do some of the things that Sackra does for them. He didn't have a great year in Chicago. I'm a little bit worried with Campbell that he's, you know, he's at that age where you hit the cliff and you fall off. But he's old enough that he probably only gets a one-year deal, and he might be, he might

be your number two defenseman on the left side in the right situation. Yeah, I buy that. So the other two guys I had on this list were, well, actually had a couple more, but then I sort of broke it into, like, I had Cody Franzen on this list as well, because I think he'll be able to have him for very cheap, and I had John Michael Liles as well, and then I split Trevor Daly and Michael Dozato into their own group because I think that they're probably going to be in a different, a different price bracket.

Yeah, I like Franzen. I feel like we're doing a, you know, we'll get to Patrick Workatch, I'm sure, and then this will just be an analytics guy's bargain bin greatest hit list. But Franzen, you know, Franzen's problems are known. He's not physically aggressive. He's a little bit of a slow skater,

but he's, he's big, he's got a good stick. He's got an offensive dimension. He's had reasonable success in a tough minute's role. To me, I think Franzen just makes a world of sense as a fallback position for Toronto if they can't get somebody like a Chris Tanev, a real difference maker. As a stopgap player, I think he'd be a fantastic fit for the leaves. Yeah, but what do you think about Michael Dosato? He's the toughest defenseman on this list, isn't he?

Yeah, he, you know, it seemed like his career was really headed in the wrong direction for a while there. towards the end of the run in New York and then he was traded to Nashville and he didn't do anything there and then you know he really revitalized his career in Philly especially I thought that pairing with him and Radka Goudas was was very intriguing and a very solid sort of second pair type role and I'm not sure I mean he's still in that age where I'm kind of curious to see like what the market for him is going to be like and what whether he's sort of rehabilitated the perception of him around the league and whether someone's going to bite him. or whether he's going to have to keep proving it. And if the case is the latter, then he seems like a very intriguing option, because I definitely think he can play. Yeah, I think the thing working in his favor is just that it's such a terrible free agent class. Like if you view Alsner the way we kind of do and you're a little bit worried about Kulikov's injury history, your left shot options are not great.

So that's what I think works in Delzato's favor. It wouldn't surprise me if he signed. a similar deal to what he had in Philly, which I think was two years and just under a $4 million cap hit. And in that role, like, if you're not betting a whole lot of term on him, I'm good with that. I think he can play. I don't know, I don't know for sure what he is, but I'd be comfortable betting on him as like a number four guy on the death chart.

Yeah, I like that. Give me some of the intriguing flyers you had, and let's not do Patrick Weircatch. I feel like everyone already at this point sort of knows. I mean, he did have a rough year in Colorado, but you could probably have him for a bag of pucks and sticks, and he could very, very well be a useful third-bearing defenseman for you. Were there any other guys that you sort of circled as intriguing names? No.

That's not exactly true, but I really had to dig on this because I don't think that this class has the, even the bargain bin type guys that previous ones have. One guy I looked at, and I'll probably get flack for this, is Kyle Quincy. I don't like John Moore. I don't think he's a very good defenseman. And Quincy away from Moore was pretty decent last year. I know he doesn't have great numbers over his history,

but he played a lot of time on the right side in Detroit, which as we know is a bad situation. To me, you pay him like a third pair of guy, and he might be a really good number five if he's, if he's playing on the left side. I know that's not a real sexy pick, but there's not a lot out there. Yeah, it's pretty bleak.

And the other guys are, like the other two guys I had were Nesterov and Yohanna V2, and both of those guys are, you know, very, they look like specialists. They might do okay once the training wheels come off, but they've never been tried in a really tough role. Yeah, I would, I would, I like both those guys and I didn't have Nestra on my list because it sounds like he's going to the KHL. I would have OV2 on my list for sure.

I think he's incredibly fun to watch, especially if you're willing to sort of get creative and experiment and maybe have sort of like a rover position where you maybe just dress seven defensemen and he sort of fits that role. Like that'd be fascinating. I'm not sure what his future at the NHL level is like as an actual traditional defenseman based on the current landscape. but I think he's got an intriguing combination of talents and I would much rather take a shot on a guy like OV2 just kind of exploding offensively versus a Kyle Quincy who we kind of know what he's going to be for you.

Yeah, yeah, absolutely. But I don't, I think Ovatusa, I don't know. He's a sound defenseman. Yeah, yeah, well, that's just it. And I actually love the idea of an 11 forward seven defensemen rotation for a lot of different reasons. But not many coaches are seem to be comfortable with it. Yeah, it's a tough sell. Okay, let's wrap this up with goalies.

And so there's a few sort of, like there isn't an obvious number one starter amongst the group, but there are a bunch of intriguing sort of platoon options if you're willing to go with a more modern like 1A, 1B, where it's a 50-30. or even 40-40 split. And it seems like I think we're going to be in agreement that, like, if you had to pick one, would you rather go with Steve Mason or Brian Elliott? Is Peter Marazic an option? Well, we're talking about purely UFAs here. Yeah, no, I know.

I just, and that was the problem when I looked at this class, because I was going, if I'm looking for a goalie this summer to maybe be my starter, I'm going the trade route. You're absolutely. There's a handful of guys that I'd mind. much rather trade for, but purely from... Probably, probably Elliot. To answer the question you actually asked, probably Brian Elliott. Yeah, I like Elliot.

I like both guys. I mean, with Steve Mason, like, he had a rough year last year. I think he fell all the way down to a 908 percentage, but you still got to keep in mind that, I mean, he's remarkably not even 30 years old yet, which, I mean, he's just been around forever, so it seems like he's old, but he's really not. And he had a 922 save percentage in 173 games for the Flyers. before last season, spanning like three or three plus seasons. So I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I know he's a Nick Mercadante, analytic special, you know, favorite darling. And I'd be willing to bring him in and give him somewhere in that 30 to 40 star range. And I think that he would be pretty useful in it. But yeah, I put him and Brian Elliott sort of in that same group. And I didn't include Chad Johnson because it, there's a report that he's pretty much assured to go back to Buffalo as being Robin Leonard's backup. So I kind of crossed him off the list.

But I guess you'd put him amongst those two as well. Yeah, I think there's a bit of separation between Johnson and the other two guys. That's just my personal view. I like Johnson, but to me, he's more pure backup at the stage and a backup who can play, which is the only kind of backup you should be interested in. But both Elliot and Mason to me are guys. that I have a lot of time for, but not necessarily guys I'd want to anoint starting goalies. Jonathan, can I interest you in the literal definition of league average in Ryan Miller?

Yeah, I'm probably good there unless he's... The problem with Miller is it's all going to depend on contract. His reputation has exceeded his results for many years now. Yeah, I think the most interesting name just based on what he'll probably cost and what he could provide you is Jonas and Roth here. And I know that... Who greatest hits? Well, here's the thing.

He had the six horrible games last year to start the season. And he was just instantly the motor and never wanted to making it back. Mostly because of a pedigree and stature, I feel like if he was a former first round pick, who was a more like a six four, more traditional goalie, he probably would have been back. But he showed that he's clearly too good for the H.L level. I mean, he killed it in San Diego, both of the regular season and in the, and the Colorado Cup playoffs with the Ducks affiliate. And I, you know, he was very good for the Kings the year before.

You know, we can get into whether that system lends itself to goalies having good numbers. But I mean, at the end of the day, like, I definitely think that for the bare minimum, he could be a very serviceable backup who could eat some starts for you and not completely do you in. And we saw last season that for a lot of teams, that would be a massive upgrade. So I kind of like Jonas Anrock for that. yeah i do too i uh he was really the only guy of the the the the the the the backup and and maybe like he's the only really bargain min guy on the the goalie market this this year i think yeah well i mean that's a assuming that you're viewing

jm my boy jf marubei as a number one goalie and not even including on that list because uh i assuming he's a real person i think jf larubay is going to do very well next season um probably in the hl but um Yeah, very good, very good American League goalie. Yes. Well, you know, good American League goalie. Yeah, that's not get crazy. Yeah, there's, there's, it's not great.

But obviously, as we said, at least with goalies, if you're really in the market for a one, I think that the trade route is the most logical option. Yeah, it's, I feel like that's kind of the conclusion we've come to at all positions, which. Well, I'm glad we, I'm glad we did a like a 75-minute podcast on a free agency preview to come to a conclusion that you shouldn't sign any free agents, you should actually just work the trade market. Well, I was, I was wondering why we spent 20 minutes on the oilers, but it wasn't really a mystery

as I, as I glanced at my list of free agents, I went, well, I guess we got to talk about something. Well, it's good that we did that at the start of the show, so we kind of rope the listeners in and they listen for a bit, and now they maybe they just kind of feel committed to see this thing through and they've actually listened to the end, because if we started with this stuff, we probably would have gotten a lot of people tuning out. Well, they probably assume that at some point we're going to talk about somebody, who actually matters, right?

Like we wouldn't talk this long about a bunch of second tier guys for just no reason. Well, we can only work with what we're given. I mean, we're not the ones picking who's available. Well, you know what? Maybe that's the takeaway from this is that NHL teams are just getting so good at not, or at locking up guys who have value that there's just nothing making it to free agency. Yes, that's what's happening. Actually, in all seriousness, though, you know what I think it is?

I think it's the Vegas effect where a lot of teams needed guys signed for two years for their exposed lists. Yeah, definitely. I think, well, I mean, next year's class looks very intriguing, but obviously some of the bigger names will probably be off the board by the time we get to that point. But that's discussion for another day. Jonathan, thanks for taking the time. Good luck with all the baby duties and enjoy the free agency bonanza. And we'll check in with you sometime down the road.

Sounds good, Dimitri. As always, it's a pleasure. All right, chat soon. The Hockey PDOCast with Dmitri Filipovich. Follow on Twitter at Dim Philipovich and on SoundCloud at soundcloud.com slash hockey pdiocast.