Welcome back to The Contrarian, the feature where you state the obvious and then I tell you why you’re wrong.
It’s been over a year since we’ve done this, because I forgot I’ve been waiting for you to come up with some worthy challenges. But with Slow News Summer crawling along, this is as good a time as any for me to do what modern sports media is apparently supposed to do best: Argue loudly and aggressively for positions I may or may not actually believe in.
We’re one day away from the biggest international showdown in 15 years, with Team USA hosting Team Canada in a grudge match that will feature all sorts of bad blood both on and off the ice.
And I’m going to be honest: My tummy hurts.
I know you're probably here looking for some sort of preview, or maybe historical context. I can’t do it. Not today. Right now, I could use a distraction.
So instead, we’re going to get dumb today. Call it a palette-cleanser. This is an idea I’ve had on my “too dumb to actually do” list – yes, of course that list exists, don’t act like you’re remotely surprised – for a while now, but it popped into my head again this week while watching Team USA.
That team has a pair of Connors… sort of. They’ve got Kyle Connor on the first line, and Connor Hellebuyck is goal. That had me wondering if Kyle Connor Hellebuyck would be the best combined name in international hockey history. And if we reach over to Team Canada, would Kyle Connor McDavid be the best offensive combo?
I have no idea, so I’m going to waste some of your valuable time figuring it out.
>> Read the full post at The Athletic
(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free trial.)
We’re days away from the trade deadline. Does anyone know who’s going where?
Yes. I do. I figured it all out a few days ago, because I’m smart like that. However, both the NHL and my editors have asked me not to spoil the suspense, and James Duthie keep showing up outside my living room window and doing to eye-pointing gesture. So for now, I’m going to keep it vague.
Here are 16 players that we typically hear about at deadline time. Will your team be adding a few, or maybe trading them away? Yes, absolutely, but that’s all I can say for now.
>> Read the full post at The Athletic
(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free trial.)
On this week's episode of the Puck Soup podcast:
- The Kraken pick 30 players and make... zero side deals?
- Seriously we're not sure what Ron Francis is doing
- NHL draft preview
- Luke Prokop comes out
- Logan Mailloux drops out
- Big names that could be about to move in a trade
- OUFL pets that aren't dogs or cats, and more...
>> Stream it now:
>> Or, listen on The Athletic or subscribe on iTunes.
>> Get weekly mailbags and special bonus episodes by supporting Puck Soup on Patreon for $5.
NHL teams sure do love to hire former players for important jobs. These days, if your favorite player retires, it’s probably not goodbye. Just give it a few years, and he’ll be back as coach or GM or to be determined.
Sometimes it works. Joe Sakic could win GM of the Year honors for his work in Colorado, while Rod Brind’Amour is the favorite for this year’s Jack Adams. Sometimes it doesn’t, like Wayne Gretzky’s coaching career or Mike Milbury as GM. Jim Benning and Travis Green, two former players, didn’t have a great year in Vancouver, but Bill Guerin and Dean Evason did pretty well in Minnesota. Lou Lamoriello and Barry Trotz never played a shift in the NHL, and neither did Julien BriseBoise or Jon Cooper, while Bob Murray and Dallas Eakins played plenty. It’s kind of all over the map.
Today, let’s come at the question from a different angle. Who’d win a head-to-head matchup, a team made up entirely of NHL stars who went on to become coaches, or those who went on to become GMs?
You’re already starting to come up with names for both teams, and that’s half the fun. But first, a few ground rules:
– We’ll build two full rosters of 12 forwards, six defensemen and two goalies, without worrying too much about position beyond that. We’ll go back over all of NHL history, but we’ll give priority to guys from the modern era, because I’m tod it’s more fun if reader know who I’m talking about.
– To be clear, we’re looking to build our two teams based on how good the player was, not necessarily what they did as coach or GM. You shouldn’t hire Wayne Gretzky to coach your favorite team, but you do want him on your Team Coach roster here.
– In the case of guys who spent time as both coach and GM, we’ll assign them to a team based on which job they held the longest. We’re looking for NHL jobs only, not WHA or other leagues. And assistants aren’t in play – you need to have held the real job.
– Finally, we’re going to limit this to guys who held the job for more than one full season. It turns out a lot of guys got hired for very short stints, especially on the coaching side, and we don’t want to fill our roster up with ringers.
Take a moment to see if you can figure out which side is going to win, and how many names your favorite team will supply. OK, let’s see how this plays out…
So yeah, let’s start with the obvious pick for Team Coach: the greatest player in NHL history, Wayne Gretzky. He never got the Coyotes into the playoffs in four years behind their bench, apparently because yelling “Just do what I used to do” isn’t really a strategy. That doesn’t matter here, as he gives Team Coach a huge head start.
For his wingers, we’ll reach back into history for Alex Delvecchio, who coached the Wings for parts of four seasons (and was their GM for three). On the other wing, let’s slot in Denis Savard, who’s top claim to fame behind the Blackhawks bench was being fired and replaced by Joel Quenneville. Gretzky, Savard and Delvecchio give us about 5,500 points worth of production, over half of which comes from Gretzky. Pretty good!
Team GM doesn’t have any Gretzky-level stars available, but they come pretty close. Let’s start them with Phil Esposito, who held the job with both the Rangers and Lightning and was a complete and certifiable madman the whole time. (Seriously, look at his trading record in just three years in New York.) We’ll give him Terrible Ted Lindsay on one wing, thanks to three seasons running the Red Wings in the late 70s.
The other pick for a spot on Team GM’s top line came with some controversy. I originally assumed that Brett Hull would be an easy pick, based on his two seasons in Dallas. But Hull shared the job with Les Jackson, with both listed as co-GMs. Should that count? The pair held the job for less that two seasons, meaning if we give Hull 50% credit he’ll fall just short of our one-year cut off. But I’m not an NHL replay official and I’m not here to pull goals off the board on a technicality, so Brett Hull is on the team.
The edge probably has to go to Team Coach here just based on having Gretzky, but it ends up being closer than you might expect – and maybe even tilts to Team GM if Lindsay catches anyone with their head down. Which he will.
We’ll start Team Coach’s second line with another Hall-of-Fame center in Adam Oates. His brief stint as Devils co-coach with Scott Stevens was even weirder than the Brett Hull thing, but luckily he had a few years in Washington to make sure he qualifies. We’ll reach back into history to give him a pair of Hart Trophy winners as his linemates, in Milt Schmidt and Toe Blake. Schmidt had some strong seasons behind the bench in Boston and two more he’d rather forget in Washington, while Blake may be the only Hall-of-Fame player who actually went on to even more success as coach.
Team GM will stay in the modern era with a trio current GMs you were probably waiting to see. We’ll start with Steve Yzerman and Joe Sakic. Granted, it will feel a little bit weird to see them on the same line given that the Red Wings and Avalanche had a bit of a rivalry back in the day, but we’re figuring they can get along well enough to rack up some offense. We’ll round out the line with Ron Francis, giving us the fifth, seventh and ninth highest scoring players of all-time on one line. Yeah, that’s probably manageable.
It’s always tough to compare across eras, and Blake and Schmidt were legitimate stars in their day, but I think Team GM takes this one and it isn’t especially close.
>> Read the full post at The Athletic
(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free trial.)
With no games to cover, we’ve spent a big chunk of the last few weeks debating the best players to wear every number. A group of us put together a list that covered the entire NHL, and various team sites have done lists for individual franchises. As a confessed history nerd, it’s all been a fun trip down memory lane. It’s always nice to remember the greatest to ever lace up the skates.
But really, why should the best of the best get all the attention? We all know about the legends who wore numbers like 99, or 4, or 66 or 77. But what about the other 99.9 percent of NHL players who never came close to making their numbers iconic? They deserve some attention too.
Today, they’re going to get it, as I work through the very worst players to wear every number in NHL history.
Of course, “worst” is subjective, especially when you’re talking about guys who managed to crack the highest level of pro hockey in the world. In some cases, they might actually be the worst, based on their career output. In others, they’ll be players who had an especially bad game or stretch or season while wearing a certain number. A lot of these are just names I remember and want to tell you a story about. Honestly, this whole thing is pretty much just an excuse to Remember Some Guys. Please don’t be mad at me if somebody you know is on the list.
With all that said, let’s settle in for some NHL History 101. Literally … that’s how many numbers we’ve got to go through. Let’s see how many I can get you to agree with.
(Unless otherwise specified, all jersey number data is via hockey-reference.com.)
The only No. 0 in modern NHL history was a decent player and went on to become a better agent. He was also way too into getting his teammates to do weird lip-synch videos, both in Calgary and later in Washington. He even got a producer credit. I’ll leave it to the reader as the whether that’s a good thing.
This is such a good number for a goaltender, but only Biron and John Davidson ever wore it. Biron lasted just three games and posted a 5.05 GAA, so maybe switching wasn’t the worst idea.
Here’s the thing about DiPietro’s career: It was better than you remember it. He obviously never lived up to the crazy contract, but he played for over a decade and had some good years, including one where he finished in the top ten in Vezina voting. He did all that wearing No. 39, though; it was only his rookie season where the Islanders had him wear No. 1, apparently to remind everyone that they’d just used the first overall pick on him. No pressure, kid. He went 3-15-1, which seems like a bad sign, before switching numbers early in his second season.
Marotte was a solid defenceman who bounced around the NHL for 12 seasons (and one monster trade), playing for five teams and wearing five different numbers in the process. But it was while he was wearing No. 2 in Chicago in 1967-68 that he set a dubious single-season record that still stands by taking 154 shots on goal without scoring once.
Wolf played two partial seasons with the Penguins in the early 80s while wearing No. 6, and that was apparently enough to earn him a promotion to the more traditional defenceman’s No. 3. He lasted five games, had zero points, got in a crazy fight with John Wensink in which he both pulled his hair and punched him in the package, and was never seen in the NHL again.
Some records will never be broken. Gretzky’s 92 goals. Brodeur’s 691 wins. Mikkelson’s -82 in just 59 games for the 1974-75 Caps. Good news: He switched numbers and wore No. 3 for the rest of his NHL career. Bad news: That lasted one game.
You may remember Yan from our “worst players ever traded straight-up for a Hall-of-Famer” post. In his case, that was Igor Larionov, who went from Florida to Detroit for Golubovsky in 2000. The Wings got three seasons of Larionov, including a triple-overtime winner in the Stanley Cup final. The Panthers got six games of Golubovsky before he headed back to Russia. Slight edge Detroit.
He lasted one NHL season and the most memorable thing about him is that his name looks like what would happen if your hand slipped while trying to type “Martin Straka.” Here’s the thing: He was once actually traded for Martin Straka. This bothers me more than it should.
>> Read the full post at The Athletic
(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free 90-day trial.)
I think there’s a good case to be made that Ottawa Senators fans just endured one of the most depressing trade deadlines in NHL history.
Ottawa ended up trading away three veterans, including the team’s most popular player in Mark Stone, plus their next two leading goal scorers in Matt Duchene and Ryan Dzingel. Just in terms of talent going out the door, the Senators’ 2019 deadline exodus is hard to match.
But that’s not what makes the weekend so depressing. Instead, it’s the context here that makes it all sting so much. The Senators wanted to re-sign Duchene and Stone, but apparently couldn’t get them to buy into the team’s long-term vision for a return to contention. Coming on the heels of the Erik Karlsson trade, it’s hard for fans to shake the feeling that their best players just don’t want to be there anymore. And so three more were traded away, leaving behind some good picks and prospects but also a husk of a roster that seems destined to finish dead last. And of course, the Sens can’t even look forward to the draft lottery, because they traded away their first-round pick for one of those players who just said goodbye.
So yeah … not fun. But we’re all about optimism around here, so let’s see if we can find some for Ottawa fans. I went back and looked at five other trade deadlines in modern NHL history that left fans feeling miserable, to see if we could find some small rays of positivity for the Senators.
This might feel like rock bottom in Ottawa. But it felt at least a little like that in these towns too, and maybe we can draw some lessons from that. Cheer up, Sens fans. There are brighter days ahead.
The setup: The Flames were about to miss the playoffs for the fourth straight year and the team hadn’t won a round since their 2004 run to the final. For years, there had been rumors that the team would have no choice but to trade franchise icon Jarome Iginla. Year after year, the deadline would pass without a move, and with hope that Iginla could somehow lead the team on one more run at an elusive Cup. But with the Flames struggling and his contract expiring, the 2013 deadline really did feel like the time had come.
What happened: After nearly 17 years, Flames fans finally heard the news they’d been dreading: Iginla had been traded. And then, a few minutes later, they heard it again.
In one of the weirder deadline week moments in recent history, Iginla was reported to have been dealt to the Bruins, only to turn out to actually be headed to Pittsburgh. The deal ended up being Iginla for Kenny Agostino, Ben Hanowski and a first.
Why it hurt: Flames fans got to enjoy the gut punch of the first deal, followed by a momentary reprieve, and then a second uppercut. When the dust settled, the trade felt like the end of an era. And it really was – Iginla finished as the Flames’ career leader in just about every major scoring stat, but never did win that Stanley Cup.
To make matters worse, this is one of those deals that really didn’t work out for anyone in hindsight. Iginla and the Penguins ended up being swept by the Bruins in the playoffs. He’d bounce around three more teams in four years, missing the playoffs in each of his last three seasons. And the Flames didn’t really get anything out of the deal; Agostino and Hanowski didn’t contribute much and they used the first-round pick on Morgan Klimchuk.
In hindsight, both Iginla and the Flames waited too long to move on. You almost wonder if it wouldn’t have been better for everyone if he’d stuck around and just ended his career in Calgary.
But the good news is: The Flames struggled through one more miserable season, but were back in the playoffs by 2015, and even won a round. They haven’t won a playoff game since, but that should change this year. It’s been a long six years, but the Flames are contenders again. It can be done!
Sens fans optimism index: That’s … well, that’s not bad, I guess. But Senators fans are probably hoping to have more to look forward to than one playoff round win in the next five years or so. Let’s see if we can find a team that went on to win a Cup.
The setup: Much like the Flames and Iginla, the Bruins were a bad team with an aging superstar running out of time to win a Cup. In this case, it was Ray Bourque, who was heading down the stretch on his 21st season in Boston. The Bruins had been reasonably good over the years, even winning a round in 1999. But the 1999-00 season had gone off the rails, and it was clear that a rebuild was on the way.
With Bourque nearing the end of his career, it was time for Bruins fans to consider the unthinkable: Watching him chase a Cup while wearing another team’s logo.
What happened: The rumor mill had Bourque staying east, with the Flyers emerging as the favorites. But in a mild surprise, the Bruins sent him to the Avalanche instead. Despite how you might remember it, Bourque didn’t go right out and win a Cup in Colorado that year. But he decided to come back for one final season, and this time he and the Avalanche went all the way, leading to the greatest Cup handoff in history.
Why it hurt: The Bruins didn’t get much out of the deal, although that wasn’t even really the point. Instead, it was about finding the right place for Bourque to chase his title. In that sense, the deal was a success, albeit a delayed one. But it was also an acknowledgement that an era was ending without a title in Boston. And while Bruins fans cheered Bourque on in Colorado, seeing him finally lift a Cup in another uniform was a bittersweet moment.
But the good news is: The Bruins did eventually recover and win that Stanley Cup, although it took 11 years to do it.
Sens fans optimism index: Guys, we’re trying to make Senators fans feel better here. Surely we can come up with a slightly better rebound story than one that takes over a decade. Come on, these folks are hurting here – let’s find them a team they can really look up to?
>> Read the full post at The Athletic
(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free seven-day trial.)
What’s the most important trade in NHL history?
Easy. Wayne Gretzky being traded from the Oilers to the Kings in 1988. There’s really no debate. That one’s number one by a mile.
Cool, good post. See you in a few days.
(Editor’s note: Uh, Sean … we were kind of hoping for more than 40 words out of this one.)
Huh. OK. In that case, let’s up the degree of difficulty by changing the question around.
What’s the second most important trade in NHL history?
Now things get tougher, in large part because the Gretzky trade was such a game-changer that it overshadows everything else. That trade changed the league’s financial landscape, reset how hockey was viewed in the U.S. and is directly responsible for the existence of about a half-dozen of today’s teams. Forget the NHL, you could make a solid argument that it’s the most important trade in the history of sports.
So sure, the drop down to second place is going to be a big one. But that’s what makes the debate fun, because once you get past Gretzky, the field suddenly gets crowded.
Note that we’re not talking about the “biggest” trade, in terms of the number of players or even the sheer star power involved. What we’re looking for here is importance. That’s an admittedly fuzzy concept, but think of it this way: If you go back and undo the deal, how much of NHL history changes?
So with all due respect to Alexandre Daigle, let’s take some time to remember number two – or at least the contenders for that crown. Here are 10 possibilities that I think can make the strongest case.
The trade: On June 30, 1992, the Nordiques sent Eric Lindros to the Flyers for Peter Forsberg, Steve Duchesne, Mike Ricci, Ron Hextall, Kerry Huffman, Chris Simon, two first-round picks and $15,000,000.
The case for: Read that list of names again. Then remember that Lindros hadn’t played a single NHL game at this point. It was an almost unfathomably huge haul for one teenaged prospect – and it may not even have been the best deal the Nordiques could get, given that they preferred the Rangers’ offer.
At the time, Lindros was considered the best prospect to come into the league since Mario Lemieux, and maybe even the best ever. He never quite lived up to that hype in Philadelphia, but he did win a Hart Trophy and led the Flyers to the Stanley Cup final. Meanwhile, Forsberg became arguably the best player in the deal and helped the Nordiques win two Cups in Colorado.
The case against: Both Lindros and Forsberg had their careers shortened by injury, so the trade’s impact wasn’t quite what it could have been. Still, that feels like nitpicking.
The trade: On Oct. 4, 1991, the Oilers traded Mark Messier to the Rangers for Bernie Nicholls, Steven Rice, Louie DeBrusk and future considerations.
The case for: For better or worse, this trade defined the next decade and more for both teams. Against all odds, the Oilers had survived the Gretzky trade and won another Cup in 1990. But Messier’s exit signaled the true end of the dynasty and the Oilers’ new role as one of the NHL’s have-nots. (A point that was driven home when Nicholls initially refused to report.)
As for the Rangers, they watched Messier win the Hart while guiding them to the Presidents’ Trophy in his first season. But the big moment came in 1994, when they finally put an end to the “1940” chants by winning the franchise’s first Stanley Cup in over half a century. It was Messier who led them there, most memorably with his guaranteed win against the Devils. And it was Messier who was the one to receive the Cup handoff in front of a roaring MSG crowd.
Messier would go on to captain the Rangers until 2004, not counting the three years he took off from 1997 to 2000 to go do missionary work, and is often ranked as the greatest Ranger of all-time. And maybe even more importantly, Messier and the Rangers made the NHL seem cool and trendy for just about the first time ever.
The case against: New commissioner Gary Bettman decided that the Rangers’ win made for the perfect time for a lockout, and any momentum the NHL was riding was squandered. Rangers fans were too delirious to care, but this trade’s impact beyond New York and Edmonton didn’t end up being as big as it could have been.
>> Read the full post at The Athletic
(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free seven-day trial.)
In the Friday Grab Bag:
- Should Joel Quenneville go to Philadelphia? I list out some pros and cons.
- A playoff format idea that's so crazy it just might work
- An obscure player who was a savage bust
- The week's three comedy stars are all adorable children
- And we celebrate the return of the Whalers by breaking down the 1980s beauty of Whalermania.
>> Read the full post at The Athletic
In this week's episode of Biscuits, the Vice Sports hockey podcast:
- I discuss the end of the Maple Leafs' season, and what comes next
- A roundup for the second round
- How bad has the officiating been?
- The Carolina front office drama continues
- Brian Burke moves on
- Draft lottery reactions
- Reader questions and lots more...
>> Stream it now:
>> Or, subscribe on iTunes.
In this week's episode of Biscuits, the Vice Sports hockey podcast:
- The GMs gather for the annual meeting, and oh god that means we have to talk about interference again
- Everyone's mad at Colin Campbell for saying goalies embellish even though he's right
- Why do the GMs get to decide the rules anyway?
- Dave came up with 42 ways to fix the NHL; I have a few objections
- The Hurricanes go cheap on their hunt for a new GM
- The great Hart Trophy war of 2018 drags on with no end in sight
- I am repeatedly accused of being a Habs fan
- Reader questions and lots more
>> Stream it now:
>> Or, subscribe on iTunes.
In this week's episode of Biscuits, the Vice Sports hockey podcast:
- Alexander Ovechkin gets his 600th; where does he rank all-time?
- Why are we surprised that Carolina fired Ron Francis?
- The Leafs front office drama
- Dave makes fun of the way I say "drama"
- Should there be a limit on winning draft lotteries?
- The playoff format is weird, and we come up with a better way
- Evgeni Malkin's case for the Hart Trophy
- Our predictions for who'll come out of the Western wildcard race
- Reader questions and lots more...
>> Stream it now:
>> Or, subscribe on iTunes.
Hockey fans love to review, rank and debate draft classes. Is this year’s any good? Was 2003 better than 1979? How does the Oilers’ class of 1980 hold up against the Red Wings’ haul in 1989?
But what about the guys who make those draft picks? Each year also brings a new class of NHL GMs, and like draft picks, some years are better than others. This off-season is shaping up to be a busy one in that regard, with plenty of GMs on the hot seat and the possibility of some major changes around NHL front offices.
With that in mind, it seems like a good time to look back at the 2014 off-season that saw eight teams anoint a new GM. According to the archives over at NHL Trade Tracker, that was the busiest single year of turnover since 2006, which was the year a bunch of NHL teams realized that the new post-lockout rules would require some fresh thinking. Other high-turnover years include 2000 (eight new GMs), 1997 (nine, including the expansion Predators), 1994 (eight) and 1974 (nine, including the expansion Scouts and Capitals).
Why was 2014 so busy? It’s hard to say, although history shows that the years immediately before and after lockouts tend to bring significant change to NHL front offices. The 2013 class had been busy in its own right, with six changes, and seven if you count coach Patrick Roy being briefly slotted in ahead of Greg Sherman on the Avs’ org chart. But the years before had been unusually stable, with just one new GM each in 2011 and 2012, so there was some pent-up demand for change. That feels a little like the situation right now, with only six GM changes (including the first hire for the expansion Golden Knights) since July 2015. That’s not quite as extreme as the situation heading into 2013 and 2014, but it’s not far off, so we could be in for a rocky few months ahead.
Of those eight GMs hired in 2014, seven are still on the job. (We pause here to sadly pour one out for Tim Murray.) But the clock may be ticking on them. We often say that a new GM deserves five years to implement a plan, and the Class of 2014 is about to head into year five. And history suggests that we should expect at least a few to not even make it that far – from that busy class of 2013, only Jim Nill and Jarmo Kekalainen are still employed.
So which of the 2014 GMs is in the most danger of not making it to 2019? And who’s got the best shot of being remembered as the class of the, uh, class? Let’s run through the seven names and see if we can figure it out.
The hiring: After missing the playoffs and firing Mike Gillis at the end of the season, the Canucks hired Benning away from the Boston Bruins, where he’d served as assistant GM, on May 21.
Record since: 133-142-36, one playoff appearance
Best moves: Benning came into the job with a reputation for drafting well, and he’s largely lived up to that. Getting Brock Boeser 23rd overall in 2015 was a major win, and 2017 fifth-overall pick Elias Pettersson looks like the real deal. Benning also landed a good prospect from Ottawa for the husk of Alex Burrows, and turned Sven Baertschi into a reasonably successful reclamation project from the Flames.
Worst moves: Given Benning’s image as a draft guru, 2016 pick Olli Juolevi looks like a miss. Worse, the Loui Eriksson signing felt like a flat-out disaster from day one. But the biggest objection to Benning’s tenure in Vancouver is probably the moves he didn’t make. From rarely acquiring draft picks to re-signing Erik Gudbranson to holding onto Chris Tanev, Benning hasn’t tried for the sort of full-scale teardown many fans seem to want to see.
Current outlook: A lot better than it was a month ago, thanks to the three-year extension he signed in February. That move came as a bit of a surprise, with the team on track to finish in the bottom five for the third straight year. Rebuilds take time, sure, but often it doesn’t seem like Benning knows the Canucks are rebuilding.
Odds of seeing 2019: Excellent. The importance of GM extensions can be overstated – remember when Dave Nonis got a five-year deal in 2013, Leafs fans freaked out, and then he was gone less than two years later? – but the vote of confidence from ownership and Trevor Linden means Benning will make it to the new year. Will he see his five-year anniversary in May? That looks likely, too, but another year without progress could call it into question.
We’re less than three weeks away from the trade deadline, which means GMs around the league are huddling with their scouts, putting together their wish lists, and working the phones. But which ones are under the most pressure as the clock ticks down?
The short answer, of course, is “all of them.” Nobody gets to take the month off when the deadline is closing in, and every team will be expected to do something. Even minor moves can make or break a team’s hopes, so all 31 GMs are feeling the heat.
But that heat isn’t the same for everyone. I’m sure George McPhee wants to make the right moves for his Golden Knights, but he’s basically playing with house money at this point. But other GMs around the league aren’t so lucky. In some cases, their jobs may be on the line. In others, the short or even long-term future of their teams are at stake.
That’s not fun for the GMs. But it’s fun for us as fans, as we wait to see how (or if) they can maneuver their way through the coming weeks. So today, let’s pick out a dozen GMs who are facing the most pressure over the next few days and weeks, and count them down as the temperature climbs up.
The league’s youngest GM is watching his team stumble through a disastrous season. Normally that would be a recipe for a high-pressure deadline as he faced down the need to salvage some sort of value out of a nightmare year.
But the Coyotes aren’t a team with any obvious rentals in play. That’s too bad, because Chayka did a great job on last year’s Martin Hanzal trade. This year’s roster doesn’t seem like it will yield any similar opportunities, short of an unexpected move involving Oliver Ekman-Larsson. Chayka is already managing expectations towards a quiet deadline. That will make for a relatively low-pressure February compared to a typical last-place team. His off-season might be a different story.
Rutherford’s a good example of the difference between being under pressure and being on the hot seat. While there’s obviously a big overlap between those two categories, Rutherford’s a guy who could sit back and watch his team crash and burn without being in any danger of losing his job. Two consecutive Cup rings will do that for a guy.
But you know what’s better than two straight Cups? Three straight. That’s the opportunity Rutherford and the Penguins have, and it’s one that nobody’s managed to pull off in almost 35 years. Wayne Gretzky’s Oilers, Mario Lemieux’s Penguins, Steve Yzerman’s Red Wings… they all managed two straight titles, but couldn’t three-peat. The Pens have a chance, and lately they’ve finally started looking the part. But they still have their share of holes, and reinforcements would help.
We’ve been hearing all year that Rutherford was working on something big. With the opportunity at achieving genuine dynasty status sitting right in front of him, it’s going to be tempting to do everything he can to give his team its best shot.
Here are two words that always bring the pressure for an NHL GM: “playoff drought.” Here are two more: “new owner.” Francis checks both boxes, with a league-leading eight-season absence from the post-season and a new owner in Tom Dundon who probably wouldn’t like to see that continue. In theory, that should be keeping Francis awake at night.
But, of course, this isn’t an ordinary situation. Francis isn’t just the GM; he’s the best player the team has ever had. Even if the Hurricanes miss the playoffs yet again, is an owner who’s been embracing the team’s history really going to fire a guy who was literally nicknamed “Ronnie Franchise”? It feels unlikely. But would he boot him upstairs to bring in new blood? Francis may prefer not to find out.
With the all-star rosters announced last week, everyone has spent the last few days compiling their lists of snubs. That’s pretty much an annual tradition at this point, and it’s all in good fun, even though a lot of the “snubs” are players who probably didn’t want to go in the first place.
But what if we aimed a little higher? What’s the best all-time roster you could assemble out of players who went their entire career without ever being recognized with a significant NHL honour?
We’re not talking midseason all-star picks here – with the one-player-per-team rule, those don’t really tell us much about who deserved what. Instead, let’s go with the big stuff. We’re looking for players who went their entire NHL career without ever:
1) Being a finalist for one of the major awards: Hart, Norris, Vezina or Calder; or
2) Being voted a first- or second-team all-star at the end of the season
You can call them the all-snub squad if you want to. Personally, I’m going to go with the Flying Federkos, in honour of the player who pretty much epitomizes the concept. Longtime Blues centre Bernie Federko scored 1,130 points over a 14-year career, which was good enough to get him into the Hall of Fame. But he never finished higher than fourth in all-star voting, and a 10th-place finish in 1986 was his best Hart Trophy showing.
So Federko’s our captain. But without getting ahead of ourselves, he’s not our best player, or even our first-line centre. And he’s far from the only Hall of Famer who’s going to make our squad. Let’s start up front, where there’s plenty of firepower to go around.
(All award-voting data comes from the invaluable Hockey Reference site.)
—
Centre: Ron Francis
Yes, despite a 22-season career that left him holding down spots in the all-time top five for points, assists and games played, Francis qualifies for our team. He did win some secondary honours, such as a Selke and three Lady Byngs. But he was never a post-season all-star, and never even finished in the top five in Hart voting.
How is that possible for a guy widely regarded as an all-time legend? For one, Francis was a two-way player, and they often don’t get the respect they deserve. But the bigger problem here can be summed up in two words: Gretzky and Lemieux. The two greatest centres of all time dominated the ’80s and early ’90s, leaving players like Francis and Federko — whose career overlapped theirs — with a tough path to recognition.
Winger: Mike Gartner
Despite finishing as one of only seven members of the 700-goal club, Gartner never earned so much as a single Hart Trophy vote during an 18-season career. And his best finish in all-star voting was fourth, which he managed twice.
Winger: Glenn Anderson
We’ll finish off our first line with another Hall of Fame winger who never received a Hart vote. It’s not hard to see why — during the Oilers glory years, Anderson was typically only the fourth-best forward on his own team. He came close to earning an all-star spot in 1986, but finished just behind Mats Naslund for second-team honours. It was one of five top-five finishes in Anderson’s career.
Most of the dust has settled on the first few days of free agency, and a handful of themes have emerged. Fiscal sanity is one, as teams mostly stayed away from the sort of long-term mega-deals that almost always turn out to be mistakes. As always, much of the focus was on veteran defensemen. And the UFAs were largely overshadowed by the extensions being signed by players like Carey Price, Marc-Edouard Vlasic and (any minute now) Connor McDavid.
And then there was the heartwarming storyline that emerged on day one: homecomings. Not only did players like Joe Thornton and T.J. Oshie stay with their current teams, but plenty of guys returned to franchise they'd previously starred with. That list included names like Justin Williams, Mike Cammalleri, Scott Hartnell and Patrick Sharp.
Reunite! Saad, Sharp (CHI); Hartnell, Lindback (NSH); Dadonov (FLA); Pominville, Johnson (BUF); Cammalleri (LA); Moore (TOR); Williams (CAR)
— luke fox (@lukefoxjukebox) July 1, 2017
Bringing back a familiar face makes for a nice storyline, and it's almost always an easy sell for fans. But the NHL has a long history of players using free agency to return to a former team, and results have been mixed. Sometimes it works, sometimes it's a reminder that breakups happen for a reason.
So today, let's look back at five Hall of Fame stars who chose to return to their former team via free agency, and how those deals worked out for both sides.
The exit: After winning the Stanley Cup with the Rangers in 1994, you’d think that Messier would have been able to write his own ticket in New York. But his relationship with the Rangers' front office was always contentious, including a post-Cup holdout in 1994 that reportedly had the team thinking about trading him.
He ended up sticking around, but when free agency arrived in 1997, Messier kept his options open. Despite being widely expected to return to New York, he eventually bolted for the Canucks.
The return: It's fair to say that the Messier era did not go well in Vancouver; the whole thing was a PR disaster form Day 1, with the Rangers' great seeming to do everything short of tear the "C" off Trevor Linden's jersey and shove him onto an ice floe. By the time Messier had been bought out after three disappointing seasons, he stood as one of the most hated Canucks ever.
Meanwhile, the Rangers hadn't made the playoffs since Messier's exit. There wasn't much suspense over where he'd wind up, and he eventually signed a two-year deal, at which point he was immediately handed back the captaincy.
The result: Mixed. Messier had an impressive 67 points in his return to New York despite turning 40 during the season, and he managed to play three more seasons after that. But he never got the Rangers back to the postseason, meaning one of the greatest winners in the sport's history went his last seven seasons without appearing in a single playoff game.
The Nashville Predators suffered one of the strangest losses in Stanley Cup final history on Monday, erasing a 3-0 deficit while holding the Penguins without a shot for 37 straight minutes before allowing a back-breaking winning goal late in the third.
The way they lost was bad enough. But just losing at all is a big deal. After all, as we're constantly told, the team that wins Game 1 in the final wins almost 80 percent the series, including each of the last five. To hear some tell it, this one's basically over.
It's tough times to be a Nashville fan. So as we head into Wednesday's crucial second game, let's offer up some hope for anyone rooting for the Predators. Here are five times in Stanley Cup final history that Game 1 didn't end up mattering, and Game 2 turned out to be the series turning point.
After one game: Calgary went into the final sporting a distinct "team of destiny" feel. After years of living in the Oilers' shadow, the Flames had knocked off their provincial rivals in seven games on Steve Smith's infamous own goal. They arrived in the final holding home ice advantage, and opened the series with a convincing 5-2 win over the Canadiens.
But then: Looking to take a 2-0 series lead back to Montreal, the Flames opened the scoring in the first and added another goal just seconds into the second period. But they let the Habs off the mat, as Montreal came back to send the game to overtime. Once they got there, it didn't take long to make some history.
Brian Skrudland's overtime goal was the fastest in playoff history, and knotted the series at a game apiece.
The rest of the way: The Canadiens didn't drop another game in the series, winning three straight tight ones to take the Stanley Cup in five games.
After one game: The Bruins and Flyers had been the league's two best teams by a wide margin during the season, with Boston earning home ice throughout the playoffs by a single point thanks to a win on the season's final day. They cashed in on that home ice advantage in Game 1, when Bobby Orr's goal with seconds left in regulation gave them a 3-2 win and a series lead.
But then: The Bruins came out strong in Game 2, scoring twice late in the first to take a 2-0 lead to intermission. The Flyers closed the gap with a goal in the second, but couldn't get any closer as regulation ticked away. But with the Bruins on the verge of taking a two-game lead in the series, Andre Dupont tied it with less than a minute to play, sending the game to overtime. That's where Bobby Clarke scored what may well be the most important goal in franchise history.
The rest of the way: The Flyers would ride the momentum from Clarke's goal to a pair of wins on home ice. The Bruins avoided elimination in Game 5 in Boston, but the Flyers closed the series with a 1-0 win back in Philadelphia, earning the franchise's first Stanley Cup and becoming the first modern expansion team to capture a championship.
In the Friday Grab Bag:
- It's OK to like that trade your team just made
- Conditional draft picks (or why the NHL hates you, part 847)
- An obscure player who was involved in two important trades
- The week's three comedy stars
- And a look back at the night that Matthew Barnaby tragically died on the ice, only to be brought back to life by Garth Snow...
Today is trade deadline day, which means you can expect to hear certain words repeated over and over. "Buyers." "Sellers." "Rentals." Those are the key terms on a day filled with bad teams flipping players to good teams in return for future assets.
But back in the old days, there used to be a different term that showed up occasionally on days like today: "Hockey trades."
To be honest, back then we pretty much just called them "trades," and they went something like this: Two teams exchanged players in a deal where both sides were trying to get better. Nobody was throwing in the towel and rebuilding, and nobody was sacrificing future assets for a short-term boost. Just two teams, both trying to improve their rosters right now, and using a trade to do it.
I know. Crazy stuff.
But it did happen. And we even sort of got one Tuesday night -- the Brandon Davidson/David Desharnais deal, while not anyone's idea of a blockbuster, was at least kind of hockey-ish. So today, while we wait for the rental market to heat up, let's look back at five true hockey trades from deadline history where there were no clear buyers and no sellers, just two teams trying to get the best end of a deal.
Let's start back in 1989 with a classic hockey deal. No picks, no prospects, just a forward and a defenseman on each side of the trade.
Oh, and 75% of the deal ended up in the Hall of Fame. That's not bad for a day's work.
The deal saw Capitals GM David Poile trade away Gartner, at the time the franchise's all-time leading scorer, and Murphy, who'd been a Norris finalist less than two years ago. In exchange, the North Stars gave up their top goal-scorer in Ciccarelli and a hard-nosed blueliner in Rouse.
As it turned out, none of the players stuck around in their new homes all that long. Gartner was traded again at the 1990 deadline, and by the time Ciccarelli was dealt to Detroit in 1992, all four players had moved on. Still, at the time this was an impressive blockbuster, and in hindsight it's probably the most star-studded four-player deal in league history.
My favorite part of the lore of this trade: According to reports at the time, it was finalized exactly one minute before the deadline.
The trade deadline is less than two weeks away, and most of the speculation has the Maple Leafs being relatively quiet. They’ll probably make a depth move or two, and could deal a pending UFA, but anything bigger than that would come as a surprise.
That’s likely the right move for the franchise, even if it would no doubt draw criticism from some fans who want to see the team swing for the fences. Trade deadlines are always more fun when your team goes big.
Then again, big deals aren’t always the best deals, and Leaf fans know that well. The team has had, to put it generously, a mixed history when it comes to the trade deadline. Today, let’s revisit that history with a quick ranking of every Leafs trade deadline of the last 25 seasons.
We’ll define “the deadline” as the two weeks leading up to the last day of trading, and our 25-season cutoff will take us back to 1991. Why then? Because 25 is a workable number, it essentially covers the time where the NHL’s trade deadline was a big deal, and it happens to coincide with the start of the Cliff Fletcher era. Also, it avoids having to mention the Harold Ballard era, as per my therapist’s recommendations.
We’ll rank our way down from worst to best. And we’ll start with one of the low points in recent franchise history.
25. – 2008
The deals: On the verge of missing the playoffs for a then franchise-record third straight year, the Leafs fire John Ferguson Jr. and head to the deadline firmly in fire-sale mode. Interim general manager Cliff Fletcher moves Wade Belak, Chad Kilger and Hal Gill, all for picks.
The outcome: None of the picks end up helping the Leafs, but that’s not the reason this year rates dead last on our list. No, that has more to do with who wasn’t traded – namely, the fabled Muskoka Five, the group of veterans led by Mats Sundin who decide en masse not to waive their no-trade clauses.
Fletcher is clearly furious, but his hands are tied. A golden opportunity to rebuild slips away – Tomas Kaberle would have landed the Leafs a young Jeff Carter – and the team doesn’t fully recover for years.
24. – 1997
The deals: With the Leafs on the verge of missing the playoffs for the first time in five years, Fletcher goes into sell mode. He’d already moved Doug Gilmour to the Devils a month earlier. On deadline day he sends Kirk Muller to the Panthers for prospect Jason Podollan, and Larry Murphy to the Red Wings for future considerations.
The outcome: Podollan never amounts to anything. But it’s the Murphy deal that stands out. The future considerations end up being nothing at all – Fletcher literally hands a future Hall-of-Famer over to the Red Wings as a freebie. Murphy puts in four good years in Detroit, helping them win two Cups, and the move stands as one of the most lopsided trade deadline deals in league history.
23. – 2003
The deals: In what turns out to be his last year as general manager, Pat Quinn goes all-in. He makes the Owen Nolan blockbuster, and trades draft picks for veterans Glen Wesley, Phil Housley and a returning Doug Gilmour.
The outcome: You can appreciate the effort, but in hindsight none of the moves work. Nolan gets hurt and later has a falling out with the franchise, and acquiring him costs the Leafs a first-round pick in the ridiculously stacked 2003 draft. Wesley and Housley don’t add much. And the worst of the bunch is Gilmour; his big return lasts just five shifts before his career ends on this play:
22. – 2001
The deals: In their only deadline deal, the contending Leafs trade Adam Mair and a second-round pick to the Kings for Aki Berg.
The outcome: Berg struggles badly and quickly becomes a whipping boy in Toronto. The deal somehow gets even worse when the Kings turn the second-round pick into Mike Cammalleri.
21. – 1996
The deals: With Pat Burns fired and the Leafs fading, Fletcher starts blowing things up by sending Ken Baumgartner to the Ducks and Dave Andreychuk to the Devils. But the big news is the blockbuster that brings Wendel Clark back to Toronto.
The outcome: The Clark trade ends up being widely viewed as a disaster; the Leafs give up a young Kenny Jonsson and a 1997 draft pick that turns into Roberto Luongo. It’s the deal that leads to Fletcher’s infamous “draft schmaft” comment and puts the first serious dent in his Toronto reputation. Still, if you were a Leafs fan back then, you can’t deny that Clark’s return to the Gardens was one of the decade’s best moments.
20. – 2013
The deals: In the first year of the Dave Nonis era, the Leafs only make one move, adding Ryan O’Byrne for a pick.
The outcome: You would have thought the playoff-bound Leafs would be trading for multiple assets, but as it turns out, it was for one.
 |
 |
The Athletic Hockey Show runs four days a week during the season, and will feature me with Other Sean Gentille on Wednesdays.
Puck Soup is a podcast featuring me and Ryan Lambert. We release one free episode each week during the season, plus mailbags and other bonus episodes for Patreon subscribers.
"Biscuits" was the Vice Sports hockey podcast, hosted by DGB and Dave Lozo. It ran for two seasons; the final episode was in July, 2018. You can find the archives below:
As of the 2018-19 season, my work will appear exclusively at The Athletic.
Don't have a subscription? You can sign up today by clicking the offer link at the bottom of my posts, or read for free with a one-week trial.
Some of my archives from other sites can be found here:
