Remembering 8 NHL stars who were Hall-of-Fame locks, until they weren’t

Nicklas Backstrom stepped away from hockey last week, and it got me thinking about the Hall of Fame.

Granted, that doesn’t take all that much. As my readers know, I love a good HHOF debate. In fact, we’ll be having a few later this week, as the Hall gets set to welcome its class of 2023.

If Backstrom’s career is over, he won’t be eligible for three years. I don’t think he makes it, but I suppose it’s not a sure thing. (The committee occasionally surprises us, to put it kindly.) But there was a time when Backstrom absolutely seemed like he was on a Hall of Fame track. Back in 2009-10, he was just 22 and coming off a 100-point season when those were exceedingly rare. If you’d gone around the league back then and placed bets on future Hall odds, he would have been high on anyone’s list. Just not anymore.

That’s not a rare story in the NHL, where we’re often a little too quick to slap the “HHOF lock” label on a player, only to see their candidacy fade – sometimes slowly, sometimes dramatically.

So today, let’s look back at eight NHL stars who sure seemed like future Hall-of-Famers, right up until they weren’t. I’ll give you the details, you see if you can guess the name.

>> Read the full post at The Athletic

(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free trial.)

The biggest trade involving each Canadian team combo, ranked

With less than a month to go until the trading deadline, the seven Canadian teams in the North Division are facing a dilemma. How do you work around a mandatory 14-day quarantine for players crossing the border from the United States?

Do you make your trades early so that you can still get some use out of a player down the stretch? Do you work on deadline day with an eye towards the playoffs, all but writing off the rest of the regular season? Reduce your offers to reflect that change in value? Resign yourself to riding out the year with what you already have, flaws and all, because at least those guys are already here?

Or maybe, you make the only sort of deal that won’t have to worry about quarantine. Maybe all the Canadian teams need to figure out a way to trade with each other.

That’s apparently what they may be doing, according to Craig Custance. That could create an interesting dynamic, because the history of all-Canadian trades is a decidedly mixed one. Some teams almost never trade with each other, while others have hooked up on multiple big moves. It’s all over the map.

That feels like the sort of thing that’s ripe for a ranking. So today, we’re going to go back and find the biggest trade between each of the existing Canadian teams, a total of 21 possible combinations. Then we’re going to rank them from least to most important. Along the way, we’ll meet a few of the bigger trades in NHL history, a few more that will trigger an “Oh yeah, I remember that one” moment, and some that you probably have no recollection of at all unless you were one of the players involved.

But first, a few ground rules. We’re only looking for trades involving players here, because draft pick swaps are boring. More importantly, this list is for the seven existing teams only – sorry Nordiques fans, as well as any old-timers hoping for some Montreal Wanderers content today. Did I make this rule specifically so that I wouldn’t have to relive the Wendel Clark trade? I cannot confirm or deny.

Finally, as always, we’re counting both versions of the Jets as one team, and ignoring anyone who wants to get pedantic about franchise lineages. (This also makes it possible to do a full list, since the post-Thrashers version of the Jets have yet to make any trades with a few Canadian teams.)

We’ll be digging into the NHL Trade Tracker database, with some support from Hockey Reference. Let’s start with the smallest biggest deal we can find and work our way up.

(Thanks to reader James for suggesting the idea.)

21. Calgary/Winnipeg: Akim Aliu for John Negrin

This midseason trade from 2012 didn’t get much notice at the time, because Aliu had yet to crack the NHL and Negrin had been there for just three games back in 2009. If you heard about the deal at all, it may have been because of a neat quirk: Aliu had previously been loaned to the Flames AHL affiliate that Negrin was already playing for, meaning this was technically a case of two teammates being traded for each other.

Aliu would debut for the Flames later that year, and played a total of seven games in Calgary. Negrin never made it back to the NHL.

So why does this deal make our list as the biggest ever player trade between the Jets and Flames? Because it appears to be the only one. The original Jets never made a deal with the Flames once they arrived in Calgary, and this deal is the only one they’ve made since the NHL returned to Winnipeg. I guess when these two teams get together they spend all their time taking about hockey not working in Atlanta and none of it talking trade.

20. Montreal/Ottawa: Mike Reilly for a fifth

The Habs and Senators have apparently only made three player trades in three decades. We’ve got this one from last year, the Matthew Peca deal, or Andreas Dackell for an eighth-round pick. Reilly’s at least a regular in Ottawa these days, so this one pretty much wins by default.

19. Calgary/Ottawa: The Sens get a second for Curtis Lazar

Lazar was a first-round pick who’d been hyped as a solid prospect, but by 2017 he was spinning his wheels in Ottawa. His name surfaced at the deadline, and reports that the Sens would want a high pick for him were mostly met with eyerolls – this was a guy with one point in 33 NHL games that year. Somehow, Pierre Dorion got the Flames to pay up, landing a second-round pick he turned into Alex Formenton. For their part, Calgary got 70 games and three goals out of Lazar. That’s not much, but it’s enough to nudge out a handful of even smaller Sens/Flames trades, like Nick Shore three years ago, Alex Chiasson in 2016 or the big Mark Osiecki/Chris Lindberg blockbuster from the early 90s.

18. Vancouver/Winnipeg: Ivan Hlinka for Brent Ashton

Do you know who Artur Oktyabrev or Dan Ratushny are? No? Then we’re pretty much left with this 1981 trade, which at least features two recognizable names. NHL fans probably remember Hlinka as the future coach of the Penguins, but he was a Czech legend who had a couple of 60-point seasons as a Canuck after the Jets sent his rights to Vancouver for Ashton, a useful journeyman who was immediately flipped to the Rockies for Lucien DeBlois.

17. Edmonton/Ottawa: Ales Hemsky for picks

These teams love to get together on classic “let’s remember some guys” deals involving names like Frantisek Musil, Brian Glynn and Eric Gryba. Their most recent deal was Tyler Ennis a year ago, but I’m going with the Sens’ 2014 deadline pickup of Hemsky, who was in his 11th year in Edmonton. He was OK down the stretch in Ottawa but couldn’t get them into the playoffs before departing as free agent; the Oilers got a third and a fifth for him but neither pick has played in the NHL.

16. Ottawa/Winnipeg: Dylan DeMelo for a third

Our only other option seems to be the 1993 Dmitri Filimonov trade, but this 2019 deal was a reasonably decent one that saw the Jets land a player who remains a key piece. The Senators used the pick on goalie Leevi Merilainen, who Scott Wheeler thought was a minor reach.

15. Edmonton/Vancouver: The Canucks get Gretzky’s wingman

Like most of the Smythe Division rivals, there isn’t as much of a trade history here as you might expect. There are a few deals, including the 2019 Ryan Spooner/Sam Gagner swap, but not many with an impact. I’ll go with a 1981 deadline deal that saw the Oilers send Blair MacDonald to Vancouver for Garry Lariviere and Ken Berry; none of those guys were stars, but they were three decent NHLers and MacDonald was just one year removed from a 94-point season that demonstrated the life-changing power of being Wayne Gretzky’s linemate. He couldn’t match those numbers in Vancouver, but was part of their surprise run to the 1982 final.

>> Read the full post at The Athletic.

(Want to read this post on The Athletic for free? Sign up for a free trial.)

A brief history of the Maple Leafs trading for defensemen

The Maple Leafs pulled off a major trade on Monday, acquiring Jake Muzzin from the Kings for a first-round pick and two prospects. For the most part, early reactions were positive for Toronto and the deal undeniably makes them better in the short term.

Of course, that doesn’t mean the move will work out in the long run. That’s the funny thing about trades; you can never be quite sure how they’ll be viewed in hindsight. That can be especially true when you’re dealing for help on the blueline, where finding the right fit for the right player can be tricky even if the price tag makes sense.

Luckily, the Leafs have plenty of experience in this area. Today, let’s crack open the history books and look back on the last 30 years of the Toronto Maple Leafs trading for blueline help. This isn’t meant to be a comprehensive list of each and every defenceman the team has acquired during that span (as much as I’m looking forward to all the comments along the lines of “Ummm, no Gord Kruppke?”), but we’ll cover off most of the bigger names.

Some of these moves worked. Some of them didn’t. Some of them were just confusing. And someday down the road, we’ll be able to look back and know which category the Muzzin deal belongs in.

The blockbusters

“Blockbuster” is admittedly subjective, and there may be other deals on this list that you’d argue belong in this category. But in the modern history of Leafs’ blueline deals, these three stand out. And maybe somewhat surprisingly, from a Leafs’ perspective, they mostly hold up well in hindsight.

The trade: On January 31, 2010, the Leafs sent Matt Stajan, Niklas Hagman, Ian White and Jamal Mayers to Calgary for Dion Phaneuf, Fredrik Sjostrom and Keith Aulie.

The situation: This was the first full season of the Brian Burke era and it was not going well. With the Leafs near the bottom of the league and without their own first-round pick, Burke pulled off a seven-player swap with the Flames that was built around Phaneuf, a 24-year-old who was less than two years removed from being the Norris Trophy runner-up.

The verdict: At the time, the consensus was that the Leafs had pulled off a robbery. In hindsight, not so much, as Phaneuf never lived up to the franchise-savior hype that greeted him in Toronto. Still, he was the Leafs’ captain and top defenceman for most of the next seven years and none of the players they gave up for him amounted to major losses. This trade still looks like a win on balance, even if it never came close to matching expectations.

The trade: On March 3, 2004, the Leafs acquired Brian Leetch and a fourth-round pick from the Rangers for prospects Maxim Kondratiev and Jarkko Immonen, plus a first and a second.

The situation: This was John Ferguson Jr.’s first major trade as Leafs GM and it was an all-in move at the deadline. The 2003-04 Leafs were very good and very old and with the lockout looming they represented what looked like the last chance to win a Cup during the Pat Quinn era. With his window open for a big move, Ferguson went out and landed the biggest name available in the 36-year-old Leetch.

The verdict: Leetch debuted with a three-assist night and instantly looked like the team’s best blueliner. But the Leafs didn’t win the Cup that year, falling in the second round to the Flyers. And while Leetch had a year left on his contract, it was wiped out by the lockout, so this became an expensive short-term rental. Still, none of the picks or prospects amounted to much of anything, so it’s best viewed as a smart gamble that just didn’t pay off.

The trade: On November 10, 1990, the Leafs sent forwards Ed Olczyk and Mark Osborne to the Jets for Paul Fenton and Dave Ellett.

The situation: This was the Leafs hitting the detonate button on a disastrous start to the season. A year after generating some optimism with a .500 finish, the Leafs were a 2-15-1 laughingstock when they pulled the trigger on a four-player blockbuster.

The verdict: Ellett didn’t come cheap, as Olczyk had been the Leafs best forward during his three seasons in Toronto and had only just turned 24. But while he’d play well in Winnipeg and for another decade around the NHL, the deal still worked out well enough for the Leafs as Ellett became their top blueliner for most of the next seven years and was a key piece of the Fletcher/Burns/Gilmour-era resurgence.

>> 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 worst possible salary cap situation you could create from today’s contracts?

Last​ week we tried​ to​ assemble​ a roster​ made​ up​ of some​ of the NHL’s​ best contracts. To​ add​ to the challenge​​ and avoid simply stocking up on entry-level deals, we decided to skip ahead to 2021-22 and put together the best team that would still fit under a reasonable salary cap. It turned out to be a lot of fun and at least a little bit thought-provoking, many of you weighed in with your own picks and a good time was had by all.

But more than a few readers had a suggestion: OK, now do it for the worst contracts.

My first reaction was that that sounded like fun. A cap-compliant team made up of the worst contracts in the league? That’s right up my alley.

My second reaction was that it would be easy. That was part of the appeal. Putting together the good contract roster had me looking like this guy by the end. But bad contracts? There are a ton of those! Every team has at least a few. This would be a breeze. I was in.

I got started. And then I began to actually think things through. And I realized what I had gotten myself into.

Here’s the thing: Anyone can do a simple list of the worst contracts in the NHL and lots of people have. But we’re talking about a roster of terrible NHL contracts that still fits under the salary cap, meaning we’ll have a hard time squeezing some of the worst deals in without having to fill out the roster with “bad” deals that somehow also don’t cost much.

That doesn’t just add several layers of difficulty, it barely even makes sense. It’s like putting together the best offensive team that won’t score more than 300 goals. What are we even doing here?

Luckily, “barely even makes sense” has never stopped me before. Let’s do this. Let’s build the worst possible NHL team that fits under the current cap. Or more specifically, let’s build the worst salary cap situation that would be possible in today’s NHL.

A few quick ground rules:

• This is a roster for this season, using this season’s cap and this season’s contracts. Unlike last week’s piece, there’s no reason to jump ahead to 2021-22 here. This is all for 2018-19, using the current cap of $79.5 million. And as with last week, all we care about here is cap hit; actual dollars paid out don’t matter to us.
• We’re not using any contracts that are dead money because of players that are on LTIR or whose careers are likely over. No David Clarksons, or Nathan Hortons or Marian Hossas on this team. Other than that, assume all active players are healthy – we’re not penalizing players for being injured here.
• We can’t save cap space by burying deals in the AHL, a rule that will apply to any deals that actually are buried in the AHL. We also don’t benefit from any retained salary from previous trades. We’re paying full sticker price on everything.
• We’re trying to build the worst cap situation possible, so term matters. Long deals are worse than short ones. Which means that for the purpose of our team, they’re better. Because they’re worse. You get what I’m saying.

This idea is so dumb. I love it. Let’s get to work.

(All salary info comes from CapFriendly.com. Stats for this season do not include last night’s games.)

But first, a word about “bad” contracts

It always feels a little weird to write about good and bad contracts and to realize that we always default to seeing those deals from the team’s perspective. A guy who makes too much money is considered “bad,” while a guy who makes less than he deserves goes in the “good” column.

On a certain level that makes sense. We’re fans, and ultimately the point of being a fan is to root for teams collectively, not individual players. This is a hard cap league now, meaning salaries matter. But it still feels strange to look at an underpaid player as always being a good thing, even when the difference might just be going straight into some billionaire owner’s yacht fund. And it’s especially strange to think that someone wanting to make as much money as they can has made a mistake when all of us feel the same way about our own jobs.

Let’s be clear: Every one of the guys we’re going to list in today’s piece earned his contract. They’re among the best few hundred hockey players in the world, playing in a league that generates billions in revenue based on people wanting to watch them play. Not one of them held anybody hostage, and each of them ultimately ended up signing an offer that their team put in front of them. If those turned out to be bad contracts, it’s only because their teams screwed up.

We are also going to screw up, although in our case we can at least claim to be doing it on purpose. Let’s do this. Who wants to make some capologists cry?

Goaltenders

Part of what makes this whole exercise so ridiculous is that we won’t be able to fit any of the league’s monster contracts onto the roster because they’d eat up too much space. In theory, there could be deals that are so bad that they can’t fit on our all-bad roster because they don’t leave room for anyone else.

For example, let’s look at Carey Price. His $10.5-million extension runs for another seven years after this one, even as he works through a second straight disappointing season. That one is tempting, and I tried to figure out a way to work it in. But I can’t. You just can’t build a truly terrible cap team when you’re spending that much on your starting goalie. (What that might say about building an actual Cup contender around a $10.5-million goaltender is an exercise left to the reader.)

But once you get past Price on the goaltender’s list, you find something a little surprising: There aren’t all that many goaltender deals that seem awful. There are certainly some questionable ones, but compared to the abject disasters we’re going to see at the other positions, NHL GMs seem to be showing getting smarter when it comes to choosing the men inside the crease.

A few deals do jump out as contenders for our team. Mike Smith ($5.67 million) and Semyon Varlamov ($5.9 million) are making more than you’d like, but both of those deals expire this year. Craig Anderson has another year left at $4.75 million, and that deal doesn’t look great, but you could live with it if he’s healthy and playing like he did earlier this year. Henrik Lundqvist at $8.5 million through 2021 has the potential to get ugly, but isn’t quite there yet.

Two familiar names almost make the cut. Roberto Luongo still has three more years at $5.33 million, and yes that deal still “sucks” even though he was really good last year. And then there’s Luongo’s old pal Cory Schneider, who’s got the Devils on the hook for three more years at $6 million. That one looks awful, which makes it awfully tempting for our roster.

But in the end, I’m going to save a little cap space while still grabbing a starter with one of the league’s more regrettable deals: Carolina’s Scott Darling at $4.15 million through 2021. Schneider has at least been a top goaltender in the NHL, even if it feels like a long time ago. Darling had never been a full-time starter when the Hurricanes gambled on him, and while it may have been worth rolling the dice at the time, it didn’t work. He’s been a great story, and is working to get his career back on track in the AHL right now. It’s still possible that we see him succeed in the NHL someday, but it seems unlikely to be in Carolina.

We’ll back him up with another goalie who’s currently in the AHL: Ottawa’s Mike Condon at $2.4 million. He’s signed through next year and is currently battling a hip injury in the minors. That leaves us with over $6 million in cap space spent on multi-year deals to goaltenders that aren’t actually in the NHL right now, which is way too much while also leaving plenty of room that we’re definitely going to need. Not a bad start.

>> 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.)

Grab Bag: McDavid vs. Matthews

In the Friday Grab Bag:
- McDavid vs. Matthews is a stupid debate and that's OK so stop complaining about it
- A word about booing returning players
- An obscure player with some of the worst stats of any goalie ever
- The week's three comedy stars
- And a YouTube look back at Wayne Gretzky's 50-in-39 record, before Auston Matthews breaks it in two weeks

>> Read the full post at The Athletic

That Eugene Melnyk video: The top-secret transcript

It’s​ almost 24​ hours later, and​ hockey​ fans around​ the league are still talking​​ about The Video.

You know the one. Late Monday night, the Ottawa Senators unveiled a video featuring owner Eugene Melnyk being interviewed by defenceman Mark Borowiecki. It was meant as an opportunity for Melnyk to finally lay out a long-term vision for the team’s future. But not everyone was impressed, partly due to Melnyk’s message and partly because the video struck many as, in the words of colleague James Gordon, “deeply weird”.

One element that’s come in for some criticism is the choice to have Borowiecki handle the interview duties. But while it may surprise some of the team’s more cynical fans, the Senators actually put a lot of thought into that decision. In fact, we’ve been told that the club even held auditions to make sure they nailed the best choice possible for the role. And as luck would have, DGB spies were there to record the top-secret transcript.

---

Director: And… CUT!

Mark Borowiecki: Whew. Was that OK?

Director: That was great, Mark. You did fantastic. But Eugene and I were talking, and we’d like to bring in a few other folks from around the hockey world to audition for the interviewer’s role.

Eugene Melnyk: Yeah, we’re just not sure that having an actual Senator do the interview is going to look good. Might seem a little softball-y, you know?

Borowiecki: Sure, I guess that makes sense.

Director: Thanks for understanding. Feel free to stick around while we run through a few more auditions. OK, first up is, let’s see … Henrik Zetterberg.

Zetterberg: Hi everyone.

Melnyk: Wow, thanks for coming out Henrik.

Zetterberg: Hey, my pleasure. I always wanted to try out this whole interviewing thing. Gives me something to do in retirement, you know.

Melnyk: You’re retired?

Zetterberg: Uh…

[Ken Holland appears in the window, making a throat-slash gesture.]

Zetterberg: Something to do while I’m injured. You know, as I work my way back from injury so that I can resume my playing duties under my contract without triggering any cap penalties. Which is totally what I’m doing.

[Holland does the eye-point move.]

Zetterberg [under his breath]: Yzerman’s totally replacing you.

Melnyk: What was that?

Zetterberg: Nothing. You know what, this may have been a bad idea.

Marc Bergevin: Did I hear somebody say “bad idea”?

>> Read the full post at The Athletic

Podcast: We have a trade to announce

In this week's episode of Biscuits, the Vice Sports hockey podcast:
- We react to the Phaneuf/Gaborik deal
- Did Jim Benning deserve his extension?
- Dave is a big baby about Team Canada beating Team USA in women's hockey, which is weird because you'd think he'd be used to it
- Islanders fans are trying to get Garth Snow fired
- The Oilers hang a banner for their fan-voted best team ever
- Reader questions and lots more

>> Stream it now:

>> Or, subscribe on iTunes.

Grab bag: Stop telling me there's a chance

In the Friday Grab Bag:
- Should we be mad about guys getting hurt while the NHL isn't at the Olympics?
- A simple request about a very old movie
- An obscure player who's record is safe after the Dion Phaneuf trade
- The week's three comedy stars
- And the YouTube section gets weird with a German pop song about loving ice hockey

>> Read the full post at Vice Sports

Saturday storylines: A Western Conference final preview

Welcome to another NHL Saturday, you’ll want to get comfy, because we’re going to be here a while. With the bye weeks over with, we’re back to a nearly full schedule for the first time in a few weeks. We’ve got 13 games on tap including three all-Canadian matchups as part of the Hockey Day in Canada festivities, and we’ll start with the best one.

HNIC Game of the Night: Jets at Flames

Man, this is going to be a great conference final.

OK, sure, we’re getting a little ahead of ourselves here, but the Jets are already a point out of first place in the league’s toughest division, and the Flames are one of the hottest teams in the NHL with seven straight wins — and neither team’s path to the third round looks all that foreboding.

Based on the standings, the Flames will have the conference’s best team to get past in the Pacific, but that team is an expansion squad. Granted, it’s the best expansion team in the history of sports, but do we really think they’re going to roll through their first ever post-season? (Thinking.) Yeah, they might.

However, with the Kings fading, the Sharks looking ordinary, the Ducks struggling to even make the playoffs, and the Oilers and Coyotes all but done, the Flames’ road out of the Pacific goes through an expansion team. You’ll take that every time.

The Jets are facing a tougher path, but the Predators had been inconsistent before their recent win streak and are fighting through various injuries. And after last year’s run to the final there’s a risk of fatigue setting in at some point.

The Blues haven’t looked like the same dominant team they were in the first half, and while the traffic jam for a wild card means that whichever teams grab those spots will probably have closed off the season hot, if the Blackhawks lose Corey Crawford for the season then we can probably write off the division’s most experienced playoff team.

And remember, the Jets are already arguably the division’s best team even with Mark Scheifele injured and Dustin Byfuglien only now waking up. Give them a healthy Scheifele, a hot Byfuglien, and a trade deadline rental or two, and who’s beating them?

Well, maybe the Flames.

One way or another, it would be a hell of a matchup, one that would bring back memories of Smythe Division battles long past, only without Wayne Gretzky and friends waiting to crush the winner in Round 2.

It might be the second-most fun you can have in a plausible Western Conference Final (trailing only the obvious Vegas-Nashville dream matchup). Plus, it would carry the added bonus of guaranteeing Canada a spot in the Stanley Cup final for the first time since 2011.

On Saturday, the two teams face off for the first time since the second game of the season (a 6-3 Flames win). With both teams coming off their bye, we can probably expect a sloppy game as they work the rust off. We’ll have to wait until April to see them again, as they meet in their second-last game of the season.

And after that, we’ll just have to wait for the main event May.

>> Read the full post at Sportsnet

Ten times an elite defenceman was traded in his prime

If you’re the sort of fan who enjoys a good trade rumour, these days it’s all about the blue line.

That’s not all that unusual – in today’s NHL, it always feels like just about everyone needs help on defence. But for a change, we’re not just talking about depth pieces or short-term rentals. Instead, it’s some of the biggest names in the sport who are rumoured to potentially be available. In Ottawa, there’s been talk that Erik Karlsson could move at some point before he hits free agency in 2019. Arizona is facing a similar dilemma with Oliver Ekman-Larsson. And the slumping Penguins are now reported to at least be considering a move involving Kris Letang.

That’s not to say that any of those trades will happen, of course. But it’s rare to even see names of this magnitude show up in discussions at all. After all, as we’re so often told, nobody trades elite defencemen in their prime in this league.

Or do they? It turns out, trades involving top defencemen have been more common than you might think.

So today, let’s crack open the history books for a look at some of the times in NHL history that an elite defenceman was traded in his prime. We’re looking for guys who were established stars, which we’ll define as already having at least one post-season all-star pick or multiple top-five Norris finishes in their career. We also want players who were still relatively young, which we’ll say means they were 32 or younger. That rules out guys who were traded later in their career, like Brian Leetch and Ray Bourque, as well as some who blossomed into top-tier stars after they were traded, like Ryan McDonagh and Brent Burns. But it still leaves us with a surprisingly long list of candidates.

Here are 10 times in the last 30 years than an elite defenceman was traded in his prime, and what those deals might teach us about what to expect from today’s rumoured moves.

Paul Coffey

The trade: We have plenty of trades to choose from with Coffey, who was traded seven times. We’ll go with his first, the 1987 deal that saw the Oilers send him along with Dave Hunter and Wayne Van Dorp to Pittsburgh for Craig Simpson, Dave Hannan, Moe Mantha and prospect Chris Joseph.

The reason: Coffey was a two-time Norris winner at the age of 26 and had been a key part of three Edmonton championships, but by the start of the 1987-88 season he was holding out in a contract dispute. The Oilers made him wait until November as they worked to get a top asset back; they found one in Simpson, a 21-year-old who’d been the first-overall pick two years earlier.

The result: This trade allowed Simpson to become the first player to ever score 50 goals in a season split between two teams. But over time, Coffey had the greater impact, including three 90-point seasons, and he helped the Penguins win their first Stanley Cup.

The lesson: Sometimes, your hand is forced and you just have to bite the bullet and do the best you can. Under the circumstances, the Oilers did OK on this deal.

Rob Blake

The trade: In February 2001, the Kings sent Blake and Steve Reinprecht to Colorado for Adam Deadmarsh, Aaron Miller, a player to be named later and two first-round picks.

The reason: Blake was a pending UFA and wanted big money, so Kings ownership decided to move him even though the team was contending for a playoff spot.

The result: The deal worked out great for the Avs, who won the Cup that year and then re-signed Blake for five more seasons. The Kings didn’t get much from the deal – Deadmarsh had his career cut short by injuries and the picks turned into Dave Steckel and Brian Boyle – but did get Blake back for a few years at the end of his career.

The lesson: When a Norris-calibre player becomes available, sometimes going all-in pays off. The Avalanche had already traded for Bourque the year before, so they were firmly in all-or-nothing mode. They ended up with “all”, and have a banner to show for it. Remember that when contenders start to hem and haw about the asking price for Karlsson or Ekman-Larsson being too high.

>> Read the full post at Sportsnet

Saturday storylines: Leafs vs. Habs

Welcome to our weekly look ahead to the Saturday slate of games. Last week, we told you all about how unstoppable Connor McDavid was. Since then, he’s had no goals, one assist and is a minus-three and the Oilers haven’t won a game.

Whose career will we curse this week? Read on to find out.

HNIC Game of the Night: Maple Leafs at Canadiens

Not exactly a tough call here. Any time the Leafs and Habs meet, it’s something special, especially if it’s on a Saturday night. And if the matchup comes at a time when the two teams can offer up some particularly interesting storylines to chew on, all the better.

That’s the case tonight, as we’ll have plenty of subplots to work with. For example: Offence. The Canadiens can’t score, and the Leafs can’t stop scoring. Not counting the shootout, the Canadiens have scored just four goals all year. Through four games, they’ve yet to manage a multi-goal period.

Meanwhile, the Leafs have already scored three or more in a period four times. The Canadiens got shut out by Henrik Lundqvist and the Rangers on Sunday; the night before, the Leafs scored more goals against Lundqvist in the first period than the Habs have in their entire season.

So yes, that would seem to tilt things in Toronto’s favour. But then there’s a second subplot: Goaltending. The Canadiens have the best goalie in the world, while the Maple Leafs still aren’t quite sure what they have. Frederik Andersen looked sharp against the Jets in the opener, but he’s been iffy ever since. He’s not getting a ton of help from a young team that still struggles in its own end, but his .871 save percentage has to have Leaf fans worried (and checking up on Calvin Pickard scouting reports).

Carey Price hasn’t exactly been on fire either – he’s clocking in at .899 – but his track record is just slightly better than Andersen’s, and he’s been the least of Montreal’s concerns so far.

These games have always been fun over the years, even when one team (or both) wasn’t very good. We’ve seen bad blood, sudden death and unfortunate singalongs. Mix in the fact that this year’s meeting could be a first-round playoff preview – no it’s not too early to talk about that; we’re just one good Lightning season away from it finally happening – along with what’s sure to be a vocal Montreal crowd, 14 straight wins for the Habs in the rivalry, the ongoing Alex Galchenyuk drama, and all the Maple Leafs’ best players calling Jonathan Drouin “grandpa,” and you’ve got a matchup that should be all sorts of fun.

It’s the first of four Leafs/Habs meetings this year, and all of them come on Saturday night. We’ll try not to put each and every one in the feature spot of this column, but no promises.

>> Read the full post at Sportsnet

Grab Bag: When bad rules can't be fixed

In the Friday Grab Bag:
- The Predators got screwed by an early whistle. Should the NHL fix their rules?
- Why it's always OK to ask a player to waive their NMC
- An obscure player who was part of one of my favorite Maple Leafs transactions ever
- The week's three comedy stars
- And the NHL tries to get funny at the 1997 awards, with decidedly mixed results...

>> Read the full post at Vice Sports

How this year's playoff performances are upending the offseason

The conference finals are always a bit of a weird time for hockey fans. On the one hand, three teams are still alive, fighting tooth and nail for the right to lift the Stanley Cup. There’s nothing more important in this sport than the do-or-die games we’re watching right now.

On the other hand, we’ve got 28 teams on the sidelines, and some of those teams have been there since early April. If we’re being honest, at least some fans are already thinking about the off-season. We’ve got a summer’s worth of trades, free-agency signings, and this year even an expansion draft waiting for us. It can be hard to keep focused on the playoffs without looking ahead.

So which is it, playoffs or off-season? Today, let’s do both. Let’s look at how this year’s playoffs may have changed what we should expect to see in the coming off-season. After all, an especially good or bad playoff run can influence or even completely upend the perception of a player (just ask Dave Bolland). Maybe it shouldn’t — a handful of games shouldn’t change how we view a guy who’s been around for years — but that doesn’t really matter. A few weeks in, the spring can rewrite everything that’s going to happen in the summer.

This year will be no different. Now we just need to figure out who’s changed what. We’ll look at a few key aspects of the off-season, starting with what some GM’s have called the biggest day of the year for off-season mistakes: July 1.

Free agency

There's nothing like a disappointing playoff run to send a player into unrestricted free agency with a dark cloud hanging over them. Fair or not, a player can cost themselves some serious money with a poorly timed post-season slump.

That may have been what we just saw happen to Kevin Shattenkirk. Widely considered to be the top player on this year's market, Shattenkirk doubled as the biggest name to move at the trade deadline. He seemed like an ideal fit for a Capitals team that was already the Stanley Cup favourite. But a disappointing playoffs saw Shattenkirk paired with Brooks Orpik, and the two veterans struggled to keep the puck out of their net.

After eight games, Shattenkirk was sitting at a minus-7 rating, a performance that his own coach publicly called "not good enough". He rebounded somewhat after that, including scoring the OT winner in game three against Pittsburgh. But heading towards July 1, teams will be asking themselves if Shattenkirk deserves to be paid like a top-pairing defenceman, and his playoff performance didn't give him much evidence to point to.

The Capitals' other pending UFAs were more of a mixed bag. T.J. Oshie had a productive post-season and probably boosted his value at least a little bit while Karl Azner struggled. Meanwhile, Justin Williams played well but lost his Mr. Game Seven aura against the Penguins.

The deadline's other top name didn't fare much better that Shattenkirk. Minnesota's Martin Hanzal heads into free agency after managing just a single point during the Wild's abbreviated run. He's a two-way player who wasn't brought in to light up the scoreboard, but when your own owner is publicly wishing his team hadn't traded for you, you may have cost yourself a few dollars.

>> Read the full post at Sportsnet

Grab bag: Kesler vs. Johansen, boring Sens, Kessel vs. Phaneuf

In the Friday Grab Bag:
- Are the Senators boring?
- Ryan Johansen calls out Ryan Kesler, kind of
- An obscure player who was the first link between the Ducks and Predators
- The week's three comedy stars
- And we look back at Dion Phaneuf and Phil Kessel sharing some friendly banter about how much they hate each other

>> Read the full post at Vice Sports

Remembering Brian Burke's ridiculous trading record

Monday is an important anniversary in the evolution of this Maple Leafs team, although we shouldn’t expect any press releases or pregame ceremonies. Instead, the team will let the date quietly slip by, without mentioning that it marks four years since Brian Burke’s reign as general manager came to an end.

Burke’s firing, announced shortly after the end of the 2012-13 lockout, came as a surprise. It’s rare to see a GM stay on the job throughout an offseason, only to be dismissed days before opening night. It eventually became clear that Burke’s relationship (or lack thereof) with new ownership had been the factor that sealed his fate.

Burke’s Toronto tenure was picked apart in the days after the firing, and in the years since. No doubt they will be again in the days to come. In short, Burke was a failure as Leafs’ GM. He drafted poorly. He mismanaged the cap, especially when it came to free agency. He refused to take advantage of various CBA loopholes that seemed tailor-made for big-money teams like Toronto. And he consistently misjudged his own roster, always believing he was almost there, as if we’d all wake up one morning and realize that what looked like a last place team was actually a contender.

So yes, Burke deserved the criticism, just as he deserved to be fired. All of that was fair. All of it was true.

But all of that also makes it easy to forget one other key trait of the Brian Burke years: When it came to trading, the man was freaking brilliant.

Not “good” or “above average”. He was ridiculous. During his time in Toronto, he put together one of the best trading records in the entire league.

That mattered. And it’s worth remembering today, as the league plods through an era where few teams use trades to build their roster, including the current iteration of the Leafs. While it’s still relatively early in the Lou Lamoriello era, the team has only made three deals of any real significance – Phil Kessel to Pittsburgh, Dion Phaneuf to Ottawa and Frederik Andersen from Anaheim.

That’s not a lot, but it’s three more than some teams have made. That’s the way it works in today’s NHL, where trading is a dying art. It’s too hard, we’re told. The salary cap is too complicated, we’re reminded. You just can’t make trades anymore, whines a generation of risk-averse GMs.

Bullshit, replied Brian Burke. Hand me the phone.

>> Read the full post at TheAthletic

Grading the 2016 trade market: the Eastern Conference

On Thursday, we went through the Western Conference and graded each team on the trades they made in 2016. Today, it’s the Eastern Conference’s turn.

Once again, we’ll use the database at nhltradetracker.com, and we’ll be focused on trades that involved at least one actual player. Each team gets a grade based on their trading only—if the GM did other things right, that’s fine, but it doesn’t show up here.

And yes, technically, a team could render all of this moot by pulling off a monster blockbuster when the holiday trade freeze is lifted a few days before New Year’s Eve. Let’s just say I’m guessing that won’t happen. Prove me wrong, NHL GMs!

Boston Bruins

Best deal: Anthony Camara and two picks to Carolina for Jean-Michael Liles. Liles is still on the team, so this one wins by default.

Worst deal: A second and fourth to New Jersey for Lee Stempniak. Normally when you make a deadline rental deal, you'd like to at least make the playoffs.

To be determined: What Don Sweeney has been doing since the trade deadline.

Total trades: Two

Overall grade: D+. Despite being linked in several high-profile rumors, deadline day was it for Boston. They've been better than expected this year, so we can't dump on them too much. Still, teams that have missed the playoffs two straight years don't typically take the conservative approach.

Buffalo Sabres

Best deal: A fourth to St. Louis for Anders Nilsson. It flew under the radar at the time, but Nilsson's been very good so far this year.

Worst deal: A third rounder to Nashville for Jimmy Vesey. You can see what Tim Murray was doing here, and it was a gamble worth making. But in hindsight, the Sabres gave up a decent pick for nothing at all.

To be determined: Jason Akeson, Philip Varone and Jerome Gauthier-Leduc to Ottawa for Michael Sdao, Alexander Guptill, Cole Schneider and Eric O`Dell. I have no recollection of this seven-player deal happening, none of the players are young enough to be prospects, and only Schneider is in the NHL. When you get together with your uncle, you swap funny stories. When Tim Murray does it, he swaps seven career minor-leaguers.

Total trades: Six

Overall grade: C+. After a busy last few years, Murray eased off in 2016. That's understandable, but he may need to get busy again in 2017.

Carolina Hurricanes

Best deal: A second and a third to Chicago for Bryan Bickell and Teuvo Teravainen. The Hurricanes found a big market team straining against the cap and took advantage.

Worst deal: Eric Staal to the Rangers for two seconds and Aleksi Saarela. Not a bad deal, and almost certainly the best they could reasonably do. But when you trade The Franchise, you'd like to think you're going to get a major haul in return. They didn't quite.

To be determined: Future considerations to Vancouver for Dane Fox. Fox is minor league depth, so there's not much to see here. I just wanted to point out that this happened in March, making it one of those rare "after the trade deadline" moves.

Total trades: Seven

Overall grade: A-. The Teravainen move was a steal, and even the Staal deal was decent.

Columbus Blue Jackets

Best deal: Ryan Johansen for Seth Jones, if only for the sheer "holy cow" moment when it was announced. Midseason blockbusters are so rare these days, it was fun to see one actually pulled off.

Worst deal: Kerby Rychel to the Leafs for Scott Harrington and a conditional pick. Rychel is still a quasi-prospect, although he hasn't done anything in Toronto yet. Look, it's slim pickings in Columbus.

To be determined: I guess it's that Ryan Stanton/Cody Goloubef deal, since it's the only other one they made.

Total trades: Three

Overall grade: B. The Blue Jackets only made three deals all year? What do they think they are, Cup contenders? [Double-checks.] Oh. OK then, carry on I guess.

>> Read the full post at Sportsnet

Let's shake up the expansion draft

Last week’s GM meetings brought plenty of talk about expansion, with the league presenting an early plan for what an expansion draft might look like. If and when we do get a draft, it will be the first one the league has held since 2000, and the NHL’s new plan looks an awful lot like what we had back then.

Let’s take a moment to remember what the NHL was like in 2000. There was no salary cap. Games could end in a tie, but not a shootout, and the standings had four columns. Gary Bettman only had one lockout under his belt. The Thrashers were in Atlanta, the Jets were on hiatus, and the Anaheim Ducks were still Mighty. The Los Angeles Kings, Boston Bruins and Chicago Blackhawks were all suffering through long Stanley Cup droughts, as was Ray Bourque. Sidney Crosby was weeks away from becoming a teenager, Connor McDavid hadn’t started kindergarten yet, and Jaromir Jagr was merely old.

All of which is to say that the NHL of 2000 has little to do with the today’s league. So why should our next expansion draft be based on what was done back then? Many of today’s fans don’t even remember how teams like the Columbus Blue Jackets, Minnesota Wild or Nashville Predators came into existence, so there’s no reason to feel bound by tradition.

No, it's time for the NHL to get creative. And we've got some idea to help them out. Here are three big new wrinkles the NHL should throw into their expansion draft plans.

Retained salary for exposed players

This will be the first expansion draft in the salary cap era, which will no doubt cause a major shift in strategy. The league is already looking at the possibility of forcing teams to expose a certain percentage of their salary cap, and there's been talk of changing the cap and floor requirements for the new teams in their inaugural seasons.

But the reality is that it's not hard to see what's going to happen here: The established teams are going to be exposing a ton of players with terrible contracts. And they'll be praying that those players will get picked, clearing the bad deals off the books. That's fine. It will probably even spur some fun trades, with teams sending assets to expansion newcomers in exchange for a promise to take a terrible contract off their hands.

But what if we went a step further? We already allow teams to retain salary in trades. Let's do the same for the expansion draft.

Here's how it would work. As each team submits their protected list, they'd have the option of also offering to retain salary on any player made available. You list the player, then you list the salary you're offering him at – knowing that you'd be responsible making up for the difference, in both cap hit and real dollars. And to really make it fun, we're not even going to the limit retained salary to 50 per cent. Sky's the limit, gentlemen.

You'd be adding a whole new element of strategy, for both the old and new teams. We know that nobody in their right mind is taking David Clarkson's $5.25 million albatross of a contract off of the Blue Jackets' hands, at least not without a first round pick or two attached to it. But what if he was on the list at $2 million? Wouldn't the Las Vegas Aces be awfully tempted to take a 32-year-old Dion Phaneuf at, say, $4.5 million, with the Senators paying the rest? Wouldn't they have to think about making Dustin Brown their first captain if the Kings were offering to eat half of his deal?

Would a team be interested in taking David Clarkson at a reduced salary? (Jamie Sabau/Getty)

This isn't all that much different than what we have now in terms of trades, but the wrinkle is that teams aren't hammering out the retained salary as part of a specific negotiation with another team. Instead, everyone would have to come up with their numbers in advance. So how far do you go? How much it too much? How big of a discount sticker are you willing to slap on your worst deals to try to tempt an expansion team to take the bait?

There's only one way to find out. Many of these GMs signed those awful deals, so let's see how far they'll go to unload them.

>> Read the full post at Sportsnet

Weekend report: Time to get real

Two weeks. That's all we've got left.

Two weeks from today, the NHL trade deadline arrives. For fans, the day and everything that builds up to it serve as one of the highlights of the hockey calendar, a perfect medley of intrigue and speculation that culminates in a day-long finale. We call in sick, camp out in front of the TV, and watch the deals roll in. It's fun.

But for general managers around the league, the trade deadline isn't about entertainment. It's about reality. It's about cutting the crap, taking a good hard look at a season that's roughly three-quarters done, and figuring out what exactly this particular iteration of your roster is going to be when it grows up.

In short: Are you in or out? Or, in some cases: Are you out, but close enough that you can pretend that you're in?

Around the league, 23 teams wake up today either holding down a playoff spot or sitting within a half-dozen points of one. Only four teams are trailing by double digits. Heck, last year's Senators roared back from a 14-point deficit in mid-February to make the playoffs; only the Maple Leafs are outside that range today. Everyone else is still in this thing.

That's all a big lie, of course. Almost all of those bubble teams on the outside looking in today won't make it, and many won't even come close. In most cases, they won't deserve to—these are teams that lose far more often than they win and give up far more goals than they score. They're bad teams having bad seasons, and they should be throwing in the towel and looking toward the future.

But most won't. We're still in it, they'll insist. We can pull this off. A lot of that is wishful thinking. Some of it is cynical marketing. A good chunk is just simple self-preservation—if you're a GM in a league where parity reigns and you get points for losing, admitting that the team you've built is dead in the water before you've even hit the 60-game mark is a great way to put a target on your own back. Sure, it may be better in the long run to move a veteran for a pick or prospect that will help three years down the line, but that's easier said than done if you expect to be unemployed by then.

Factor in the potential for impatient fans, a demanding local media, and an owner who may have set your budget based on at least a few games of postseason revenue, and the stakes are high. So if you're a GM with two weeks left to figure out where you stand, what do you do?

One bubble team has already made its decision. The Ottawa Senators pushed their chips in last week, acquiring Dion Phaneuf from the Maple Leafs in a surprise blockbuster that made them better in the short term even as it saddled them with a potentially disastrous long-term contract. Even eight points out with five teams to pass, the Senators have decided that they're in.

Other teams will have to make their own calls soon. The Flyers, for example, are six points back; they were in a similar situation last year, when rookie GM Ron Hextall made the rare call to stand pat and keep focused on the future. Does he do the same this time?

The Flames and Canucks were first-round opponents last year, but there won't be room for both in the Western Conference this time. The Flames are eight points back and fading, while the Canucks are five out after somehow getting outplayed by the Leafs' ECHL squad on Saturday. Both teams should probably look toward the future.

Meanwhile, the Canadiens are already reeling from a two-month cold streak and now face reports that Carey Price is done for the season. They're denying that, but these days it feels like Habs fans have already thrown in the towel and moved on to the Auston Matthews watch; it will be fascinating to see if GM Marc Bergevin does the same.

We could keep going down the list, one that includes teams like the Predators, Avalanche, Islanders and Penguins. And then there's perhaps the toughest bubble case of all: the free-falling Minnesota Wild. They've already pulled the trigger on one major move, firing head coach Mike Yeo on Saturday after losing eight straight and 13 out of 14. The Wild are five points out and look every bit like a team that desperately needs to start over, but with so many massive contracts clogging the books they may not be able to. When you're clearly in win-now mode but can't find a way to win now, you're almost forced to double down, no matter how unlikely it is to work.

Each of those teams have tough calls to make, and just two weeks left to make them. And for the GMs involved, their ability to cut out the self-delusion and get real might go a long way to determining whether they're even still on the job this time next year.

Race to the Cup

The five teams with the best shot at winning the Stanley Cup.

5. St. Louis Blues (32-17-9, +6 true goals differential)—They have a realistic shot of finishing in fourth place overall in the league and starting the playoffs on the road. The Central, man.

4. Los Angeles (33-19-3, +22)—They've alternated losses and wins over their last nine games, and now Marian Gaborik is on the injured reserve and could be out long term after a knee-on-knee collision in Friday's win over the Rangers.

>> Read the full post at Vice.com

The Dion Phaneuf Trade

NHL trades don’t have to be zero sum games. Fans and media love to assign wins and losses to each deal as they get made, on the assumption that what’s good for one team must be bad for the other, but that’s not really how it works. Some trades can be win-win, some are lose-lose, and most need to be evaluated as two separate entities, with one side having little if anything to do with the other.

All of which is good news for the Ottawa Senators, because man, Tuesday’s Dion Phaneuf blockbuster sure looks like a monster win for the Toronto Maple Leafs.

>> Read the full post at The Guardian

Weekend wrap: Deadline day arrives

A look back at the biggest games and emerging story lines of the NHL weekend.

Theme of the Week: Deadline Day Arrives

Today is trade deadline day, with a 3 p.m. ET cutoff for teams looking to make a deal. And after a very busy weekend, there may not be much excitement left.

We ran a full preview on Thursday. Here’s a quick roundup of the deals we’ve seen since then.

The Rangers went all-in: New York landed arguably the biggest name available, acquiring Arizona’s Keith Yandle in a blockbuster. But the Rangers paid a big price, giving up an excellent prospect in Anthony Duclair and next year’s first-rounder. The Coyotes retain half of Yandle’s salary, which makes him an excellent value, and he’s signed through next year, so this isn’t a straight rental. But it feels like an all-or-nothing gamble for New York, and maybe that makes sense for a team that was just a few bounces away from a championship last year. The Rangers also acquired James Sheppard from San Jose, sent Lee Stempniak to Winnipeg, and have reportedly agreed on a new deal with Mats Zuccarello.

The Blackhawks loaded up: Chicago added two of the top players available, in Antoine Vermette and Kimmo Timonen. Vermette is a solid two-way player who won’t replace the injured Patrick Kane, but will play strong middle-six minutes. Timonen hadn’t played a game for the Flyers this season due to blood clots, but is reportedly healthy now, and if he can play at the same level he was at last year, he could be the deadline’s best acquisition. He’s a gamble, sure, but a high-reward one that certainly looks good from the Hawks’ side.

The Lightning made their moves: Steve Yzerman stayed up late last night, pulling off a pair of deals. He sent Brett Connolly to Boston for two seconds, and then flipped a first, third, and Radko Gudas to Philadelphia for Braydon Coburn. That’s a pretty clear net gain for the Lightning, who remain one of the co-favorites in a hard-to-call East.

The Maple Leafs traded David Clarkson: Hours after I wrote that it was impossible, the Leafs found a way to trade the league’s worst contract on Thursday. And somehow, it made perfect sense. The Blue Jackets had Nathan Horton’s contract clogging their books; Horton isn’t expect to ever play again due to back problems, but his deal was uninsured, so the Jackets were on the hook for every dollar of it. So they swapped him for Clarkson, a player who’ll actually suit up for roughly the same money. And the Leafs get eventual salary-cap relief thanks to the LTIR. It’s brilliant.

The Panthers (?) got Jaromir Jagr: We expected Jagr to be moved, although the idea was that he’d go to a contender and the Panthers sure don’t seem like one. But Jagr winding up in Florida, even at the cost of a pair of decent picks, could put the Panthers over the top in the chase for the East’s final wild-card spot.

Washington added Curtis Glencross: The Flames forward was expected to be on the move, and he didn’t come cheap, with the Caps giving up a second and a third in this year’s draft. With Washington all but locked into a playoff spot, the team is thinking postseason depth here.

The Red Wings landed Erik Cole: Having lost six straight to fall out of the race, Dallas sent the veteran forward to Detroit for a pick and a pair of decent prospects. The Wings still need blue-line help and may not be done.

The Habs added Jeff Petry: There may not have been a more divisive player available; the old school doesn’t like his game much, but analytics types love him. The Habs got him for a second and a fifth.

The Maple Leafs traded David Clarkson: I know I mentioned that already. I just really enjoy typing those words. I promise it won’t happen again.

The Ducks added Tomas Fleischmann: The Ducks get a useful player. The Panthers get a draft pick. The rest of us get to say, “Wait, Dany Heatley is still playing?” I’d call that a win all the way around.

A few other smaller deals: Tim Gleason! Spencer Abbott! Adam Cracknell! Carl Klingberg! You are vaguely aware of who some of these people are!

The Maple Leafs traded David Clarkson: I lied.

So with all of those deals done, what’s still left on the table for today? Well … not much, to be honest. But here are a few names to watch.

Chris Stewart: The Sabres power forward has been on the block for a year now, and should have several bidders.¹

Most of Toronto’s roster: It sounds like the odds of a Phil Kessel deal are close to zero, while a Dion Phaneuf move is unlikely but still in play; action around both players could pick up near the draft instead. Joffrey Lupul, Tyler Bozak, and maybe even Jonathan Bernier are in play, although it’s possible that nobody of any significance gets moved.

Patrick Sharp: Well, this one was fun while it lasted, at least. First the Blackhawks star was on the block. Then he wasn’t. Then he was threatening legal action. So, nothing to see here, apparently.

Zbynek Michalek: Oh, right, the other Coyotes defenseman. He’ll probably go somewhere, and the way Arizona GM Don Maloney is going, it will be in exchange for a lot more than you’d think.

The Maple Leafs traded David Clarkson: I may need help.

Cup Watch: The League’s Five Best

The five teams that seem most likely to earn the league’s top prize: the Stanley Cup.

5. Detroit Red Wings (35-15-11, plus-21) The top of the East remains a pick’em, but an impressive road win over Nashville earns the Wings a temporary spot.

4. Anaheim Ducks (40-17-7, plus-12) This Corey Perry goal is so filthy. You really need to stick around for the last slow-motion replay to appreciate it.

>> Read the full post on Grantland