If your team has championship aspirations, this month is going to be a roller coaster. Here's an inside look on how teams prepare.
As the deadline approaches, has a different strategy based on where they are in the standings. There are the obvious buyers and sellers, and the dreaded middle-of-the-pack teams. In the second installment of Trade Deadline Prep, Rachel takes you through how a buyer prepares for the trade deadline.
The trade deadline is a few weeks away, and there are key pieces available for contending teams. Timo Meier, Patrick Kane, Luke Schenn and Vladislav Gavrikov are all pieces buyers will be looking at. We’ve already seen both New York teams make splashes with Bo Horvat and Vladimir Tarasenko having immediate impacts on their new clubs. There are the rumblings surrounding Jakob Chychrun that ratcheted into overdrive over the weekend.
How does a team decide if they are a buyer? That’s a lot more complicated than deciding if a team is going to sell. A couple things need to be considered. Are you pushing the chips in the way Tampa has the past few seasons? Or are you working around the edges of your roster like Edmonton? The upper offices will surely be weighing likely playoff scenarios – the path out of the Atlantic is arguably more difficult than the path out of the entire Western Conference, for example. Mortgaging significant assets when you’re unsure if your team can get through the team they need to, can be challenging.
For a team like Edmonton, with two of the top players in the NHL, in a wide-open conference, there should be no discussion. If the asset doesn’t help the Oilers win in the next two seasons, it has to be leveraged. No expense should be spared giving Connor McDavid and Leon Draisaitl a puck-mover who can hit them in stride, break the puck out cleanly and provide positive impact. Whether it is a first-round pick, a top prospect, a roster player…if it nets the Oilers a high-impact player, the time to clutch the pearls is not now.
Preparing for a trade deadline when Team X is buying is undoubtedly exciting, but very complicated. The most important question is surely, how much cap space is available and what can be done to maximize the impact? When sitting down for scouting meetings, the scouts and executives will go through each NHL team to determine who is available and if they fit with the team needs. Most of the buyers this season are well-known for their use of analytics. Tampa, Boston, Carolina and Toronto are famous for integrating data-driven decision-making. These teams use data available to them to predict how players of interest may or may not fit in the lineup. They will also weigh the factors of removing Player X or Player Y from the lineup and the impact it will have on-ice.
When creating a list of targets, it becomes obvious who is going to be available. They are most likely players on expiring contracts. Sometimes, a player with term will move, as is the case this year. Regardless of term left on contract, a question is asked about every player: does this player fit long-term or is this trade for a pure rental? The assets a team is willing to part with are based on that answer. If Team X believes they are acquiring a player they believe fits long-term, they need to figure out what the possible contract is and if it fits within the salary cap restrictions. If they know they’re going to retain the player, you’re more likely to part with better assets because there isn’t a fear of giving up quality assets for two months of a player. If it is a pure rental, a team would be more cautious about including their top-end pieces in a trade.
Teams in buyer mode need a list of untouchables, parts of their organization that are absolutely off the table. There is always a scale; no one is untouchable if you’re acquiring McDavid or Cale Makar (but you’re not). Usually, the list includes one or two of the team’s young players and certain roster players. Contending teams need players who can perform well above the value of their ELC, hence the importance of keeping top-end prospects in the organization. However, those are players that teams like San Jose and Arizona will covet when trading the likes of Timo Meier and Jakob Chychrun. What this usually leads to is more quantity and less quality. Instead of trading away a first-rounder and the organization’s top prospect, the team may offer a roster player, a prospect and a pick. For example, if New Jersey acquires Meier, it is safe to assume their top D prospects and maybe Dawson Mercer are off the table. Perhaps, Shakir Mukhamadullin, Alexander Holtz or Yegor Sharangovich are pieces to be included in the deal.
When trading for pending unrestricted free agents, contenders generally don’t have room to take on the full brunt of the salary. However, the more Team X needs the trading partner to retain, the higher the price. Acquiring a top-six forward or top-four defenseman is already a challenging feat before any salary cap gymnastics is performed. If Team X decides they need a defenseman, they must weigh the cost of someone like Vladislav Gavrikov against the likes of Luke Schenn.
This process changes when teams are inquiring about the likes of Jake McCabe or Chychrun. Then the team must consider the longer-term implications of acquiring the player given the remaining term on the contract. In the current cap climate, Chicago and Arizona are likely going to have to take a contract back, simply due to lack of available dollars around the league. The team trading for those players must consider what removing that player from the lineup looks like, as well as how the player fits into the lineup on a longer-term basis and salary cap structure with whatever upcoming decisions that need to be made.
Hypothetically, this is how a conversation may go: (A reminder: Defensemen are a hot commodity at the deadline, and teams overpay every year) “We believe Gavrikov is a fourth or fifth guy on a $2.8 million expiring deal, and the asking price might be a first and a C prospect. We can also acquire Schenn who has shown he can play higher up the lineup in a pinch on an $850,000 contract for a second- or third-round pick. However, if we give up our top prospect, a first and Player X (usually under 25) off the roster, we may be able to acquire Chychrun.” Management and pro scouts will weigh the differences between the players and determine if the discrepancy in asking price is worth it. Furthermore, management needs to consider the extra assets that may be required to get their trade partner to retain salary, if necessary.
As the deadline approaches, players a buyer covets will naturally be traded and come off the list. Horvat and Tarasenko are off the list, already. Sellers don’t want to be caught with nothing for their expiring assets, either. The wrinkle of Chychrun, McCabe and possibly Erik Karlsson who aren’t on expiring deals being available makes this more interesting. It is expected that Chychrun will be traded, and teams who miss out will undoubtedly turn to Plan B or C once that occurs. This is known as the domino. When Horvat was traded, the attention around Tarasenko and Meier picked up. Once Tarasenko got moved, the rumours around Brock Boeser picked up. The same will happen with Chychrun. Once he’s dealt, the attention will shift towards McCabe, Gavrikov, Schenn and others.
Being a buyer is a delicate balance. You want to acquire assets to give your team the best chance to win without completely mortgaging your future. You have to figure out who you can ship out without upsetting the chemistry in the dressing room, while understanding guys will have to go in order to be salary cap compliant. Pure rentals are always risky, because if the team doesn’t have some level of success and the player is not extended, you’ve effectively wasted valuable assets. It is rare that players like Meier and Chychrun, who are team-controlled, are available, which is what makes being a buyer at this deadline a little bit more interesting.