Welcome back to Forum Buzz, where I peruse the DobberHockey Forums and weigh in on active, heavily debated, or otherwise relevant recent threads, reminding folks just how great a resource the Forums are. Nearly anything might be covered here, other than trades and signings, which usually get their own separate write-ups on the main site and are also normally covered in the next day’s Ramblings, or questions that are specific to salary cap issues, which is the domain of the weekly Capped column. To access the specific forum thread on which a question is based, click on the “Topic” for that question.

As is now becoming tradition, I'll start the column with a nod to the "Who am I?" thread in the Forums where someone thinks of a real life hockey player or persona, who can be from the past or present, male or female, in the NHL or not, and they give clues to help people guess who it is. You get to enter one guess per clue, and if you guess correctly you think of the next player, so it just keeps going indefinitely. For your enjoyment, here is a "Who am I?" sample. See how many clues it takes for you to guess who I am.

CLUE #1 – I'm a retired forward

CLUE #2 – I played for only one NHL team

CLUE #3 – I ended my NHL career with more goals than assists

CLUE #4 – I was a Stanley Cup champion

CLUE #5 – Over my career, my scoring rate in the playoffs was much better than it was in the regular season

CLUE #6 – I didn't debut in the NHL before age 25 

CLUE #7 – My career ended due to concussions

CLUE #8 – Even before concussions plagued me, I was definitely known as a Band-Aid Boy

CLUE #9 – The team I played my entire career for is an original six team

CLUE #10 – I'm from Sweden

CLUE#11 – My NHL nickname was "The Mule"

CLUE #12 – My initials are J.F.

So, who am I? Hopefully you figured it out. Check the end of the column to confirm, or, if not, to find out who I am. Now onto regularly scheduled Forum Buzz programming. 

Topic #1 –In a 16 team, keep 8, weekly H2H league where 6F, 4D, 1G start and scoring is G(2 for F, 3 for D), A (1 for F, 2 for D), PIM (0.5), +/- (0.5), SOG(0.1), PPG(1), PPA(1), W(4), SV(0.14), GA(-1), OTW(1), ShootoutW(1), SO(2), a GM is looking very unlikely to make the playoffs and has been moving more toward youth. Their current line-up is:

F: Aleksander Barkov, Jack Hughes, Mika Zibanejad, Logan Cooley, Tom Wilson, Patrick Kane, Connor McMichael, Kent Johnson, William Eklund
D: Roman Josi, Dougie Hamilton, Brandt Clarke, MacKenzie Weegar, Devon Toews, Ryker Evans
G: Sergei Bobrovsky, Adin Hill

They've pondered whether the time is right to trade Josi for Noah Dobson, Miro Heiskanen, or Moritz Seider. Would it make sense to do so now, and, if so, for which of the three?

Looking at this roster, I count 17 players, meaning that keepers could comprise nearly half of one's roster. It'd also translate to 128 players being kept in a league where roughly 270 players are owned. That means great keepers are vital. It would also suggest to me this team still has a ways to go before it can rise to the level of being a serious contender.

Josi should be traded; the questions then become when, and for whom. He is a stud d-man in any league; but here, where defensemen comprise 40% of a team's active line-up and get a points bump, he's all the more valuable. Still, he's also 34 years old. How does that bode for his future? Let's look at player comparables to get a sense of what might happen.

Dating back to 1990-91, just three other d-men, like Josi, had more than one point per game season from ages 30 to 33: Ray Bourque, Larry Murphy, and Paul Coffey. Murphy had 61 points in 82 games at age 34, then never bested 52 points. Coffey struggled with injuries and didn't play a full season after age 34. Bourque had a point per game season at age 35, but from there it was downhill. In all, this is concerning, and strongly suggests Josi may never come close again to top-tier scoring. If he can be turned into one of the three young d-men I think it's something that should be done, before Josi is past his expiration date. But which of the three to target?

Seider is youngest, but also has yet to be anointed a true #1 defenseman, complete with great deployment. He's also such a well-rounded talent that it might stand in the way of him reaching his full offensive potential. Then again, consider Chris Pronger and Victor Hedman, and that could be Seider. Dobson and Heiskanen are unquestioned #1 d-men on their teams, complete with tons of PP time, but Heiskanen has sputtered since 2022-23, while Dobson had a slow start to 2024-25 but has picked up steam of late. I think Dobson is the one to get, as he was able to score last season despite being on a not very potent team, and he shoots a lot.

I wouldn't stop there in terms of making deals. I'd also move Wilson, as I see no universe where he is able to keep up this pace. Also, in a recent mailbag I showed what happens to big hitters as they near or reach 30. Wilson likely has huge name value in this league and can fetch a hefty return. He should be moved before it's too late.

I'd move Barkov as well. He's great……when he plays. His scoring rate this season is as high as it's ever been. Yes, he could be very good for a number of more seasons; however, I'm not sure how many of those would occur after this team gets back into contention. I fear too that as Barkov ages his injuries either will become even more frequent or will take a collective toll on his talent. Trade him now while he can still fetch a great return.

Topic #2 – In a 12 team, keep 14 (plus 4 rookies, defined as <150 games played) league with categories and scoring of: G (1), A (1), +/- (0.25), H (0.1), B(0.1), PIM (0.1), SOG (0.1), GWG (1), PPPts (1), SHPts (1), W (2), SO (3), GA (-0.5), OTL (1), SV (0.1), a GM has a roster of:

F: Jack Hughes, Logan Cooley (r), Jesper Bratt, Patrik Laine, Matthew Tkachuk, Martin Necas, Andrei Svechnikov, Seth Jarvis, Matvei Michkov (r), Wyatt Johnston, Trevor Zegras, Patrick Kane, Brock Nelson, Gustav Nyqvist, Jack Roslovic, Chandler Stephenson, Adam Lowry, Pius Suter

D: Zach Werenski, Mikhail Sergachev, Brandt Clarke (r), Shea Theodore, Oliver Ekman-Larsson, Dmitri Orlov, Alexander Nikishin (r)

G: Ilya Sorokin , Jake Oettinger, Yaroslav Askarov (r), Cam Talbot

They are in talks about trading Johnston for Quinton Byfield, as they are looking long term and feel Byfield has a higher ceiling than Johnston. Should they make this trade?

This is a tough one to gauge. Is Johnston as great as he showed last season, despite what we've seen for 2024-25? Is Byfield still on track to be a major star, or will he be a bigger player who was drafted early but just doesn't work out in the end, like Jesse Puljujarvi, Jake Virtanen, Nick Ritchie, and, former Byfield teammate Pierre-Luc Dubois, to name a few?

In terms of comparables for Johnston, dating back to 1990-91 just five other wingers produced 30+ goals and 30+ assists while averaging 2.5 SOG per game in one of their first two NHL seasons: Alex Ovechkin, Jaromir Jagr, Marion Gaborik, Owen Nolan, and Jeff Skinner. With all due respect to Johnston, he's not in the rarified air of Ovi or Jagr. As for the other three, Skinner has had flashes of strong play, but by and large has been a disappointment. Nolan was better, but never lived up to his first overall draft selection. Gaborik seemed to be on the way to a very solid career, but then was derailed by injuries. A mixed bag overall. Of course, past results are not necessarily indicative of future performance of another player, but they are food for thought.

As for Byfield, also going back to 1990-91, a total of only 17 forwards who were as tall or taller and as heavy or heavier than Byfield played a total of 200+ games, and of them only seven were first round picks: Nik Antropov, David Steckel, Brian Boyle, Martin Hanzal, Mats Sundin, Scott Parker, and Anthony Mantha. Not great names to see for comparison.

Still, some who were as tall but not quite as heavy, like Blake Wheeler, Jason Arnott, Tage Thompson, and Evgeni Malkin, did end up being successful. Also, in addition to Hanzal and Antropov, there was Eric Daze, and all three showed promise but ultimately had careers either cut short or derailed by injuries. But others too did not come close to meeting first round expectations, like Keith Primeau, Nick Bjugstad, Dainus Zubrus and Kevin Hayes. Again, this is not probative of what will occur with Byfield; but with far more players at or near Byfield's size and weight disappointing as opposed to succeeding, it is worrisome food for thought.

Basically, Johnston and Byfield are players with unfavorable comparisons. But I'm more concerned by those applicable to Byfield, since there were quite a number of disappointments and very few who proved to be even consistent 60+ point players, let alone better than that. Although maybe Byfield can be an exception, I think I'm going with the safer bet of Johnston, and standing pat.

Topic #3 – In a 16 team dynasty league with categories of G, A, PPPts, PIM, SOG, HIT, W, GAA, SV%, SO and starting line-ups of 3C, 6W, 4D, 2G, a GM has a roster as follows:

C: Tage Thompson, Connor Bedard, Adam Fantilli, Jack Eichel, Anton Lundell
W: Dmitri Voronkov, Juraj Slafkovsky, William Eklund, Patrik Laine, Lucas Raymond, Kirill Marchenko, Dawson Mercer, Matvei Michkov, Vasili Podkolzin, Nikolai Kovalenko, Paul Cotter
D: Jacob Trouba, Luke Hughes, Jamie Drysdale, Mikhail Sergachev, Matt Roy
G: Karel Vejmelka, Joseph Woll, Justus Annunen
Farm: Alexander Nikishin, Oren Zellweger, Arthurs Silovs, Sebastian Cossa, Yaroslav Askarov, David Jiricek, Zayne Parekh, Artyom Levshunov, Eric Portillo, Denton Mateychuk, Dennis Hildeby, Carter Yakemchuk, Trey Augustine

They are pondering whether to trade Marchenko, Lundell, and Eklund for Jacob Markstrom. Should they make the deal?

In my opinion, no way. This team is stacked with young talent. Its time is not now; and trading for Markstrom would be in furtherance of a goal of winning sooner rather than later. While it is not uncommon for goalies to play better as they age, even past 30, Markstrom turns 35 this month so he most likely has a short shelf life left, as dating back to 2000-01 there were only 24 total instances, by a total of 15 goalies, of a netminder starting 50+ games at age 35 or older. Those who won 30+ games were all more proven and reliable than Markstrom, who, let's not forget, only twice has had a double digit GSAA and likewise only on two occasions had a 60%+ Quality Start %.

Also, this team is stocked with goalie prospects. Yes, some of them will not pan out, as goalie is the most difficult position to find success; but even though none of the young goalies would be part of the envisioned deal, that still does not mean it's a good idea to trade three prized assets to get one with the "warts" that Markstrom has.

All these things having been said, I think it is possible this team has too many top prospects. The reality is at least a third of them will never come close to fulfilling expectations that accompany them now. Need proof? Look at this list from June 2019. As such, the time to trade them would be now. The problem, of course, is knowing which of them will pan out and which won't. That is not an easy task, and no fantasy owner can be right all the time about this area.

One name I'd consider is Slaf. Yes, he's not quite as large a frame player as Byfield, but he is a big player, meaning there is an increased chance he won't pan out, plus if he does it might take longer. But as a former #1 overall pick who has done pretty well and plays for one of the most high-profile NHL teams, he has significant name value. I'd dangle him out there and see what kind of offers he can land. The rest of the prospects strike me as not being worthwhile to trade either because they are more likely to do well, or might not net enough in return. I'd tell other GMs I'm open to offers and see if one of them dazzles you. It never hurts to listen.

I would trade some players too. At the top of the list, if Sam Bennett re-signs with the Panthers, is Lundell. I think he will be pigeonholed as a Jordan Staal type player if Bennett remains on the Panthers. I would also strongly consider moving Eichel. He is playing amazing, but it's called selling high for a reason and I believe his value never will be higher. He could be leveraged to help this team obtain a player like Jack Hughes or Tim Stutzle, who are on a par with Eichel now but will be a big step up in a few years when this team will be hitting its stride. I'd also be looking to move Luke Hughes now that he's showing signs of life and has name value due to his pedigree, as his rookie output occurring with so few SOG and so many PPPts puts him in the company of players like Matt Carle and Will Butcher, which is worrisome.

Topic #4 –A GM in a 15 team, points only (Win = 2 pts, OTL = 1 pt, SO = 3 added pts), dynasty keeper with 16 player rosters and 7F, 3D, 2G starting, has the following players on their team:
F : Leon Draisaitl, Kyle Connor, Tim Stutzle, Mark Scheifele, JT Miller, Jack Eichel, Dylan Larkin, Matvei Michkov, Brock Boeser, Gabe Perreault
D : Cale Makar, Evan Bouchard, Shayne Gostisbehere
G : Igor Shesterkin, Thatcher Demko, Darcy Kuemper

They are thinking of offering Evan Bouchard and Kyle Connor for Kirill Kaprizov and Thomas Chabot. Is it a deal worth making?

With a total of 210 players owned, this is what I call a "middle ground" league, meaning every roster will look pretty solid, and there will likely always be decent talent on the waiver wire. That gets me to Chabot, who I am fairly confident is not better than at least a handful of unowned players, especially with only three Dmen starting for each team and this being points only. Really this is a two for one deal, as I'd not factor in Chabot at all. This is also a dynasty, such that if a team gets an amazing player they can keep him for as long as they want. That makes trades more likely to occur than in leagues with a limited number of keepers and/or a limited duration during which a player can be kept.

Looking at this team from top to bottom, it has a top five d-man, goalie, and forward. In a 15-team league, the expectation would be to have maybe one top-five player at one position. Also, none of them (Draisaitl, Makar, Shesterkin) is nearing the point where they'd be expected to slow. As such, this team is both built for now, but also the future. That can present challenges since sometimes it leads to being good enough to be very good, but not quite the best. It also means I think this team needs to decide if it wants to go "all in" over the next 3-5 seasons, or play a longer game. 

My view is they should go for it, and, with that, do what it takes to get Kaprizov. Kaprizov is a true star, and that's occurred despite a weaker supporting cast. Let's remember the Wild will be able to spend this summer for the first time in quite a while. Who knows how much better Kaprizov could be amidst even more talent? Yes, there will be more competition for points, which for the time being have been mostly going to Kaprizov, but also likely quite a few more goals, for a net positive effect on his scoring. Although the ideal time to have tried to trade for Kaprizov was around this time last season, I believe his cost will only go higher from here.

Bouchard and Connor is a steep price to pay for sure. However, Bouchard might not be as amazing as first thought, as although his PP IPP is down quite a bit, his secondary assist rate is well above his normal rate. He might be more of a 65- to 70-point d-man than a 75+ point rearguard. Still great, but not among the best of the best. Connor is a fine player; however, he is in uncharted territory right now and, at 28, likely is not going to get better from here. I have concerns in that Connor has never managed to string together two consecutive point per game seasons. To put it another way, when he's great he's great, but he's not always great. Again, it's called selling high for a reason. Plus, you have to give to get.

I'm open to moving Bouchard and Connor to get Kaprizov, but the second piece coming back has to be better than Chabot, who, as I said, is no better than waiver wire material. I realize I've said many times I don't like deals where either team gives or gets more than two players, but here if need be I could see adding a third player to Bouchard and Connor to get a better second player coming back. Do find a way make this deal, as once the Wild land better players Kaprizov really could be the next Nikita Kucherov, and that's not something to let slip through one's fingers.

Topic #5 – In an 8 team one-year league with rosters of 2C, 2LW, 2RW, 2UTIL, 2G, plus 4Bench and categories of G, A, +/-, PPPts, SOG, HIT, BLK, W, GAA, SV%, SO, a GM had the following players on their roster as of December 17th:

C – Nathan Mackinnon, Jack Eichel
LW – Artemi Panarin, Jason Robertson
RW – Tage Thompson (C, RW), Kiefer Sherwood (LW, RW)
D – Evan Bouchard, Moritz Seider, Noah Dobson, John Carlson
UTIL – Guenther (RW), Sebastian Aho (C)
G – Jeremy Swayman
Bench – Brady Tkachuk (C, LW), Nikita Zadorov (D), Matthew Knies (LW), Wyatt Johnston (C, RW), Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (LW, C)

Would it make sense for them to trade Guenther for Andrei Svhechnikov? Or is Guenther's strong recent play an indication they should stand pat?

First off, they didn't list their second goalie, but I don't think that's a factor. What is relevant is the reality that only up to eight forwards can start at one time. Guenther being only RW eligible is a bit of a hindrance, whereas Svech has dual wing eligibility in most if not all leagues.

Guenther has been a streaky player, but in more of a good way than bad. He most recently followed up 11 points in a seven game stretch with zero in three contests. He's also a PP dynamo, with nearly half his points coming on the man advantage. But his streakiness also has kept his ice times down, as in his last eight games, he was above 18:00 once, 17:00 twice, 16:00 twice, but below 15:00 once and below 14:00 once. The net result has been solid overall scoring but a not great 16:16 per game.

This is meaningful since going back to 2000-01 there have been a total of 133 instances of a forward scoring at a 60+ point pace in 41+ games despite averaging less than 17:00 per game. That might seem like a lot, but there were 1592 total instances of 60+ point pace forwards in 41+ games, such that fewer than 10% did so with a TOI under 17:00. As talented as Guenther is, he will need a consistently better TOI to likely be able to keep up the pace he's at now.

Svech is a good bit above a 17:00 per game average, and actually is doing even better on the PP than Guenther, with 14 of his 26 points coming on the man advantage. He shoots and hits a lot more than Guenther too, plus is more proven, such that it would be difficult to envision him being deemphasized, whereas Guenther could be, especially since he's never played more than 45 NHL games in a season, meaning he could hit a wall. Despite Svech's high percentage of PPPts, his PP IPP is below average, and his overall IPP is below his normal rate, which, prior to this season, has been rising for two straight campaigns.

If this was not a one year league, it would be Guenther, since he has the potential to be a huge producer given his trajectory, whereas Svech is projecting to not be as great as once hoped. But with it being one year, I'm going with Svech, as his peripherals are better and it is more realistic to envision him staying as much of an offensive focal point, whereas Guenther could see his TOI stay this low or drop even further if he hits a rough patch, plus could hit a wall with not having previously played over 45 games in an NHL season to date.

Topic #6 – A GM is pondering whether to trade for Logan Stankoven in a keeper, as the asking price is a high end prospect plus a draft pick. Is there a sense that Stankoven can become a point per game player?

Stankoven, though a second round pick, has thus far thrived at every level, most recently with 57 points in 48 AHL games last season, earning him a promotion to the big club, where he posted 14 points in 24 games and eight points in 19 playoff contests. This was from someone who'd just turned 21.

For 2024-25, however, he's below his scoring pace from last year despite a minute more TOI per game, nearly all of which has been in the form of PP time. A quick look at his numbers shows he's shooting, as I write this, a paltry 4.6%, which, even accounting for his jump in SOG per game rate from 2.1 to 2.7, is unsustainably low. If he shot at his 11.7% rate from last season, he'd have ten goals instead of four, and his scoring rate would be just under 60 points.

Some might worry that he is undersized. While I've pointed out how that has indeed seemed to be an impediment for centers to find NHL success, the same is not true for wingers. In fact, the seven right wings as short or shorter than Stankoven who've played 300+ NHL games dating back to 1990-91 consist of Theo Fleury, Brian Gionta, Cam Atkinson, Martin St. Louis, Mats Zuccarello, Donald Audette, and Alex DeBrincat, with five of the seven having at least one point per game season, and the other two topping at 69 and 78, which is pretty impressive. It reinforces that, when given the chance, undersized wingers can, and do, produce well. All signs point to Stankoven being talented enough to be able to log at least 300 NHL games, which, based on these comparables, suggests he could do quite well.

What I also like to see is that his OZ% is actually a hair below 50%, so at least he's not struggling while being sheltered. Also, his SOG rate per 60 minutes is 10.4, placing him 14th among all NHL forwards. His IPP sits just below 70% this season, which is great to see from a player his age, especially since he's been a top six fixture all season, playing with veteran talent who all are very capable scorers. Plus, his secondary assist rate suggests he's been a bit unlucky in that area.

It is true, as I've said on many occasions in this column, that Dallas is a tough team on which to be a huge offensive success since it spreads ice time around, including on the PP. Look no further than the extent to which Jason Robertson has been throttled. With the team finding great success with this formula, it could continue for a while. Carolina is proof of that. But Stankoven is young enough that he can grow and mature in such a system, with a virtual guarantee of good but not great TOI and deployment, making it more likely that once Dallas moves past their current strategy he will be in his prime and can shine. 

In sum, I like what I'm seeing from Stankoven, plus his diminutive size not only is unlikely to be an impediment, but may forecast success as much as his very positive numbers. I'd expect him to be in the 65- to 75-point range for as long as the Stars retain their ice time philosophy, but with a very real chance to rise to point per game or better numbers if/when Dallas opens up their offense. I would consider trading for him, provided the high-end prospect is either unlikely to develop into a player better than Stankoven, or, even better, only seems high end to the other GM. Remember the link above showing how much of a crapshoot prospects are. Draft picks are even bigger unknowns, so if one has to be tossed in as a sweetener, I'm not opposed to that.

************

THE ANSWER TO WHO THE PLAYER IS……….Johan Franzen!

************

Questions for Mailbag column needed

The upcoming edition of my monthly mailbag still has room for more questions, which you can send me by either private messaging “rizzeedizzee” via the DobberHockey Forums, or emailing [email protected] with “Roos Mailbag” as the subject line.