The NHL standings are far more compressed compared to most other years.
In the Eastern Conference, the New York Rangers are the only team with a sub .500 points percentage. The Metropolitan Division is especially up for grabs, with the Carolina Hurricanes the only team that has separated itself as a safe bet to make the playoffs. A meager four points is the difference between being in 5th and 12th place in the East. The end result is that every team in the East except for the Rangers is still firmly in the playoff hunt.
The Western Conference is a bit more stratified. The Vancouver Canucks are already out of the race, with the St. Louis Blues and Calgary Flames not far behind, either. However, the West still has a glut of teams battling in the mushy middle — only four points separate the 6th-place Seattle Kraken and the 11th-place Anaheim Ducks in the conference standings. And that doesn’t even include last year’s Presidents’ Trophy-winning Winnipeg Jets. The Jets are further behind the pack, but with a mini-three-game winning streak and top-of-the-lineup star power, they can’t be completely written off yet, either.
This uniquely tight standings picture will have a fascinating impact on the trade market in the lead-up to the March 6 deadline. Very few teams are willing to wave the white flag on their season, so there aren’t many sellers right now. However, as we get closer to the deadline, several NHL front offices will have to commit to a direction, whether it be buying, selling or standing pat.
Perhaps we’ll even see teams take a hybrid approach, buying and selling simultaneously. The Columbus Blue Jackets, for example, paid a second and fourth-round pick to pry Mason Marchment out of Seattle right before the December holiday freeze. Nine days later, they recouped that draft capital by selling young winger Egor Chinakhov to the Pittsburgh Penguins for a second and third-round pick.
With all that in mind, here are some teams that are facing interesting dilemmas ahead of the trade deadline.
(All data collected prior to Thursday’s games)
Columbus Blue Jackets
Despite sitting in 15th place in the Eastern Conference, the Columbus Blue Jackets aren’t ready to give up on their season. Acquiring Marchment was the first sign of that, and the second, more impactful domino fell earlier this week when the club dismissed head coach Dean Evason in favor of Rick Bowness.
Columbus is seven points behind a playoff spot, which is significant but not insurmountable. The Blue Jackets’ internal expectations must be high after a surprisingly promising campaign last year, where they missed the playoffs by just two points. Zach Werenski, on pace to crack 30 goals and nearly 100 points, is having a season for the ages, and the organization probably feels some pressure not to waste it.
GM Don Waddell’s challenge will be weighing his team’s real but long-shot playoff chances (Dom Luszczyszyn’s model gives Columbus a 32 percent chance of making the postseason) against the bounty of assets he could collect for veterans if he decides to sell ahead of the deadline.
The Blue Jackets have a few key pending unrestricted free agents they’ll need to make decisions on: Charlie Coyle, captain Boone Jenner and Marchment. Coyle is having an outstanding season — he leads all Columbus forwards in five-on-five points and has delivered Selke-caliber two-way results (earning 54 percent of expected goals and 60 percent of actual goals) despite handling some of the toughest matchups of all NHL forwards. He’d be a highly sought-after trade chip if he were made available, especially with how high the demand for quality centers is.
Jenner would also fetch a lucrative return because of his production, versatility (he can play center or wing), and big-bodied, hard-nosed playing style. The Blue Jackets could also recoup most, if not all, of the draft capital they gave up for Marchment if they don’t get on a roll and decide to sell.
Of course, Columbus could (and likely will) explore extensions with those three forwards, but can it realistically keep all of them? Alexander Wennberg and Christian Dvorak’s recent contract extensions proved that veteran centers are becoming increasingly expensive to retain.
The notion of acquiring future assets may not sound appealing to a franchise that has missed the playoffs for six consecutive years. However, imagine how valuable those excess draft picks could be this coming summer as trade chips, which the Blue Jackets could use to make more serious upgrades ahead of next season.
It’d be wise to see how the team performs over the next 10-15 games under Bowness before the deadline. If they go on a heater, great, you can justify keeping everyone. If not, the Blue Jackets would be wise to either re-sign or trade their valuable pending UFAs, because missing the playoffs and losing them in the offseason for nothing would sting.
San Jose Sharks
San Jose, against all odds, is in the hunt for a wild-card spot in the West. There are some red flags to be wary of — the Sharks’ goal differential is minus-15, and their five-on-five analytics are poor — but you can’t count them out as a playoff contender in this weak West so long as Macklin Celebrini keeps playing at an MVP level.
For years, GM Mike Grier has been disciplined about trading veterans for future assets. Will that change now that the club is on the playoff bubble?
The Sharks don’t have any headline-worthy rental trade chips on the roster, but five of their defensemen, led by Mario Ferraro and John Klingberg, are pending UFAs. Ferraro is probably worth a second or third-round pick, and Klingberg’s trade value is probably in the mid-round pick range.
Asset optimizers may argue that the Sharks should sell one (if not both) of Ferraro or Klingberg. Barring a collapse before the deadline, though, San Jose would be justified in keeping Klingberg and Ferraro. Neither one of them is going to fetch a significant trade haul, and for development and good vibes purposes, the Sharks probably want their talented young forwards to have established, NHL-quality defensemen to feed them the puck, plus an opportunity to play meaningful games down the stretch. Trading away Klingberg and Ferraro would leave the club’s blue line so depleted that it could hinder their young forwards.
The Sabres are facing a dilemma with Alex Tuch. (Timothy T. Ludwig / Imagn Images)
Buffalo Sabres
Winners of 14 of their last 16 games, the red-hot Sabres have charged into a playoff spot, though they’re hanging on by a razor-thin margin. That makes them an intriguing wild card ahead of the trade deadline, especially with new GM Jarmo Kekäläinen, who’s never afraid to make bold moves, now at the helm.
On the one hand, with the team desperate to end a 14-year playoff drought, management could justify buying. This isn’t to say the Sabres should chase expensive rentals, but you can make a case for them to shop for win-now additions with contract term beyond this season and/or second-tier, inexpensive rental options.
Then there’s the Alex Tuch dilemma.
At first glance, it might seem like a no-brainer for the Sabres to re-sign Tuch, who’s second on the team in points, given the team’s playoff push. What happens, though, if Tuch wants an extension that looks similar to Adrian Kempe’s recent eight-year, $10.625 million AAV deal? A contract like that for a 29-year-old winger would likely age poorly over the long term. And it’s not like the Sabres have unlimited cap space because several of their core players are already locked up to long-term deals, not to mention that breakout wingers Josh Doan and Zach Benson need new RFA deals this summer as well.
If Buffalo decides that extending Tuch isn’t worth it, would it keep him as its own rental? Or is he too valuable an asset to lose for nothing? Remember that Kekäläinen kept Artemi Panarin and Sergei Bobrovsky for Columbus’ playoff push in 2018-19 (and ended up being an aggressive deadline buyer by trading for Matt Duchene and Ryan Dzingel). Kekäläinen ultimately lost Panarin and Bobrovsky in free agency, but it also led to the Blue Jackets’ first playoff series victory in franchise history. That situation was different because the Blue Jackets were a more established team with a higher ceiling than this current Sabres squad, but it is still a relevant scenario to keep in mind.
Perhaps there’s even a creative hybrid scenario where the Sabres are simultaneously buyers and sellers. If a reasonable Tuch extension isn’t possible, could you trade him and then immediately flip those assets for non-rental win-now players ahead of the deadline? An example is the 2023 Canucks trading former captain Bo Horvat to the Islanders and, a month later, leveraging those future assets to acquire Filip Hronek.
The overall point is that the Sabres have many options, starting with the difficult Tuch dilemma.
Nashville Predators
Just five weeks ago, the Predators were 10-14-4, sitting dead-last in the NHL. A deadline sell-off seemed inevitable; the only question was how deep they would go.
Erik Haula, Michael Bunting and Michael McCarron, all on expiring contracts, seemed overwhelmingly likely to be dealt. Every contending team in search of a center, meanwhile, was probably circling Ryan O’Reilly, who’s signed through 2026-27 at a bargain $4.5 million cap hit, as their dream target. Perhaps GM Barry Trotz was even going to consider moving Steven Stamkos and Jonathan Marchessault, two of the club’s highest-profile veterans, who haven’t quite been an optimal fit.
Remarkably, the Predators have caught fire in recent weeks and are only one point behind a playoff spot in a flawed Western Conference. Will this run change Nashville’s status as a presumed seller? It very well could, assuming they stay in the playoff race.
Haula, Bunting and McCarron probably wouldn’t command more than mid-round picks on the trade market. The Predators, who own two second-round picks, two fourth-round picks, and three fifth-round picks this year (and four third-round picks in 2027), may value keeping these veterans for an end-of-season push rather than adding more mid-round draft capital. Nashville also doesn’t have to rush to move O’Reilly, Stamkos, or Marchessault, as Trotz can deal them for a significant return in the offseason.
While this gives the Predators a sensible case to stand pat at the deadline, it’d behoove them to stay open-minded. For example, if a buyer, enticed by the possibility of owning O’Reilly for two playoff runs rather than just one, blows the Preds away with an offer, it’s still worth making that deal for the long-term sake of the franchise. The Predators can justify either approach (standing pat or selling), giving them leverage whenever a buyer calls ahead of the deadline.
Toronto Maple Leafs
The Leafs’ recent run has catapulted them back to the playoff bubble. From the outside, though, it seems very difficult for Toronto to justify going all in as deadline buyers. Yes, the team’s performance has improved, especially with Auston Matthews bouncing back lately, but they don’t profile as a true Stanley Cup contender.
Toronto’s underlying metrics are sketchy (rank 31st and 26th in five-on-five shot attempt and expected goal share, respectively), the blue line is a question mark (especially given Chris Tanev’s uncertain long-term injury status), and the team is clearly missing Mitch Marner’s elite two-way impact. Moreover, because the Leafs have pushed their chips into the middle in so many previous years, they’re asset-poor. They’re already missing their first and second-round picks this year (and only have three 2026 draft picks total), and have also traded away their 2027 first and third-round picks. Their prospect pool is also below average.
I’d argue the Leafs should stand pat (or make a cheap, depth acquisition at most) because they aren’t one piece away from winning a Stanley Cup. The Leafs shouldn’t mortgage the future by trading away an Easton Cowan or Ben Danford.
We’ll see if Toronto’s front office can actually stomach standing pat, though. GM Brad Treliving may feel pressure to avoid a playoff miss for the sake of his own job security, which could incentivize him to make a significant addition or two.
Seattle Kraken
In late December, the Kraken traded Marchment to the Blue Jackets. Many expected it to be the start of a bigger sell-off in Seattle, with the team having lost eight of its last 10 games at the time, and sitting in 29th place in the league standings.
Ironically, the Kraken have gone on a tear since then, which has thrust them back into a playoff spot. Not only that, but with the Kings struggling and the Ducks spiraling, there’s a chance they could even finish third-place in the Pacific.
With Jaden Schwartz, Jordan Eberle, Eeli Tolvanen and Jamie Oleksiak all on expiring contracts, the Kraken have valuable trade chips if they decide to sell. Will management actually make future-focused moves with the team in a playoff position, though? It would probably be in the franchise’s best long-term interests to sell some pieces off because they aren’t a realistic threat to advance far in the postseason, and because their underlying analytics (including Dom’s model, which gives them only a 16 percent chance of making the postseason) suggest regression could be coming.
However, the longer this winning continues, the harder it will be to justify subtracting from a team that has only made the playoffs once since 2021-22. And if their strong play continues, could they even emerge as dark-horse buyers, especially if there are non-rentals that fit their core long-term? Seattle has a ton of draft picks it could leverage as trade chips (four first-round picks over the next two years and four second-round picks in that same timeframe) and a surplus of cap space.
Boston Bruins
The Bruins emerged as one of the most aggressive deadline sellers last year, shipping Brad Marchand, Brandon Carlo, Coyle, and Trent Frederic to teams for significant future assets. It was a clear signal that Boston is in a transitional phase where the future matters more than the present. That’s helped replenish the club’s pool of young players and armed them with four first-round picks over the next two years.
This season is different, though, because Boston has been flirting with a playoff spot all year. It probably still makes sense to prioritize the future and trade pending UFAs Viktor Arvidsson, who’s having a resurgent year with 23 points in 35 games, and Andrew Peeke. Maybe the Bruins even look to capitalize on Casey Mittelstadt’s improved play on the wing and see if there’s a taker for his contract.
Beyond that, Pavel Zacha’s future is an important dilemma the franchise faces.
Zacha, who has a year and a half left on a bargain $4.75 million cap hit, would be an enormously valuable trade commodity if the Bruins made him available. On the other hand, though, Boston is probably in more of a retool rather than a rebuild, and may want to execute a turnaround quick enough to still capitalize on David Pastrnak, Charlie McAvoy and Jeremy Swayman’s remaining prime years. And if that’s the plan, then the 28-year-old Zacha could still be young enough to fit that, in which case the move may be to offer him a new contract when he’s extension-eligible in the summer rather than move him.
