With 38 words, Ryan Whitney set the internet abuzz Sunday night.
Almost 24 hours later, the Spittin’ Chiclets co-host’s tweet had generated almost one million views.
Any time someone suggests the rumour that the Senators are mulling the possibility of trading their captain, Brady Tkachuk.
As the season progressed and the Senators failed to meet even the lowest of expectations, it was only a matter of time before names began circulating the rumour mill. Fans grew accustomed to Vladimir Tarasenko and Dominik Kubalik being at the forefront of most of them, but Tkachuk? And, now?!?
The timing, the naming of Tkachuk himself, and the rumour that the Senators could consider moving him, none of it makes sense on any level.
The Senators are finally finding their footing under Jacques Martin and are playing a more structured defence as a five-man unit. This is not a situation like his brother’s where he is an impending restricted free agent who only offers the organization one year of team control. Tkachuk’s just 24 years old has four years remaining on a contract that will take him through the 2027-28 season.
So, why listen to offers at all?
The way Whitney phrased his tweet and then circled to say that he “can’t believe it because no one could be that dumb,” certainly suggests that the Senators who are navigating the market.
So, again, why?
General managers are often sent feelers to see if players could be available. By listening, they are performing the basic due diligence required of their job, but given his age, production, physicality, and position of leadership, Tkachuk should be as close to untouchable as it gets given the circumstances.
Naturally, there will be an inclination to dismiss the rumour based on the source. Although he is the co-host of one of hockey’s most popular podcasts, Whitney’s not renowned for breaking trade rumours. He is not Elliotte Friedman, Bob McKenzie, Chris Johnston or Pierre LeBrun.
In saying that, it is worth remembering that the Spittin’ Chiclets have made huge inroads with players. Last summer the podcast was the one responsible for breaking the Columbus Blue Jackets/Mike Babcock incident that shed light on his interactions with his players. Their information led to an NHLPA investigation and eventually, Babcock’s resignation.
If the Chiclets have become a tip line for NHL players, maybe we shouldn’t be too quick to outright dismiss Whitney.
The only way the rumour would make sense is if it’s a player unhappiness situation. In Tkachuk’s case, for the rumour to make sense, he would have had to voice displeasure with the Senators’ situation and voice those concerns to management. Given the team’s aforementioned struggles which led to the dismissal of their player-friendly head coach, I could certainly understand if Tkachuk was frustrated with the situation.
For six seasons his Senators teams have languished and for half of those seasons, Tkachuk has been the face of the franchise and their captain. He wears these sustained losses more heavily than his peers. If Tkachuk had openly voiced his displeasure with the organization in another lost season that featured dysfunction and distraction it would make sense. Looking beyond the win/loss record, the franchise dealt with more dysfunction brought about by the previous regime. Poor asset allocation created cap constraints, there were the Shane Pinto negotiations and suspension, the Evgenii Dadonov fallout, and the dismissals of Pierre Dorion and D.J. Smith that all clouded this season with negativity.
As Senators fans know, it is a lot to endure — especially if Brady looked at his brother leaving Calgary and recognized that the grass could be greener elsewhere.
It is all hypothetical, however, but it is the only scenario that makes sense. If Tkachuk openly voiced concerns during the turmoil that embroiled the franchise in December, it would be hard to blame him. It is exhausting.
Hopefully, the rumour is untrue, but if any concerns were voiced, hopefully, it means that they were made in a time-sensitive way. What Brady may have felt at that time may no longer be true now.
The vibes around this team are more positive and the players have finally embraced the message being delivered. The underlying metrics and results speak for themselves. There are still obvious problems with the roster and goaltending, but the onus is on new management with its processes and information to trim the fat and supplement the roster with better and more efficient talent.
Goaltending Issues
I was digging through Evolving-Hockey’s site looking at the team stat tables. Through 56 games played, the Senators have an expected goals allowed (xGA) total of 172.30. It is the fifth-lowest mark in the league and can be partially attributed to the fact that the Senators have played in the second-fewest number of games. With a few more games to balance things out, that number will increase, but from a defensive perspective, this team has made some significant strides defensively.
If the Senators simply had league-average goaltending, their place in the standings would be significantly higher. No team in the league has suffered worse goaltending than the Senators. Their all-situations save percentage of 88.01 is the league’s worst mark. Their big free agent acquisition this past offseason, Joonas Korpisalo, has the lowest goals saved above expectation (-16.76 GSAx) in the league. Anton Forsberg is not far behind with the league’s 14th-lowest mark (-4.05 GSAx).
In games like last night’s 6-3 loss to the Capitals, it is incredibly difficult to play in front of a goaltender who allows a handful of soft goals.
For this team to take a meaningful step forward, it will need to find a quality option. Even with the volatility of the position, this team cannot rely on the guys that they have here. Perhaps there is a chance that Forsberg can bounce back to his previous norms that he exhibited in his previous three seasons here. Of the 50 goaltenders who played more than 50 minutes during that time, Forsberg had the 17th-highest number of goals saved above expected.
With another season left on a deal that pays him $2.75 million, it is a relatively inexpensive and short-term gamble — especially with the presence of prospects like Mads Sogaard and Leevi Merilainen in Belleville. Korpisalo’s contract is a hindrance. With four years and $16 million left on his deal, a buyout would take eight years and cost the Senators $10.667 million.
CapFriendly lists the terms of the buyout as:
A cap hit of less than a million for the next two seasons isn’t too punitive. Spending $1.833 million to $2.333 million across the 2026-27 and 2027-28 seasons at a time when the Senators should be in a playoff position.
It is criminal that the same regime that traded for and inked Matt Murray to a contract extension was permitted to sign another middling goaltender to a long-term deal while the sale of this franchise was hanging over it.
Looking ahead, the buyout makes the most sense. Having used several valuable futures to rid itself of bad contracts (Nikita Zaitsev, Matt Murray) or acquire short-term pieces like Alex DeBrincat (and potentially Jakob Chychrun), spending more draft capital to rid itself of Korpisalo’s contract may not be palatable.
Management may view cap space as being more valuable than whatever pick(s) it uses to get out from underneath his contract. But, given the landscape of what is available in the unrestricted free agent market, the Senators could be in a position where if they are looking to address the goaltending position, they will need to rely on draft capital and prospects to secure a deal.
If the Sens get a good draft pick this spring they can thank Korpisalo, and to a certain extent Forsberg.
Personally, I think this summer is too soon to consider a buyout. It stretches too long and costs too much. I'd keep Korpisalo as the backup for next season and if he still stinks then maybe he plays a chunk of the year in Belleville. Sogaard is looking good in the AHL, but not quite ready for the NHL. Maybe mid-season next year, he will be there.
I suppose this could be some kind of 4-D chess move where Brady is putting pressure on management or something. That said, it was more likely from a moment of frustration before the team started turning things around. Also, we can't rule out the possibility that this is just hot air based on more or less nothing.