NHL trade deadline: Analyzing 5 players to avoid on the market

The trade deadline is a time for the league’s best teams to improve their chances by plucking away useful pieces from the league’s worst teams. 

But that’s not always how it works out. Buyer beware.

Every deadline has hazards to avoid, red flags to watch for, snake oil to stay away from. The players who aren’t worth the price of admission because the price is too high for what they bring or because their addition may be a legitimate detriment. The players whose reputation exceeds their performance. The players who contribute to why their currently bad team might be so bad.

That doesn’t mean the players listed here are worthless or beyond saving — it just means express caution. That’s especially true after last year’s list started with Vladislav Gavrikov who exceeded all expectations with the L.A. Kings. He looked like a rock on the team’s blue line. Oops.

That mistake offered a learning experience. While the new version of the model should limit such mistakes (a greater emphasis on eating minutes compared to efficiency), it would still be wise to approach this year’s “buyer beware” list with a bit more vigilance. And while a projection is always a helpful starting point, a major change in context can drastically alter a player’s value. Fit matters a lot and it’s more than possible anyone on this list can find a new and better life with a stronger fit on their new team.

Caution is still the key, though. Based on Chris Johnston’s final trade board, these are the five names I’d be wary of acquiring. 

---

Deadline day is often about supply and demand. It’s why the prices for some assets look a lot larger than some might anticipate based purely on the player’s ability. With the defenseman market looking thin, especially on the right side, that could be Arizona’s gain.

In prior seasons, Matt Dumba might’ve been a strong get for a contender. He had some offensive flair with some finishing prowess. He was an excellent puck-mover who could handle tough minutes well. Dumba was a true top-four guy and those types are usually worth the price tag.

Dumba hasn’t looked the part this year with the Arizona Coyotes, though. There were already some signs of that in his last season with the Minnesota Wild and his work with the Coyotes has felt like a confirmation of that.

This year, Dumba has played second-pair minutes with the Coyotes and has earned 47 percent of the expected goals and 43 percent of the actual goals. Relative to teammates he’s been below average for the third straight season in both categories.

In prior years, you could use his tough usage as an excuse. Or that his raw defensive numbers were sound. In moving from Minnesota to Arizona, in a lesser role to boot, it’s Dumba’s weaker relative numbers that have stayed consistent. That points to needing a lot of support or an even lesser role to be successful.

He’s also not quite the puck-mover he used to be. Dumba can still effectively lead a rush and does well at denying entries. But when it comes to retrieving pucks in his own zone and exiting, his game has taken a real step back the past two seasons. In 2021-22, he had 10.2 exits per 60 with 66 percent of them being controlled — both above the 80th percentile. Over the last two years, both his workload (6.1 and 9.0 exits per 60) and efficiency (43 and 45 percent controlled) have decreased. He’s seen a huge drop in how often his retrievals lead to exits, too.

Those underlying signs aren’t promising and point to a player who might be closer to a passenger than a driver these days. That can still make for a useful player and it’s possible Dumba can still play top-four minutes if paired with someone who can fill in the current gaps in his game. 

But it is a question of whether he can be a true top-four defenseman on his own accord — and whether he’ll cost as much as one. If he does, it’s probably best to avoid overpaying for a guy who comes with question marks about where he truly fits on a contending depth chart. It’s paying for the brand name more than the quality.

I know, I know, I know. Everyone loves Frank Vatrano and his season has been an incredible story. He’s scored 29 goals and 48 points in 61 games, giving him one of the most productive offensive seasons of anyone available. Vatrano is a good player who has always had a pretty keen finishing instinct, one who makes sense as a middle-six scoring threat in a sheltered role.

The worry comes with what the price tag may be for a player whose scoring totals may inflate his perceived value. At the right price, Vatrano can be a savvy add, especially with an extra year remaining on his deal. However, some red flags warrant caution regarding his acquisition cost.

Vatrano has 29 goals this season, but a lot of that has to do with his power-play usage. He’s Anaheim’s primary triggerman and has made hay in that role scoring 4.6 goals per 60. That’s off an inflated 25 percent shooting percentage that would be difficult for any player to keep up. Over the prior three seasons, Vatrano has scored on half as many shots with the man advantage. Some might point to playing with better players on a top unit as one reason for the spike — but that’s not a role he would receive on a playoff team. Expectations need to be tempered regarding his goal-scoring for that reason.

Perhaps the bigger issue is Vatrano’s play without the puck. It’s worth taking his on-ice numbers with some grain of salt given his location, but it’s not exactly ideal that the Anaheim Ducks got outchanced and outscored more with Vatrano on the ice in each of the last two seasons. That’s likely a result of playing too high in the lineup, the exact thing that’s helping him look like a much more productive forward than he likely is. It shows that while he can produce in those bigger minutes, it’s at a net loss to the team thanks to his defensive acumen. 

That limits Vatrano’s fit as a top-six forward. If teams understand the risks and he doesn’t cost as much as the usual price for one, then no harm done. He’s a potentially strong fit as a sheltered scorer. But there looks to be a decent chance that his surprising point totals could make the cost of acquisition costlier. And if he’s put in a higher role than he can handle, the acquisition cost may not be the only worry.

Teams love a veteran presence with championship experience. Coming from a former captain who is a rugged right-shot defenseman? Sounds too good to be true. 

With Erik Johnson, it just might be, given how this season has gone for him. Johnson faces some of the softest competition in the league and still the Buffalo Sabres have given up 0.36 more expected goals against per 60 and 0.83 goals against per 60 with him on the ice. That’s unfathomably bad given how sheltered his usage has been.

With not a single assist to his name all season, Johnson’s value depends on lockdown defense. That’s always been the case for him, but at 35, it feels like the game has passed him by this season — a decline that really started to manifest last year.

Johnson takes on a huge burden getting the puck out (without control) and it’s possible that easing that burden can allow him to focus on what little he can do best without the puck. As long as that’s in a very sheltered role, he might be passable enough for his intangible element to be worthwhile. If the price is low enough it’s not the end of the world.

Still, it does feel like there are better avenues to improve defensive depth than with Johnson, whose play has left a lot to be desired this season — with and without the puck.

When it comes to fit, Dominik Kubalik is a prime example of how much it matters. He’s had a miserable season with Ottawa, whose goal percentage (28 percent) and expected goal percentage (39 percent) when he’s on the ice is well below the mark when he’s off. He’s been a huge drag and hasn’t produced much of note either with just 13 points in 55 games. When it comes to possession-driving plays, he doesn’t shoot much, pass much, forecheck much, bring the puck up ice much, or help in his own end much. That’s consistent with how he looked in his final season with Chicago: like an empty-calorie scorer who doesn’t do much of anything else.

The silver lining is what he was in Detroit. He was still a defensive liability, sure, but he drove enough offense to make up for it while scoring 20 goals and 45 points. He created chances at an average rate and looked like a capable middle-six player.

The difference? A lot of time spent with Dylan Larkin, where he scored 1.87 points per 60. He was at 1.29 without him. Compare that to the mish-mash of bottom-six talent he’s played with in Ottawa and it’s easy to see why he isn’t scoring like he was in Detroit.

And there lies the dilemma. Kubalik only seems useful if he’s playing with other skilled players. That goes back to his time in Chicago next to Patrick Kane. He’s someone who can complete plays, but doesn’t often start or drive them. That’s a fine skill set in the right situation, but is that the right situation on a contender if it means he’s exposed higher in the lineup? Probably not. So a team either has someone who can finish playing too high in the lineup, or a player who can’t do much and is a liability lower in the lineup. A poor man’s Vatrano.

That’s what makes Kubalik a very difficult fit for a playoff team. Maybe he works on a sheltered scoring line with a play-making center who can hold his own without the puck, but that seems like a very rare fit and one that likely goes against what many teams are looking for in a bottom six. 

Kubalik probably isn’t going to be an expensive add, but he doesn’t look like someone who works well on a contending roster.

I understand the appeal of Andrew Peeke. He’s 6-foot-3, 214 pounds and a tough customer who blocks a lot of shots and hits a lot of people. He doesn’t take a lot of penalties in the process either like some defenders of his ilk. That type of defenseman is one many teams covet for the playoffs.

From 2021-22 to 2022-23, his expected goals rate relative to teammates wasn’t that bad, just a little below average. The fact his actual rate was between 42-44 percent is not a good sign, but his less bad relative numbers mean he can potentially hold his own in a better environment.

That’s the best-case scenario: That he can hold his own.

The worst-case scenario makes him really risky though, and that starts with what he’s done this season.

It’s never a good sign when one of the absolute worst defensive teams in the league does not have room for you in their top six. Peeke has spent a lot of nights as a healthy scratch and has seen his role significantly diminish from last season. He’s only played in 21 games and those games have not been pretty. He has just 35 percent of the expected goals with a relative expected goal rate of minus-1.21, the worst mark in the league. On a bad team in the easiest role possible, that’s difficult to do. If Peeke hasn’t been good enough for the Blue Jackets of all teams, how likely is it that he can be good enough for an actual contender?

The other issue is things look worse when it comes to actual goals. That’s been consistent in each of the last three seasons. Over the last three years, his goals percentage has been 40, 32 and 42 percent — all lower than the team average. During that stretch, no defenseman has been outscored more than Peeke’s 36.6 percent and only four defensemen have been worse relative to teammates where Columbus’ goal difference per 60 drops 0.63 with Peeke on the ice.

His tracked data from Corey Sznajder doesn’t paint a very flattering picture either. As expected, he offers next to nothing in the offensive zone, he doesn’t move the puck often or well in the defensive zone, and he’s only OK at stopping controlled entries. It all points to the likelihood that what we’re seeing from Peeke’s on-ice numbers is not a total mirage, especially given his usage.

Based on his projected Net Rating, Peeke is worth minus-9.2 goals — one of the absolute lowest marks in the league. Maybe he can figure it out somewhere else with more structure and support. It’s just not a risk I would take, especially given his price tag.

— Data via Evolving Hockey, Natural Stat Trick and All Three Zones

(Top photos of Matt Dumba, Erik Johnson and Frank Vatrano: Christian Petersen / Getty Images, Jeff Curry and Gary A. Vasquez / USA Today)