Mailbag: Devils as Patrick Kane trade destination; Ducks' biggest issue

Here is the Dec. 7 edition of the mailbag, where we answer your questions asked on Twitter using #OvertheBoards. Tweet your questions to @drosennhl.

The recent rumors of the New Jersey Devils being in the Patrick Kane sweepstakes, what is the possibility of that happening? What would the Devils have to give up to make the cap money work? Or, if they don't get Kane, would they go for another player or just wait on Ondrej Palat? -- @NylnLvr84
Rumors are rumors, and Kane to New Jersey sounds like a fun topic to discuss. It is fun to imagine Kane playing on the same line as center Jack Hughes, but Kane with center Nico Hischier makes more sense. It'd be very similar to Kane playing with Chicago Blackhawks center Jonathan Toews.
But sorry for being a naysayer. It's too soon to consider this, and the Devils should leave well enough alone. Palat, who had groin surgery, is skating and on his way back, and should return prior to the 2023 NHL Trade Deadline on March 3. I don't discount the idea that the Devils could add before then, but needs will emerge, perhaps through injury or maybe a slump.
If the Devils are going to go down this path, they'd be no different than other teams in the Kane sweepstakes. To make it work, they would almost certainly have to give up their first-round pick in the 2023 NHL Draft and a top prospect in the ballpark of forward Alexander Holtz. The Blackhawks should ask for forward Dawson Mercer, a 21-year-old who could be a big part of their future core much the same way he is in New Jersey. He shouldn't be off the table if the Devils think they have a real shot at the Stanley Cup this season. They should not even consider including defensemen Luke Hughes or Simon Nemec in any trade. They won't. There is also the NHL salary cap to consider, which means New Jersey, like any team interested in Kane, would have to get Chicago to retain salary up to 50 percent. But slow down. There's time.

What is the biggest issue in Anaheim? -- @punmasterrifkin
Leadership and defending. OK, that's two, but there's a lot to choose from with the struggles the Anaheim Ducks have had this season.
The loss of Ryan Getzlaf is significant. The Ducks' former captain, who retired after last season, is a big man who casts a big shadow, and there were a lot of players under his cover the past several seasons. They're out from under it now and maybe in his absence they're seeing even clearer how much Getzlaf meant to them. Leaders should emerge eventually. Forwards Trevor Zegras, Troy Terry and Mason McTavish could soon make up a big part of the leadership core, but they are 25, 21 and 19, respectively. It's not happening yet.
I did not think the Ducks would be a Stanley Cup Playoff contender, but I didn't think they'd regress in their own end as badly as they have. Entering Wednesday, they are last in goals against per game (4.15) and shots against per game (37.9), 31st on the penalty kill (66.3 percent) and 30th in shot attempts percentage (44.8). By comparison, the Ducks allowed 3.24 goals per game, went 80.8 percent on the kill, gave up 33.2 shots on goal per game and played to a 47.9 SAT percentage last season. None of their defensive numbers last season are to be celebrated, but they are drastically better than what they're doing this season. You can't pin this all on goaltending because I think it's to the credit of John Gibson and Anthony Stolarz that they are playing to a combined .894 save percentage (108 goals on 1,018 shots) behind the defense in front of them, particularly on the kill. I get it, the goalie has to be your best penalty killer, but he needs help, and Gibson and Stolarz aren't getting it.
The Ducks are building for tomorrow, but there are things they can fix today to help the process. They're fun to watch, skilled and dynamic at times, but they have to clean up their own end even if it comes at the cost of some of their flash. They need people to step up and lead the charge with that.
Do you think we will ever see the day that ALL games are worth three points? Three points for a regulation win, two for an overtime or shootout win, and one for an OT or SO loss. They should award three points every game. Can you imagine the last minutes of a tie game? Now they just play for the tie. -- @emotrin
I don't think it's going to happen, at least not any time soon. I also don't agree with your premise about imagining the last few minutes of regulation in a tie game in the regular season, assuming you mean they would be frantic or something like that. My guess is teams will still play it as they do now, even knowing of the potential point swing of getting three for the regulation win and the other team zero for the regulation loss instead of it going two and one. Those points matter, but teams aren't going to go all Stanley Cup Playoff-like in the final minutes of regulation to get that extra point unless it's absolutely needed at the time. I could be wrong, but that's my gut feeling. And I don't see the NHL moving to a 3-2-1 points system because it would reduce the competitive balance that exists now, the fear being that the three-point games could effectively eliminate some teams from playoff contention too early, leaving them to play out a string of games with little to no consequence. That's not good for the game even if those teams are not necessarily true contenders. The longer teams are in it, the more interest there is in them. That matters.
I've sometimes wondered what it would be like if the NHL stopped awarding a point to each team for just getting to overtime because there is also the shootout. I wonder if overtime could become a continuation of regulation, a winner in overtime gets the two points and the loser gets nothing. If there is no winner, then each team gets a point and you go to the shootout, with the winner getting the other point. But that shootout win still wouldn't count as much in the standings when it comes to tiebreakers. It would still be regulation and overtime wins that matter more. But to do that I think you'd have to give a longer runway in overtime, say 10 minutes, and you'd probably have to go back to 5-on-5 in overtime if we're going to make it a true continuation of regulation. Those are two changes that would receive pushback from general managers and the NHL Players' Association.
What's your opinion of Jordan Binnington's aggressiveness? Is he just reacting to getting hit/bumped in the net? -- @TrishTheMiddle
Binnington must be an aggressive goalie, playing on the edge, channeling his emotion into his play for the St. Louis Blues. His emotion is part of his game. It fuels him. It fuels his confidence. It's a big reason why he's a Stanley Cup champion. It's even fine on occasion to go overboard with your aggressiveness if you're playing to a .927 save percentage, like he did in 32 games (30 starts) in 2018-19 before helping the Blues win the Stanley Cup. You'll live with it if he's playing to a .912 save percentage or .910, like he did in the two seasons following the Stanley Cup championship. The Blues also had a relatively effective penalty kill in those seasons and especially last season, when they were fifth in the NHL at 84.1 percent. The goalie was their best penalty killer.
But things are different when your team is struggling and needs you to play your position, to stop the puck. Things are different when Binnington has an .889 save percentage and the Blues are last in the NHL on the PK at 64.9 percent. We often hear coaches and players talk about simplifying their game when they're in a slump. Goalies can too. It doesn't help the Blues if Binnington is taking players out behind the net and chirping the opposing team's bench on his way to his own after getting pulled because he gave up four goals, all of which happened in a 6-2 loss to the Pittsburgh Penguins on Saturday. The Blues need Binnington to be their rock. Play with emotion, but channel it toward focusing on saves.
The Rangers have to shake something up before they slide too far out of the playoff picture. What's more likely: a coaching change or a big trade? -- @JonathanNJayne1
They shook some things up Monday by elevating forwards
Alexis Lafreniere
and Kaapo Kakko to play on the top line with Mika Zibanejad. It helped them come back from one goal down in the third period for a 6-4 win against the Blues at Madison Square Garden. Lafreniere scored the game-winning goal on a deflection of Zibanejad's shot and had an assist on defenseman K'Andre Miller's game-tying goal. A move like that, overdue as it may be, could be big for the Rangers. They need Lafreniere and Kakko to produce and they need to give them opportunities to do it. Putting them with Zibanejad fuels confidence, which is big for both players, by giving them a better chance to get on the score sheet. It's essential for the Rangers to get more out of Lafreniere and Kakko than they have so far this season, a combined eight goals entering Wednesday. It's as important that the Rangers keep them with Zibanejad for a string of games. Let them sink or swim on the top line for a while. Chris Kreider, who has played the most at 5-on-5 with Zibanejad, will still get his power-play ice time. His game won't change whether he's on the first line or the third line. It's Lafreniere and Kakko who need the help, so keep them there. Let's see how it works when they play the Vegas Golden Knights at T-Mobile Arena on Wednesday and the Colorado Avalanche at Ball Arena on Friday. If the Rangers can get something rolling with a couple of strong road games, it will be a sign they're turning things around. If they can't, coach Gerard Gallant's seat will only get warmer.

---
Listen: New episode of NHL @TheRink