Montreal Canadiens mailbag: How long before Lane Hutson signs extension?

New season, new batch of mail to open and address. Starting with the most pertinent topic: Lane Hutson’s contract status.

Ryan on Bluesky asks: Now that Luke Hughes is signed, how long before Lane Hutson signs an extension?

I think it could take a while longer, with the caveat that a single phone call could change that.

I believe it’s going to have to come from Hutson’s side, though I want to qualify that by saying that’s only my belief.

Things are understandably hush-hush around this negotiation, so most of what I write on the subject is pure opinion.

Except for this: It’s my understanding a long-term deal has been offered to Hutson.

But my inclination is Hutson wants more and is prepared to go into the season betting on himself, which is his right. 

It’s actually one of the only rights he has as a pending Group 2, 10.2C free agent.

Hutson will come out of this deal in July ineligible to sign an offer sheet. He will also be ineligible to file for salary arbitration for the first two years that follow the expiration date of his current contract. And those two factors tip the leverage almost completely the Canadiens’ way.

Hutson’s way to potentially gain a bit more of it than he has now is to play, to improve upon a 66-point rookie season that netted him the Calder Trophy, and to wait for as long as he deems necessary to maybe get a better deal.

It’s what Luke Hughes just did in New Jersey. It’s also what Mason McTavish did in Anaheim before signing a six-year, $42-million extension five days ago.

McTavish did have a bit more leverage for his deal, though, because he wasn’t a 10.2C RFA.

Hughes was, which, in addition to also being a defenceman, makes him more of a direct comparable for Hutson. 

Hughes’ situation was unique, though, in one respect. The Devils’ leverage was somewhat weakened by the need to guard against upsetting brother Jack, who is a foundational piece of their team and is in Year 4 of an eight-year deal that will expire when he’s 29. 

With Jack and older brother Quinn both stating over the summer they’d love nothing more than for all three Hughes brothers to play on the same team someday, you’d understand the Devils hoping it’ll be with them and bending a bit in the negotiation with Luke to keep themselves in contention. 

Getting Luke Hughes done for seven years at a higher number than the Devils needed to give him had to have been influenced by that reality, and that reality is different than Hutson’s in Montreal.

I don’t believe the Canadiens want to get into a long-term game of chicken with him, but that doesn’t mean they’re going to suddenly abandon their position just because Hughes got signed.

As I mentioned, Hutson can handle it all as he sees fit. And if he believes he should do that by wagering on himself, that’s his right.

It seems like that’s what he’s contemplating doing right now. 

I think it’s worth it for Hutson to think the whole thing through as thoroughly as possible, though, as one should always do when they’re making any kind of bet, let alone a high-stakes one like this.

If, in the end, Hutson is willing to assume the risk that comes with it — of potentially getting hurt and weakening his already-limited bargaining power — because he thinks it’ll result in a bigger reward, that is absolutely his right.

As of now, I’m expecting Hutson to exercise it.

But, again, that could change with one phone call.

Stephen Lee on Bluesky asks: Engstrom looks to be the most NHL-ready of any prospect at camp. Does his emergence mean the Habs potentially deal Matheson/Struble at some point during the season, or is he better off with another year in the A?

I’m not sure I agree with the assessment on Adam Engstrom versus other Canadiens prospects at this camp, though I don’t think there’s any denying his NHL potential. 

He will play in this league, even if it isn’t at the start of this season. His mobility, his puck-movement efficiency and his offensive skills make him a good depth option for the team. There’s a lot of upside there.

But there’s still plenty of time for Engstrom to build up his floor. Especially at just 21 years old — even if he has three professional seasons (two in Sweden and one in Laval) under his belt. And, in my opinion, Engstrom needs that time to round out his defensive game and get a better handle on game management to turn himself into a player who can be depended on in all situations.

That opportunity is ripe for him in Laval this season, where he’ll fill out a top pair with David Reinbacher, who should soon be rehabilitated from the hand injury he suffered in pre-season.

If Engstrom handles his assignment and development in Laval well, we’ll see what it means for Jayden Struble and Mike Matheson down the line.

I don’t see a reason for the Canadiens to start weakening their greatest strength — defensive depth — anytime soon. And though I understand Matheson is approaching unrestricted free agency, I don’t see the Canadiens rushing him out the door. 

I think they’d like to re-sign Matheson if they can, but that’s a deeper subject for another day.

Derek Ford on X asks: I see four forwards who might not fit into the long-term plans — Dach, Newy, Josh, Gally. Which of these do you think is most at risk of being traded and why is it (Anderson)? What sort of trade value would he have?

I think the most important word you placed in that entry was “might.”

Kirby Dach will be a restricted free agent after playing out this final season of his current contract. Alex Newhook will have the same status two summers from now. And Josh Anderson and Brendan Gallagher will be 33 and 35, respectively, when their deals expire at the same time as Newhook’s. It’s a fair assumption they “might” not all fit in the Canadiens’ long-term plans.

But who’s to say they won’t all fit in their short-term ones?

Performance will dictate how Dach and Newhook do on new deals, but underperformance in years already burned on their current contracts could balance out great play this year (and next for Newhook) to keep the numbers reasonable. 

As for Anderson and Gallagher, their ages will likely limit their bargaining power to earn long- or even medium-term deals. And strong play by them over the next two seasons could entice the Canadiens to try to retain them on short-term deals, depending on what they do with some of their other players in the interim.

Look, there are a ton of good prospects in the organization, and many of them won’t play in Montreal. Not only because they could be potentially blocked by veterans such as Anderson or Gallagher down the line, but also because the Canadiens will be entering a contention window that will entice them to deal from this pool for more established players.

I’m inclined to say Anderson’s future trade value won’t be as high as his value would be to the Canadiens if he were to maintain the standard of play he established last season. Also, because of Anderson’s style of play, his greatest value is in the playoffs, and the Canadiens are planning on being a playoff team for the foreseeable future.

Simon on X asks: Who is your pick for a spot based off the camp/pre-season? F. Xhekaj, Kapanen, Beck, Veleno, Blais, Other?

Simon, I think Oliver Kapanen will be in the opening lineup and Joe Veleno will start as the 13^th forward. 

If the Canadiens keep 14 forwards, I’d expect Samuel Blais to stick around.

But I don’t think they will keep 14 because Laval is 20 minutes away and I don’t think they should be particularly concerned about exposing Blais to waivers. And I don’t think it makes too much sense to have a younger player like Florian Xhekaj or Owen Beck waiting for long periods of time on the sidelines. 

I expect both those players will play games in Montreal this season. 

Blais could, too. As could Alex Belzile, and Sean Farrell and Jared Davidson. Lots of options in Laval.

GoalieGuy1965 on X asks: Why did the Habs not offer-sheet McTavish?

The simple answer is because Anaheim never had interest in losing McTavish and would’ve matched. And the Canadiens weren’t going to cross a threshold that would make him too expensive for Anaheim to keep and too expensive for them to acquire.

Mark Dreyer on X asks: How many Habs will score 20 goals or more this year?

I think, over 82 games, Nick Suzuki, Cole Caufield and Juraj Slafkovsky are safe bets, so that makes three.

I also think, over 82 games, that Ivan Demidov, Alex Newhook, Zack Bolduc, Brendan Gallagher, Kirby Dach and Patrik Laine all could score at 20, too. 

We’ll see who stays healthy and plays well enough to get it done.